CivilAxisCivilAxis
☕ Support🌐 Community

SHS 140×140×10 vs SHS 150×150×9

SHS 140×140×10 is an SHS Hot-finished section from the UK Blue Book (SCI P363); SHS 150×150×9 is the closest equivalent in the European (Continental) range. They are close to interchangeable in bending: 246 cm³ against 248 cm³ of plastic modulus, a difference of 0.8%. They weigh essentially the same, 40 kg/m and 40.52 kg/m. SHS 150×150×9 is deeper, 150 mm against 140 mm, which matters where the floor zone is tight.

Section properties side by side. Bold marks the more favourable value where one is.
PropertySHS 140×140×10
SHS Hot-finished
SHS 150×150×9
SHS Cold-formed
Difference
Mass40 kg/m40.5 kg/m-1.3%
Depth140 mm150 mm-6.7%
Width140 mm150 mm-6.7%
Web thickness0 mm0 mmsame
Flange thickness0 mm0 mmsame
Area50.9 cm²48 cm²+6.0%
Second moment, major (Iy)1,420 cm⁴1,537 cm⁴-7.6%
Plastic modulus, major (Wpl,y)246 cm³248 cm³-0.8%
Elastic modulus, major (Wel,y)202 cm³205 cm³-1.5%
Second moment, minor (Iz)1,420 cm⁴1,537 cm⁴-7.6%
Plastic modulus, minor (Wpl,z)246 cm³248 cm³-0.8%
Radius of gyration, minor (iz)5.27 cm5.66 cm-6.9%
Torsion constant (It)2,270 cm⁴2,608 cm⁴-13.0%

SHS 140×140×10 to BS EN 10210-2:2006; SHS 150×150×9 to EN 10219 · Continental Steel. Difference is expressed relative to SHS 150×150×9.

How to choose between them

On stiffness, SHS 150×150×9 has the larger second moment of area: 1,537 cm⁴ against 1,420 cm⁴, a difference of 7.6%. 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 (6.2 against 6.1 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.

These come from different catalogues, so treat the swap as a design change rather than a like-for-like substitution. SHS Hot-finished sections are specified to BS EN 10210-2:2006 and SHS 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 a marginal amount of weight.

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. SHS 140×140×10 has a plastic modulus of 246 cm³ and SHS 150×150×9 has 248 cm³, a difference of only 0.8% - within the margin that section choice normally turns on. Compare stiffness and availability instead.

Neither meaningfully: SHS 140×140×10 is 40 kg/m and SHS 150×150×9 is 40.52 kg/m. On a tonnage basis they cost the same.

Structurally it is the closest equivalent we hold: SHS 150×150×9 gives 248 cm³ of plastic modulus and 1,537 cm⁴ of inertia against 246 cm³ and 1,420 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.

SHS 150×150×9, with a second moment of area of 1,537 cm⁴ against 1,420 cm⁴ (7.6% 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

SHS 150×150×8 vs SHS 150×150×9SHS 150×150×8.8 vs SHS 150×150×9SHS 160×160×7.1 vs SHS 150×150×9
Rate this
No ratings yet
Sign in to join the discussion.
Loading…