CivilAxisCivilAxis
☕ Support🌐 Community

UC 356×406×634 vs W 14X426

UC 356×406×634 is an UC section from the UK Blue Book (SCI P363); W 14X426 is the closest equivalent in the American AISC Shapes Database. They are close to interchangeable in bending: 14200 cm³ against 14240.4 cm³ of plastic modulus, a difference of 0.3%. They weigh essentially the same, 633.9 kg/m and 634 kg/m. Both are about 475 mm deep, so either fits the same construction zone.

Section properties side by side. Bold marks the more favourable value where one is.
PropertyUC 356×406×634
UC
W 14X426
W
Difference
Mass633.9 kg/m634 kg/msame
Depth474.6 mm475 mm-0.1%
Width424 mm424.2 mmsame
Web thickness47.6 mm47.8 mm-0.4%
Flange thickness77 mm77.2 mm-0.3%
Area808 cm²806.5 cm²+0.2%
Second moment, major (Iy)275,000 cm⁴274,713 cm⁴+0.1%
Plastic modulus, major (Wpl,y)14,200 cm³14,240.4 cm³-0.3%
Elastic modulus, major (Wel,y)11,600 cm³11,569.3 cm³+0.3%
Second moment, minor (Iz)98,100 cm⁴98,231 cm⁴-0.1%
Plastic modulus, minor (Wpl,z)7,110 cm³7,112 cm³same
Radius of gyration, minor (iz)11 cm11.02 cm-0.2%
Torsion constant (It)13,700 cm⁴13,777 cm⁴-0.6%

UC 356×406×634 to BS EN 10365:2017; W 14X426 to AISC Shapes Database v16.0. Difference is expressed relative to W 14X426.

How to choose between them

On stiffness, UC 356×406×634 has the larger second moment of area: 275,000 cm⁴ against 274,713 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 (22.4 against 22.5 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 356×406×634 has a plastic modulus of 14200 cm³ and W 14X426 has 14240.4 cm³, a difference of only 0.3% - within the margin that section choice normally turns on. Compare stiffness and availability instead.

Neither meaningfully: UC 356×406×634 is 633.9 kg/m and W 14X426 is 634 kg/m. On a tonnage basis they cost the same.

Structurally it is the closest equivalent we hold: W 14X426 gives 14240.4 cm³ of plastic modulus and 274,713 cm⁴ of inertia against 14200 cm³ and 275,000 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 356×406×634, with a second moment of area of 275,000 cm⁴ against 274,713 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 356×406×634 vs H-400x400x45x70W 14X426 vs H-400x400x45x70
Rate this
No ratings yet
Sign in to join the discussion.
Loading…