CivilAxisCivilAxis
☕ Support🌐 Community

WT 7X30.5 vs Tee 171×178×34

WT 7X30.5 is an WT section from the American AISC Shapes Database; Tee 171×178×34 is the closest equivalent in the UK Blue Book (SCI P363). WT 7X30.5 carries more bending: 149.94 cm³ of plastic modulus against 145 cm³, 3.4% more. Tee 171×178×34 is the lighter of the two at 33.5 kg/m against 45.4 kg/m, a saving of 35.5% on steel weight. Tee 171×178×34 is deeper, 181.6 mm against 176.5 mm, which matters where the floor zone is tight.

Section properties side by side. Bold marks the more favourable value where one is.
PropertyWT 7X30.5
WT
Tee 171×178×34
Tees (from UB)
Difference
Mass45.4 kg/m33.5 kg/m+35.5%
Depth176.5 mm181.6 mm-2.8%
Width254 mm173.2 mm+46.7%
Web thickness9.5 mm9.1 mm+4.4%
Flange thickness16.4 mm15.7 mm+4.5%
Area57.8 cm²42.7 cm²+35.4%
Second moment, major (Iy)1,203 cm⁴1,150 cm⁴+4.6%
Plastic modulus, major (Wpl,y)149.94 cm³145 cm³+3.4%
Elastic modulus, major (Wel,y)83.082 cm³81.5 cm³+1.9%
Second moment, minor (Iz)2,235 cm⁴681 cm⁴+228.2%
Plastic modulus, minor (Wpl,z)268.75 cm³121 cm³+122.1%
Radius of gyration, minor (iz)6.22 cm3.99 cm+55.9%
Torsion constant (It)45.37 cm⁴27.8 cm⁴+63.2%

WT 7X30.5 to AISC Shapes Database v16.0; Tee 171×178×34 to BS EN 10365:2017. Difference is expressed relative to Tee 171×178×34.

How to choose between them

On stiffness, WT 7X30.5 has the larger second moment of area: 1,203 cm⁴ against 1,150 cm⁴, a difference of 4.6%. 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 of steel, Tee 171×178×34 is the more efficient section: 4.3 against 3.3 cm³ per kg/m, 23.7% 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: WT 7X30.5 has 268.75 cm³ of minor-axis plastic modulus against 121 cm³, 122.1% 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. WT sections are specified to AISC Shapes Database v16.0 and Tees (from 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 35.5% weight.

In short, WT 7X30.5 is the stronger section and Tee 171×178×34 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

WT 7X30.5 is the stronger of the two in bending, with a plastic modulus of 149.94 cm³ against 145 cm³ - 3.4% more. At the same steel grade that translates directly into moment capacity, since M_pl,Rd = W_pl x f_y / gamma_M0.

Tee 171×178×34 at 33.5 kg/m, against 45.4 kg/m for the other - a saving of 35.5%. 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: Tee 171×178×34 gives 145 cm³ of plastic modulus and 1,150 cm⁴ of inertia against 149.94 cm³ and 1,203 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.

WT 7X30.5, with a second moment of area of 1,203 cm⁴ against 1,150 cm⁴ (4.6% 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

Tee 171×178×34 vs WT 7X26.5
Rate this
No ratings yet
Sign in to join the discussion.
Loading…