For a more complex script I would like to start with obtaining the geometry from a Revit family. The geometry consists of a sweep representing a window frame. (As a new user I cannot upload the family but the shape is visible in the image below it was created in Revit with the solid sweep command).
To convert the Revit geometry into Dynamo geometry I tried the Element.Geometry component giving me the result below:
In the screenshot we can see that where there is a hole in Revit, in Dynamo a face is created. I also tried the Element.Solids, Element.Faces and Element.Geometry+ (clockwork package) components, that all give the same result.
I would really appreciate it if somebody could explain why this happens and tell me if it is possible to obtain the correct geometry.
In the family environment there is a geometry which cuts the hole in the wall - the wall opening. That is a surface just like you saw (but typically not seen).
Thank you for your response, but I am not sure if I understand it correctly, because if I delete the wall opening (in the family environment) this does not change the geometry that I get in Dynamo:
image 1 (please see below I can only upload 1 image per post)
furthermore if I look at the faces from the Element.Faces component, I get on one side of the frame the following (ring shaped) face:
image 2
but on the other side this face:
image 3
and this face:
image 4
While I would expect there to be another ring shaped face. It seems like this ring shape would be the result of subtracting the face out of the 3th image from the face of the 4th image (these faces are overlapping).
Huh… missed that you’d built this as a sweep before. Looks like you’re running into a bug with the geometry conversion - can you please submit the files (rfa and dyn) to the Dynamo Revit GitHub as an issue so the development team can review?
@r-vdg in playing around some more I did find that a basic extrusion will pull the correct geometry, or you can use two C shapes instead of a complete donut (Revit has problems with donuts in general, and this may be another instance thereof).
Thank you for your suggestion! But unfortunately this work around is not really a suitable beginning for a script that needs to be able to handle different families created by different people.
The good thing is that the bug that causes the problem should already be solved, according to the response I got on the github. I guess this fix will soon also be released in a default Dynamo for Revit installer.
To clarify: the statement indicates a future Revit build not a Dynamo installer. This would mean something like 2021.n where n is greater than the current build. It is good to see that the solution is coming. Hopefully the workaround can keep you moving forward for the time being.
