Hi, I am probably following up an earlier workflow with Dynamo and Robot Structural Analysis.
Whilst I’m not completely sure there appears to be an issue when taking a surface, say by a list node to an anaytical panel conversion node required to move the geometry from Dynamo to Robot.
The interface between Dynamo and Robot is at best clunky and at worse ineffective, that may be harsh though.
To run the analysis workflow:
Dynamo intial geometry via Revit
Dynamo to Robot
Is any one else looking at a similar type of workflow?
I find that the geometry in dynamo, requires an additional step to make an analytical node and Revit requires that a further node is added to take the dynamo surfaces into Robot.
The reliability of working dynamo definition is also quite poor for transferring into Robot reliably sometimes the panels are visible sometimes they are not.
Dynamo def for those that are interested, you will need Robot to run. Please note that its only the geometry other attributes can be added material, section properties etc. Purely due to an easier process of generating loads etc in the analysis package.
U_Frame_NR_Rev_H_Analytical.dyn (758.9 KB)
Revit: my use of revit is just developing but is more focused on workflow than competence for me as the package has too much complexity, would appreciate comments from users following similar workflow paths.
thanks
Kenyon
Hi,
My take is that RSA/REVIT are bidirectinally fully integrated so considering Dynamo part of Revit the workflow is complete. Of course there are certain things you cant expect revit/dynamo to do, for instance as the degree of complexity grows there are going to be errors, aborts etc. Its quite normal bcs the soft is a BIM platform not a conceptual tool. Myself i am only starting to experiment and already wish to throw in Rhino/Grasshopper…Dynamo/Revit/Robot
Kind regards
Hi Kenyon
I’m following along the same line of thinking and the workings of Dynamo -> Robot works quite ok, from the Analysis package though the “complexity” of the structures etc are limited.
If you however wish to go the other way, Robot -> Dynamo to my experience the “best” way is to interact directly with the Robot API through either C# or Python.
I last year created a preliminary workflow looking into capturing geometry, sections etc from Revit and create the geometry in Robot (through Dynamo).
Kind regards
Thanks, Jonathan for your reply. I stopped trying to use Robot as the analysis package. I found that I was unable to use it in an effective manner for my workflow.
I now use SAP2000 which I find works better…
more reliable. I found Robot painful for relatively simple shell models. My original post has such a definition.
From posting on The forum, it appears that such a workflow isn’t being pursued which surprises me. If you post on the Robot forum, you’ll be directed here.
Python yes I do use, however what I am trying to do geometrically shouldn’t need it. Simples good…
Rgds
Kenyon
Hi Kenyon,
We have experimented with the Revit>RSA analytical link with some success (for RC building structures). The trick to this is understanding the Revit analytical model (which is created in the background as you build your physical model).
If you’re looking to generate geometry parametrically, would it not be worth considering generating geometry in Revit using Dynamo; then adjusting the model to work analytically; and exporting to RSA for analysis.
I haven’t explored Dynamo interacting directly with RSA before, but would like to look at this. Any general advise on this?
Regards,
Mishlin