CivilAxisCivilAxis
☕ Support🌐 Community

UB 1016×305×487 vs HE 1000 x 494

UB 1016×305×487 is an UB section from the UK Blue Book (SCI P363); HE 1000 x 494 is the closest equivalent in the European (Continental) range. They are close to interchangeable in bending: 23200 cm³ against 23400 cm³ of plastic modulus, a difference of 0.9%. They weigh essentially the same, 486.7 kg/m and 494 kg/m. Both are about 1036 mm deep, so either fits the same construction zone.

Section properties side by side. Bold marks the more favourable value where one is.
PropertyUB 1016×305×487
UB
HE 1000 x 494
HE
Difference
Mass486.7 kg/m494 kg/m-1.5%
Depth1036.3 mm1036 mmsame
Width308.5 mm309 mm-0.2%
Web thickness30 mm31 mm-3.2%
Flange thickness54.1 mm54 mm+0.2%
Area620 cm²629 cm²-1.4%
Second moment, major (Iy)1,022,000 cm⁴1,028,000 cm⁴-0.6%
Plastic modulus, major (Wpl,y)23,200 cm³23,400 cm³-0.9%
Elastic modulus, major (Wel,y)19,700 cm³19,800 cm³-0.5%
Second moment, minor (Iz)26,700 cm⁴26,800 cm⁴-0.4%
Plastic modulus, minor (Wpl,z)2,800 cm³2,820 cm³-0.7%
Radius of gyration, minor (iz)6.57 cm6.53 cm+0.6%
Torsion constant (It)4,300 cm⁴4,400 cm⁴-2.3%

UB 1016×305×487 to BS EN 10365:2017; HE 1000 x 494 to EN 10365 · Continental Steel. Difference is expressed relative to HE 1000 x 494.

How to choose between them

On stiffness, HE 1000 x 494 has the larger second moment of area: 1,028,000 cm⁴ against 1,022,000 cm⁴, a difference of 0.6%. 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 (47.7 against 47.4 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 HE to EN 10365 · Continental Steel; 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 1016×305×487 has a plastic modulus of 23200 cm³ and HE 1000 x 494 has 23400 cm³, a difference of only 0.9% - within the margin that section choice normally turns on. Compare stiffness and availability instead.

Neither meaningfully: UB 1016×305×487 is 486.7 kg/m and HE 1000 x 494 is 494 kg/m. On a tonnage basis they cost the same.

Structurally it is the closest equivalent we hold: HE 1000 x 494 gives 23400 cm³ of plastic modulus and 1,028,000 cm⁴ of inertia against 23200 cm³ and 1,022,000 cm⁴. But they are from different catalogues (BS EN 10365:2017 and EN 10365 · Continental Steel), so this is a design change, not a drop-in swap: re-check deflection, connection detailing and local availability.

HE 1000 x 494, with a second moment of area of 1,028,000 cm⁴ against 1,022,000 cm⁴ (0.6% 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 1016×305×487 vs W 40X327W 44X290 vs UB 1016×305×487W 44X290 vs HE 1000 x 494W 40X324 vs UB 1016×305×487W 40X324 vs HE 1000 x 494W 40X331 vs UB 1016×305×487W 40X331 vs HE 1000 x 494W 40X327 vs HE 1000 x 494
Rate this
No ratings yet
Sign in to join the discussion.
Loading…