CivilAxisCivilAxis
☕ Support🌐 Community

SHS 180×180×8.8 vs SHS 175×175×9.5

SHS 180×180×8.8 is an SHS Hot-finished section from the UK Blue Book (SCI P363); SHS 175×175×9.5 is the closest equivalent in the European (Continental) range. SHS 180×180×8.8 carries more bending: 379 cm³ of plastic modulus against 364 cm³, 4.1% more. SHS 180×180×8.8 is the lighter of the two at 46.7 kg/m against 48.4 kg/m, a saving of 3.5% on steel weight. SHS 180×180×8.8 is deeper, 180 mm against 175 mm, which matters where the floor zone is tight.

Section properties side by side. Bold marks the more favourable value where one is.
PropertySHS 180×180×8.8
SHS Hot-finished
SHS 175×175×9.5
SHS Cold-formed
Difference
Mass46.7 kg/m48.4 kg/m-3.5%
Depth180 mm175 mm+2.9%
Width180 mm175 mm+2.9%
Web thickness0 mm0 mmsame
Flange thickness0 mm0 mmsame
Area59.4 cm²59.8 cm²-0.7%
Second moment, major (Iy)2,880 cm⁴2,650 cm⁴+8.7%
Plastic modulus, major (Wpl,y)379 cm³364 cm³+4.1%
Elastic modulus, major (Wel,y)320 cm³303 cm³+5.6%
Second moment, minor (Iz)2,880 cm⁴2,650 cm⁴+8.7%
Plastic modulus, minor (Wpl,z)379 cm³364 cm³+4.1%
Radius of gyration, minor (iz)6.96 cm6.66 cm+4.5%
Torsion constant (It)4,520 cm⁴4,446 cm⁴+1.7%

SHS 180×180×8.8 to BS EN 10210-2:2006; SHS 175×175×9.5 to EN 10219 · Continental Steel. Difference is expressed relative to SHS 175×175×9.5.

How to choose between them

On stiffness, SHS 180×180×8.8 has the larger second moment of area: 2,880 cm⁴ against 2,650 cm⁴, a difference of 8.7%. 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 180×180×8.8 is the more efficient section: 8.1 against 7.5 cm³ per kg/m, 7.9% 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.

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 Cold-formed 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 3.5% weight.

In short, SHS 180×180×8.8 is the stronger section and SHS 180×180×8.8 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 180×180×8.8 is the stronger of the two in bending, with a plastic modulus of 379 cm³ against 364 cm³ - 4.1% more. At the same steel grade that translates directly into moment capacity, since M_pl,Rd = W_pl x f_y / gamma_M0.

SHS 180×180×8.8 at 46.7 kg/m, against 48.4 kg/m for the other - a saving of 3.5%. 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: SHS 175×175×9.5 gives 364 cm³ of plastic modulus and 2,650 cm⁴ of inertia against 379 cm³ and 2,880 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 180×180×8.8, with a second moment of area of 2,880 cm⁴ against 2,650 cm⁴ (8.7% 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…