CivilAxisCivilAxis
☕ Support🌐 Community

CHS 101.6×5.6 vs PIPE 3-1-2STD

CHS 101.6×5.6 is an CHS Hot-finished section from the UK Blue Book (SCI P363); PIPE 3-1-2STD is the closest equivalent in the American AISC Shapes Database. CHS 101.6×5.6 carries more bending: 51.7 cm³ of plastic modulus against 49.653 cm³, 4.1% more. CHS 101.6×5.6 is the lighter of the two at 13.3 kg/m against 13.6 kg/m, a saving of 2.2% on steel weight. Both are about 102 mm deep, so either fits the same construction zone.

Section properties side by side. Bold marks the more favourable value where one is.
PropertyCHS 101.6×5.6
CHS Hot-finished
PIPE 3-1-2STD
Pipe
Difference
Mass13.3 kg/m13.6 kg/m-2.2%
Depth101.6 mm101.6 mmsame
Width101.6 mm101.6 mmsame
Web thickness0 mm5.4 mm-100.0%
Flange thickness0 mm0 mmsame
Area16.9 cm²16.1 cm²+5.0%
Second moment, major (Iy)195 cm⁴188.1 cm⁴+3.7%
Plastic modulus, major (Wpl,y)51.7 cm³49.653 cm³+4.1%
Elastic modulus, major (Wel,y)38.4 cm³37.035 cm³+3.7%
Second moment, minor (Iz)195 cm⁴188.1 cm⁴+3.7%
Plastic modulus, minor (Wpl,z)51.7 cm³49.653 cm³+4.1%
Radius of gyration, minor (iz)3.4 cm3.4 cmsame
Torsion constant (It)390 cm⁴376.3 cm⁴+3.6%

CHS 101.6×5.6 to BS EN 10210-2:2006; PIPE 3-1-2STD to AISC Shapes Database v16.0. Difference is expressed relative to PIPE 3-1-2STD.

How to choose between them

On stiffness, CHS 101.6×5.6 has the larger second moment of area: 195 cm⁴ against 188.1 cm⁴, a difference of 3.7%. 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, CHS 101.6×5.6 is the more efficient section: 3.9 against 3.7 cm³ per kg/m, 6.5% 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.

These come from different catalogues, so treat the swap as a design change rather than a like-for-like substitution. CHS Hot-finished sections are specified to BS EN 10210-2:2006 and Pipe to AISC Shapes Database v16.0; the steel grades, tolerances and available lengths differ, connection details and bolt gauges are set out differently, and the two are rarely both stocked in the same market. Check availability before changing a section on a drawing to save 2.2% weight.

In short, CHS 101.6×5.6 is the stronger section and CHS 101.6×5.6 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

CHS 101.6×5.6 is the stronger of the two in bending, with a plastic modulus of 51.7 cm³ against 49.653 cm³ - 4.1% more. At the same steel grade that translates directly into moment capacity, since M_pl,Rd = W_pl x f_y / gamma_M0.

CHS 101.6×5.6 at 13.3 kg/m, against 13.6 kg/m for the other - a saving of 2.2%. 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: PIPE 3-1-2STD gives 49.653 cm³ of plastic modulus and 188.1 cm⁴ of inertia against 51.7 cm³ and 195 cm⁴. But they are from different catalogues (BS EN 10210-2:2006 and AISC Shapes Database v16.0), so this is a design change, not a drop-in swap: re-check deflection, connection detailing and local availability.

CHS 101.6×5.6, with a second moment of area of 195 cm⁴ against 188.1 cm⁴ (3.7% 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.

Rate this
No ratings yet
Sign in to join the discussion.
Loading…