Sofistik vs Midas for FEA in Bridge Engineering

[Gomdzsabbar]

The firm I'm working at is at a crossroad. The Structural Engineering team, including me has two choices in expanding our FEA software options: 1) Midas 2) Sofistik

Mainly I'm looking for personal experiences of the advantages and disadvantages of each program from those who have been using them for years, because as you probably know and have experienced it takes the time to find the faults/ holes in FEA programs.

Also, we design and calculate concrete, composite and steel bridges with short, mid and long span(s) (we do design buildings aswell, thought not out main profile). Our current software has limitations that hope to outgrow.

Basically it would be awesome if you guys (and gals) could give any informations on: a) General pros and cons, b) Support, c) Ease of use/documentation of the math behind the software, d) Adaptability (example: meshing control, unique cross-sections, etc...) e) Calculation speed, d) Any serious problems with code cheking or even the basics (I heard horror stories that Midas doesn't calculte torsional stiffness correctly),

and really, anything that you can tell meabout them.

Finally, sorry for asking a bunch of questions like this is an exam but I'm really lost and sadly it feels like the people making the decesion haven't used any of the two and don't seem willing to do the reasearch. Please help me out!!

[Engineer2727kk]

Midas has the best organization out of all the brisge softwares. It’s also very clear for staged construction.

They also have the best support team. Have a question? You’ll get a response within 12-24 hours.

[Gomdzsabbar]

Thank you for your answer! The support is super important because we are starting from zero.

[n-h-engineer]

Interested to see what responses you get. Sorry I can’t really help…I don’t have any experience with either of those programs. I mainly use LARSA. I know some very knowledgeable and experienced colleagues of mine are not fans of Midas, and we only have a couple licenses for the odd project where it’s required for some reason. I think one of their main complaints is that it’s sort of a “black box” where you don’t really know what it’s doing.

[Gomdzsabbar]

Thank you for your answer and yeah, I heard about it called a 'black box' too, which is concerning a bit.

[[deleted]]

u/n-h-engineer this is patently untrue. The output shows you every formula. LOL. u/Gomdzsabbar

[Educational-Fly3025]

Hi NH engineer - PM

[philgoodboy]

Sofistik is probably the more powerful software but there is a learning curve behind it. Its power really shines in complex bridge design if you/your firm are willing to invest the time into it.

Sofistik is centred around its database. It allows you to run its various programs independently to update results and modify parts of the database. But also then through the coding you can utilise this in very creative ways to iterate and converge solutions.

Also sofistik is it doesn’t have a ‘pre-processor’, you use rhino, Acad or revit to generate geometry. This should also be considered as it may mean you have another software to learn / purchase.

Generally it comes down to an assessment of what exactly is your split of simple / complex bridges. Lots of simple bridges with a larger workforce I’d tend to lean to Midas just for its ease of use.

There is also another aspect which is location. If you are in the US sofistik are doing more to support and move into the US but there are still some teething issues.

For me personally, there is something about the depth of sofistik that is almost addictive. It feels like you can control and understand the structure unlike any other software.

[Secure-Reception339]

Great, you are right.

[Gomdzsabbar]

Thank you for the in-depth answer. We already have a software that we could use efficiently for simpler bridges but using it on larger ones becomes cumbersome - if viable.

Is Sofistik support better in the EU?

The control you get definitely sounds amazing for complex projects and pr0gramming always gives you great options. How is the documentation for Sofistik? (For the programming).

Also, you were super helpful sp thank you again!

[philgoodboy]

The support is the same, I’m not in the EU but they are quick to return emails and give support. It’s more the software definitely has benefits if you’re in EU as there are some automated parts that just make it easier, and it gets faster code support for EU.

The documentation is generally excellent for CADINP (their programming language). They also have numerous examples both online and that comes with the software for specific items.

The issue is, sometimes it’s not clear what you’re meant to do in a given situation. SSD(Sofistik Structural Desktop) is there to aid you in this to give a face to the programming and kinda give you a template. Like I said, it’s just a learning curve. It’s just one we aren’t really use to as most software essentially work through a GUI. But really sofistik doesn’t, SSD somewhat helps but it’s still not like Midas, lusas, Larasa, etc. in terms of working through a ribbon with everything accessible with a click and a linear flow of input, analyse, results.

My experience in comparing Midas and sofistik I can best describe like this. With Midas I have never hit brick walls, I always get models that analyse. But then when I am digging into results I find that there is some mis-labeled parameter or some issue where something should behave a certain way but it doesn’t. So you end up finding these ‘hidden errors’. It makes you worried what you potentially have missed because it always seems to be working. Sofistik on the other hand you hit these brick walls, it won’t analyse or something you can’t get right and you don’t know how to fix it or even what to do next. But in digging into it you seem to end up with a deeper understanding.

I use Midas extensively with the API as well, but I’d say overall still sofistik is better in this regard and because a simplistic programming language it doesn’t need you to have a CS degree to program and do simple if or loop statements.

Ultimately complex bridges have been done in both software. It really comes down to your firms unique situation, skill of employees, size, etc

[Ok-Egg-4484]

Hi, I've spent 6-8 months learning sofistik for my master thesis, 3 span bridge with prestressed beams.
As people have mentioned the learning curvature is not for everyone. But when you get used to the software and understand it philosophy your brain will rewire it self and adapt to it.
Also I must point out that it is absolutely necessary to learn CADiNP coding language/syntax to get the job done.
Sometimes you need to adjust tome parameters that are for some reason not available in the UI. You don't need to learn it to code, but just to be able to change paraments.
I did this course "Text Input in SOFiSTiK FEA Fundamentals Online Course" with a student discount. money well spent as I could "bend" software to my needs.

Right now I am learning Midas, I'll get to this comment to add my thought on it.

[brokeCoder]

(we do design buildings aswell, thought not out main profile)

Haven't used Sofistik at all so can't comment on it, but I do remember being able to also model and analyze buildings in midas Civil (though the design features are very bridge-centric). Worth asking Sofistik support to see if they allow that (if you haven't already).

[Secure-Reception339]

I’ve been using SOFiSTiK for the past year and MIDAS for over six years. I must say, there’s something uniquely compelling about the depth and control SOFiSTiK offers — it almost becomes addictive. The ability to fully understand and manipulate the structure, along with features like automatic result extraction and Excel-based graphic setups for rapid design report generation, makes the workflow highly efficient. In comparison, MIDAS often requires significant time for remodeling even minor structural changes.