CivilAxisCivilAxis
☕ Support🌐 Community

W 40X331 vs UB 1016×305×487

W 40X331 is an W section from the American AISC Shapes Database; UB 1016×305×487 is the closest equivalent in the UK Blue Book (SCI P363). They are close to interchangeable in bending: 23433.5 cm³ against 23200 cm³ of plastic modulus, a difference of 1.0%. They weigh essentially the same, 492.6 kg/m and 486.7 kg/m. Both are about 1036 mm deep, so either fits the same construction zone.

Section properties side by side. Bold marks the more favourable value where one is.
PropertyW 40X331
W
UB 1016×305×487
UB
Difference
Mass492.6 kg/m486.7 kg/m+1.2%
Depth1036.3 mm1036.3 mmsame
Width309.9 mm308.5 mm+0.5%
Web thickness31 mm30 mm+3.3%
Flange thickness54.1 mm54.1 mmsame
Area630.3 cm²620 cm²+1.7%
Second moment, major (Iy)1,028,092 cm⁴1,022,000 cm⁴+0.6%
Plastic modulus, major (Wpl,y)23,433.5 cm³23,200 cm³+1.0%
Elastic modulus, major (Wel,y)19,828.3 cm³19,700 cm³+0.7%
Second moment, minor (Iz)26,805 cm⁴26,700 cm⁴+0.4%
Plastic modulus, minor (Wpl,z)2,818.6 cm³2,800 cm³+0.7%
Radius of gyration, minor (iz)6.53 cm6.57 cm-0.6%
Torsion constant (It)4,370 cm⁴4,300 cm⁴+1.6%

W 40X331 to AISC Shapes Database v16.0; UB 1016×305×487 to BS EN 10365:2017. Difference is expressed relative to UB 1016×305×487.

How to choose between them

On stiffness, W 40X331 has the larger second moment of area: 1,028,092 cm⁴ against 1,022,000 cm⁴, a difference of 0.6%. 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 (47.6 against 47.7 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 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, 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 40X331 has a plastic modulus of 23433.5 cm³ and UB 1016×305×487 has 23200 cm³, a difference of only 1.0% - within the margin that section choice normally turns on. Compare stiffness and availability instead.

Neither meaningfully: W 40X331 is 492.6 kg/m and UB 1016×305×487 is 486.7 kg/m. On a tonnage basis they cost the same.

Structurally it is the closest equivalent we hold: UB 1016×305×487 gives 23200 cm³ of plastic modulus and 1,022,000 cm⁴ of inertia against 23433.5 cm³ and 1,028,092 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 40X331, with a second moment of area of 1,028,092 cm⁴ against 1,022,000 cm⁴ (0.6% 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 1016×305×487 vs HE 1000 x 494UB 1016×305×487 vs W 40X327W 44X290 vs UB 1016×305×487W 40X324 vs UB 1016×305×487W 40X331 vs HE 1000 x 494W 36X330 vs UB 1016×305×487W 36X350 vs UB 1016×305×487
Rate this
No ratings yet
Sign in to join the discussion.
Loading…