CivilAxisCivilAxis
☕ Support🌐 Community

RHS 150×100×5 vs CF RHS 150×100×5

RHS 150×100×5 is an RHS Hot-finished section from the UK Blue Book (SCI P363); CF RHS 150×100×5 is the closest equivalent in the UK Blue Book (SCI P363). They are close to interchangeable in bending: 119 cm³ against 117 cm³ of plastic modulus, a difference of 1.7%. They weigh essentially the same, 18.6 kg/m and 18.3 kg/m. Both are about 150 mm deep, so either fits the same construction zone.

Section properties side by side. Bold marks the more favourable value where one is.
PropertyRHS 150×100×5
RHS Hot-finished
CF RHS 150×100×5
RHS Cold-formed
Difference
Mass18.6 kg/m18.3 kg/m+1.6%
Depth150 mm150 mmsame
Width100 mm100 mmsame
Web thickness0 mm0 mmsame
Flange thickness0 mm0 mmsame
Area23.7 cm²23.4 cm²+1.3%
Second moment, major (Iy)739 cm⁴719 cm⁴+2.8%
Plastic modulus, major (Wpl,y)119 cm³117 cm³+1.7%
Elastic modulus, major (Wel,y)98.5 cm³95.9 cm³+2.7%
Second moment, minor (Iz)392 cm⁴384 cm⁴+2.1%
Plastic modulus, minor (Wpl,z)90.1 cm³88.3 cm³+2.0%
Radius of gyration, minor (iz)4.07 cm4.05 cm+0.5%
Torsion constant (It)807 cm⁴809 cm⁴-0.2%

RHS 150×100×5 to BS EN 10210-2:2006; CF RHS 150×100×5 to BS EN 10219-2:2006. Difference is expressed relative to CF RHS 150×100×5.

How to choose between them

On stiffness, RHS 150×100×5 has the larger second moment of area: 739 cm⁴ against 719 cm⁴, a difference of 2.8%. 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 (6.4 against 6.4 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, these two are genuine equivalents. Pick whichever your supplier stocks and the rest of the frame already uses.

Common questions

They are effectively equal in bending. RHS 150×100×5 has a plastic modulus of 119 cm³ and CF RHS 150×100×5 has 117 cm³, a difference of only 1.7% - within the margin that section choice normally turns on. Compare stiffness and availability instead.

Neither meaningfully: RHS 150×100×5 is 18.6 kg/m and CF RHS 150×100×5 is 18.3 kg/m. On a tonnage basis they cost the same.

Structurally it is the closest equivalent we hold: CF RHS 150×100×5 gives 117 cm³ of plastic modulus and 719 cm⁴ of inertia against 119 cm³ and 739 cm⁴. Re-check deflection and the connection details before swapping, since the flange and web thicknesses differ.

RHS 150×100×5, with a second moment of area of 739 cm⁴ against 719 cm⁴ (2.8% 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 150×100×5 vs RHS 150×75×6.4
Rate this
No ratings yet
Sign in to join the discussion.
Loading…