CivilAxisCivilAxis
☕ Support🌐 Community

RHS 250×100×7.1 vs RHS 250×150×6

RHS 250×100×7.1 is an RHS Hot-finished section from the UK Blue Book (SCI P363); RHS 250×150×6 is the closest equivalent in the European (Continental) range. RHS 250×150×6 carries more bending: 378 cm³ of plastic modulus against 363 cm³, 4.0% more. RHS 250×150×6 is the lighter of the two at 35.8 kg/m against 37 kg/m, a saving of 3.4% on steel weight. Both are about 250 mm deep, so either fits the same construction zone.

Section properties side by side. Bold marks the more favourable value where one is.
PropertyRHS 250×100×7.1
RHS Hot-finished
RHS 250×150×6
RHS Cold-formed
Difference
Mass37 kg/m35.8 kg/m+3.4%
Depth250 mm250 mmsame
Width100 mm150 mm-33.3%
Web thickness0 mm0 mmsame
Flange thickness0 mm0 mmsame
Area47.1 cm²45.6 cm²+3.3%
Second moment, major (Iy)3,560 cm⁴3,886 cm⁴-8.4%
Plastic modulus, major (Wpl,y)363 cm³378 cm³-4.0%
Elastic modulus, major (Wel,y)285 cm³311 cm³-8.4%
Second moment, minor (Iz)827 cm⁴1,768 cm⁴-53.2%
Plastic modulus, minor (Wpl,z)188 cm³266 cm³-29.3%
Radius of gyration, minor (iz)4.19 cm6.23 cm-32.7%
Torsion constant (It)2,200 cm⁴3,886 cm⁴-43.4%

RHS 250×100×7.1 to BS EN 10210-2:2006; RHS 250×150×6 to EN 10219 · Continental Steel. Difference is expressed relative to RHS 250×150×6.

How to choose between them

On stiffness, RHS 250×150×6 has the larger second moment of area: 3,886 cm⁴ against 3,560 cm⁴, a difference of 8.4%. 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 250×150×6 is the more efficient section: 10.6 against 9.8 cm³ per kg/m, 7.1% 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.

The two diverge much more about the minor axis: RHS 250×150×6 has 266 cm³ of minor-axis plastic modulus against 188 cm³, 29.3% 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 Cold-formed 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 3.4% weight.

In short, RHS 250×150×6 is the stronger section and RHS 250×150×6 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 250×150×6 is the stronger of the two in bending, with a plastic modulus of 378 cm³ against 363 cm³ - 4.0% more. At the same steel grade that translates directly into moment capacity, since M_pl,Rd = W_pl x f_y / gamma_M0.

RHS 250×150×6 at 35.8 kg/m, against 37 kg/m for the other - a saving of 3.4%. 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 250×150×6 gives 378 cm³ of plastic modulus and 3,886 cm⁴ of inertia against 363 cm³ and 3,560 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 250×150×6, with a second moment of area of 3,886 cm⁴ against 3,560 cm⁴ (8.4% 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 250×100×7.1 vs CF RHS 250×150×6RHS 250×100×7.1 vs RHS 250×150×6
Rate this
No ratings yet
Sign in to join the discussion.
Loading…