CivilAxisCivilAxis
☕ Support🌐 Community

SHS 140×140×6.3 vs SHS 140×140×6

SHS 140×140×6.3 is an SHS Hot-finished section from the UK Blue Book (SCI P363); SHS 140×140×6 is the closest equivalent in the European (Continental) range. SHS 140×140×6.3 carries more bending: 166 cm³ of plastic modulus against 159 cm³, 4.4% more. SHS 140×140×6 is the lighter of the two at 25.1 kg/m against 26.1 kg/m, a saving of 4.0% on steel weight. Both are about 140 mm deep, so either fits the same construction zone.

Section properties side by side. Bold marks the more favourable value where one is.
PropertySHS 140×140×6.3
SHS Hot-finished
SHS 140×140×6
SHS
Difference
Mass26.1 kg/m25.1 kg/m+4.0%
Depth140 mm140 mmsame
Width140 mm140 mmsame
Web thickness0 mm0 mmsame
Flange thickness0 mm0 mmsame
Area33.3 cm²31.8 cm²+4.7%
Second moment, major (Iy)984 cm⁴944 cm⁴+4.2%
Plastic modulus, major (Wpl,y)166 cm³159 cm³+4.4%
Elastic modulus, major (Wel,y)141 cm³135 cm³+4.4%
Second moment, minor (Iz)984 cm⁴944 cm⁴+4.2%
Plastic modulus, minor (Wpl,z)166 cm³159 cm³+4.4%
Radius of gyration, minor (iz)5.44 cm5.45 cm-0.2%
Torsion constant (It)1,540 cm⁴1,475 cm⁴+4.4%

SHS 140×140×6.3 to BS EN 10210-2:2006; SHS 140×140×6 to EN 10219 · Continental Steel. Difference is expressed relative to SHS 140×140×6.

How to choose between them

On stiffness, SHS 140×140×6.3 has the larger second moment of area: 984 cm⁴ against 944 cm⁴, a difference of 4.2%. 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 (6.4 against 6.3 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 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 4.0% weight.

In short, SHS 140×140×6.3 is the stronger section and SHS 140×140×6 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

SHS 140×140×6.3 is the stronger of the two in bending, with a plastic modulus of 166 cm³ against 159 cm³ - 4.4% more. At the same steel grade that translates directly into moment capacity, since M_pl,Rd = W_pl x f_y / gamma_M0.

SHS 140×140×6 at 25.1 kg/m, against 26.1 kg/m for the other - a saving of 4.0%. 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: SHS 140×140×6 gives 159 cm³ of plastic modulus and 944 cm⁴ of inertia against 166 cm³ and 984 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 140×140×6.3, with a second moment of area of 984 cm⁴ against 944 cm⁴ (4.2% 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.

Rate this
No ratings yet
Sign in to join the discussion.
Loading…