CivilAxisCivilAxis
☕ Support🌐 Community

UB 914×419×388 vs W 36X262

UB 914×419×388 is an UB section from the UK Blue Book (SCI P363); W 36X262 is the closest equivalent in the American AISC Shapes Database. They are close to interchangeable in bending: 17700 cm³ against 18025.8 cm³ of plastic modulus, a difference of 1.8%. They weigh essentially the same, 388 kg/m and 389.9 kg/m. Both are about 929 mm deep, so either fits the same construction zone.

Section properties side by side. Bold marks the more favourable value where one is.
PropertyUB 914×419×388
UB
W 36X262
W
Difference
Mass388 kg/m389.9 kg/m-0.5%
Depth921 mm937.3 mm-1.7%
Width420.5 mm421.6 mm-0.3%
Web thickness21.4 mm21.3 mm+0.5%
Flange thickness36.6 mm36.6 mmsame
Area494 cm²498.1 cm²-0.8%
Second moment, major (Iy)720,000 cm⁴745,054 cm⁴-3.4%
Plastic modulus, major (Wpl,y)17,700 cm³18,025.8 cm³-1.8%
Elastic modulus, major (Wel,y)15,600 cm³15,928.2 cm³-2.1%
Second moment, minor (Iz)45,400 cm⁴45,369 cm⁴+0.1%
Plastic modulus, minor (Wpl,z)3,340 cm³3,343 cm³-0.1%
Radius of gyration, minor (iz)9.59 cm9.55 cm+0.4%
Torsion constant (It)1,730 cm⁴1,732 cm⁴-0.1%

UB 914×419×388 to BS EN 10365:2017; W 36X262 to AISC Shapes Database v16.0. Difference is expressed relative to W 36X262.

How to choose between them

On stiffness, W 36X262 has the larger second moment of area: 745,054 cm⁴ against 720,000 cm⁴, a difference of 3.4%. 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 (45.6 against 46.2 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 914×419×388 has a plastic modulus of 17700 cm³ and W 36X262 has 18025.8 cm³, a difference of only 1.8% - within the margin that section choice normally turns on. Compare stiffness and availability instead.

Neither meaningfully: UB 914×419×388 is 388 kg/m and W 36X262 is 389.9 kg/m. On a tonnage basis they cost the same.

Structurally it is the closest equivalent we hold: W 36X262 gives 18025.8 cm³ of plastic modulus and 745,054 cm⁴ of inertia against 17700 cm³ and 720,000 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 36X262, with a second moment of area of 745,054 cm⁴ against 720,000 cm⁴ (3.4% 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 914×419×388 vs HE 900 x 391W 36X247 vs UB 914×419×388W 36X256 vs UB 914×419×388
Rate this
No ratings yet
Sign in to join the discussion.
Loading…