How do W, HSS, angle, and channel sections compare in bending?

Section selection for bending is governed by Ix (stiffness) and Sx, Zx (strength) relative to weight. Quantitative comparison for sections of approximately equal weight (~40 lbs/ft): (1) W-SHAPE (W18x40, Ix=612 in^4, Sx=68.4 in^3): Highest strong-axis bending efficiency. 85% of the section area is in the flanges — where it's most effective for bending. Ix/wt ratio: 612/40 = 15.3 — the highest of any section type. This is why W-shapes dominate beam applications. (2) HSS RECTANGULAR (HSS 8x6x1/4, wt=38.5 lbs/ft, Ix=112 in^4, Sx=28.0 in^3): Bending efficiency is 3-5x lower than equivalent W-shape because material is distributed around the perimeter rather than concentrated in flanges. However, Ix=Iy for square HSS — it's equally strong in both axes, while W-shapes have Iy 3-10x smaller than Ix. (3) CHANNEL (C12x30, wt=30 lbs/ft, Ix=162 in^4, Sx=27.0 in^3): Similar bending efficiency to W per pound, but only when loaded through the shear center. Under vertical load through the web, the channel twists. The asymmetrical section means the shear center is outside the web — load must be applied at the shear center or the channel must be laterally braced. (4) ANGLE (L6x4x1/2, wt=16.2, Ix=15.0 in^4, Iz=35.2 in^4): Least bending-efficient shape. Low I because material is at the centroid (radius), not at extreme fibers. Angles bend about principal axes (w, z), not geometric axes (x, y) — causing biaxial bending under single-axis load. Conclusion: for strong-axis bending, W-shapes are optimal. For biaxial bending (equal in both directions), HSS square is optimal. Angles should NOT be used for bending — only tension (bracing, hangers).

Which section type is most efficient for axial compression?

Axial compression efficiency depends on the buckling axis. For sections of equal weight (~40 lbs/ft): COMPARISON BY rx (radius of gyration — larger is better for buckling): (1) HSS 8x8x1/4 (wt=38.5 lbs/ft): rx = ry = 3.05 in. Ix=Iy=162 in^4. Buckling slenderness KL/r = 120/3.05 = 39.3 for 10 ft column. The EQUAL rx=ry means HSS is equally resistant to buckling in both axes — ideal for biaxially loaded columns, corner columns, and free-standing columns. (2) W14x48 (wt=48 lbs/ft): rx=5.85 in, ry=1.91 in. Strong-axis buckling: KL/rx = 120/5.85 = 20.5 (very low). Weak-axis buckling: KL/ry = 120/1.91 = 62.8 (controls). The weak-axis governs because it has the higher slenderness. W14s are efficient because the ry/rx ratio ~0.33 means both axes are well-balanced for typical column lengths. (3) W12x40 (wt=40 lbs/ft): rx=5.13, ry=1.94. Similar to W14 but slightly lower rx. W10s sacrifice rx for compactness. (4) HSS ROUND 6.625x0.375 (wt=25 lbs/ft): rx=ry=2.22 in. The round HSS has the theoretical optimum for compression per pound (maximum rx/minimum area), but connections are more difficult. (5) ANGLE L6x6x1/2: rz (weak principal) is very small — angles buckle easily as individual members and are NOT used as standalone compression columns. They're used as bracing (tension or compression, but always checked for buckling) or built-up into cruciform or star column sections. WINNER for axial efficiency per pound: HSS square/round (rx highest per pound). WINNER for overall installed cost: W14 (connections are cheaper, and connection cost dominates). The optimal column depends on bracing: if braced in both directions at 5 ft intervals, W12 or W10 become competitive. If unbraced height > 15 ft, HSS usually wins. For truly heavy compression (1000+ kips): W14x90+ with heavy flanges — the economics shift because wide-flange mill rolling is cheaper than large HSS.

How do section properties compare for torsion resistance?

