CivilAxisCivilAxis
☕ Support🌐 Community

UC 305×305×118 vs HP 12X84

UC 305×305×118 is an UC section from the UK Blue Book (SCI P363); HP 12X84 is the closest equivalent in the American AISC Shapes Database. They are close to interchangeable in bending: 1960 cm³ against 1966.4 cm³ of plastic modulus, a difference of 0.3%. UC 305×305×118 is the lighter of the two at 117.9 kg/m against 125 kg/m, a saving of 5.7% on steel weight. Both are about 313 mm deep, so either fits the same construction zone.

Section properties side by side. Bold marks the more favourable value where one is.
PropertyUC 305×305×118
UC
HP 12X84
HP
Difference
Mass117.9 kg/m125 kg/m-5.7%
Depth314.5 mm312.4 mm+0.7%
Width307.4 mm312.4 mm-1.6%
Web thickness12 mm17.4 mm-31.0%
Flange thickness18.7 mm17.4 mm+7.5%
Area150 cm²158.7 cm²-5.5%
Second moment, major (Iy)27,700 cm⁴27,055 cm⁴+2.4%
Plastic modulus, major (Wpl,y)1,960 cm³1,966.4 cm³-0.3%
Elastic modulus, major (Wel,y)1,760 cm³1,737 cm³+1.3%
Second moment, minor (Iz)9,060 cm⁴8,866 cm⁴+2.2%
Plastic modulus, minor (Wpl,z)895 cm³871.79 cm³+2.7%
Radius of gyration, minor (iz)7.77 cm7.47 cm+4.0%
Torsion constant (It)161 cm⁴176.5 cm⁴-8.8%

UC 305×305×118 to BS EN 10365:2017; HP 12X84 to AISC Shapes Database v16.0. Difference is expressed relative to HP 12X84.

How to choose between them

On stiffness, UC 305×305×118 has the larger second moment of area: 27,700 cm⁴ against 27,055 cm⁴, a difference of 2.4%. 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 of steel, UC 305×305×118 is the more efficient section: 16.6 against 15.7 cm³ per kg/m, 5.7% better. Over a floor of repeated beams that difference is real tonnage, though it is often outweighed by whichever section the fabricator can actually source.

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 HP 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 5.7% weight.

In short, HP 12X84 is the stronger section and UC 305×305×118 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

They are effectively equal in bending. UC 305×305×118 has a plastic modulus of 1960 cm³ and HP 12X84 has 1966.4 cm³, a difference of only 0.3% - within the margin that section choice normally turns on. Compare stiffness and availability instead.

UC 305×305×118 at 117.9 kg/m, against 125 kg/m for the other - a saving of 5.7%. 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: HP 12X84 gives 1966.4 cm³ of plastic modulus and 27,055 cm⁴ of inertia against 1960 cm³ and 27,700 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 305×305×118, with a second moment of area of 27,700 cm⁴ against 27,055 cm⁴ (2.4% 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

UC 305×305×118 vs W 12X79UC 305×305×118 vs H-300x300x13x20W 12X79 vs HP 12X84
Rate this
No ratings yet
Sign in to join the discussion.
Loading…