CivilAxisCivilAxis
☕ Support🌐 Community

UB 457×191×89 vs W 18X60

UB 457×191×89 is an UB section from the UK Blue Book (SCI P363); W 18X60 is the closest equivalent in the American AISC Shapes Database. They are close to interchangeable in bending: 2010 cm³ against 2015.6 cm³ of plastic modulus, a difference of 0.3%. They weigh essentially the same, 89.3 kg/m and 89.3 kg/m. Both are about 463 mm deep, so either fits the same construction zone.

Section properties side by side. Bold marks the more favourable value where one is.
PropertyUB 457×191×89
UB
W 18X60
W
Difference
Mass89.3 kg/m89.3 kg/msame
Depth463.4 mm462.3 mm+0.2%
Width191.9 mm192 mm-0.1%
Web thickness10.5 mm10.5 mmsame
Flange thickness17.7 mm17.7 mmsame
Area114 cm²113.5 cm²+0.4%
Second moment, major (Iy)41,000 cm⁴40,957 cm⁴+0.1%
Plastic modulus, major (Wpl,y)2,010 cm³2,015.6 cm³-0.3%
Elastic modulus, major (Wel,y)1,770 cm³1,769.8 cm³same
Second moment, minor (Iz)2,090 cm⁴2,085 cm⁴+0.2%
Plastic modulus, minor (Wpl,z)338 cm³337.57 cm³+0.1%
Radius of gyration, minor (iz)4.29 cm4.27 cm+0.5%
Torsion constant (It)90.7 cm⁴90.32 cm⁴+0.4%

UB 457×191×89 to BS EN 10365:2017; W 18X60 to AISC Shapes Database v16.0. Difference is expressed relative to W 18X60.

How to choose between them

On stiffness, UB 457×191×89 has the larger second moment of area: 41,000 cm⁴ against 40,957 cm⁴, a difference of 0.1%. 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, the two are equally efficient (22.5 against 22.6 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 457×191×89 has a plastic modulus of 2010 cm³ and W 18X60 has 2015.6 cm³, a difference of only 0.3% - within the margin that section choice normally turns on. Compare stiffness and availability instead.

Neither meaningfully: UB 457×191×89 is 89.3 kg/m and W 18X60 is 89.3 kg/m. On a tonnage basis they cost the same.

Structurally it is the closest equivalent we hold: W 18X60 gives 2015.6 cm³ of plastic modulus and 40,957 cm⁴ of inertia against 2010 cm³ and 41,000 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.

UB 457×191×89, with a second moment of area of 41,000 cm⁴ against 40,957 cm⁴ (0.1% 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 457×191×89 vs IPE O 450UB 457×191×89 vs S 18X70UB 457×191×89 vs H-450x200x10x17W 18X60 vs IPE O 450W 18X60 vs S 18X70W 18X60 vs H-450x200x10x17
Rate this
No ratings yet
Sign in to join the discussion.
Loading…