CivilAxisCivilAxis
☕ Support🌐 Community

UB 838×292×226 vs W 33X152

UB 838×292×226 is an UB section from the UK Blue Book (SCI P363); W 33X152 is the closest equivalent in the American AISC Shapes Database. They are close to interchangeable in bending: 9160 cm³ against 9160.4 cm³ of plastic modulus, a difference of 0.0%. They weigh essentially the same, 226.5 kg/m and 226.2 kg/m. Both are about 851 mm deep, so either fits the same construction zone.

Section properties side by side. Bold marks the more favourable value where one is.
PropertyUB 838×292×226
UB
W 33X152
W
Difference
Mass226.5 kg/m226.2 kg/m+0.1%
Depth850.9 mm850.9 mmsame
Width293.8 mm294.6 mm-0.3%
Web thickness16.1 mm16.1 mmsame
Flange thickness26.8 mm26.9 mm-0.4%
Area289 cm²289.7 cm²-0.2%
Second moment, major (Iy)340,000 cm⁴339,645 cm⁴+0.1%
Plastic modulus, major (Wpl,y)9,160 cm³9,160.4 cm³same
Elastic modulus, major (Wel,y)7,980 cm³7,980.5 cm³same
Second moment, minor (Iz)11,400 cm⁴11,363 cm⁴+0.3%
Plastic modulus, minor (Wpl,z)1,210 cm³1,211 cm³-0.1%
Radius of gyration, minor (iz)6.27 cm6.27 cmsame
Torsion constant (It)514 cm⁴516.1 cm⁴-0.4%

UB 838×292×226 to BS EN 10365:2017; W 33X152 to AISC Shapes Database v16.0. Difference is expressed relative to W 33X152.

How to choose between them

On stiffness, UB 838×292×226 has the larger second moment of area: 340,000 cm⁴ against 339,645 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 (40.4 against 40.5 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 838×292×226 has a plastic modulus of 9160 cm³ and W 33X152 has 9160.4 cm³, a difference of only 0.0% - within the margin that section choice normally turns on. Compare stiffness and availability instead.

Neither meaningfully: UB 838×292×226 is 226.5 kg/m and W 33X152 is 226.2 kg/m. On a tonnage basis they cost the same.

Structurally it is the closest equivalent we hold: W 33X152 gives 9160.4 cm³ of plastic modulus and 339,645 cm⁴ of inertia against 9160 cm³ and 340,000 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 838×292×226, with a second moment of area of 340,000 cm⁴ against 339,645 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 838×292×226 vs H-900x300x15x23-213W 33X152 vs H-900x300x15x23-213
Rate this
No ratings yet
Sign in to join the discussion.
Loading…