MIDAS Gen vs ETABS: Building Analysis Platform Comparison for Structural Engineers

MIDAS Gen vs ETABS: Building Analysis Platform Comparison for Structural Engineers

I've used both MIDAS Gen and ETABS extensively, and the question of which one to use comes up a lot — especially on international projects where the client or local authority has a preference. ETABS dominates in the Americas; MIDAS Gen has a strong following in Asia, the Middle East, and parts of Europe. Both are capable tools, but they have different strengths. Here's how I think about the choice.

Cost Comparison

| | MIDAS Gen | ETABS | |---|---|---| | License type | Perpetual + annual maintenance | Perpetual + annual maintenance | | Purchase cost | ~$4,000-6,000 | ~$4,000-5,000 | | Annual maintenance | ~$800-1,200 | ~$800-1,000 | | 5-year TCO | ~$8,000-12,000 | ~$8,000-10,000 |

Costs are comparable. MIDAS Gen is slightly more expensive in some markets but offers more features in the base license.

Modeling Comparison

| Feature | MIDAS Gen | ETABS | |---------|-----------|-------| | Story-based modeling | Yes | Yes (more mature) | | Grid system | Cartesian + cylindrical | Cartesian + cylindrical | | Templates | Building, stadium, tower | Building frame, shear wall | | Floor load distribution | Automatic | Automatic | | Rigid diaphragm | Automatic per story | Automatic per story | | Semi-rigid diaphragm | Yes | Yes | | Meshed walls | Yes (auto-mesh) | Yes (auto-mesh) | | Meshed slabs | Yes | Yes | | Section database | International (AISC, JIS, KS, GB, EN) | International (AISC, EN, IS, BS) | | Material models | Steel, concrete, timber, aluminum | Steel, concrete, composite, aluminum | | Cold-formed steel | Yes | Limited |

Seismic Analysis

| Feature | MIDAS Gen | ETABS | |---------|-----------|-------| | Equivalent lateral force | Auto (ASCE 7, IS 1893, EN 1998, NBCC) | Auto (ASCE 7, IS 1893, EN 1998, NBCC) | | Response spectrum | Yes (CQC, SRSS) | Yes (CQC, SRSS) | | Time history (linear) | Yes | Yes | | Time history (nonlinear) | Yes | Yes | | Pushover | Yes | Yes | | Base shear scaling | Manual | Automatic | | Accidental eccentricity | Auto (5% or custom) | Auto (5% or custom) | | Directional combination | 100/30 or SRSS | 100/30 or SRSS |

Key difference: ETABS automatically scales response spectrum results to 85% of static base shear. MIDAS Gen requires manual checking and scaling.

Design Codes

| Code | MIDAS Gen | ETABS | |------|-----------|-------| | AISC 360 (steel, US) | Yes | Yes | | ACI 318 (concrete, US) | Yes | Yes | | Eurocode 2 (concrete) | Yes | Yes | | Eurocode 3 (steel) | Yes | Yes | | IS 456 (concrete, India) | Yes | Yes | | IS 800 (steel, India) | Yes | Yes | | KS (Korea) | Yes | Limited | | GB (China) | Yes | Limited | | AIJ (Japan) | Yes | No | | AS/NZS (Australia) | Yes | Yes | | CSA S16 (Canada, steel) | Yes | Yes | | CSA A23.3 (Canada, concrete) | Yes | Yes |

Key difference: MIDAS Gen has better support for Asian codes (KS, GB, AIJ) while ETABS has better integration with North American codes.

