CivilAxisCivilAxis
☕ Support🌐 Community

SHS 150×150×6.3 vs CF SHS 140×140×8

SHS 150×150×6.3 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). They are close to interchangeable in bending: 192 cm³ against 194 cm³ of plastic modulus, a difference of 1.0%. SHS 150×150×6.3 is the lighter of the two at 28.1 kg/m against 31.4 kg/m, a saving of 10.5% on steel weight. SHS 150×150×6.3 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 150×150×6.3
SHS Hot-finished
CF SHS 140×140×8
SHS Cold-formed
Difference
Mass28.1 kg/m31.4 kg/m-10.5%
Depth150 mm140 mm+7.1%
Width150 mm140 mm+7.1%
Web thickness0 mm0 mmsame
Flange thickness0 mm0 mmsame
Area35.8 cm²40 cm²-10.5%
Second moment, major (Iy)1,220 cm⁴1,130 cm⁴+8.0%
Plastic modulus, major (Wpl,y)192 cm³194 cm³-1.0%
Elastic modulus, major (Wel,y)163 cm³161 cm³+1.2%
Second moment, minor (Iz)1,220 cm⁴1,130 cm⁴+8.0%
Plastic modulus, minor (Wpl,z)192 cm³194 cm³-1.0%
Radius of gyration, minor (iz)5.85 cm5.3 cm+10.4%
Torsion constant (It)1,910 cm⁴1,900 cm⁴+0.5%

SHS 150×150×6.3 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, SHS 150×150×6.3 has the larger second moment of area: 1,220 cm⁴ against 1,130 cm⁴, a difference of 8.0%. 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, SHS 150×150×6.3 is the more efficient section: 6.8 against 6.2 cm³ per kg/m, 10.6% 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, CF SHS 140×140×8 is the stronger section and SHS 150×150×6.3 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

They are effectively equal in bending. SHS 150×150×6.3 has a plastic modulus of 192 cm³ and CF SHS 140×140×8 has 194 cm³, a difference of only 1.0% - within the margin that section choice normally turns on. Compare stiffness and availability instead.

SHS 150×150×6.3 at 28.1 kg/m, against 31.4 kg/m for the other - a saving of 10.5%. 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 192 cm³ and 1,220 cm⁴. Re-check deflection and the connection details before swapping, since the flange and web thicknesses differ.

SHS 150×150×6.3, with a second moment of area of 1,220 cm⁴ against 1,130 cm⁴ (8.0% 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

SHS 140×140×7.1 vs CF SHS 140×140×8SHS 140×140×7.1 vs SHS 150×150×6.3SHS 140×140×8 vs CF SHS 140×140×8SHS 150×150×6.3 vs SHS 150×150×6.4
Rate this
No ratings yet
Sign in to join the discussion.
Loading…