CivilAxisCivilAxis
☕ Support🌐 Community

UB 1016×305×437 vs W 40X294

UB 1016×305×437 is an UB section from the UK Blue Book (SCI P363); W 40X294 is the closest equivalent in the American AISC Shapes Database. They are close to interchangeable in bending: 20800 cm³ against 20811.6 cm³ of plastic modulus, a difference of 0.1%. They weigh essentially the same, 437 kg/m and 437.5 kg/m. Both are about 1026 mm deep, so either fits the same construction zone.

Section properties side by side. Bold marks the more favourable value where one is.
PropertyUB 1016×305×437
UB
W 40X294
W
Difference
Mass437 kg/m437.5 kg/m-0.1%
Depth1026.1 mm1026.2 mmsame
Width305.4 mm304.8 mm+0.2%
Web thickness26.9 mm26.9 mmsame
Flange thickness49 mm49 mmsame
Area557 cm²556.1 cm²+0.2%
Second moment, major (Iy)910,000 cm⁴911,547 cm⁴-0.2%
Plastic modulus, major (Wpl,y)20,800 cm³20,811.6 cm³-0.1%
Elastic modulus, major (Wel,y)17,700 cm³17,698 cm³same
Second moment, minor (Iz)23,400 cm⁴23,392 cm⁴same
Plastic modulus, minor (Wpl,z)2,470 cm³2,458.1 cm³+0.5%
Radius of gyration, minor (iz)6.49 cm6.48 cm+0.2%
Torsion constant (It)3,190 cm⁴3,188 cm⁴+0.1%

UB 1016×305×437 to BS EN 10365:2017; W 40X294 to AISC Shapes Database v16.0. Difference is expressed relative to W 40X294.

How to choose between them

On stiffness, W 40X294 has the larger second moment of area: 911,547 cm⁴ against 910,000 cm⁴, a difference of 0.2%. 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, the two are equally efficient (47.6 against 47.6 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.

These come from different catalogues, so treat the swap as a design change rather than a like-for-like substitution. UB sections are specified to BS EN 10365:2017 and W 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 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. UB 1016×305×437 has a plastic modulus of 20800 cm³ and W 40X294 has 20811.6 cm³, a difference of only 0.1% - within the margin that section choice normally turns on. Compare stiffness and availability instead.

Neither meaningfully: UB 1016×305×437 is 437 kg/m and W 40X294 is 437.5 kg/m. On a tonnage basis they cost the same.

Structurally it is the closest equivalent we hold: W 40X294 gives 20811.6 cm³ of plastic modulus and 911,547 cm⁴ of inertia against 20800 cm³ and 910,000 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.

W 40X294, with a second moment of area of 911,547 cm⁴ against 910,000 cm⁴ (0.2% 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

UB 1016×305×437 vs HE 1000 x 438W 44X262 vs UB 1016×305×437W 40X297 vs UB 1016×305×437W 40X277 vs UB 1016×305×437W 40X294 vs HE 1000 x 438W 36X302 vs UB 1016×305×437W 36X318 vs UB 1016×305×437
Rate this
No ratings yet
Sign in to join the discussion.
Loading…