CivilAxisCivilAxis
☕ Support🌐 Community

W 40X297 vs UB 1016×305×437

W 40X297 is an W section from the American AISC Shapes Database; UB 1016×305×437 is the closest equivalent in the UK Blue Book (SCI P363). W 40X297 carries more bending: 21794.8 cm³ of plastic modulus against 20800 cm³, 4.8% more. They weigh essentially the same, 442 kg/m and 437 kg/m. Both are about 1019 mm deep, so either fits the same construction zone.

Section properties side by side. Bold marks the more favourable value where one is.
PropertyW 40X297
W
UB 1016×305×437
UB
Difference
Mass442 kg/m437 kg/m+1.1%
Depth1010.9 mm1026.1 mm-1.5%
Width401.3 mm305.4 mm+31.4%
Web thickness23.6 mm26.9 mm-12.3%
Flange thickness41.9 mm49 mm-14.5%
Area563.2 cm²557 cm²+1.1%
Second moment, major (Iy)965,657 cm⁴910,000 cm⁴+6.1%
Plastic modulus, major (Wpl,y)21,794.8 cm³20,800 cm³+4.8%
Elastic modulus, major (Wel,y)19,172.9 cm³17,700 cm³+8.3%
Second moment, minor (Iz)45,369 cm⁴23,400 cm⁴+93.9%
Plastic modulus, minor (Wpl,z)3,523.2 cm³2,470 cm³+42.6%
Radius of gyration, minor (iz)8.99 cm6.49 cm+38.5%
Torsion constant (It)2,547 cm⁴3,190 cm⁴-20.2%

W 40X297 to AISC Shapes Database v16.0; UB 1016×305×437 to BS EN 10365:2017. Difference is expressed relative to UB 1016×305×437.

How to choose between them

On stiffness, W 40X297 has the larger second moment of area: 965,657 cm⁴ against 910,000 cm⁴, a difference of 6.1%. 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, W 40X297 is the more efficient section: 49.3 against 47.6 cm³ per kg/m, 3.6% 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.

The two diverge much more about the minor axis: W 40X297 has 3523.2 cm³ of minor-axis plastic modulus against 2470 cm³, 42.6% 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 UB to BS EN 10365:2017; 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 40X297 is the stronger section and UB 1016×305×437 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 40X297 is the stronger of the two in bending, with a plastic modulus of 21794.8 cm³ against 20800 cm³ - 4.8% 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 40X297 is 442 kg/m and UB 1016×305×437 is 437 kg/m. On a tonnage basis they cost the same.

Structurally it is the closest equivalent we hold: UB 1016×305×437 gives 20800 cm³ of plastic modulus and 910,000 cm⁴ of inertia against 21794.8 cm³ and 965,657 cm⁴. But they are from different catalogues (AISC Shapes Database v16.0 and BS EN 10365:2017), so this is a design change, not a drop-in swap: re-check deflection, connection detailing and local availability.

W 40X297, with a second moment of area of 965,657 cm⁴ against 910,000 cm⁴ (6.1% 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 1016×305×437 vs HE 1000 x 438UB 1016×305×437 vs W 40X294W 44X262 vs UB 1016×305×437W 40X297 vs HE 1000 x 438W 40X277 vs UB 1016×305×437W 36X302 vs UB 1016×305×437W 36X318 vs UB 1016×305×437
Rate this
No ratings yet
Sign in to join the discussion.
Loading…