CivilAxisCivilAxis
☕ Support🌐 Community

RHS 120×60×3 vs CF RHS 120×60×3

RHS 120×60×3 is an RHS Hot-finished section from the UK Blue Book (SCI P363); CF RHS 120×60×3 is the closest equivalent in the UK Blue Book (SCI P363). RHS 120×60×3 carries more bending: 40 cm³ of plastic modulus against 39.2 cm³, 2.0% more. They weigh essentially the same, 8.12 kg/m and 8.01 kg/m. Both are about 120 mm deep, so either fits the same construction zone.

Section properties side by side. Bold marks the more favourable value where one is.
PropertyRHS 120×60×3
RHS Hot-finished
CF RHS 120×60×3
RHS Cold-formed
Difference
Mass8.1 kg/m8 kg/m+1.4%
Depth120 mm120 mmsame
Width60 mm60 mmsame
Web thickness0 mm0 mmsame
Flange thickness0 mm0 mmsame
Area10.3 cm²10.2 cm²+1.0%
Second moment, major (Iy)194 cm⁴189 cm⁴+2.6%
Plastic modulus, major (Wpl,y)40 cm³39.2 cm³+2.0%
Elastic modulus, major (Wel,y)32.3 cm³31.5 cm³+2.5%
Second moment, minor (Iz)65.5 cm⁴64.4 cm⁴+1.7%
Plastic modulus, minor (Wpl,z)24.6 cm³24.2 cm³+1.7%
Radius of gyration, minor (iz)2.52 cm2.51 cm+0.4%
Torsion constant (It)156 cm⁴156 cm⁴same

RHS 120×60×3 to BS EN 10210-2:2006; CF RHS 120×60×3 to BS EN 10219-2:2006. Difference is expressed relative to CF RHS 120×60×3.

How to choose between them

On stiffness, RHS 120×60×3 has the larger second moment of area: 194 cm⁴ against 189 cm⁴, a difference of 2.6%. 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, the two are equally efficient (4.9 against 4.9 cm³ per kg/m), so on a pure steel-tonnage basis there is nothing to choose between them. The decision comes down to availability, connection detailing and what the rest of the frame uses.

In short, RHS 120×60×3 is the stronger section and CF RHS 120×60×3 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

RHS 120×60×3 is the stronger of the two in bending, with a plastic modulus of 40 cm³ against 39.2 cm³ - 2.0% more. At the same steel grade that translates directly into moment capacity, since M_pl,Rd = W_pl x f_y / gamma_M0.

Neither meaningfully: RHS 120×60×3 is 8.12 kg/m and CF RHS 120×60×3 is 8.01 kg/m. On a tonnage basis they cost the same.

Structurally it is the closest equivalent we hold: CF RHS 120×60×3 gives 39.2 cm³ of plastic modulus and 189 cm⁴ of inertia against 40 cm³ and 194 cm⁴. Re-check deflection and the connection details before swapping, since the flange and web thicknesses differ.

RHS 120×60×3, with a second moment of area of 194 cm⁴ against 189 cm⁴ (2.6% 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…