CivilAxisCivilAxis
☕ Support🌐 Community

IPE 180 vs UB 178×102×19

IPE 180 is an IPE section from the European (Continental) range; UB 178×102×19 is the closest equivalent in the UK Blue Book (SCI P363). UB 178×102×19 carries more bending: 171 cm³ of plastic modulus against 166 cm³, 2.9% more. They weigh essentially the same, 18.8 kg/m and 19 kg/m. Both are about 179 mm deep, so either fits the same construction zone.

Section properties side by side. Bold marks the more favourable value where one is.
PropertyIPE 180
IPE
UB 178×102×19
UB
Difference
Mass18.8 kg/m19 kg/m-1.1%
Depth180 mm177.8 mm+1.2%
Width91 mm101.2 mm-10.1%
Web thickness5.3 mm4.8 mm+10.4%
Flange thickness8 mm7.9 mm+1.3%
Area23.9 cm²24.3 cm²-1.6%
Second moment, major (Iy)1,320 cm⁴1,360 cm⁴-2.9%
Plastic modulus, major (Wpl,y)166 cm³171 cm³-2.9%
Elastic modulus, major (Wel,y)146 cm³153 cm³-4.6%
Second moment, minor (Iz)101 cm⁴137 cm⁴-26.3%
Plastic modulus, minor (Wpl,z)34.6 cm³41.6 cm³-16.8%
Radius of gyration, minor (iz)2.05 cm2.37 cm-13.5%
Torsion constant (It)4.73 cm⁴4.41 cm⁴+7.3%

IPE 180 to EN 10365 · Continental Steel; UB 178×102×19 to BS EN 10365:2017. Difference is expressed relative to UB 178×102×19.

How to choose between them

On stiffness, UB 178×102×19 has the larger second moment of area: 1,360 cm⁴ against 1,320 cm⁴, a difference of 2.9%. 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 (8.8 against 9.0 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.

The two diverge much more about the minor axis: UB 178×102×19 has 41.6 cm³ of minor-axis plastic modulus against 34.6 cm³, 16.8% 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, UB 178×102×19 is the stronger section and IPE 180 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

UB 178×102×19 is the stronger of the two in bending, with a plastic modulus of 171 cm³ against 166 cm³ - 2.9% 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: IPE 180 is 18.8 kg/m and UB 178×102×19 is 19 kg/m. On a tonnage basis they cost the same.

Structurally it is the closest equivalent we hold: UB 178×102×19 gives 171 cm³ of plastic modulus and 1,360 cm⁴ of inertia against 166 cm³ and 1,320 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.

UB 178×102×19, with a second moment of area of 1,360 cm⁴ against 1,320 cm⁴ (2.9% 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…