CivilAxisCivilAxis
☕ Support🌐 Community

RHS 250×150×5 vs CF RHS 250×150×5

RHS 250×150×5 is an RHS Hot-finished section from the UK Blue Book (SCI P363); CF RHS 250×150×5 is the closest equivalent in the UK Blue Book (SCI P363). They are close to interchangeable in bending: 324 cm³ against 320 cm³ of plastic modulus, a difference of 1.3%. They weigh essentially the same, 30.4 kg/m and 30.1 kg/m. 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 250×150×5
RHS Hot-finished
CF RHS 250×150×5
RHS Cold-formed
Difference
Mass30.4 kg/m30.1 kg/m+1.0%
Depth250 mm250 mmsame
Width150 mm150 mmsame
Web thickness0 mm0 mmsame
Flange thickness0 mm0 mmsame
Area38.7 cm²38.4 cm²+0.8%
Second moment, major (Iy)3,360 cm⁴3,300 cm⁴+1.8%
Plastic modulus, major (Wpl,y)324 cm³320 cm³+1.3%
Elastic modulus, major (Wel,y)269 cm³264 cm³+1.9%
Second moment, minor (Iz)1,530 cm⁴1,510 cm⁴+1.3%
Plastic modulus, minor (Wpl,z)228 cm³225 cm³+1.3%
Radius of gyration, minor (iz)6.28 cm6.27 cm+0.2%
Torsion constant (It)3,280 cm⁴3,290 cm⁴-0.3%

RHS 250×150×5 to BS EN 10210-2:2006; CF RHS 250×150×5 to BS EN 10219-2:2006. Difference is expressed relative to CF RHS 250×150×5.

How to choose between them

On stiffness, RHS 250×150×5 has the larger second moment of area: 3,360 cm⁴ against 3,300 cm⁴, a difference of 1.8%. 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 (10.7 against 10.6 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 250×150×5 has a plastic modulus of 324 cm³ and CF RHS 250×150×5 has 320 cm³, a difference of only 1.3% - within the margin that section choice normally turns on. Compare stiffness and availability instead.

Neither meaningfully: RHS 250×150×5 is 30.4 kg/m and CF RHS 250×150×5 is 30.1 kg/m. On a tonnage basis they cost the same.

Structurally it is the closest equivalent we hold: CF RHS 250×150×5 gives 320 cm³ of plastic modulus and 3,300 cm⁴ of inertia against 324 cm³ and 3,360 cm⁴. Re-check deflection and the connection details before swapping, since the flange and web thicknesses differ.

RHS 250×150×5, with a second moment of area of 3,360 cm⁴ against 3,300 cm⁴ (1.8% 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 250×100×6.3 vs CF RHS 250×150×5RHS 250×100×6.3 vs RHS 250×150×5RHS 260×140×5 vs CF RHS 250×150×5RHS 260×140×5 vs RHS 250×150×5
Rate this
No ratings yet
Sign in to join the discussion.
Loading…