CivilAxisCivilAxis
☕ Support🌐 Community

SHS 180×180×6.3 vs CF SHS 180×180×6.3

SHS 180×180×6.3 is an SHS Hot-finished section from the UK Blue Book (SCI P363); CF SHS 180×180×6.3 is the closest equivalent in the UK Blue Book (SCI P363). SHS 180×180×6.3 carries more bending: 281 cm³ of plastic modulus against 273 cm³, 2.9% more. CF SHS 180×180×6.3 is the lighter of the two at 33.3 kg/m against 34 kg/m, a saving of 2.1% on steel weight. Both are about 180 mm deep, so either fits the same construction zone.

Section properties side by side. Bold marks the more favourable value where one is.
PropertySHS 180×180×6.3
SHS Hot-finished
CF SHS 180×180×6.3
SHS Cold-formed
Difference
Mass34 kg/m33.3 kg/m+2.1%
Depth180 mm180 mmsame
Width180 mm180 mmsame
Web thickness0 mm0 mmsame
Flange thickness0 mm0 mmsame
Area43.3 cm²42.4 cm²+2.1%
Second moment, major (Iy)2,170 cm⁴2,100 cm⁴+3.3%
Plastic modulus, major (Wpl,y)281 cm³273 cm³+2.9%
Elastic modulus, major (Wel,y)241 cm³233 cm³+3.4%
Second moment, minor (Iz)2,170 cm⁴2,100 cm⁴+3.3%
Plastic modulus, minor (Wpl,z)281 cm³273 cm³+2.9%
Radius of gyration, minor (iz)7.07 cm7.03 cm+0.6%
Torsion constant (It)3,360 cm⁴3,380 cm⁴-0.6%

SHS 180×180×6.3 to BS EN 10210-2:2006; CF SHS 180×180×6.3 to BS EN 10219-2:2006. Difference is expressed relative to CF SHS 180×180×6.3.

How to choose between them

On stiffness, SHS 180×180×6.3 has the larger second moment of area: 2,170 cm⁴ against 2,100 cm⁴, a difference of 3.3%. 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 (8.3 against 8.2 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, SHS 180×180×6.3 is the stronger section and CF SHS 180×180×6.3 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

SHS 180×180×6.3 is the stronger of the two in bending, with a plastic modulus of 281 cm³ against 273 cm³ - 2.9% more. At the same steel grade that translates directly into moment capacity, since M_pl,Rd = W_pl x f_y / gamma_M0.

CF SHS 180×180×6.3 at 33.3 kg/m, against 34 kg/m for the other - a saving of 2.1%. 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 180×180×6.3 gives 273 cm³ of plastic modulus and 2,100 cm⁴ of inertia against 281 cm³ and 2,170 cm⁴. Re-check deflection and the connection details before swapping, since the flange and web thicknesses differ.

SHS 180×180×6.3, with a second moment of area of 2,170 cm⁴ against 2,100 cm⁴ (3.3% 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…