CivilAxisCivilAxis
☕ Support🌐 Community

UC 305×305×137 vs W 12X96

UC 305×305×137 is an UC section from the UK Blue Book (SCI P363); W 12X96 is the closest equivalent in the American AISC Shapes Database. W 12X96 carries more bending: 2408.9 cm³ of plastic modulus against 2300 cm³, 4.5% more. UC 305×305×137 is the lighter of the two at 136.9 kg/m against 142.9 kg/m, a saving of 4.2% on steel weight. Both are about 322 mm deep, so either fits the same construction zone.

Section properties side by side. Bold marks the more favourable value where one is.
PropertyUC 305×305×137
UC
W 12X96
W
Difference
Mass136.9 kg/m142.9 kg/m-4.2%
Depth320.5 mm322.6 mm-0.7%
Width309.2 mm309.9 mm-0.2%
Web thickness13.8 mm14 mm-1.4%
Flange thickness21.7 mm22.9 mm-5.2%
Area174 cm²181.9 cm²-4.3%
Second moment, major (Iy)32,800 cm⁴34,672 cm⁴-5.4%
Plastic modulus, major (Wpl,y)2,300 cm³2,408.9 cm³-4.5%
Elastic modulus, major (Wel,y)2,050 cm³2,146.7 cm³-4.5%
Second moment, minor (Iz)10,700 cm⁴11,238 cm⁴-4.8%
Plastic modulus, minor (Wpl,z)1,050 cm³1,106.1 cm³-5.1%
Radius of gyration, minor (iz)7.83 cm7.85 cm-0.3%
Torsion constant (It)249 cm⁴285.1 cm⁴-12.7%

UC 305×305×137 to BS EN 10365:2017; W 12X96 to AISC Shapes Database v16.0. Difference is expressed relative to W 12X96.

How to choose between them

On stiffness, W 12X96 has the larger second moment of area: 34,672 cm⁴ against 32,800 cm⁴, a difference of 5.4%. 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 (16.8 against 16.9 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 4.2% weight.

In short, W 12X96 is the stronger section and UC 305×305×137 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

W 12X96 is the stronger of the two in bending, with a plastic modulus of 2408.9 cm³ against 2300 cm³ - 4.5% more. At the same steel grade that translates directly into moment capacity, since M_pl,Rd = W_pl x f_y / gamma_M0.

UC 305×305×137 at 136.9 kg/m, against 142.9 kg/m for the other - a saving of 4.2%. 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 12X96 gives 2408.9 cm³ of plastic modulus and 34,672 cm⁴ of inertia against 2300 cm³ and 32,800 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 12X96, with a second moment of area of 34,672 cm⁴ against 32,800 cm⁴ (5.4% 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 305×305×137 vs H-300x300x20x21W 12X96 vs HE 340 BW 12X96 vs HP 14X89
Rate this
No ratings yet
Sign in to join the discussion.
Loading…