CivilAxisCivilAxis
☕ Support🌐 Community

RHS 200×100×4 vs CF RHS 200×100×4

RHS 200×100×4 is an RHS Hot-finished section from the UK Blue Book (SCI P363); CF RHS 200×100×4 is the closest equivalent in the UK Blue Book (SCI P363). They are close to interchangeable in bending: 150 cm³ against 148 cm³ of plastic modulus, a difference of 1.4%. They weigh essentially the same, 18.2 kg/m and 18 kg/m. Both are about 200 mm deep, so either fits the same construction zone.

Section properties side by side. Bold marks the more favourable value where one is.
PropertyRHS 200×100×4
RHS Hot-finished
CF RHS 200×100×4
RHS Cold-formed
Difference
Mass18.2 kg/m18 kg/m+1.1%
Depth200 mm200 mmsame
Width100 mm100 mmsame
Web thickness0 mm0 mmsame
Flange thickness0 mm0 mmsame
Area23.2 cm²22.9 cm²+1.3%
Second moment, major (Iy)1,220 cm⁴1,200 cm⁴+1.7%
Plastic modulus, major (Wpl,y)150 cm³148 cm³+1.4%
Elastic modulus, major (Wel,y)122 cm³120 cm³+1.7%
Second moment, minor (Iz)416 cm⁴411 cm⁴+1.2%
Plastic modulus, minor (Wpl,z)92.8 cm³91.7 cm³+1.2%
Radius of gyration, minor (iz)4.24 cm4.23 cm+0.2%
Torsion constant (It)983 cm⁴985 cm⁴-0.2%

RHS 200×100×4 to BS EN 10210-2:2006; CF RHS 200×100×4 to BS EN 10219-2:2006. Difference is expressed relative to CF RHS 200×100×4.

How to choose between them

On stiffness, RHS 200×100×4 has the larger second moment of area: 1,220 cm⁴ against 1,200 cm⁴, a difference of 1.7%. 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 (8.2 against 8.2 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 200×100×4 has a plastic modulus of 150 cm³ and CF RHS 200×100×4 has 148 cm³, a difference of only 1.4% - within the margin that section choice normally turns on. Compare stiffness and availability instead.

Neither meaningfully: RHS 200×100×4 is 18.2 kg/m and CF RHS 200×100×4 is 18 kg/m. On a tonnage basis they cost the same.

Structurally it is the closest equivalent we hold: CF RHS 200×100×4 gives 148 cm³ of plastic modulus and 1,200 cm⁴ of inertia against 150 cm³ and 1,220 cm⁴. Re-check deflection and the connection details before swapping, since the flange and web thicknesses differ.

RHS 200×100×4, with a second moment of area of 1,220 cm⁴ against 1,200 cm⁴ (1.7% 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…