Torsion resistance varies DRAMATICALLY between open and closed sections. The torsional constant J quantifies this: OPEN SECTIONS (W, C, L, WT): (a) J is very small because torsion is resisted by shear stress circulating around thin, open cross-section elements. For rectangular plate element: J = b x t^3 / 3. Summing flange and web contributions: J_W ≈ (2 x bf x tf^3 + d x tw^3) / 3. (b) Typical values: W18x40 (40 lbs/ft): J = 0.861 in^4. W14x90 (90 lbs/ft): J = 4.12 in^4. W30x99 (99 lbs/ft): J = 3.62 in^4. Even the heaviest W-shapes have J < 50 in^4. (c) W-shapes resist torsion ~50% through Saint-Venant shear (proportional to J) + 50% through warping (proportional to Cw). Both mechanisms are weak compared to closed sections. CLOSED SECTIONS (HSS, pipe, box): (a) J is very large because torsion is resisted by a closed shear flow loop around the perimeter (Bredt-Batho). For rectangular HSS: J = 2 x t x (B - 2t)^2 x (H - 2t)^2 / (B + H - 4t). For round HSS: J = pi x (D^4 - (D-2t)^4) / 32. (b) HSS 6x6x1/4 (30 lbs/ft): J ≈ 60 in^4 — 70x larger than W18x40 of similar weight. HSS 8x8x1/4 (38.5 lbs/ft): J ≈ 140 in^4. HSS 8x8x1/2: J ≈ 250 in^4. (c) HSS resists torsion > 95% through Saint-Venant shear — warping is negligible for closed sections. CONCLUSION: If design torque T* exceeds 5% of design moment M*, switch from W-shape to HSS. The 5% threshold is based on the observation that W torsion capacity is typically 5-10% of flexural capacity (comparing shear stresses: T x tf / J vs M x c / I). For T*/M* > 0.10: HSS mandatory. Box girder for T*/M* > 0.30.

How does section selection affect connection design?

Section type drives connection complexity and cost. This is often the dominant consideration — not the member strength. CONNECTION COMPLEXITY BY SECTION TYPE (easiest to hardest): (1) W-SHAPE: Easiest connections. Open section — both sides of web and flange accessible. Bolts can be installed from either side. Standard connections: shear tab (web), single/double angle (web), end plate (flange + web), flange moment plate. Welding access: excellent. (2) CHANNEL: Moderate. Open on one side — back of web is accessible but flange slope (1:6 taper on inside) means bolts bear on tapered surface unless washers are tapered. Less optimal but manageable. (3) ANGLE: Moderate. Bolted through one leg — accessible from both sides of the outstanding leg. Tension-only connections are simple (single-leg bolted). But compression connections need to address buckling of the outstanding leg and often require stitch bolts or batten plates. (4) HSS: Difficult. Closed section — NO internal access. All connections must be external: knife plates (plate passes through slot, welded both sides), end plates (cap plate welded to HSS end, bolted to connecting member), tee stubs (T-section welded to HSS face, bolted to connecting member), direct welding (branch HSS welded to chord HSS — K/T/Y connections). Connection fabrication cost: HSS 2-3x > W-shape. Welding inspection for HSS: more UT/MT required because some welds are single-sided access. (5) WT-SHAPE: Moderate-difficult. Stem (web) is accessible for bolting, flange is accessible. But the section is asymmetric — connection must account for eccentricity. Often used where the stem provides a natural bolting surface for brace-to-gusset connections. The connection cost hierarchy means that a W-shape with slightly higher weight is often cheaper overall than an HSS with optimized weight — the connection savings outweigh the material penalty. This is why W-shapes dominate US building construction despite HSS having better structural efficiency per pound.

What is the most cost-effective section for common applications?

The optimal section balances weight, connection cost, and availability. Common application recommendations: FLOOR BEAMS (simple span, composite): W16-W21. Depth = span/20 to span/24. Shallow enough for floor-to-floor height, deep enough for vibration stiffness. W18x40 typical for 30 ft at 10 ft spacing (office). ROOF BEAMS (simple span, non-composite): W14-W18. Lighter than floor beams (lower live load). Camber if DL deflection > 0.5 in. COLUMNS (interior, axial dominant): W10-W14. W14 preferred for rx≈ry balance. W14x90 typical for 10-story interior column. Corner columns with biaxial bending: HSS 8x8 or 10x10. BRACING (tension/compression): W10-W12 for SCBF (strong-axis in-plane buckling), HSS 6x6-8x8 for OCBF or exposed bracing. HSS looks cleaner (no weak-axis flange protrusion). Angle for light tension-only bracing. TRUSSES (roof, floor): HSS round for chords (axial efficiency + aesthetic), HSS square for web diagonals (easier profile cutting), WT for top chord of composite floor trusses (provides shear stud surface). W-shape chords where bolted field splices are needed (access for bolts). LINTELS, SPANDRELS, HEADERS: W8-W12. Shallow enough for architectural head height. Channel for light lintels in masonry walls (MC shapes fit in wall thickness). CRANE RUNWAY BEAMS: W24-W36 with MC18 cap channel (increases J and provides lateral stiffness for crane wheel lateral forces). ECONOMIC RULE: W-shapes 80%+ of applications by tonnage. HSS 10-15% (columns, bracing, exposed). Angles 3-5% (bracing, connections, lintels). Channels 1-2% (purlins, girts, lintels). Built-up sections < 1% (plate girders, transfer girders). The market reflects connection economics — W-shapes dominate because they're the easiest to connect.

