CivilAxisCivilAxis
☕ Support🌐 Community

UB 914×305×289 vs W 36X194

UB 914×305×289 is an UB section from the UK Blue Book (SCI P363); W 36X194 is the closest equivalent in the American AISC Shapes Database. They are close to interchangeable in bending: 12600 cm³ against 12568.9 cm³ of plastic modulus, a difference of 0.2%. They weigh essentially the same, 289.1 kg/m and 288.7 kg/m. Both are about 927 mm deep, so either fits the same construction zone.

Section properties side by side. Bold marks the more favourable value where one is.
PropertyUB 914×305×289
UB
W 36X194
W
Difference
Mass289.1 kg/m288.7 kg/m+0.1%
Depth926.6 mm927.1 mm-0.1%
Width307.7 mm307.3 mm+0.1%
Web thickness19.5 mm19.4 mm+0.5%
Flange thickness32 mm32 mmsame
Area368 cm²367.7 cm²+0.1%
Second moment, major (Iy)504,000 cm⁴503,640 cm⁴+0.1%
Plastic modulus, major (Wpl,y)12,600 cm³12,568.9 cm³+0.2%
Elastic modulus, major (Wel,y)10,900 cm³10,881 cm³+0.2%
Second moment, minor (Iz)15,600 cm⁴15,609 cm⁴-0.1%
Plastic modulus, minor (Wpl,z)1,600 cm³1,601 cm³-0.1%
Radius of gyration, minor (iz)6.51 cm6.5 cm+0.2%
Torsion constant (It)926 cm⁴924 cm⁴+0.2%

UB 914×305×289 to BS EN 10365:2017; W 36X194 to AISC Shapes Database v16.0. Difference is expressed relative to W 36X194.

How to choose between them

On stiffness, UB 914×305×289 has the larger second moment of area: 504,000 cm⁴ against 503,640 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 (43.6 against 43.5 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 914×305×289 has a plastic modulus of 12600 cm³ and W 36X194 has 12568.9 cm³, a difference of only 0.2% - within the margin that section choice normally turns on. Compare stiffness and availability instead.

Neither meaningfully: UB 914×305×289 is 289.1 kg/m and W 36X194 is 288.7 kg/m. On a tonnage basis they cost the same.

Structurally it is the closest equivalent we hold: W 36X194 gives 12568.9 cm³ of plastic modulus and 503,640 cm⁴ of inertia against 12600 cm³ and 504,000 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 914×305×289, with a second moment of area of 504,000 cm⁴ against 503,640 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 914×305×289 vs HE 900 BUB 914×305×289 vs H-900x300x18x34-286W 36X194 vs HE 900 BW 36X194 vs H-900x300x18x34-286W 33X201 vs UB 914×305×289
Rate this
No ratings yet
Sign in to join the discussion.
Loading…