CivilAxisCivilAxis
☕ Support🌐 Community

UC 254×254×167 vs HE 260 M

UC 254×254×167 is an UC section from the UK Blue Book (SCI P363); HE 260 M is the closest equivalent in the European (Continental) range. HE 260 M carries more bending: 2520 cm³ of plastic modulus against 2420 cm³, 4.0% more. UC 254×254×167 is the lighter of the two at 167.1 kg/m against 172 kg/m, a saving of 2.8% on steel weight. Both are about 290 mm deep, so either fits the same construction zone.

Section properties side by side. Bold marks the more favourable value where one is.
PropertyUC 254×254×167
UC
HE 260 M
HE
Difference
Mass167.1 kg/m172 kg/m-2.8%
Depth289.1 mm290 mm-0.3%
Width265.2 mm268 mm-1.0%
Web thickness19.2 mm18 mm+6.7%
Flange thickness31.7 mm32.5 mm-2.5%
Area213 cm²220 cm²-3.2%
Second moment, major (Iy)30,000 cm⁴31,300 cm⁴-4.2%
Plastic modulus, major (Wpl,y)2,420 cm³2,520 cm³-4.0%
Elastic modulus, major (Wel,y)2,080 cm³2,160 cm³-3.7%
Second moment, minor (Iz)9,870 cm⁴10,400 cm⁴-5.1%
Plastic modulus, minor (Wpl,z)1,140 cm³1,190 cm³-4.2%
Radius of gyration, minor (iz)6.81 cm6.9 cm-1.3%
Torsion constant (It)626 cm⁴720 cm⁴-13.1%

UC 254×254×167 to BS EN 10365:2017; HE 260 M to EN 10365 · Continental Steel. Difference is expressed relative to HE 260 M.

How to choose between them

On stiffness, HE 260 M has the larger second moment of area: 31,300 cm⁴ against 30,000 cm⁴, a difference of 4.2%. 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 (14.5 against 14.7 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 HE to EN 10365 · Continental Steel; 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 2.8% weight.

In short, HE 260 M is the stronger section and UC 254×254×167 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

HE 260 M is the stronger of the two in bending, with a plastic modulus of 2520 cm³ against 2420 cm³ - 4.0% more. At the same steel grade that translates directly into moment capacity, since M_pl,Rd = W_pl x f_y / gamma_M0.

UC 254×254×167 at 167.1 kg/m, against 172 kg/m for the other - a saving of 2.8%. 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: HE 260 M gives 2520 cm³ of plastic modulus and 31,300 cm⁴ of inertia against 2420 cm³ and 30,000 cm⁴. But they are from different catalogues (BS EN 10365:2017 and EN 10365 · Continental Steel), so this is a design change, not a drop-in swap: re-check deflection, connection detailing and local availability.

HE 260 M, with a second moment of area of 31,300 cm⁴ against 30,000 cm⁴ (4.2% 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 254×254×167 vs W 10X112W 10X112 vs HE 260 M
Rate this
No ratings yet
Sign in to join the discussion.
Loading…