CivilAxisCivilAxis
☕ Support🌐 Community

SHS 260×260×7.1 vs SHS 250×250×8

SHS 260×260×7.1 is an SHS Hot-finished section from the UK Blue Book (SCI P363); SHS 250×250×8 is the closest equivalent in the European (Continental) range. SHS 250×250×8 carries more bending: 694 cm³ of plastic modulus against 674 cm³, 2.9% more. SHS 260×260×7.1 is the lighter of the two at 56 kg/m against 60.5 kg/m, a saving of 7.4% on steel weight. SHS 260×260×7.1 is deeper, 260 mm against 250 mm, which matters where the floor zone is tight.

Section properties side by side. Bold marks the more favourable value where one is.
PropertySHS 260×260×7.1
SHS Hot-finished
SHS 250×250×8
SHS
Difference
Mass56 kg/m60.5 kg/m-7.4%
Depth260 mm250 mm+4.0%
Width260 mm250 mm+4.0%
Web thickness0 mm0 mmsame
Flange thickness0 mm0 mmsame
Area71.3 cm²76.8 cm²-7.2%
Second moment, major (Iy)7,570 cm⁴7,455 cm⁴+1.5%
Plastic modulus, major (Wpl,y)674 cm³694 cm³-2.9%
Elastic modulus, major (Wel,y)582 cm³596 cm³-2.3%
Second moment, minor (Iz)7,570 cm⁴7,455 cm⁴+1.5%
Plastic modulus, minor (Wpl,z)674 cm³694 cm³-2.9%
Radius of gyration, minor (iz)10.3 cm9.86 cm+4.5%
Torsion constant (It)11,600 cm⁴11,530 cm⁴+0.6%

SHS 260×260×7.1 to BS EN 10210-2:2006; SHS 250×250×8 to EN 10219 · Continental Steel. Difference is expressed relative to SHS 250×250×8.

How to choose between them

On stiffness, SHS 260×260×7.1 has the larger second moment of area: 7,570 cm⁴ against 7,455 cm⁴, a difference of 1.5%. 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 of steel, SHS 260×260×7.1 is the more efficient section: 12.0 against 11.5 cm³ per kg/m, 4.9% 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 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 7.4% weight.

In short, SHS 250×250×8 is the stronger section and SHS 260×260×7.1 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

SHS 250×250×8 is the stronger of the two in bending, with a plastic modulus of 694 cm³ against 674 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.

SHS 260×260×7.1 at 56 kg/m, against 60.5 kg/m for the other - a saving of 7.4%. 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 250×250×8 gives 694 cm³ of plastic modulus and 7,455 cm⁴ of inertia against 674 cm³ and 7,570 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 260×260×7.1, with a second moment of area of 7,570 cm⁴ against 7,455 cm⁴ (1.5% 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 250×250×8 vs CF SHS 250×250×8SHS 260×260×7.1 vs CF SHS 250×250×8SHS 260×260×7.1 vs SHS 250×250×8
Rate this
No ratings yet
Sign in to join the discussion.
Loading…