Hi team,
Do you know if Dynaworks is still working for navisworks 2024 files, the latest Package i could find was Dynaworks 22, any advice?
Cheers
The API methods require rewriting g the package annually, and as there havenât been updates in awhile it almost certainly doesnât work. That said I linked to the repository in this old thread so you can fork it and write your own update is you so desire.
Pff, itâs too complex for me. I was checking John Piersonâs offer to users to ask him to update packages, but I think he is not active in the forum anymore.
John is VERY active, but updating and maintaining a package like Dynaworks is a rather big liftâŚ
Remember that package maintainers and authors do so as an act of kindness to the larger community; they arenât paid by users who consume the work, and for the most part the work they put in is not part of their job even though it can be a full time commitment. So adding a tool which needs a separate repository for each annual release⌠well items a lot.
For now you can look for another tool, try reaching out to the original package author to see if theyâd consider picking but back up, learn how to do the authoring (and investment in your own skill set) or perhaps hire someone to produce a new version.
4 Likes
I didnât know was a big deal, make sense.
Ill try to use another tool to do something similar any suggestion ?
Cheers
Nothing offhand. Sorry - never really got big into navisworks nor Dynaworks as the jobs Iâve been in have been in ACC/BIM360 for clash detection.
Apologies in advance AutodeskâŚ
Honestly Navisworks is an old, rather dead horse at this point. A reliable and predictable one, but a relatively dead one, nonetheless. Itâs riding off into the sunset in a straight line, whilst the competitors are taking to the skies. We know it, I would assume Autodesk knows it and the small developer team keeping it going probably does as well (but good on them for keeping at it - itâs a great program for clash detection with enough settings made by the user - it truly stood the test of time as it got so many things right).
Iâd suggest looking into competitors with more active development based on my experience with a similar scenario to this if customization is desired but you donât have inhouse developers who can work with it at a coding level (we had a Navisworks developer inhouse, they moved on, code base was messy/unmaintainable). That or pushing ACC coordination module harder - it can get some good work done but needs training and setup/support in my xp.
No need to apologize.
To me much of what makes NW seem stagnant is the number of hours that go into supporting all of those formats. The number of edge cases they have to handle across all of those file formats (something like 50 file formats, 60+ CAD applications, 5 custom exporters for other tools, and 12 importers; current and prior versions for all of this too) which have to all be updated in time with fixes issues to those formats. Heck just think of all the âthis IFC viewer doesnât align these IFCs correctly while that one does so we know the files are validâ that we hear about⌠NW attempts to handle them all and often better than other desktop apps⌠likely that team does more with âother toolâs file formatsâ then maybe two teams I know of, neither of which are desktop focused and cloud is just easier to âbrute forceâ your edge cases did importers.
As far as future and if I were to build a workflow in a form today⌠well âwebâ is a better base for coordination than desktop as coordination is a collaborative process by default. So the fun new stuff is often focused there (hence the ACC stuff). If everyoneâs stuff is there, why not coordinate with that? It just makes more sense. So if youâre in ACC, start there. If youâre elsewhere or on a local network, consider Navisworks, but I recommend you consider developing your tools for automation with it. It isnât that difficult to get into compared to many other tools, but annual maintenance is a must due to the stuff above so make sure you have good code standards and documentation.
1 Like
Thanks for your reply, guys; Iâll dedicate some time to review this; however, what I want to do is detect clashings between my reo and cast items in my Revit file, run the test in Navisworks and bring it with dynamo (with the nwf file) and show the points in revit not to do it manually.
However, getting an acc just to do that or doing it manually in Navisworks (risky) should be a solution in the market, hehe.
Cheers
Cheers
1 Like
In terms of functionality, ACCâs âModele Coordinationâ module is nowhere near as powerful (to date) as Navisworks.
But if itâs just clash detection, ACCâs âModele Coordinationâ + the Revit Issue add-in can do the job (requires a collaborate pro license).
alternatives :
-
use bcf format (from Navisworks to Revit)
-
use the Navisworks COM API and code your tools (recommends Ironpython3 or C# for this)
1 Like
Am I understanding correctly that all the geometry you want to check is already within Revit?
And you want the output within Revit?
I know this is not a simple matter and Navis already has the tools for clash detection, but couldnât you just leverage Dynamoâs geometry tools to do this all within Revit?
Or just use Revitâs built in clash detection tools. 
Unfortunately, Revitâs built-in clash detection is woefully inadequate and hasnât been updated in nearly two decades. Itâs even more inadequate when you are dealing with reinforcing in concrete elements. Rebar does not cut itâs concrete beam/slab/column host, so you have 100% clash. (I assume the OP is looking for something a little more specific than that.)
Makes sense that Autodesk doesnât spend any time on it in Revit when they already had a much more robust and purpose-driven solution in Navis.
Depends on the use. At earlier phases itâs perfectly adequate and actually purposely built for such. Later stages it certainly isnât ideal, but that doesnât mean it wonât work for the user.
Exactly. Thatâs my problem with Revit because I want to check my reinforcing vs. cast items to detect clashes, but based on Revit, a starter bar going out of a wall is already a clash.
cheers @Joe.Charpentier
I couldnât find a options for reinforcing o structural connections in Revit clash detection, it looks like it is only for the main elements or worksets, however i started to do a script trying to get clashing coordinates from the html report, still stuck haha
cheers @jacob.small
Reinforcing doesnât really have a physical thickness, it is all line based. That is why you have the non-standard âshow as 3d in viewâ workflow. They show the thickness with a âribbonâ graphic in medium/fine views. and a round dot whenever they are cut.
So you canât really get a physical clash out of Revit with rebar, another reason people use Navis.
Now that I think of it, you may not even be able to get 3d geometry of rebar in Dynamo- or you may have to jump through some hoops to get it.
As far as structural connections, they are relatively new elements in Revit- See my previous comment about Revitâs clash detection not really being updated. It doesnât surprise me they are not in the clash dialog. Steel connections (in particular) started out as non-revit-specific elements (based on Advance Steel) and I believe that there are similar behind-the-scenes tricks that are done. For example, I think the original Revit column geometry (with no holes) lives in the project and the holes are only shown in certain situations, therefore figuring out the clash between bolts and beams or columns could be a similar problem as rebar and concrete.
13 years of Revit and this is the first Iâm hearing of this 
Googling Iâm guessing you mean the interface check. Pretty cool.
1 Like
Look into the intersection nodes in bimorph nodes. Theyâre very quick vs ootb nodes and you can prefilter elements into them using typical Dynamo logic.
2 Likes
yeah thats the way i sometimes do it local so it so clean as it can be before the official clashdetection in ACC-navis or solibri where we also test for consistentâŚand i normally already filter good clashes [provision for void] out before that testâŚactuelly very fast with bimorph 
sometimes i do it local for consistence as well for mepâŚhere i just use a sphere geometry there define the consistence
2 Likes