CivilAxisCivilAxis
☕ Support🌐 Community

UB 610×305×179 vs W 24X117

UB 610×305×179 is an UB section from the UK Blue Book (SCI P363); W 24X117 is the closest equivalent in the American AISC Shapes Database. UB 610×305×179 carries more bending: 5550 cm³ of plastic modulus against 5358.6 cm³, 3.6% more. W 24X117 is the lighter of the two at 174.1 kg/m against 179 kg/m, a saving of 2.8% on steel weight. Both are about 619 mm deep, so either fits the same construction zone.

Section properties side by side. Bold marks the more favourable value where one is.
PropertyUB 610×305×179
UB
W 24X117
W
Difference
Mass179 kg/m174.1 kg/m+2.8%
Depth620.2 mm617.2 mm+0.5%
Width307.1 mm325.1 mm-5.5%
Web thickness14.1 mm14 mm+0.7%
Flange thickness23.6 mm21.6 mm+9.3%
Area228 cm²221.9 cm²+2.7%
Second moment, major (Iy)153,000 cm⁴147,346 cm⁴+3.8%
Plastic modulus, major (Wpl,y)5,550 cm³5,358.6 cm³+3.6%
Elastic modulus, major (Wel,y)4,930 cm³4,768.6 cm³+3.4%
Second moment, minor (Iz)11,400 cm⁴12,362 cm⁴-7.8%
Plastic modulus, minor (Wpl,z)1,140 cm³1,170 cm³-2.6%
Radius of gyration, minor (iz)7.07 cm7.47 cm-5.4%
Torsion constant (It)340 cm⁴279.7 cm⁴+21.6%

UB 610×305×179 to BS EN 10365:2017; W 24X117 to AISC Shapes Database v16.0. Difference is expressed relative to W 24X117.

How to choose between them

On stiffness, UB 610×305×179 has the larger second moment of area: 153,000 cm⁴ against 147,346 cm⁴, a difference of 3.8%. 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 (31.0 against 30.8 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 2.8% weight.

In short, UB 610×305×179 is the stronger section and W 24X117 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 610×305×179 is the stronger of the two in bending, with a plastic modulus of 5550 cm³ against 5358.6 cm³ - 3.6% more. At the same steel grade that translates directly into moment capacity, since M_pl,Rd = W_pl x f_y / gamma_M0.

W 24X117 at 174.1 kg/m, against 179 kg/m for the other - a saving of 2.8%. 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 24X117 gives 5358.6 cm³ of plastic modulus and 147,346 cm⁴ of inertia against 5550 cm³ and 153,000 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 610×305×179, with a second moment of area of 153,000 cm⁴ against 147,346 cm⁴ (3.8% 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 610×305×179 vs IPE V 600W 24X117 vs IPE V 600W 24X117 vs HE 600 AW 24X117 vs H-600x300x14x23-175
Rate this
No ratings yet
Sign in to join the discussion.
Loading…