CivilAxisCivilAxis
☕ Support🌐 Community

UB 914×305×201 vs W 36X135

UB 914×305×201 is an UB section from the UK Blue Book (SCI P363); W 36X135 is the closest equivalent in the American AISC Shapes Database. They are close to interchangeable in bending: 8350 cm³ against 8341 cm³ of plastic modulus, a difference of 0.1%. They weigh essentially the same, 200.9 kg/m and 200.9 kg/m. Both are about 904 mm deep, so either fits the same construction zone.

Section properties side by side. Bold marks the more favourable value where one is.
PropertyUB 914×305×201
UB
W 36X135
W
Difference
Mass200.9 kg/m200.9 kg/msame
Depth903 mm904.2 mm-0.1%
Width303.3 mm304.8 mm-0.5%
Web thickness15.1 mm15.2 mm-0.7%
Flange thickness20.2 mm20.1 mm+0.5%
Area256 cm²257.4 cm²-0.5%
Second moment, major (Iy)325,000 cm⁴324,661 cm⁴+0.1%
Plastic modulus, major (Wpl,y)8,350 cm³8,341 cm³+0.1%
Elastic modulus, major (Wel,y)7,200 cm³7,193.9 cm³+0.1%
Second moment, minor (Iz)9,420 cm⁴9,365 cm⁴+0.6%
Plastic modulus, minor (Wpl,z)982 cm³978.31 cm³+0.4%
Radius of gyration, minor (iz)6.07 cm6.05 cm+0.3%
Torsion constant (It)291 cm⁴291.4 cm⁴-0.1%

UB 914×305×201 to BS EN 10365:2017; W 36X135 to AISC Shapes Database v16.0. Difference is expressed relative to W 36X135.

How to choose between them

On stiffness, UB 914×305×201 has the larger second moment of area: 325,000 cm⁴ against 324,661 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 (41.6 against 41.5 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 914×305×201 has a plastic modulus of 8350 cm³ and W 36X135 has 8341 cm³, a difference of only 0.1% - within the margin that section choice normally turns on. Compare stiffness and availability instead.

Neither meaningfully: UB 914×305×201 is 200.9 kg/m and W 36X135 is 200.9 kg/m. On a tonnage basis they cost the same.

Structurally it is the closest equivalent we hold: W 36X135 gives 8341 cm³ of plastic modulus and 324,661 cm⁴ of inertia against 8350 cm³ and 325,000 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 914×305×201, with a second moment of area of 325,000 cm⁴ against 324,661 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 914×305×201 vs H-900x300x15x23-210W 36X135 vs H-900x300x15x23-210W 33X141 vs UB 914×305×201
Rate this
No ratings yet
Sign in to join the discussion.
Loading…