CivilAxisCivilAxis
☕ Support🌐 Community

W 14X109 vs H-400x400x11x18

W 14X109 is an W section from the American AISC Shapes Database; H-400x400x11x18 is the closest equivalent in the European (Continental) range. They are close to interchangeable in bending: 3146.3 cm³ against 3118 cm³ of plastic modulus, a difference of 0.9%. H-400x400x11x18 is the lighter of the two at 147 kg/m against 162.2 kg/m, a saving of 10.3% on steel weight. H-400x400x11x18 is deeper, 394 mm against 363.2 mm, which matters where the floor zone is tight.

Section properties side by side. Bold marks the more favourable value where one is.
PropertyW 14X109
W
H-400x400x11x18
MB & MC
Difference
Mass162.2 kg/m147 kg/m+10.3%
Depth363.2 mm394 mm-7.8%
Width370.8 mm398 mm-6.8%
Web thickness13.3 mm11 mm+20.9%
Flange thickness21.8 mm18 mm+21.1%
Area206.5 cm²187 cm²+10.4%
Second moment, major (Iy)51,613 cm⁴56,150 cm⁴-8.1%
Plastic modulus, major (Wpl,y)3,146.3 cm³3,118 cm³+0.9%
Elastic modulus, major (Wel,y)2,835 cm³2,850 cm³-0.5%
Second moment, minor (Iz)18,606 cm⁴18,930 cm⁴-1.7%
Plastic modulus, minor (Wpl,z)1,519.1 cm³1,441 cm³+5.4%
Radius of gyration, minor (iz)9.47 cm10.1 cm-6.2%
Torsion constant (It)296.4 cm⁴194 cm⁴+52.8%

W 14X109 to AISC Shapes Database v16.0; H-400x400x11x18 to Continental Steel. Difference is expressed relative to H-400x400x11x18.

How to choose between them

On stiffness, H-400x400x11x18 has the larger second moment of area: 56,150 cm⁴ against 51,613 cm⁴, a difference of 8.1%. 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, H-400x400x11x18 is the more efficient section: 21.2 against 19.4 cm³ per kg/m, 8.5% 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. W sections are specified to AISC Shapes Database v16.0 and MB & MC to 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 10.3% weight.

In short, W 14X109 is the stronger section and H-400x400x11x18 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

They are effectively equal in bending. W 14X109 has a plastic modulus of 3146.3 cm³ and H-400x400x11x18 has 3118 cm³, a difference of only 0.9% - within the margin that section choice normally turns on. Compare stiffness and availability instead.

H-400x400x11x18 at 147 kg/m, against 162.2 kg/m for the other - a saving of 10.3%. 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: H-400x400x11x18 gives 3118 cm³ of plastic modulus and 56,150 cm⁴ of inertia against 3146.3 cm³ and 51,613 cm⁴. But they are from different catalogues (AISC Shapes Database v16.0 and Continental Steel), so this is a design change, not a drop-in swap: re-check deflection, connection detailing and local availability.

H-400x400x11x18, with a second moment of area of 56,150 cm⁴ against 51,613 cm⁴ (8.1% 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

W 14X109 vs HP 14X117HE 400 B vs H-400x400x11x18
Rate this
No ratings yet
Sign in to join the discussion.
Loading…