Section Comparison — UB, UC, IPE, HEA, HEB & W-Shapes

Structural steel sections manufactured to different national standards can look similar on a drawing yet behave differently under load. This reference provides side-by-side property comparisons, a worked substitution example, code-specific requirements for section classification, and the pitfalls engineers encounter when substituting sections across standards.

Section families and their standards

W-shapes (AISC / ASTM A6)

Wide-flange sections designated by nominal depth and weight per foot (e.g., W360x33 in metric or W14x22). Standardized per ASTM A6/A6M. Default grade: ASTM A992 (Fy = 345 MPa / 50 ksi, Fu = 450 MPa / 65 ksi). Most common structural shape in North America.

UB / UC (BS 4-1, AS/NZS 3679.1)

Universal Beams (UB) have deeper webs optimized for bending; Universal Columns (UC) have roughly equal depth and width, optimized for axial compression. Designated by serial size and mass per meter (e.g., 310UB40.4). Default grade: AS/NZS 3679.1 Grade 300 (Fy = 300 MPa, Fu = 440 MPa) or BS EN 10025 S275/S355.

IPE / HEA / HEB (EN 10025, EN 10034)

European I-sections with parallel flanges. IPE sections have narrow flanges for bending. HEA (light) and HEB (standard) have wider flanges suited for columns. HEM (heavy) series exists for high-axial-load columns. Default grade: S355 (fy = 355 MPa, fu = 510 MPa for t <= 16 mm).

Key dimensional differences

Property	W14x22 (AISC)	310UB40.4 (AU)	IPE 300 (EU)	HEA 300 (EU)
Depth d (mm)	349	304	300	290
Flange bf (mm)	127	166	150	300
Flange tf (mm)	8.5	10.2	10.7	14.0
Web tw (mm)	5.8	6.1	7.1	8.5
Ix (10^6 mm^4)	82.8	86.4	83.6	182.6
Zx (10^3 mm^3)	545	634	628	1383
Mass (kg/m)	32.7	40.4	42.2	88.3

Notice: W14x22, 310UB40.4, and IPE 300 have similar Ix values (~83-86 x 10^6 mm^4) but very different flange widths (127 vs 166 vs 150 mm). This means their lateral-torsional buckling resistance differs significantly even though bending stiffness is nearly identical.

Worked example — substituting W310x33 with 310UB40.4

Problem: A project designed to AISC 360 with W310x33 (W12x22) must source sections in Australia where only UB/UC sections are available. Is 310UB40.4 an adequate substitute for a 6 m simply-supported floor beam?

Step 1 — Compare bending capacity (AISC 360 Eq. F2-1 vs AS 4100 Cl. 5.1):

AISC: phiMn = 0.90 x Fy x Zx = 0.90 x 345 x 545x10^-3 = 169 kN-m (W310x33)

AS 4100: phiMs = 0.90 x fy x Ze = 0.90 x 300 x 634x10^-3 = 171 kN-m (310UB40.4, compact)

Bending capacities are comparable (169 vs 171 kN-m), but note the Australian section uses a lower Fy (300 vs 345 MPa) offset by its larger Zx.

Step 2 — Compare deflection (stiffness check):

Ix(W310x33) = 82.8 x 10^6 mm^4 vs Ix(310UB40.4) = 86.4 x 10^6 mm^4. The UB section is 4.3% stiffer, so deflection is acceptable.

Step 3 — Check lateral-torsional buckling:

The 310UB40.4 has a wider flange (bf = 166 mm vs 127 mm), giving it better lateral stability. LTB capacity is adequate.

