CivilAxisCivilAxis
☕ Support🌐 Community

UB 305×102×25 vs W 12X16

UB 305×102×25 is an UB section from the UK Blue Book (SCI P363); W 12X16 is the closest equivalent in the American AISC Shapes Database. UB 305×102×25 carries more bending: 342 cm³ of plastic modulus against 329.38 cm³, 3.8% more. W 12X16 is the lighter of the two at 23.8 kg/m against 24.8 kg/m, a saving of 4.2% on steel weight. Both are about 305 mm deep, so either fits the same construction zone.

Section properties side by side. Bold marks the more favourable value where one is.
PropertyUB 305×102×25
UB
W 12X16
W
Difference
Mass24.8 kg/m23.8 kg/m+4.2%
Depth305.1 mm304.8 mm+0.1%
Width101.6 mm101.3 mm+0.3%
Web thickness5.8 mm5.6 mm+3.6%
Flange thickness7 mm6.7 mm+4.5%
Area31.6 cm²30.4 cm²+3.9%
Second moment, major (Iy)4,460 cm⁴4,287 cm⁴+4.0%
Plastic modulus, major (Wpl,y)342 cm³329.38 cm³+3.8%
Elastic modulus, major (Wel,y)292 cm³280.22 cm³+4.2%
Second moment, minor (Iz)123 cm⁴117.4 cm⁴+4.8%
Plastic modulus, minor (Wpl,z)38.8 cm³37.035 cm³+4.8%
Radius of gyration, minor (iz)1.97 cm1.96 cm+0.5%
Torsion constant (It)4.77 cm⁴4.29 cm⁴+11.2%

UB 305×102×25 to BS EN 10365:2017; W 12X16 to AISC Shapes Database v16.0. Difference is expressed relative to W 12X16.

How to choose between them

On stiffness, UB 305×102×25 has the larger second moment of area: 4,460 cm⁴ against 4,287 cm⁴, a difference of 4.0%. 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 (13.8 against 13.8 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 4.2% weight.

In short, UB 305×102×25 is the stronger section and W 12X16 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

UB 305×102×25 is the stronger of the two in bending, with a plastic modulus of 342 cm³ against 329.38 cm³ - 3.8% more. At the same steel grade that translates directly into moment capacity, since M_pl,Rd = W_pl x f_y / gamma_M0.

W 12X16 at 23.8 kg/m, against 24.8 kg/m for the other - a saving of 4.2%. 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: W 12X16 gives 329.38 cm³ of plastic modulus and 4,287 cm⁴ of inertia against 342 cm³ and 4,460 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.

UB 305×102×25, with a second moment of area of 4,460 cm⁴ against 4,287 cm⁴ (4.0% 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.

Rate this
No ratings yet
Sign in to join the discussion.
Loading…