Advanced Computing–Based Modeling of Steel Connection Behavior and Stability Performance using ETABS And STAAD Pro

Abstract

Advanced computational modeling has become an essential tool for evaluating the structural performance of steel frame systems and their connection behavior under complex loading conditions. This study examined the structural behavior and stability performance of steel connections using advanced computing-based modeling through ETABS and STAAD Pro. A quantitative comparative simulation design was adopted to analyze the response of multistory steel frame structures under standardized modeling conditions. A total of 24 three-dimensional steel structural models were developed and analyzed using identical geometric properties, material characteristics, and boundary conditions in both software platforms. The analytical dataset consisted of 960 structural observations derived from multiple load combinations including gravity, wind, and seismic loading scenarios. Key structural performance indicators evaluated in the study included maximum displacement, interstory drift, column axial force, beam shear force, bending moment distribution, and structural stability indices. The findings demonstrated that both ETABS and STAAD Pro produced generally consistent structural response patterns across the simulated models. The average maximum displacement predicted by ETABS was 40.56 mm, compared with 37.12 mm generated by STAAD Pro, indicating slightly greater lateral deformation predicted by ETABS. Similarly, the average interstory drift ratio was 0.0023 in ETABS and 0.0021 in STAAD Pro, confirming similar deformation trends between the two platforms. In contrast, STAAD Pro simulations produced higher internal force values in structural members, with average column axial forces of 1287.66 kN compared with 1218.43 kN in ETABS, and average beam bending moments of 366.88 kN·m compared with 349.72 kN·m in ETABS. Subgroup analysis further showed that structural models with semi-rigid connections produced greater deformation responses, with an average displacement of 42.63 mm compared with 35.18 mm in rigid connection models. Statistical testing confirmed that several structural indicators exhibited significant differences between the two software platforms, although effect size analysis indicated that these differences were generally small to moderate in magnitude. Overall, the results demonstrated that both ETABS and STAAD Pro provide reliable analytical capabilities for modeling steel structural behavior while exhibiting modest numerical variation in certain structural performance indicators.