CivilAxisCivilAxis
☕ Support🌐 Community

RHS 250×150×8 vs CF RHS 250×150×8

RHS 250×150×8 is an RHS Hot-finished section from the UK Blue Book (SCI P363); CF RHS 250×150×8 is the closest equivalent in the UK Blue Book (SCI P363). RHS 250×150×8 carries more bending: 501 cm³ of plastic modulus against 482 cm³, 3.9% more. CF RHS 250×150×8 is the lighter of the two at 46.5 kg/m against 47.7 kg/m, a saving of 2.6% 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 250×150×8
RHS Hot-finished
CF RHS 250×150×8
RHS Cold-formed
Difference
Mass47.7 kg/m46.5 kg/m+2.6%
Depth250 mm250 mmsame
Width150 mm150 mmsame
Web thickness0 mm0 mmsame
Flange thickness0 mm0 mmsame
Area60.8 cm²59.2 cm²+2.7%
Second moment, major (Iy)5,110 cm⁴4,890 cm⁴+4.5%
Plastic modulus, major (Wpl,y)501 cm³482 cm³+3.9%
Elastic modulus, major (Wel,y)409 cm³391 cm³+4.6%
Second moment, minor (Iz)2,300 cm⁴2,220 cm⁴+3.6%
Plastic modulus, minor (Wpl,z)350 cm³340 cm³+2.9%
Radius of gyration, minor (iz)6.15 cm6.12 cm+0.5%
Torsion constant (It)5,020 cm⁴5,050 cm⁴-0.6%

RHS 250×150×8 to BS EN 10210-2:2006; CF RHS 250×150×8 to BS EN 10219-2:2006. Difference is expressed relative to CF RHS 250×150×8.

How to choose between them

On stiffness, RHS 250×150×8 has the larger second moment of area: 5,110 cm⁴ against 4,890 cm⁴, a difference of 4.5%. 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 (10.5 against 10.4 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, RHS 250×150×8 is the stronger section and CF RHS 250×150×8 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 250×150×8 is the stronger of the two in bending, with a plastic modulus of 501 cm³ against 482 cm³ - 3.9% more. At the same steel grade that translates directly into moment capacity, since M_pl,Rd = W_pl x f_y / gamma_M0.

CF RHS 250×150×8 at 46.5 kg/m, against 47.7 kg/m for the other - a saving of 2.6%. 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: CF RHS 250×150×8 gives 482 cm³ of plastic modulus and 4,890 cm⁴ of inertia against 501 cm³ and 5,110 cm⁴. Re-check deflection and the connection details before swapping, since the flange and web thicknesses differ.

RHS 250×150×8, with a second moment of area of 5,110 cm⁴ against 4,890 cm⁴ (4.5% 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 250×100×10 vs CF RHS 250×150×8RHS 250×100×10 vs RHS 250×150×8RHS 250×100×10 vs RHS 250×150×8RHS 260×140×8 vs RHS 250×150×8
Rate this
No ratings yet
Sign in to join the discussion.
Loading…