MeshToolkit stopped working with Revit 2024

Hi, I installed Revit 2024 into my PC and few weeks after I needed to use MeshToolkit (version 3.0), but unfortunately I was not able to get the package to work. It throws an error:

I was wondering if it’s my PC problem or it’s systematic problem with RVT 2024. do you have any ideas how to solve it?

Hello @Sage.Hlavacek - Apologies you have hit this issue :frowning: We are going to ship a new version of MeshToolkit that will resolve this issue. The underlying dependencies for Mesh Toolkit are now also a dependency in the geometry kernel we use, so there is a conflict.

We are actively working on a .NET 6 migration right now that takes priority (If we don’t - there won’t be a Dynamo next year. Think this happening to the entire system, not just Mesh Toolkit nodes), and plan to slot in this package upgrade as soon as we have bandwidth :pray:

We’re hoping this can happen in the next couple of weeks. In the meantime, what are you looking to use this node (Or other Mesh Toolkit) nodes to do?

2 Likes

Thank you for the info. It’s understandable reason and it’s worth waiting. So I’m looking forward to a new release of MeshToolkit in the next weeks.

Currently I wanted to use it as input to some dynashape simulations. But I think I can get the geometry via .sat to some PC without RVT2024 and solve it there.

1 Like

Hello @Sage.Hlavacek and everyone else on this thread - MeshToolkit for Dynamo 3.0 has just been updated on the Package Manager, and we’re actively working on a version for Dynamo 2.19 / Revit 2024 right now :pray:

The Matrix is as follows:

  • Revit 2023 and earlier, using Dynamo 2.18 and earlier = MeshToolkit v3.0 (Already on the Package Manager)
  • Revit 2024 using Dynamo 2.19 = MeshToolkit v4.0 (Set to be delivered to the Package Manager later today, Jan 29th 2024)
  • Revit 2025 using Dynamo 3.0 = MeshToolkit v5.0 (Already on Package Manager)

Update: This is now complete and both versions are uploaded :star_struck: There were some technical difficulties, but we got it working in the end. Big shout-out to @Aparajit_Pratap for this one!

4 Likes