CivilAxisCivilAxis
☕ Support🌐 Community

SHS 180×180×8 vs CF SHS 180×180×8

SHS 180×180×8 is an SHS Hot-finished section from the UK Blue Book (SCI P363); CF SHS 180×180×8 is the closest equivalent in the UK Blue Book (SCI P363). SHS 180×180×8 carries more bending: 349 cm³ of plastic modulus against 336 cm³, 3.9% more. CF SHS 180×180×8 is the lighter of the two at 41.5 kg/m against 42.7 kg/m, a saving of 2.9% 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 180×180×8
SHS Hot-finished
CF SHS 180×180×8
SHS Cold-formed
Difference
Mass42.7 kg/m41.5 kg/m+2.9%
Depth180 mm180 mmsame
Width180 mm180 mmsame
Web thickness0 mm0 mmsame
Flange thickness0 mm0 mmsame
Area54.4 cm²52.8 cm²+3.0%
Second moment, major (Iy)2,660 cm⁴2,550 cm⁴+4.3%
Plastic modulus, major (Wpl,y)349 cm³336 cm³+3.9%
Elastic modulus, major (Wel,y)296 cm³283 cm³+4.6%
Second moment, minor (Iz)2,660 cm⁴2,550 cm⁴+4.3%
Plastic modulus, minor (Wpl,z)349 cm³336 cm³+3.9%
Radius of gyration, minor (iz)7 cm6.94 cm+0.9%
Torsion constant (It)4,160 cm⁴4,190 cm⁴-0.7%

SHS 180×180×8 to BS EN 10210-2:2006; CF SHS 180×180×8 to BS EN 10219-2:2006. Difference is expressed relative to CF SHS 180×180×8.

How to choose between them

On stiffness, SHS 180×180×8 has the larger second moment of area: 2,660 cm⁴ against 2,550 cm⁴, a difference of 4.3%. 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 (8.2 against 8.1 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.

In short, SHS 180×180×8 is the stronger section and CF SHS 180×180×8 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 180×180×8 is the stronger of the two in bending, with a plastic modulus of 349 cm³ against 336 cm³ - 3.9% 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 180×180×8 at 41.5 kg/m, against 42.7 kg/m for the other - a saving of 2.9%. 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 180×180×8 gives 336 cm³ of plastic modulus and 2,550 cm⁴ of inertia against 349 cm³ and 2,660 cm⁴. Re-check deflection and the connection details before swapping, since the flange and web thicknesses differ.

SHS 180×180×8, with a second moment of area of 2,660 cm⁴ against 2,550 cm⁴ (4.3% 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.

Related comparisons

SHS 180×180×8 vs SHS 175×175×9
Rate this
No ratings yet
Sign in to join the discussion.
Loading…