CivilAxisCivilAxis
☕ Support🌐 Community

WT 6X29 vs ST 6X17.5

WT 6X29 is an WT section from the American AISC Shapes Database; ST 6X17.5 is the closest equivalent in the American AISC Shapes Database. ST 6X17.5 carries more bending: 116.68 cm³ of plastic modulus against 114.22 cm³, 2.1% more. ST 6X17.5 is the lighter of the two at 26 kg/m against 43.2 kg/m, a saving of 66.2% on steel weight. Both are about 154 mm deep, so either fits the same construction zone.

Section properties side by side. Bold marks the more favourable value where one is.
PropertyWT 6X29
WT
ST 6X17.5
ST
Difference
Mass43.2 kg/m26 kg/m+66.2%
Depth154.9 mm152.4 mm+1.6%
Width254 mm129 mm+96.9%
Web thickness9.1 mm10.9 mm-16.5%
Flange thickness16.3 mm13.8 mm+18.1%
Area55 cm²33 cm²+66.7%
Second moment, major (Iy)795 cm⁴715.9 cm⁴+11.0%
Plastic modulus, major (Wpl,y)114.22 cm³116.68 cm³-2.1%
Elastic modulus, major (Wel,y)61.615 cm³64.729 cm³-4.8%
Second moment, minor (Iz)2,227 cm⁴204.8 cm⁴+987.4%
Plastic modulus, minor (Wpl,z)265.47 cm³55.716 cm³+376.5%
Radius of gyration, minor (iz)6.38 cm2.49 cm+156.2%
Torsion constant (It)43.7 cm⁴21.81 cm⁴+100.4%

WT 6X29 to AISC Shapes Database v16.0; ST 6X17.5 to AISC Shapes Database v16.0. Difference is expressed relative to ST 6X17.5.

How to choose between them

On stiffness, WT 6X29 has the larger second moment of area: 795 cm⁴ against 715.9 cm⁴, a difference of 11.0%. 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 6X17.5 is the more efficient section: 4.5 against 2.6 cm³ per kg/m, 41.1% 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 6X29 has 265.47 cm³ of minor-axis plastic modulus against 55.716 cm³, 376.5% 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, ST 6X17.5 is the stronger section and ST 6X17.5 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

ST 6X17.5 is the stronger of the two in bending, with a plastic modulus of 116.68 cm³ against 114.22 cm³ - 2.1% more. At the same steel grade that translates directly into moment capacity, since M_pl,Rd = W_pl x f_y / gamma_M0.

ST 6X17.5 at 26 kg/m, against 43.2 kg/m for the other - a saving of 66.2%. 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 6X17.5 gives 116.68 cm³ of plastic modulus and 715.9 cm⁴ of inertia against 114.22 cm³ and 795 cm⁴. Re-check deflection and the connection details before swapping, since the flange and web thicknesses differ.

WT 6X29, with a second moment of area of 795 cm⁴ against 715.9 cm⁴ (11.0% 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

WT 6X25 vs ST 6X17.5
Rate this
No ratings yet
Sign in to join the discussion.
Loading…