Building Positioning based on Solar Analysis

Generate Solar Analysis “Weater.ByLatitudeLongitude” gives an incorrect output (null).
Anyone see the mistake (see also fig. 1) ?
At first I thought the wrintig errors (latitud, longitude), but even if we correct this, things still going wrong.

Fig. 1

Thanks in advance.02-02_Building-positioning.dyn (3.5 MB)

That package has an explicit note about not working after Jan 1 of 2016… likely best to find another method of pulling the data you are after.

@JacobSmall @GavinCrump

Any suggestions for that ?

Thanks in advance.

Not sure if this is a good answer given we’re on the dynamo forums, but I use Ladybug/Gh/Rhino Inside for most environmental analysis’ these days. I used to use Ladybug for Dynamo but the weather files stopped parseing in 2020 and beyond (and Gh can process site files with more detail, as meshes etc.).

Dynamo is always my Bae for data processing and element geometry exercises, but for the heavy geometry tasks I sometimes like to explore Gh options. I find some of the package alternatives a bit easier to implement also (e.g. Dynashape vs Kangaroo), but probably comes down to personal preference also.

1 Like

1 hour Gavin, 1 hour and Excommunicado! :sweat_smile:



Could this be found somewhere on Youtube / …?

They’re a bit out of date, but I have some videos on the basics of Rhino Inside and Ladybug for solar analysis here;

They might help you get started, the location settings can be derived from the epw file if this was your stumbling block.

Dynamo’s ladybug works similarly, but the epw file doesn’t come clean out the other side. I saw some work by Konrad recently which might see it’s return in app form possibly;

1 Like

Hi all,

We have currently opted for the workaround below:

  1. Remove “Solar Analysis for Autodesk Revit 2021” (see also fig. 1)
  2. Remove "Lighting Analysis for Autodesk Revit 2021 (see also fig. 2)
  3. Change Refinery Inputs (see fig. 3)
  4. “Open” Data Gate Building ID (see fig. 4).
  5. Dynamo script without warnings (Run completed) (see fig. 5)

Fig. 1
Fig. 1

Fig. 2
Fig. 2

Fig. 3

Fig. 4

Fig. 5

@GavinCrump @JacobSmall @SeanP agree with the above (thanks for the help)?

Thanks also to @Mohammad_Asl and @Jose Bravo

I guess it works, but breaking software package A to fix code snippet B isn’t something I would recommend.



Indeed it works. But we currently saw now other solution within Dynamo than the workaround described above.