Step 4 — Check weight penalty:

310UB40.4 weighs 40.4 kg/m vs 32.7 kg/m for W310x33, a 24% weight increase. On a 6 m beam this adds 46 kg of steel, roughly $50-70 USD in material cost. Acceptable for procurement flexibility.

Conclusion: 310UB40.4 is a valid substitute, but the engineer must verify local buckling classification under the governing code (the section may be compact under AISC but non-compact under AS 4100 due to different slenderness limits).

Code-specific section classification limits

Section classification determines whether a member can develop full plastic moment (Class 1/Compact) or is limited to elastic capacity (Class 3-4/Slender). The slenderness limits differ across codes:

Flange slenderness (half-width / thickness, compression flange of I-beam):

Code	Compact / Class 1	Non-compact / Class 2	Slender / Class 3
AISC 360 B4.1b	bf/(2tf) <= 0.38*sqrt(E/Fy) = 9.15	<= 1.0*sqrt(E/Fy) = 24.1	> 24.1
AS 4100 T5.2	(bf-tw)/(2tf) <= 9	<= 16	> 16 (use effective width)
EN 1993 T5.2	c/tf <= 9*epsilon	<= 10*epsilon	<= 14*epsilon

Where epsilon = sqrt(235/fy). For S355: epsilon = 0.81, so Class 1 limit = 7.3.

Web slenderness (clear depth / thickness, pure bending):

Code	Compact / Class 1	Non-compact / Class 2	Slender / Class 3
AISC 360 B4.1b	h/tw <= 3.76*sqrt(E/Fy) = 90.5	<= 5.70*sqrt(E/Fy) = 137	> 137
AS 4100 T5.2	d1/tw <= 82	<= 115	> 115
EN 1993 T5.2	c/tw <= 72*epsilon	<= 83*epsilon	<= 124*epsilon

A section that is compact under AISC may be Class 2 (non-compact equivalent) under EN 1993 due to the tighter European flange limits. Always re-classify when changing codes.

Common pitfalls in cross-standard section substitution

Matching only one property. A section with equal Ix to the original may have a much smaller Zx, lower flange width (worse LTB), or different web thickness (affecting shear and web crippling). Always compare the full property set: Ix, Zx, Sx, ry, J, Cw, bf, tf, tw, and Ag.
Ignoring different yield strengths. ASTM A992 has Fy = 345 MPa; AS/NZS Grade 300 has Fy = 300 MPa; EN S275 has fy = 275 MPa. A section with 10% more Zx but 15% lower Fy results in a net capacity reduction. Capacity is Fy x Zx, not just Zx.
Not re-classifying the section under the new code. The AISC compact/non-compact limits differ from AS 4100 and EN 1993 plate slenderness classes. A W-shape that is compact under AISC 360 Table B4.1b may be Class 2 or even Class 3 under EN 1993 Table 5.2, reducing the usable section modulus from plastic (Zx) to elastic (Sx).
Overlooking connection compatibility. Different section families have different flange widths, web thicknesses, and fillet radii. A connection designed for a W-shape flange may not work with a UB flange due to different bolt gage, access clearance, or weld root gap. Column splice plates, beam-to-column clips, and base plates often need redesign.

Frequently asked questions

Are W-shapes and UB sections interchangeable? Not directly. While some have similar depth and Ix, they differ in flange proportions, web thickness, fillet radius, and standard grades. Each substitution requires a full property comparison and re-check of all limit states under the governing code.

Which section is most efficient for bending? For pure strong-axis bending, IPE sections are typically the lightest because their deep, narrow profile maximizes Ix per kg. However, their narrow flanges make them more susceptible to LTB, so they require closer bracing spacing.

Can I use European section data with AISC 360? Yes, but you must verify that the section properties are computed per AISC conventions (e.g., k-design vs k-detailing for web depth, fillet radius treatment) and that the material grade meets AISC requirements or is approved as an equivalent per AISC 360 Section A3.1a.

W-Shape vs. HSS vs. Angle vs. Channel — Comparison by Application

Different structural shapes are optimized for different loading conditions and applications. Selecting the right shape for the right application is fundamental to efficient structural steel design. The following table compares the four major shape families across key application criteria.

