CivilAxisCivilAxis
☕ Support🌐 Community

UC 152×152×23 vs W 6X15

UC 152×152×23 is an UC section from the UK Blue Book (SCI P363); W 6X15 is the closest equivalent in the American AISC Shapes Database. UC 152×152×23 carries more bending: 182 cm³ of plastic modulus against 176.98 cm³, 2.8% more. W 6X15 is the lighter of the two at 22.3 kg/m against 23 kg/m, a saving of 3.1% on steel weight. Both are about 152 mm deep, so either fits the same construction zone.

Section properties side by side. Bold marks the more favourable value where one is.
PropertyUC 152×152×23
UC
W 6X15
W
Difference
Mass23 kg/m22.3 kg/m+3.1%
Depth152.4 mm152.1 mm+0.2%
Width152.2 mm152.1 mm+0.1%
Web thickness5.8 mm5.8 mmsame
Flange thickness6.8 mm6.6 mm+3.0%
Area29.2 cm²28.6 cm²+2.1%
Second moment, major (Iy)1,250 cm⁴1,211 cm⁴+3.2%
Plastic modulus, major (Wpl,y)182 cm³176.98 cm³+2.8%
Elastic modulus, major (Wel,y)164 cm³159.28 cm³+3.0%
Second moment, minor (Iz)400 cm⁴387.9 cm⁴+3.1%
Plastic modulus, minor (Wpl,z)80.1 cm³77.839 cm³+2.9%
Radius of gyration, minor (iz)3.7 cm3.68 cm+0.5%
Torsion constant (It)4.63 cm⁴4.2 cm⁴+10.2%

UC 152×152×23 to BS EN 10365:2017; W 6X15 to AISC Shapes Database v16.0. Difference is expressed relative to W 6X15.

How to choose between them

On stiffness, UC 152×152×23 has the larger second moment of area: 1,250 cm⁴ against 1,211 cm⁴, a difference of 3.2%. 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 (7.9 against 7.9 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. UC 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 3.1% weight.

In short, UC 152×152×23 is the stronger section and W 6X15 is the lighter one; where those are the same section, it is the clear choice, and where they are not, decide on whether your design is governed by capacity or by tonnage.

Common questions

UC 152×152×23 is the stronger of the two in bending, with a plastic modulus of 182 cm³ against 176.98 cm³ - 2.8% more. At the same steel grade that translates directly into moment capacity, since M_pl,Rd = W_pl x f_y / gamma_M0.

W 6X15 at 22.3 kg/m, against 23 kg/m for the other - a saving of 3.1%. Over a repeated floor beam that is a real cost difference, but check it against the deflection case before taking it.

Structurally it is the closest equivalent we hold: W 6X15 gives 176.98 cm³ of plastic modulus and 1,211 cm⁴ of inertia against 182 cm³ and 1,250 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.

UC 152×152×23, with a second moment of area of 1,250 cm⁴ against 1,211 cm⁴ (3.2% 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

UC 152×152×23 vs S 6X17.25W 6X15 vs S 6X17.25
Rate this
No ratings yet
Sign in to join the discussion.
Loading…