CivilAxisCivilAxis
☕ Support🌐 Community

W 33X318 vs HE 900 x 466

W 33X318 is an W section from the American AISC Shapes Database; HE 900 x 466 is the closest equivalent in the European (Continental) range. W 33X318 carries more bending: 20811.6 cm³ of plastic modulus against 20400 cm³, 2.0% more. They weigh essentially the same, 473.2 kg/m and 466 kg/m. HE 900 x 466 is deeper, 938 mm against 894.1 mm, which matters where the floor zone is tight.

Section properties side by side. Bold marks the more favourable value where one is.
PropertyW 33X318
W
HE 900 x 466
HE
Difference
Mass473.2 kg/m466 kg/m+1.5%
Depth894.1 mm938 mm-4.7%
Width406.4 mm312 mm+30.3%
Web thickness26.4 mm30 mm-12.0%
Flange thickness48 mm54 mm-11.1%
Area604.5 cm²594 cm²+1.8%
Second moment, major (Iy)811,651 cm⁴815,000 cm⁴-0.4%
Plastic modulus, major (Wpl,y)20,811.6 cm³20,400 cm³+2.0%
Elastic modulus, major (Wel,y)18,189.6 cm³17,400 cm³+4.5%
Second moment, minor (Iz)53,694 cm⁴27,600 cm⁴+94.5%
Plastic modulus, minor (Wpl,z)4,096.8 cm³2,830 cm³+44.8%
Radius of gyration, minor (iz)9.42 cm6.81 cm+38.3%
Torsion constant (It)3,513 cm⁴4,230 cm⁴-17.0%

W 33X318 to AISC Shapes Database v16.0; HE 900 x 466 to EN 10365 · Continental Steel. Difference is expressed relative to HE 900 x 466.

How to choose between them

On stiffness, HE 900 x 466 has the larger second moment of area: 815,000 cm⁴ against 811,651 cm⁴, a difference of 0.4%. 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 (44.0 against 43.8 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.

The two diverge much more about the minor axis: W 33X318 has 4096.8 cm³ of minor-axis plastic modulus against 2830 cm³, 44.8% more. If the member sees any minor-axis bending, or if it is unrestrained over a long length and lateral-torsional buckling governs, that gap decides the comparison even though the major-axis numbers looked equivalent.

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 HE to EN 10365 · 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 a marginal amount of weight.

In short, W 33X318 is the stronger section and HE 900 x 466 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

W 33X318 is the stronger of the two in bending, with a plastic modulus of 20811.6 cm³ against 20400 cm³ - 2.0% more. At the same steel grade that translates directly into moment capacity, since M_pl,Rd = W_pl x f_y / gamma_M0.

Neither meaningfully: W 33X318 is 473.2 kg/m and HE 900 x 466 is 466 kg/m. On a tonnage basis they cost the same.

Structurally it is the closest equivalent we hold: HE 900 x 466 gives 20400 cm³ of plastic modulus and 815,000 cm⁴ of inertia against 20811.6 cm³ and 811,651 cm⁴. But they are from different catalogues (AISC Shapes Database v16.0 and EN 10365 · Continental Steel), so this is a design change, not a drop-in swap: re-check deflection, connection detailing and local availability.

HE 900 x 466, with a second moment of area of 815,000 cm⁴ against 811,651 cm⁴ (0.4% 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

W 36X302 vs HE 900 x 466W 36X282 vs HE 900 x 466
Rate this
No ratings yet
Sign in to join the discussion.
Loading…