CivilAxisCivilAxis
☕ Support🌐 Community

CHS 168.3×10 vs PIPE 6XS

CHS 168.3×10 is an CHS Hot-finished section from the UK Blue Book (SCI P363); PIPE 6XS is the closest equivalent in the American AISC Shapes Database. They are close to interchangeable in bending: 251 cm³ against 255.64 cm³ of plastic modulus, a difference of 1.8%. CHS 168.3×10 is the lighter of the two at 39 kg/m against 42.6 kg/m, a saving of 8.5% on steel weight. Both are about 168 mm deep, so either fits the same construction zone.

Section properties side by side. Bold marks the more favourable value where one is.
PropertyCHS 168.3×10
CHS Hot-finished
PIPE 6XS
Pipe
Difference
Mass39 kg/m42.6 kg/m-8.5%
Depth168.3 mm168.3 mmsame
Width168.3 mm168.3 mmsame
Web thickness0 mm10.2 mm-100.0%
Flange thickness0 mm0 mmsame
Area49.7 cm²50.5 cm²-1.6%
Second moment, major (Iy)1,560 cm⁴1,594 cm⁴-2.1%
Plastic modulus, major (Wpl,y)251 cm³255.64 cm³-1.8%
Elastic modulus, major (Wel,y)186 cm³190.09 cm³-2.2%
Second moment, minor (Iz)1,560 cm⁴1,594 cm⁴-2.1%
Plastic modulus, minor (Wpl,z)251 cm³255.64 cm³-1.8%
Radius of gyration, minor (iz)5.61 cm5.59 cm+0.4%
Torsion constant (It)3,130 cm⁴3,188 cm⁴-1.8%

CHS 168.3×10 to BS EN 10210-2:2006; PIPE 6XS to AISC Shapes Database v16.0. Difference is expressed relative to PIPE 6XS.

How to choose between them

On stiffness, PIPE 6XS has the larger second moment of area: 1,594 cm⁴ against 1,560 cm⁴, a difference of 2.1%. 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 168.3×10 is the more efficient section: 6.4 against 6.0 cm³ per kg/m, 7.2% 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 8.5% weight.

In short, PIPE 6XS is the stronger section and CHS 168.3×10 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

They are effectively equal in bending. CHS 168.3×10 has a plastic modulus of 251 cm³ and PIPE 6XS has 255.64 cm³, a difference of only 1.8% - within the margin that section choice normally turns on. Compare stiffness and availability instead.

CHS 168.3×10 at 39 kg/m, against 42.6 kg/m for the other - a saving of 8.5%. 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 6XS gives 255.64 cm³ of plastic modulus and 1,594 cm⁴ of inertia against 251 cm³ and 1,560 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.

PIPE 6XS, with a second moment of area of 1,594 cm⁴ against 1,560 cm⁴ (2.1% 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

CHS 168.3×10 vs CF CHS 168.3×10
Rate this
No ratings yet
Sign in to join the discussion.
Loading…