CivilAxisCivilAxis
☕ Support🌐 Community

Tee 171×178×34 vs WT 7X26.5

Tee 171×178×34 is an Tees (from UB) section from the UK Blue Book (SCI P363); WT 7X26.5 is the closest equivalent in the American AISC Shapes Database. They are close to interchangeable in bending: 145 cm³ against 145.35 cm³ of plastic modulus, a difference of 0.2%. Tee 171×178×34 is the lighter of the two at 33.5 kg/m against 39.4 kg/m, a saving of 15.0% on steel weight. Tee 171×178×34 is deeper, 181.6 mm against 176.8 mm, which matters where the floor zone is tight.

Section properties side by side. Bold marks the more favourable value where one is.
PropertyTee 171×178×34
Tees (from UB)
WT 7X26.5
WT
Difference
Mass33.5 kg/m39.4 kg/m-15.0%
Depth181.6 mm176.8 mm+2.7%
Width173.2 mm204.7 mm-15.4%
Web thickness9.1 mm9.4 mm-3.2%
Flange thickness15.7 mm16.8 mm-6.5%
Area42.7 cm²50.3 cm²-15.1%
Second moment, major (Iy)1,150 cm⁴1,149 cm⁴+0.1%
Plastic modulus, major (Wpl,y)145 cm³145.35 cm³-0.2%
Elastic modulus, major (Wel,y)81.5 cm³80.952 cm³+0.7%
Second moment, minor (Iz)681 cm⁴1,199 cm⁴-43.2%
Plastic modulus, minor (Wpl,z)121 cm³180.26 cm³-32.9%
Radius of gyration, minor (iz)3.99 cm4.88 cm-18.2%
Torsion constant (It)27.8 cm⁴40.25 cm⁴-30.9%

Tee 171×178×34 to BS EN 10365:2017; WT 7X26.5 to AISC Shapes Database v16.0. Difference is expressed relative to WT 7X26.5.

How to choose between them

On stiffness, Tee 171×178×34 has the larger second moment of area: 1,150 cm⁴ against 1,149 cm⁴, a difference of 0.1%. 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 3.7 cm³ per kg/m, 17.3% 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 7X26.5 has 180.26 cm³ of minor-axis plastic modulus against 121 cm³, 32.9% 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 15.0% weight.

In short, WT 7X26.5 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

They are effectively equal in bending. Tee 171×178×34 has a plastic modulus of 145 cm³ and WT 7X26.5 has 145.35 cm³, a difference of only 0.2% - within the margin that section choice normally turns on. Compare stiffness and availability instead.

Tee 171×178×34 at 33.5 kg/m, against 39.4 kg/m for the other - a saving of 15.0%. 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 7X26.5 gives 145.35 cm³ of plastic modulus and 1,149 cm⁴ of inertia against 145 cm³ and 1,150 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.

Tee 171×178×34, with a second moment of area of 1,150 cm⁴ against 1,149 cm⁴ (0.1% 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

WT 7X30.5 vs Tee 171×178×34
Rate this
No ratings yet
Sign in to join the discussion.
Loading…