CivilAxisCivilAxis
☕ Support🌐 Community

RHS 260×140×5 vs CF RHS 250×150×5

RHS 260×140×5 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). RHS 260×140×5 carries more bending: 331 cm³ of plastic modulus against 320 cm³, 3.4% more. They weigh essentially the same, 30.4 kg/m and 30.1 kg/m. RHS 260×140×5 is deeper, 260 mm against 250 mm, which matters where the floor zone is tight.

Section properties side by side. Bold marks the more favourable value where one is.
PropertyRHS 260×140×5
RHS Hot-finished
CF RHS 250×150×5
RHS Cold-formed
Difference
Mass30.4 kg/m30.1 kg/m+1.0%
Depth260 mm250 mm+4.0%
Width140 mm150 mm-6.7%
Web thickness0 mm0 mmsame
Flange thickness0 mm0 mmsame
Area38.7 cm²38.4 cm²+0.8%
Second moment, major (Iy)3,530 cm⁴3,300 cm⁴+7.0%
Plastic modulus, major (Wpl,y)331 cm³320 cm³+3.4%
Elastic modulus, major (Wel,y)272 cm³264 cm³+3.0%
Second moment, minor (Iz)1,350 cm⁴1,510 cm⁴-10.6%
Plastic modulus, minor (Wpl,z)216 cm³225 cm³-4.0%
Radius of gyration, minor (iz)5.91 cm6.27 cm-5.7%
Torsion constant (It)3,080 cm⁴3,290 cm⁴-6.4%

RHS 260×140×5 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 260×140×5 has the larger second moment of area: 3,530 cm⁴ against 3,300 cm⁴, a difference of 7.0%. 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 260×140×5 is the more efficient section: 10.9 against 10.6 cm³ per kg/m, 2.4% 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.

In short, RHS 260×140×5 is the stronger section and CF RHS 250×150×5 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 260×140×5 is the stronger of the two in bending, with a plastic modulus of 331 cm³ against 320 cm³ - 3.4% more. At the same steel grade that translates directly into moment capacity, since M_pl,Rd = W_pl x f_y / gamma_M0.

Neither meaningfully: RHS 260×140×5 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 331 cm³ and 3,530 cm⁴. Re-check deflection and the connection details before swapping, since the flange and web thicknesses differ.

RHS 260×140×5, with a second moment of area of 3,530 cm⁴ against 3,300 cm⁴ (7.0% 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 250×150×5 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…