Tee 152×229×41 vs WT 9X30
Tee 152×229×41 is an Tees (from UB) section from the UK Blue Book (SCI P363); WT 9X30 is the closest equivalent in the American AISC Shapes Database. They are close to interchangeable in bending: 267 cm³ against 270.39 cm³ of plastic modulus, a difference of 1.3%. Tee 152×229×41 is the lighter of the two at 41 kg/m against 44.6 kg/m, a saving of 8.1% on steel weight. Both are about 232 mm deep, so either fits the same construction zone.
| Property | Tee 152×229×41 Tees (from UB) | WT 9X30 WT | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mass | 41 kg/m | 44.6 kg/m | -8.1% |
| Depth | 232.8 mm | 231.6 mm | +0.5% |
| Width | 155.3 mm | 192 mm | -19.1% |
| Web thickness | 10.5 mm | 10.5 mm | same |
| Flange thickness | 18.9 mm | 17.7 mm | +6.8% |
| Area | 52.3 cm² | 56.9 cm² | -8.1% |
| Second moment, major (Iy) | 2,600 cm⁴ | 2,693 cm⁴ | -3.5% |
| Plastic modulus, major (Wpl,y) | 267 cm³ | 270.39 cm³ | -1.3% |
| Elastic modulus, major (Wel,y) | 150 cm³ | 152.24 cm³ | -1.5% |
| Second moment, minor (Iz) | 592 cm⁴ | 1,041 cm⁴ | -43.1% |
| Plastic modulus, minor (Wpl,z) | 120 cm³ | 168.79 cm³ | -28.9% |
| Radius of gyration, minor (iz) | 3.37 cm | 4.27 cm | -21.1% |
| Torsion constant (It) | 44.5 cm⁴ | 44.95 cm⁴ | -1.0% |
Tee 152×229×41 to BS EN 10365:2017; WT 9X30 to AISC Shapes Database v16.0. Difference is expressed relative to WT 9X30.
How to choose between them
On stiffness, WT 9X30 has the larger second moment of area: 2,693 cm⁴ against 2,600 cm⁴, a difference of 3.5%. 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 152×229×41 is the more efficient section: 6.5 against 6.1 cm³ per kg/m, 7.4% 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 9X30 has 168.79 cm³ of minor-axis plastic modulus against 120 cm³, 28.9% 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 8.1% weight.
In short, WT 9X30 is the stronger section and Tee 152×229×41 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.