CivilAxisCivilAxis
☕ Support🌐 Community

W 40X264 vs HE 1000 x 393

W 40X264 is an W section from the American AISC Shapes Database; HE 1000 x 393 is the closest equivalent in the European (Continental) range. They are close to interchangeable in bending: 18517.4 cm³ against 18500 cm³ of plastic modulus, a difference of 0.1%. They weigh essentially the same, 392.9 kg/m and 393 kg/m. Both are about 1016 mm deep, so either fits the same construction zone.

Section properties side by side. Bold marks the more favourable value where one is.
PropertyW 40X264
W
HE 1000 x 393
HE
Difference
Mass392.9 kg/m393 kg/msame
Depth1016 mm1016 mmsame
Width302.3 mm303 mm-0.2%
Web thickness24.4 mm24.4 mmsame
Flange thickness43.9 mm43.9 mmsame
Area499.4 cm²500 cm²-0.1%
Second moment, major (Iy)807,489 cm⁴808,000 cm⁴-0.1%
Plastic modulus, major (Wpl,y)18,517.4 cm³18,500 cm³+0.1%
Elastic modulus, major (Wel,y)15,911.8 cm³15,900 cm³+0.1%
Second moment, minor (Iz)20,520 cm⁴20,500 cm⁴+0.1%
Plastic modulus, minor (Wpl,z)2,163.1 cm³2,170 cm³-0.3%
Radius of gyration, minor (iz)6.4 cm6.4 cmsame
Torsion constant (It)2,335 cm⁴2,330 cm⁴+0.2%

W 40X264 to AISC Shapes Database v16.0; HE 1000 x 393 to EN 10365 · Continental Steel. Difference is expressed relative to HE 1000 x 393.

How to choose between them

On stiffness, HE 1000 x 393 has the larger second moment of area: 808,000 cm⁴ against 807,489 cm⁴, a difference of 0.1%. 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, the two are equally efficient (47.1 against 47.1 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. 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, these two are genuine equivalents. Pick whichever your supplier stocks and the rest of the frame already uses.

Common questions

They are effectively equal in bending. W 40X264 has a plastic modulus of 18517.4 cm³ and HE 1000 x 393 has 18500 cm³, a difference of only 0.1% - within the margin that section choice normally turns on. Compare stiffness and availability instead.

Neither meaningfully: W 40X264 is 392.9 kg/m and HE 1000 x 393 is 393 kg/m. On a tonnage basis they cost the same.

Structurally it is the closest equivalent we hold: HE 1000 x 393 gives 18500 cm³ of plastic modulus and 808,000 cm⁴ of inertia against 18517.4 cm³ and 807,489 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 1000 x 393, with a second moment of area of 808,000 cm⁴ against 807,489 cm⁴ (0.1% 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

UB 1016×305×393 vs HE 1000 x 393UB 1016×305×393 vs W 40X264W 40X249 vs HE 1000 x 393
Rate this
No ratings yet
Sign in to join the discussion.
Loading…