CivilAxisCivilAxis
☕ Support🌐 Community

UB 914×305×253 vs W 36X170

UB 914×305×253 is an UB section from the UK Blue Book (SCI P363); W 36X170 is the closest equivalent in the American AISC Shapes Database. They are close to interchangeable in bending: 10900 cm³ against 10946.6 cm³ of plastic modulus, a difference of 0.4%. They weigh essentially the same, 253.4 kg/m and 253 kg/m. Both are about 919 mm deep, so either fits the same construction zone.

Section properties side by side. Bold marks the more favourable value where one is.
PropertyUB 914×305×253
UB
W 36X170
W
Difference
Mass253.4 kg/m253 kg/m+0.2%
Depth918.4 mm919.5 mm-0.1%
Width305.5 mm304.8 mm+0.2%
Web thickness17.3 mm17.3 mmsame
Flange thickness27.9 mm27.9 mmsame
Area323 cm²322.6 cm²+0.1%
Second moment, major (Iy)436,000 cm⁴437,043 cm⁴-0.2%
Plastic modulus, major (Wpl,y)10,900 cm³10,946.6 cm³-0.4%
Elastic modulus, major (Wel,y)9,500 cm³9,520.9 cm³-0.2%
Second moment, minor (Iz)13,300 cm⁴13,319 cm⁴-0.1%
Plastic modulus, minor (Wpl,z)1,370 cm³1,373.2 cm³-0.2%
Radius of gyration, minor (iz)6.42 cm6.43 cm-0.2%
Torsion constant (It)626 cm⁴628.5 cm⁴-0.4%

UB 914×305×253 to BS EN 10365:2017; W 36X170 to AISC Shapes Database v16.0. Difference is expressed relative to W 36X170.

How to choose between them

On stiffness, W 36X170 has the larger second moment of area: 437,043 cm⁴ against 436,000 cm⁴, a difference of 0.2%. 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 (43.0 against 43.3 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 914×305×253 has a plastic modulus of 10900 cm³ and W 36X170 has 10946.6 cm³, a difference of only 0.4% - within the margin that section choice normally turns on. Compare stiffness and availability instead.

Neither meaningfully: UB 914×305×253 is 253.4 kg/m and W 36X170 is 253 kg/m. On a tonnage basis they cost the same.

Structurally it is the closest equivalent we hold: W 36X170 gives 10946.6 cm³ of plastic modulus and 437,043 cm⁴ of inertia against 10900 cm³ and 436,000 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.

W 36X170, with a second moment of area of 437,043 cm⁴ against 436,000 cm⁴ (0.2% 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 914×305×253 vs HE 900 AUB 914×305×253 vs H-900x300x16x28-243W 36X170 vs HE 900 AW 36X170 vs H-900x300x16x28-243
Rate this
No ratings yet
Sign in to join the discussion.
Loading…