CivilAxisCivilAxis
☕ Support🌐 Community

UB 305×165×46 vs H-300x150x7.5x12

UB 305×165×46 is an UB section from the UK Blue Book (SCI P363); H-300x150x7.5x12 is the closest equivalent in the European (Continental) range. UB 305×165×46 carries more bending: 720 cm³ of plastic modulus against 702 cm³, 2.6% more. They weigh essentially the same, 46.1 kg/m and 46.2 kg/m. Both are about 306 mm deep, so either fits the same construction zone.

Section properties side by side. Bold marks the more favourable value where one is.
PropertyUB 305×165×46
UB
H-300x150x7.5x12
MB & MC
Difference
Mass46.1 kg/m46.2 kg/m-0.2%
Depth306.6 mm306 mm+0.2%
Width165.7 mm151 mm+9.7%
Web thickness6.7 mm7.5 mm-10.7%
Flange thickness11.8 mm12 mm-1.7%
Area58.7 cm²58.8 cm²-0.2%
Second moment, major (Iy)9,900 cm⁴9,514 cm⁴+4.1%
Plastic modulus, major (Wpl,y)720 cm³702 cm³+2.6%
Elastic modulus, major (Wel,y)646 cm³622 cm³+3.9%
Second moment, minor (Iz)896 cm⁴691 cm⁴+29.7%
Plastic modulus, minor (Wpl,z)166 cm³142 cm³+16.9%
Radius of gyration, minor (iz)3.9 cm3.43 cm+13.7%
Torsion constant (It)22.2 cm⁴24.9 cm⁴-10.8%

UB 305×165×46 to BS EN 10365:2017; H-300x150x7.5x12 to Continental Steel. Difference is expressed relative to H-300x150x7.5x12.

How to choose between them

On stiffness, UB 305×165×46 has the larger second moment of area: 9,900 cm⁴ against 9,514 cm⁴, a difference of 4.1%. 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, UB 305×165×46 is the more efficient section: 15.6 against 15.2 cm³ per kg/m, 2.8% 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: UB 305×165×46 has 166 cm³ of minor-axis plastic modulus against 142 cm³, 16.9% 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. UB sections are specified to BS EN 10365:2017 and MB & MC to 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, UB 305×165×46 is the stronger section and UB 305×165×46 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 305×165×46 is the stronger of the two in bending, with a plastic modulus of 720 cm³ against 702 cm³ - 2.6% more. At the same steel grade that translates directly into moment capacity, since M_pl,Rd = W_pl x f_y / gamma_M0.

Neither meaningfully: UB 305×165×46 is 46.1 kg/m and H-300x150x7.5x12 is 46.2 kg/m. On a tonnage basis they cost the same.

Structurally it is the closest equivalent we hold: H-300x150x7.5x12 gives 702 cm³ of plastic modulus and 9,514 cm⁴ of inertia against 720 cm³ and 9,900 cm⁴. But they are from different catalogues (BS EN 10365:2017 and Continental Steel), so this is a design change, not a drop-in swap: re-check deflection, connection detailing and local availability.

UB 305×165×46, with a second moment of area of 9,900 cm⁴ against 9,514 cm⁴ (4.1% 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

UB 305×165×46 vs IPE O 300UB 305×165×46 vs W 12X30UB 305×165×46 vs S 12X35UB 305×127×48 vs H-300x150x7.5x12W 12X30 vs H-300x150x7.5x12
Rate this
No ratings yet
Sign in to join the discussion.
Loading…