CivilAxisCivilAxis
☕ Support🌐 Community

SHS 300×300×6.3 vs SHS 300×300×6

SHS 300×300×6.3 is an SHS Hot-finished section from the UK Blue Book (SCI P363); SHS 300×300×6 is the closest equivalent in the European (Continental) range. SHS 300×300×6.3 carries more bending: 809 cm³ of plastic modulus against 764 cm³, 5.9% more. SHS 300×300×6 is the lighter of the two at 54.7 kg/m against 57.8 kg/m, a saving of 5.7% on steel weight. Both are about 300 mm deep, so either fits the same construction zone.

Section properties side by side. Bold marks the more favourable value where one is.
PropertySHS 300×300×6.3
SHS Hot-finished
SHS 300×300×6
SHS Cold-formed
Difference
Mass57.8 kg/m54.7 kg/m+5.7%
Depth300 mm300 mmsame
Width300 mm300 mmsame
Web thickness0 mm0 mmsame
Flange thickness0 mm0 mmsame
Area73.6 cm²69.6 cm²+5.7%
Second moment, major (Iy)10,500 cm⁴9,964 cm⁴+5.4%
Plastic modulus, major (Wpl,y)809 cm³764 cm³+5.9%
Elastic modulus, major (Wel,y)703 cm³664 cm³+5.9%
Second moment, minor (Iz)10,500 cm⁴9,964 cm⁴+5.4%
Plastic modulus, minor (Wpl,z)809 cm³764 cm³+5.9%
Radius of gyration, minor (iz)12 cm12 cmsame
Torsion constant (It)16,100 cm⁴15,430 cm⁴+4.3%

SHS 300×300×6.3 to BS EN 10210-2:2006; SHS 300×300×6 to EN 10219 · Continental Steel. Difference is expressed relative to SHS 300×300×6.

How to choose between them

On stiffness, SHS 300×300×6.3 has the larger second moment of area: 10,500 cm⁴ against 9,964 cm⁴, a difference of 5.4%. 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 (14.0 against 14.0 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.

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 5.7% weight.

In short, SHS 300×300×6.3 is the stronger section and SHS 300×300×6 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 300×300×6.3 is the stronger of the two in bending, with a plastic modulus of 809 cm³ against 764 cm³ - 5.9% more. At the same steel grade that translates directly into moment capacity, since M_pl,Rd = W_pl x f_y / gamma_M0.

SHS 300×300×6 at 54.7 kg/m, against 57.8 kg/m for the other - a saving of 5.7%. 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 300×300×6 gives 764 cm³ of plastic modulus and 9,964 cm⁴ of inertia against 809 cm³ and 10,500 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 300×300×6.3, with a second moment of area of 10,500 cm⁴ against 9,964 cm⁴ (5.4% 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 300×300×6.3 vs CF SHS 300×300×6.3
Rate this
No ratings yet
Sign in to join the discussion.
Loading…