Application	Best Shape	Second Choice	Why
Floor beams (bending)	W-shape	UB/IPE	Highest Ix and Zx per unit weight for strong-axis bending
Columns (axial)	W-shape (heavy) or HSS	HSS (square)	W-shapes for high axial + moment; HSS for pure axial and aesthetics
Bracing (tension/compression)	HSS (round or square)	Double angles	HSS provides equal capacity in all directions; angles for single-bolt connections
Beams with torsion	HSS (closed section)	Built-up box	Closed sections resist torsion efficiently; open sections (W, C) are poor in torsion
Base plates / connections	Plate material	Angles	Flat plates for bearing; angles for clip angles and seated connections
Girts and purlins	Channel (C or MC)	Z-section	Channels provide adequate bending capacity with easy connections to flanges
Lateral bracing	Single angle	Double angles	Angles allow single-bolt connections and fit between framing members
Moment frame beams	W-shape (deep)	Built-up plate girder	W-shapes develop full plastic moment; deep sections maximize Zx
Truss chords	HSS (square) or W-shape	Double angles	HSS for clean connections; W-shapes for heavy chord forces
Truss web members	Single angle or HSS	Double angles	Angles for light trusses; HSS for heavy trusses with welded connections
Cantilever beams	W-shape	HSS (rectangular)	W-shapes maximize strong-axis bending capacity at the root
Biaxial bending	HSS (square or round)	W-shape (heavy)	HSS has equal Ix and Iy; W-shapes need heavy sections for weak-axis resistance
Architectural exposed	HSS (round)	HSS (square)	Clean lines, no flange dirt ledges, aesthetic appeal
Stair stringers	Channel (MC)	W-shape (shallow)	Channels allow tread connections to the web; easy coping at landings

Weight Efficiency Comparison — Ix per Pound

The structural efficiency of a section can be measured by its moment of inertia per unit weight (Ix / weight), which indicates how much bending stiffness is obtained per pound of steel. Higher values mean more efficient use of material.

Section	Weight (lb/ft)	Ix (in.^4)	Ix/Weight (in.^4 per lb/ft)	Application Note
W24x55	55	1350	24.5	Very efficient deep beam
W18x35	35	510	14.6	Efficient floor beam
W12x26	26	204	7.8	Light beam / heavy purlin
W14x22	22	199	9.0	Light column or beam
W8x31	31	110	3.5	Column with some bending
HSS12x12x3/8	58.1	563	9.7	Square HSS column
HSS10x6x3/8	46.4	201	4.3	Rectangular HSS beam
HSS8.625x0.322 (round)	28.5	146	5.1	Round HSS brace
C12x20.7	20.7	129	6.2	Channel beam
L6x6x1/2	19.2	27.2	1.4	Angle (poor bending efficiency)
2L4x4x3/8 (long leg back-to-back)	19.4	14.0	0.7	Double angle (minimal Ix)

Key observations:

Deep W-shapes are the most efficient for bending. The W24x55 delivers 24.5 in.^4 of Ix per lb/ft, nearly three times the efficiency of a comparable HSS section. This is because W-shapes concentrate material in the flanges, which are far from the neutral axis.
HSS sections excel in multi-directional loading. While their Ix/weight is lower than W-shapes for strong-axis bending, HSS sections provide similar Ix and Iy values, making them far more efficient for biaxial bending or columns with uncertain load direction.
Angles are the least efficient for bending. Single angles have very low Ix/weight ratios because their shape concentrates material close to the centroid. Angles should only be used for bending in light applications (lintels, bracing).
Channels are moderately efficient. Channels are more efficient than angles but less efficient than W-shapes for bending. Their advantage is easy connections (one flange is flat for bolting or welding to supporting members).

Selection Guide by Loading Type

Pure Bending (Strong Axis):

For pure strong-axis bending, the objective is to maximize the section modulus Zx per unit weight. W-shapes (wide flanges) dominate this category because their wide flanges place the maximum amount of steel at the greatest distance from the neutral axis. The optimal depth-to-weight ratio favors deeper, lighter sections: W24 and W30 shapes typically provide the best Zx/weight ratios for spans of 20-40 feet.

The selection process is:

Determine the required plastic moment: M_p,req = M_u / phi
Find sections with Zx >= M_p,req / F_y
Among these, select the lightest section that also satisfies deflection limits (L/360 for floors, L/240 for roofs)
Verify lateral-torsional buckling if the compression flange is not continuously braced

Pure Compression (Columns):

For pure axial compression, the governing parameter is the radius of gyration r, which determines the slenderness ratio KL/r. The most efficient compression member has the largest r for a given weight. HSS sections (round or square) provide the largest r because their material is distributed symmetrically about both axes, eliminating weak-axis buckling concerns.

