CivilAxisCivilAxis
☕ Support🌐 Community

HE 280 A vs HP 10X57

HE 280 A is an HE section from the European (Continental) range; HP 10X57 is the closest equivalent in the American AISC Shapes Database. They are close to interchangeable in bending: 1110 cm³ against 1089.7 cm³ of plastic modulus, a difference of 1.9%. HE 280 A is the lighter of the two at 76.4 kg/m against 84.8 kg/m, a saving of 9.9% on steel weight. HE 280 A is deeper, 270 mm against 253.7 mm, which matters where the floor zone is tight.

Section properties side by side. Bold marks the more favourable value where one is.
PropertyHE 280 A
HE
HP 10X57
HP
Difference
Mass76.4 kg/m84.8 kg/m-9.9%
Depth270 mm253.7 mm+6.4%
Width280 mm259.1 mm+8.1%
Web thickness8 mm14.4 mm-44.4%
Flange thickness13 mm14.4 mm-9.7%
Area97.3 cm²107.7 cm²-9.7%
Second moment, major (Iy)13,700 cm⁴12,237 cm⁴+12.0%
Plastic modulus, major (Wpl,y)1,110 cm³1,089.7 cm³+1.9%
Elastic modulus, major (Wel,y)1,010 cm³963.56 cm³+4.8%
Second moment, minor (Iz)4,760 cm⁴4,204 cm⁴+13.2%
Plastic modulus, minor (Wpl,z)518 cm³496.53 cm³+4.3%
Radius of gyration, minor (iz)7 cm6.22 cm+12.5%
Torsion constant (It)63.5 cm⁴82 cm⁴-22.6%

HE 280 A to EN 10365 · Continental Steel; HP 10X57 to AISC Shapes Database v16.0. Difference is expressed relative to HP 10X57.

How to choose between them

On stiffness, HE 280 A has the larger second moment of area: 13,700 cm⁴ against 12,237 cm⁴, a difference of 12.0%. 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, HE 280 A is the more efficient section: 14.5 against 12.9 cm³ per kg/m, 13.1% 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.

These come from different catalogues, so treat the swap as a design change rather than a like-for-like substitution. HE sections are specified to EN 10365 · Continental Steel and HP 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 9.9% weight.

In short, HE 280 A is the stronger section and HE 280 A 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. HE 280 A has a plastic modulus of 1110 cm³ and HP 10X57 has 1089.7 cm³, a difference of only 1.9% - within the margin that section choice normally turns on. Compare stiffness and availability instead.

HE 280 A at 76.4 kg/m, against 84.8 kg/m for the other - a saving of 9.9%. 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: HP 10X57 gives 1089.7 cm³ of plastic modulus and 12,237 cm⁴ of inertia against 1110 cm³ and 13,700 cm⁴. But they are from different catalogues (EN 10365 · Continental Steel 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.

HE 280 A, with a second moment of area of 13,700 cm⁴ against 12,237 cm⁴ (12.0% 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

W 10X54 vs HE 280 AW 10X54 vs HP 10X57
Rate this
No ratings yet
Sign in to join the discussion.
Loading…