CivilAxisCivilAxis
☕ Support🌐 Community

Tee 140×203×27 vs WT 8X20

Tee 140×203×27 is an Tees (from UB) section from the UK Blue Book (SCI P363); WT 8X20 is the closest equivalent in the American AISC Shapes Database. They are close to interchangeable in bending: 155 cm³ against 154.53 cm³ of plastic modulus, a difference of 0.3%. Tee 140×203×27 is the lighter of the two at 26.6 kg/m against 29.8 kg/m, a saving of 10.7% on steel weight. Both are about 203 mm deep, so either fits the same construction zone.

Section properties side by side. Bold marks the more favourable value where one is.
PropertyTee 140×203×27
Tees (from UB)
WT 8X20
WT
Difference
Mass26.6 kg/m29.8 kg/m-10.7%
Depth203.3 mm203.5 mm-0.1%
Width143.3 mm177.8 mm-19.4%
Web thickness7.9 mm7.7 mm+2.6%
Flange thickness12.9 mm12.8 mm+0.8%
Area34 cm²38 cm²-10.5%
Second moment, major (Iy)1,320 cm⁴1,378 cm⁴-4.2%
Plastic modulus, major (Wpl,y)155 cm³154.53 cm³+0.3%
Elastic modulus, major (Wel,y)87 cm³87.671 cm³-0.8%
Second moment, minor (Iz)317 cm⁴599.4 cm⁴-47.1%
Plastic modulus, minor (Wpl,z)69.5 cm³104.22 cm³-33.3%
Radius of gyration, minor (iz)3.06 cm3.96 cm-22.7%
Torsion constant (It)14.4 cm⁴16.48 cm⁴-12.6%

Tee 140×203×27 to BS EN 10365:2017; WT 8X20 to AISC Shapes Database v16.0. Difference is expressed relative to WT 8X20.

How to choose between them

On stiffness, WT 8X20 has the larger second moment of area: 1,378 cm⁴ against 1,320 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, Tee 140×203×27 is the more efficient section: 5.8 against 5.2 cm³ per kg/m, 12.4% 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 8X20 has 104.22 cm³ of minor-axis plastic modulus against 69.5 cm³, 33.3% 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. Tees (from UB) sections are specified to BS EN 10365:2017 and WT to AISC Shapes Database v16.0; 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 10.7% weight.

In short, Tee 140×203×27 is the stronger section and Tee 140×203×27 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

They are effectively equal in bending. Tee 140×203×27 has a plastic modulus of 155 cm³ and WT 8X20 has 154.53 cm³, a difference of only 0.3% - within the margin that section choice normally turns on. Compare stiffness and availability instead.

Tee 140×203×27 at 26.6 kg/m, against 29.8 kg/m for the other - a saving of 10.7%. 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: WT 8X20 gives 154.53 cm³ of plastic modulus and 1,378 cm⁴ of inertia against 155 cm³ and 1,320 cm⁴. But they are from different catalogues (BS EN 10365:2017 and AISC Shapes Database v16.0), so this is a design change, not a drop-in swap: re-check deflection, connection detailing and local availability.

WT 8X20, with a second moment of area of 1,378 cm⁴ against 1,320 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.

Related comparisons

Tee 178×203×30 vs WT 8X20
Rate this
No ratings yet
Sign in to join the discussion.
Loading…