For column selection:

Determine the effective length KL for both axes
Compute the required r_min from the slenderness limit (KL/r < 200 recommended)
Select HSS for moderate loads with equal KL in both directions
Select W-shapes for heavy loads where the strong axis has a shorter KL
Check that phi x P_n >= P_u using AISC Chapter E equations

Biaxial Bending:

When bending occurs about both axes simultaneously, the section must resist My as well as Mx. This is where HSS sections have a decisive advantage: Ix and Iy are approximately equal for square HSS, and for round HSS, every axis has the same moment of inertia. W-shapes have Iy values that are typically 3-10 times smaller than Ix, making them very inefficient for weak-axis bending.

For biaxial bending design:

Compute the required section moduli for both axes
For HSS: check phi x M_n >= sqrt(M_ux^2 + M_uy^2) (vector sum approximation)
For W-shapes: use the interaction equation from AISC H1: P_u/(phi x P_n) + 8/9 x (M_ux/(phi x M_nx) + M_uy/(phi x M_ny)) <= 1.0
For biaxial bending with significant My, the W-shape must be very heavy to provide adequate Iy, often making HSS the lighter choice despite its lower Zx/weight

Torsion:

Torsional resistance is measured by the St. Venant torsion constant J and the warping constant Cw. Closed sections (HSS round and rectangular) have torsional stiffness J = pi x (D-t)^3 x t / 4 for round HSS, which is orders of magnitude larger than open sections of similar weight. W-shapes, channels, and angles are very poor in torsion — their J values are negligible compared to HSS.

For members subject to significant torsion:

Calculate the applied torque T_u
For HSS: phi x T_n = phi x 0.60 x F_y x C, where C = pi x (D-t)^2 x t / 2 for round HSS
For W-shapes: the warping normal stress must be checked per AISC Design Guide 9 (Torsional Analysis of Structural Steel Members)
In most cases where torsion is a primary load effect, switching from W-shapes to HSS is the most efficient solution

Cost and Availability Comparison

The cost of structural steel shapes depends on mill production volumes, market demand, and geographic location. The following comparison reflects typical North American market conditions.

Factor	W-Shapes	HSS	Angles	Channels
Relative material cost ($/lb)	1.00 (baseline)	1.15-1.40	0.90-1.05	1.00-1.10
Mill availability	Excellent (all sizes)	Good (common sizes)	Good	Moderate
Service center stock	Deep inventory	Moderate	Good	Limited (esp. MC)
Lead time (standard)	1-2 weeks	2-4 weeks	1-2 weeks	2-3 weeks
Lead time (non-standard)	2-4 weeks	4-8 weeks	2-3 weeks	4-6 weeks
Fabrication cost	Low (standard)	Moderate (welding)	Low	Moderate
Connection cost	Moderate	Moderate (cutting)	Low (simple bolts)	Low
Painting/fireproofing area	Large (flange surfaces)	Smaller (smooth)	Moderate	Moderate
Galvanizing suitability	Excellent	Good (vent holes needed)	Excellent	Excellent
Minimum order (service center)	1 stick (20-60 ft)	1 stick (20-48 ft)	1 stick (20-40 ft)	1 stick (20-40 ft)

Key cost observations:

W-shapes are the most cost-effective for beams. Despite having a slightly higher per-pound cost than angles, W-shapes provide so much more bending capacity per pound that their cost-per-kip-ft of moment capacity is the lowest of all shapes.
HSS carries a 15-40% premium over W-shapes per pound. This premium is justified when HSS is used for columns (eliminating weak-axis design), bracing (equal capacity in all directions), or architectural applications (clean appearance). For pure bending applications, HSS is rarely cost-competitive with W-shapes.
Angles are the cheapest per pound but the least efficient structurally. Angles are economical only for light bracing, lintels, and connection elements where the low structural efficiency is acceptable.
Channels fill a niche for girts, purlins, and stair stringers. Their C-shape allows easy connections to the supporting member while providing adequate bending capacity for moderate spans. Channels are less commonly stocked than W-shapes and may have longer lead times.

Run this calculation

Related references

Disclaimer

This page is for educational and reference use only. It does not constitute professional engineering advice. All design values must be verified against the applicable standard and project specification before use. The site operator disclaims liability for any loss arising from the use of this information.