Post-Processing

| Feature | MIDAS Gen | ETABS | |---------|-----------|-------| | Story shear | Yes | Yes | | Story drift | Yes | Yes | | Center of mass/rigidity | Yes | Yes | | Drift check vs. code limits | Yes | Yes (automatic) | | Member forces | Yes | Yes | | Reactions | Yes | Yes | | Moment diagrams | Yes | Yes | | Contour plots | Yes | Yes | | Design ratios | Yes | Yes | | Concrete detailing | Yes (basic) | Yes (more detailed) | | Steel optimization | Yes | Yes | | Report generation | Yes (structured) | Yes (structured) |

Unique MIDAS Gen Advantages

• Asian code support: Full support for KS, GB, AIJ, AS/NZS
• Tower and stadium templates: Specialized templates for non-building structures
• Construction stage analysis: Sequential construction loading
• Material time-dependent: Creep and shrinkage analysis for concrete
• Cable and tension structures: For special structures
• Buckling analysis: Linear and nonlinear buckling
• Heat of hydration: For mass concrete analysis
• More flexible modeling: Not limited to story-based — can model any 3D structure

Unique ETABS Advantages

• More mature story workflow: Refined over 30+ years
• Automatic base shear scaling: No manual check required
• Better concrete detailing: Automatic beam, column, and shear wall detailing
• Larger user community: More tutorials, forums, and training resources
• Better North American market adoption: Easier collaboration with US/Canada partners
• CSI ecosystem: Integration with SAP2000, SAFE, CSiBridge
• Better documentation: Comprehensive help system and verification examples
• Faster analysis: Optimized solver for large building models

Construction Stage Analysis

MIDAS Gen (Superior)

MIDAS Gen includes construction stage analysis:

1. Define construction stages:
   • Stage 1: Cast basement columns and slabs
   • Stage 2: Cast ground floor
   • Stage 3: Cast Level 1
   • ... and so on
2. At each stage:
   • Apply self-weight of new elements
   • Remove temporary supports (formwork)
   • Account for concrete age and strength gain
   • Include creep and shrinkage effects
3. Results show:
   • Cumulative displacements per stage
   • Force redistribution due to sequential construction
   • Long-term deflections (creep + shrinkage)

ETABS (Limited)

ETABS has basic construction stage analysis but lacks creep and shrinkage modeling. For detailed construction sequencing, MIDAS Gen is superior.

When to Choose MIDAS Gen

• You work in Asia, Middle East, or markets using KS/GB/AIJ codes
• You need construction stage analysis with creep and shrinkage
• You analyze non-building structures (towers, stadiums) in addition to buildings
• You need buckling or heat of hydration analysis
• You work with cable or tension structures
• Your firm already uses MIDAS Civil for bridge projects (shared interface)

When to Choose ETABS

• You work in North America or markets dominated by ACI/AISC
• You want automatic base shear scaling and drift checks
• You need detailed concrete detailing output
• You collaborate with partners who use ETABS
• You want the largest community and resource ecosystem
• You need integration with SAFE (foundation/slab design)
• You prefer a more refined story-based workflow

File Compatibility

MIDAS Gen and ETABS do not have direct file exchange. To transfer models:

1. Export to IFC or CIS/2 from one tool
2. Import into the other
3. Geometry transfers but design parameters and load cases may need reconfiguration

Code Support and Regional Considerations

Code support is a major factor in choosing between midas Gen and ETABS. ETABS has comprehensive support for US codes: ACI 318 for concrete, AISC 360 for steel, ASCE 7 for loads, and IBC for general building requirements. This makes ETABS the default choice for US-based structural engineering practice. midas Gen supports a broader range of international codes: Eurocode, British Standards, Korean, Chinese, Japanese, and Indian codes, in addition to US codes. This makes midas Gen more versatile for international firms working across multiple code jurisdictions. However, the depth of code support varies — midas Gen's US code implementation may not be as comprehensive or up-to-date as ETABS' implementation. For firms working primarily in the US, ETABS' code support is more reliable and better validated. For firms working in Europe, Asia, or the Middle East, midas Gen's multi-code support is a significant advantage.

My Take

Both MIDAS Gen and ETABS are excellent tools. If you're in Asia or the Middle East, MIDAS Gen is probably the better choice — better code support for the region, construction stage analysis built in, and a growing user community. If you're in the Americas, ETABS is the safer bet — larger community, better support, and most of your collaborators will be using it. If you work internationally, you might need both. I use MIDAS Gen for Asian projects and ETABS for North American ones, and that setup works well for me.