CivilAxisCivilAxis
☕ Support🌐 Community

UB 254×102×28 vs W 10X19

UB 254×102×28 is an UB section from the UK Blue Book (SCI P363); W 10X19 is the closest equivalent in the American AISC Shapes Database. They are close to interchangeable in bending: 353 cm³ against 353.96 cm³ of plastic modulus, a difference of 0.3%. They weigh essentially the same, 28.3 kg/m and 28.3 kg/m. Both are about 260 mm deep, so either fits the same construction zone.

Section properties side by side. Bold marks the more favourable value where one is.
PropertyUB 254×102×28
UB
W 10X19
W
Difference
Mass28.3 kg/m28.3 kg/msame
Depth260.4 mm259.1 mm+0.5%
Width102.2 mm102.1 mm+0.1%
Web thickness6.3 mm6.4 mm-1.6%
Flange thickness10 mm10 mmsame
Area36.1 cm²36.3 cm²-0.6%
Second moment, major (Iy)4,000 cm⁴4,008 cm⁴-0.2%
Plastic modulus, major (Wpl,y)353 cm³353.96 cm³-0.3%
Elastic modulus, major (Wel,y)308 cm³308.08 cm³same
Second moment, minor (Iz)179 cm⁴178.6 cm⁴+0.2%
Plastic modulus, minor (Wpl,z)54.8 cm³54.897 cm³-0.2%
Radius of gyration, minor (iz)2.22 cm2.22 cmsame
Torsion constant (It)9.57 cm⁴9.7 cm⁴-1.3%

UB 254×102×28 to BS EN 10365:2017; W 10X19 to AISC Shapes Database v16.0. Difference is expressed relative to W 10X19.

How to choose between them

On stiffness, W 10X19 has the larger second moment of area: 4,008 cm⁴ against 4,000 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 (12.5 against 12.5 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 254×102×28 has a plastic modulus of 353 cm³ and W 10X19 has 353.96 cm³, a difference of only 0.3% - within the margin that section choice normally turns on. Compare stiffness and availability instead.

Neither meaningfully: UB 254×102×28 is 28.3 kg/m and W 10X19 is 28.3 kg/m. On a tonnage basis they cost the same.

Structurally it is the closest equivalent we hold: W 10X19 gives 353.96 cm³ of plastic modulus and 4,008 cm⁴ of inertia against 353 cm³ and 4,000 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 10X19, with a second moment of area of 4,008 cm⁴ against 4,000 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 254×102×28 vs H-250x125x6x9-29W 10X19 vs H-250x125x6x9-29
Rate this
No ratings yet
Sign in to join the discussion.
Loading…