CivilAxisCivilAxis
☕ Support🌐 Community

RHS 120×60×7.1 vs RHS 120×80×6

RHS 120×60×7.1 is an RHS Hot-finished section from the UK Blue Book (SCI P363); RHS 120×80×6 is the closest equivalent in the European (Continental) range. RHS 120×80×6 carries more bending: 87.3 cm³ of plastic modulus against 84.4 cm³, 3.3% more. RHS 120×80×6 is the lighter of the two at 17.6 kg/m against 18.1 kg/m, a saving of 2.8% on steel weight. 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 120×60×7.1
RHS Hot-finished
RHS 120×80×6
RHS
Difference
Mass18.1 kg/m17.6 kg/m+2.8%
Depth120 mm120 mmsame
Width60 mm80 mm-25.0%
Web thickness0 mm0 mmsame
Flange thickness0 mm0 mmsame
Area23 cm²22.2 cm²+3.6%
Second moment, major (Iy)391 cm⁴423 cm⁴-7.6%
Plastic modulus, major (Wpl,y)84.4 cm³87.3 cm³-3.3%
Elastic modulus, major (Wel,y)65.2 cm³70.6 cm³-7.6%
Second moment, minor (Iz)126 cm⁴222 cm⁴-43.2%
Plastic modulus, minor (Wpl,z)50.8 cm³65.5 cm³-22.4%
Radius of gyration, minor (iz)2.34 cm3.17 cm-26.2%
Torsion constant (It)317 cm⁴468 cm⁴-32.3%

RHS 120×60×7.1 to BS EN 10210-2:2006; RHS 120×80×6 to EN 10219 · Continental Steel. Difference is expressed relative to RHS 120×80×6.

How to choose between them

On stiffness, RHS 120×80×6 has the larger second moment of area: 423 cm⁴ against 391 cm⁴, a difference of 7.6%. 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 of steel, RHS 120×80×6 is the more efficient section: 5.0 against 4.7 cm³ per kg/m, 6.0% 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: RHS 120×80×6 has 65.5 cm³ of minor-axis plastic modulus against 50.8 cm³, 22.4% 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.

These come from different catalogues, so treat the swap as a design change rather than a like-for-like substitution. RHS Hot-finished sections are specified to BS EN 10210-2:2006 and RHS to EN 10219 · Continental Steel; 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 2.8% weight.

In short, RHS 120×80×6 is the stronger section and RHS 120×80×6 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

RHS 120×80×6 is the stronger of the two in bending, with a plastic modulus of 87.3 cm³ against 84.4 cm³ - 3.3% more. At the same steel grade that translates directly into moment capacity, since M_pl,Rd = W_pl x f_y / gamma_M0.

RHS 120×80×6 at 17.6 kg/m, against 18.1 kg/m for the other - a saving of 2.8%. 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: RHS 120×80×6 gives 87.3 cm³ of plastic modulus and 423 cm⁴ of inertia against 84.4 cm³ and 391 cm⁴. But they are from different catalogues (BS EN 10210-2:2006 and EN 10219 · Continental Steel), so this is a design change, not a drop-in swap: re-check deflection, connection detailing and local availability.

RHS 120×80×6, with a second moment of area of 423 cm⁴ against 391 cm⁴ (7.6% 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.

Related comparisons

RHS 120×60×7.1 vs CF RHS 120×80×6RHS 120×60×7.1 vs RHS 120×80×6
Rate this
No ratings yet
Sign in to join the discussion.
Loading…