CivilAxisCivilAxis
☕ Support🌐 Community

UC 305×305×97 vs W 12X65

UC 305×305×97 is an UC section from the UK Blue Book (SCI P363); W 12X65 is the closest equivalent in the American AISC Shapes Database. They are close to interchangeable in bending: 1590 cm³ against 1586.3 cm³ of plastic modulus, a difference of 0.2%. They weigh essentially the same, 96.9 kg/m and 96.7 kg/m. Both are about 308 mm deep, so either fits the same construction zone.

Section properties side by side. Bold marks the more favourable value where one is.
PropertyUC 305×305×97
UC
W 12X65
W
Difference
Mass96.9 kg/m96.7 kg/m+0.2%
Depth307.9 mm307.3 mm+0.2%
Width305.3 mm304.8 mm+0.2%
Web thickness9.9 mm9.9 mmsame
Flange thickness15.4 mm15.4 mmsame
Area123 cm²123.2 cm²-0.2%
Second moment, major (Iy)22,200 cm⁴22,185 cm⁴+0.1%
Plastic modulus, major (Wpl,y)1,590 cm³1,586.3 cm³+0.2%
Elastic modulus, major (Wel,y)1,450 cm³1,440.4 cm³+0.7%
Second moment, minor (Iz)7,310 cm⁴7,242 cm⁴+0.9%
Plastic modulus, minor (Wpl,z)726 cm³722.67 cm³+0.5%
Radius of gyration, minor (iz)7.69 cm7.67 cm+0.3%
Torsion constant (It)91.2 cm⁴90.74 cm⁴+0.5%

UC 305×305×97 to BS EN 10365:2017; W 12X65 to AISC Shapes Database v16.0. Difference is expressed relative to W 12X65.

How to choose between them

On stiffness, UC 305×305×97 has the larger second moment of area: 22,200 cm⁴ against 22,185 cm⁴, a difference of 0.1%. 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 (16.4 against 16.4 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 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. UC 305×305×97 has a plastic modulus of 1590 cm³ and W 12X65 has 1586.3 cm³, a difference of only 0.2% - within the margin that section choice normally turns on. Compare stiffness and availability instead.

Neither meaningfully: UC 305×305×97 is 96.9 kg/m and W 12X65 is 96.7 kg/m. On a tonnage basis they cost the same.

Structurally it is the closest equivalent we hold: W 12X65 gives 1586.3 cm³ of plastic modulus and 22,185 cm⁴ of inertia against 1590 cm³ and 22,200 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 305×305×97, with a second moment of area of 22,200 cm⁴ against 22,185 cm⁴ (0.1% 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 305×305×97 vs HE 320 AUC 305×305×97 vs H-300x300x15x15W 12X65 vs HE 320 AW 12X65 vs H-300x300x15x15
Rate this
No ratings yet
Sign in to join the discussion.
Loading…