CivilAxisCivilAxis
☕ Support🌐 Community

WT 6X22.5 vs ST 6X15.9

WT 6X22.5 is an WT section from the American AISC Shapes Database; ST 6X15.9 is the closest equivalent in the American AISC Shapes Database. WT 6X22.5 carries more bending: 99.961 cm³ of plastic modulus against 97.339 cm³, 2.7% more. ST 6X15.9 is the lighter of the two at 23.7 kg/m against 33.5 kg/m, a saving of 41.4% on steel weight. Both are about 153 mm deep, so either fits the same construction zone.

Section properties side by side. Bold marks the more favourable value where one is.
PropertyWT 6X22.5
WT
ST 6X15.9
ST
Difference
Mass33.5 kg/m23.7 kg/m+41.4%
Depth153.2 mm152.4 mm+0.5%
Width204.5 mm127 mm+61.0%
Web thickness8.5 mm8.9 mm-4.5%
Flange thickness14.6 mm13.8 mm+5.8%
Area42.3 cm²30 cm²+41.0%
Second moment, major (Iy)690.9 cm⁴616 cm⁴+12.2%
Plastic modulus, major (Wpl,y)99.961 cm³97.339 cm³+2.7%
Elastic modulus, major (Wel,y)55.552 cm³54.077 cm³+2.7%
Second moment, minor (Iz)1,041 cm⁴194 cm⁴+436.6%
Plastic modulus, minor (Wpl,z)155.19 cm³52.766 cm³+194.1%
Radius of gyration, minor (iz)4.95 cm2.54 cm+94.9%
Torsion constant (It)26.1 cm⁴18.23 cm⁴+43.2%

WT 6X22.5 to AISC Shapes Database v16.0; ST 6X15.9 to AISC Shapes Database v16.0. Difference is expressed relative to ST 6X15.9.

How to choose between them

On stiffness, WT 6X22.5 has the larger second moment of area: 690.9 cm⁴ against 616 cm⁴, a difference of 12.2%. This matters more often than the strength comparison, because on normal floor spans deflection rather than bending capacity sets the beam size - so if the two are close on modulus but apart on inertia, the stiffer one is usually the better answer even when it is not the stronger one.

Measured as bending capacity per kilogram of steel, ST 6X15.9 is the more efficient section: 4.1 against 3.0 cm³ per kg/m, 27.3% better. Over a floor of repeated beams that difference is real tonnage, though it is often outweighed by whichever section the fabricator can actually source.

The two diverge much more about the minor axis: WT 6X22.5 has 155.19 cm³ of minor-axis plastic modulus against 52.766 cm³, 194.1% more. If the member sees any minor-axis bending, or if it is unrestrained over a long length and lateral-torsional buckling governs, that gap decides the comparison even though the major-axis numbers looked equivalent.

In short, WT 6X22.5 is the stronger section and ST 6X15.9 is the lighter one; where those are the same section, it is the clear choice, and where they are not, decide on whether your design is governed by capacity or by tonnage.

Common questions

WT 6X22.5 is the stronger of the two in bending, with a plastic modulus of 99.961 cm³ against 97.339 cm³ - 2.7% more. At the same steel grade that translates directly into moment capacity, since M_pl,Rd = W_pl x f_y / gamma_M0.

ST 6X15.9 at 23.7 kg/m, against 33.5 kg/m for the other - a saving of 41.4%. Over a repeated floor beam that is a real cost difference, but check it against the deflection case before taking it.

Structurally it is the closest equivalent we hold: ST 6X15.9 gives 97.339 cm³ of plastic modulus and 616 cm⁴ of inertia against 99.961 cm³ and 690.9 cm⁴. Re-check deflection and the connection details before swapping, since the flange and web thicknesses differ.

WT 6X22.5, with a second moment of area of 690.9 cm⁴ against 616 cm⁴ (12.2% more). Deflection under a uniform load goes as 5wL⁴/384EI, so it is inversely proportional to I - on a span where the deflection limit governs rather than strength, this is the number that decides the section.

Related comparisons

Tee 165×152×27 vs ST 6X15.9Tee 127×152×24 vs WT 6X22.5Tee 127×152×24 vs ST 6X15.9
Rate this
No ratings yet
Sign in to join the discussion.
Loading…