CivilAxisCivilAxis
☕ Support🌐 Community

SHS 80×80×3.2 vs SHS 80×80×3

SHS 80×80×3.2 is an SHS Hot-finished section from the UK Blue Book (SCI P363); SHS 80×80×3 is the closest equivalent in the European (Continental) range. SHS 80×80×3.2 carries more bending: 27.9 cm³ of plastic modulus against 26.3 cm³, 6.1% more. SHS 80×80×3 is the lighter of the two at 7.18 kg/m against 7.63 kg/m, a saving of 6.3% on steel weight. Both are about 80 mm deep, so either fits the same construction zone.

Section properties side by side. Bold marks the more favourable value where one is.
PropertySHS 80×80×3.2
SHS Hot-finished
SHS 80×80×3
SHS
Difference
Mass7.6 kg/m7.2 kg/m+6.3%
Depth80 mm80 mmsame
Width80 mm80 mmsame
Web thickness0 mm0 mmsame
Flange thickness0 mm0 mmsame
Area9.7 cm²9.1 cm²+6.3%
Second moment, major (Iy)95 cm⁴89.8 cm⁴+5.8%
Plastic modulus, major (Wpl,y)27.9 cm³26.3 cm³+6.1%
Elastic modulus, major (Wel,y)23.7 cm³22.5 cm³+5.3%
Second moment, minor (Iz)95 cm⁴89.8 cm⁴+5.8%
Plastic modulus, minor (Wpl,z)27.9 cm³26.3 cm³+6.1%
Radius of gyration, minor (iz)3.13 cm3.13 cmsame
Torsion constant (It)148 cm⁴140 cm⁴+5.7%

SHS 80×80×3.2 to BS EN 10210-2:2006; SHS 80×80×3 to EN 10219 · Continental Steel. Difference is expressed relative to SHS 80×80×3.

How to choose between them

On stiffness, SHS 80×80×3.2 has the larger second moment of area: 95 cm⁴ against 89.8 cm⁴, a difference of 5.8%. 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 (3.7 against 3.7 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 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 6.3% weight.

In short, SHS 80×80×3.2 is the stronger section and SHS 80×80×3 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 80×80×3.2 is the stronger of the two in bending, with a plastic modulus of 27.9 cm³ against 26.3 cm³ - 6.1% more. At the same steel grade that translates directly into moment capacity, since M_pl,Rd = W_pl x f_y / gamma_M0.

SHS 80×80×3 at 7.18 kg/m, against 7.63 kg/m for the other - a saving of 6.3%. 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 80×80×3 gives 26.3 cm³ of plastic modulus and 89.8 cm⁴ of inertia against 27.9 cm³ and 95 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 80×80×3.2, with a second moment of area of 95 cm⁴ against 89.8 cm⁴ (5.8% 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 80×80×3 vs CF SHS 80×80×3SHS 80×80×3.2 vs CF SHS 80×80×3.5
Rate this
No ratings yet
Sign in to join the discussion.
Loading…