CivilAxisCivilAxis
☕ Support🌐 Community

IPE 160 vs UB 152×89×16

IPE 160 is an IPE section from the European (Continental) range; UB 152×89×16 is the closest equivalent in the UK Blue Book (SCI P363). They are close to interchangeable in bending: 124 cm³ against 123 cm³ of plastic modulus, a difference of 0.8%. They weigh essentially the same, 15.8 kg/m and 16 kg/m. IPE 160 is deeper, 160 mm against 152.4 mm, which matters where the floor zone is tight.

Section properties side by side. Bold marks the more favourable value where one is.
PropertyIPE 160
IPE
UB 152×89×16
UB
Difference
Mass15.8 kg/m16 kg/m-1.2%
Depth160 mm152.4 mm+5.0%
Width82 mm88.7 mm-7.6%
Web thickness5 mm4.5 mm+11.1%
Flange thickness7.4 mm7.7 mm-3.9%
Area20.1 cm²20.3 cm²-1.0%
Second moment, major (Iy)869 cm⁴834 cm⁴+4.2%
Plastic modulus, major (Wpl,y)124 cm³123 cm³+0.8%
Elastic modulus, major (Wel,y)109 cm³109 cm³same
Second moment, minor (Iz)68.3 cm⁴89.8 cm⁴-23.9%
Plastic modulus, minor (Wpl,z)26.1 cm³31.2 cm³-16.3%
Radius of gyration, minor (iz)1.84 cm2.1 cm-12.4%
Torsion constant (It)3.54 cm⁴3.56 cm⁴-0.6%

IPE 160 to EN 10365 · Continental Steel; UB 152×89×16 to BS EN 10365:2017. Difference is expressed relative to UB 152×89×16.

How to choose between them

On stiffness, IPE 160 has the larger second moment of area: 869 cm⁴ against 834 cm⁴, a difference of 4.2%. 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, IPE 160 is the more efficient section: 7.8 against 7.7 cm³ per kg/m, 2.1% 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: UB 152×89×16 has 31.2 cm³ of minor-axis plastic modulus against 26.1 cm³, 16.3% 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. IPE sections are specified to EN 10365 · Continental Steel 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. IPE 160 has a plastic modulus of 124 cm³ and UB 152×89×16 has 123 cm³, a difference of only 0.8% - within the margin that section choice normally turns on. Compare stiffness and availability instead.

Neither meaningfully: IPE 160 is 15.8 kg/m and UB 152×89×16 is 16 kg/m. On a tonnage basis they cost the same.

Structurally it is the closest equivalent we hold: UB 152×89×16 gives 123 cm³ of plastic modulus and 834 cm⁴ of inertia against 124 cm³ and 869 cm⁴. But they are from different catalogues (EN 10365 · Continental Steel and BS EN 10365:2017), so this is a design change, not a drop-in swap: re-check deflection, connection detailing and local availability.

IPE 160, with a second moment of area of 869 cm⁴ against 834 cm⁴ (4.2% 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.

Rate this
No ratings yet
Sign in to join the discussion.
Loading…