CivilAxisCivilAxis
☕ Support🌐 Community

SHS 140×140×7.1 vs CF SHS 140×140×8

SHS 140×140×7.1 is an SHS Hot-finished section from the UK Blue Book (SCI P363); CF SHS 140×140×8 is the closest equivalent in the UK Blue Book (SCI P363). CF SHS 140×140×8 carries more bending: 194 cm³ of plastic modulus against 184 cm³, 5.2% more. SHS 140×140×7.1 is the lighter of the two at 29.2 kg/m against 31.4 kg/m, a saving of 7.0% 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 140×140×7.1
SHS Hot-finished
CF SHS 140×140×8
SHS Cold-formed
Difference
Mass29.2 kg/m31.4 kg/m-7.0%
Depth140 mm140 mmsame
Width140 mm140 mmsame
Web thickness0 mm0 mmsame
Flange thickness0 mm0 mmsame
Area37.2 cm²40 cm²-7.0%
Second moment, major (Iy)1,090 cm⁴1,130 cm⁴-3.5%
Plastic modulus, major (Wpl,y)184 cm³194 cm³-5.2%
Elastic modulus, major (Wel,y)155 cm³161 cm³-3.7%
Second moment, minor (Iz)1,090 cm⁴1,130 cm⁴-3.5%
Plastic modulus, minor (Wpl,z)184 cm³194 cm³-5.2%
Radius of gyration, minor (iz)5.4 cm5.3 cm+1.9%
Torsion constant (It)1,710 cm⁴1,900 cm⁴-10.0%

SHS 140×140×7.1 to BS EN 10210-2:2006; CF SHS 140×140×8 to BS EN 10219-2:2006. Difference is expressed relative to CF SHS 140×140×8.

How to choose between them

On stiffness, CF SHS 140×140×8 has the larger second moment of area: 1,130 cm⁴ against 1,090 cm⁴, a difference of 3.5%. 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 (6.3 against 6.2 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, CF SHS 140×140×8 is the stronger section and SHS 140×140×7.1 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

CF SHS 140×140×8 is the stronger of the two in bending, with a plastic modulus of 194 cm³ against 184 cm³ - 5.2% more. At the same steel grade that translates directly into moment capacity, since M_pl,Rd = W_pl x f_y / gamma_M0.

SHS 140×140×7.1 at 29.2 kg/m, against 31.4 kg/m for the other - a saving of 7.0%. 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: CF SHS 140×140×8 gives 194 cm³ of plastic modulus and 1,130 cm⁴ of inertia against 184 cm³ and 1,090 cm⁴. Re-check deflection and the connection details before swapping, since the flange and web thicknesses differ.

CF SHS 140×140×8, with a second moment of area of 1,130 cm⁴ against 1,090 cm⁴ (3.5% 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

SHS 140×140×7.1 vs SHS 150×150×6SHS 140×140×7.1 vs SHS 150×150×6.3SHS 140×140×8 vs CF SHS 140×140×8SHS 150×150×6.3 vs CF SHS 140×140×8
Rate this
No ratings yet
Sign in to join the discussion.
Loading…