CivilAxisCivilAxis
☕ Support🌐 Community

SHS 60×60×3.6 vs SHS 60×60×4

SHS 60×60×3.6 is an SHS Hot-finished section from the UK Blue Book (SCI P363); SHS 60×60×4 is the closest equivalent in the European (Continental) range. SHS 60×60×4 carries more bending: 17.6 cm³ of plastic modulus against 16.8 cm³, 4.5% more. SHS 60×60×3.6 is the lighter of the two at 6.27 kg/m against 6.71 kg/m, a saving of 6.6% on steel weight. Both are about 60 mm deep, so either fits the same construction zone.

Section properties side by side. Bold marks the more favourable value where one is.
PropertySHS 60×60×3.6
SHS Hot-finished
SHS 60×60×4
SHS Cold-formed
Difference
Mass6.3 kg/m6.7 kg/m-6.6%
Depth60 mm60 mmsame
Width60 mm60 mmsame
Web thickness0 mm0 mmsame
Flange thickness0 mm0 mmsame
Area8 cm²8.6 cm²-6.7%
Second moment, major (Iy)41.9 cm⁴43.6 cm⁴-3.9%
Plastic modulus, major (Wpl,y)16.8 cm³17.6 cm³-4.5%
Elastic modulus, major (Wel,y)14 cm³14.5 cm³-3.4%
Second moment, minor (Iz)41.9 cm⁴43.6 cm⁴-3.9%
Plastic modulus, minor (Wpl,z)16.8 cm³17.6 cm³-4.5%
Radius of gyration, minor (iz)2.29 cm2.26 cm+1.3%
Torsion constant (It)66.5 cm⁴72.6 cm⁴-8.4%

SHS 60×60×3.6 to BS EN 10210-2:2006; SHS 60×60×4 to EN 10219 · Continental Steel. Difference is expressed relative to SHS 60×60×4.

How to choose between them

On stiffness, SHS 60×60×4 has the larger second moment of area: 43.6 cm⁴ against 41.9 cm⁴, a difference of 3.9%. 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 60×60×3.6 is the more efficient section: 2.7 against 2.6 cm³ per kg/m, 2.2% 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 6.6% weight.

In short, SHS 60×60×4 is the stronger section and SHS 60×60×3.6 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 60×60×4 is the stronger of the two in bending, with a plastic modulus of 17.6 cm³ against 16.8 cm³ - 4.5% more. At the same steel grade that translates directly into moment capacity, since M_pl,Rd = W_pl x f_y / gamma_M0.

SHS 60×60×3.6 at 6.27 kg/m, against 6.71 kg/m for the other - a saving of 6.6%. 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 60×60×4 gives 17.6 cm³ of plastic modulus and 43.6 cm⁴ of inertia against 16.8 cm³ and 41.9 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 60×60×4, with a second moment of area of 43.6 cm⁴ against 41.9 cm⁴ (3.9% 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 60×60×3.6 vs CF SHS 60×60×4SHS 60×60×4 vs CF SHS 60×60×4
Rate this
No ratings yet
Sign in to join the discussion.
Loading…