CivilAxisCivilAxis
☕ Support🌐 Community

UB 762×267×147 vs W 30X99

UB 762×267×147 is an UB section from the UK Blue Book (SCI P363); W 30X99 is the closest equivalent in the American AISC Shapes Database. They are close to interchangeable in bending: 5160 cm³ against 5112.8 cm³ of plastic modulus, a difference of 0.9%. They weigh essentially the same, 146.9 kg/m and 147.3 kg/m. Both are about 754 mm deep, so either fits the same construction zone.

Section properties side by side. Bold marks the more favourable value where one is.
PropertyUB 762×267×147
UB
W 30X99
W
Difference
Mass146.9 kg/m147.3 kg/m-0.3%
Depth754 mm754.4 mm-0.1%
Width265.2 mm266.7 mm-0.6%
Web thickness12.8 mm13.2 mm-3.0%
Flange thickness17.5 mm17 mm+2.9%
Area187 cm²187.1 cm²-0.1%
Second moment, major (Iy)169,000 cm⁴166,076 cm⁴+1.8%
Plastic modulus, major (Wpl,y)5,160 cm³5,112.8 cm³+0.9%
Elastic modulus, major (Wel,y)4,470 cm³4,408.1 cm³+1.4%
Second moment, minor (Iz)5,460 cm⁴5,328 cm⁴+2.5%
Plastic modulus, minor (Wpl,z)647 cm³632.54 cm³+2.3%
Radius of gyration, minor (iz)5.4 cm5.33 cm+1.3%
Torsion constant (It)159 cm⁴156.9 cm⁴+1.3%

UB 762×267×147 to BS EN 10365:2017; W 30X99 to AISC Shapes Database v16.0. Difference is expressed relative to W 30X99.

How to choose between them

On stiffness, UB 762×267×147 has the larger second moment of area: 169,000 cm⁴ against 166,076 cm⁴, a difference of 1.8%. 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 (35.1 against 34.7 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 762×267×147 has a plastic modulus of 5160 cm³ and W 30X99 has 5112.8 cm³, a difference of only 0.9% - within the margin that section choice normally turns on. Compare stiffness and availability instead.

Neither meaningfully: UB 762×267×147 is 146.9 kg/m and W 30X99 is 147.3 kg/m. On a tonnage basis they cost the same.

Structurally it is the closest equivalent we hold: W 30X99 gives 5112.8 cm³ of plastic modulus and 166,076 cm⁴ of inertia against 5160 cm³ and 169,000 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 762×267×147, with a second moment of area of 169,000 cm⁴ against 166,076 cm⁴ (1.8% 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 762×267×147 vs IPE 750 x 147W 30X99 vs IPE 750 x 147
Rate this
No ratings yet
Sign in to join the discussion.
Loading…