X-Rotational linear spring modulus missing

[jorge.bslu]

HI,

I need to collect all boundary condition data from Revit analysis model.

There is a line BC that has linear springs in all allowed directions, including rotation about X.

The problem is that the value is shown in the properties grid but is not retrieved by the API.

By using the useful tool Revit Lookup, it is possible to confirm that issue:

FYI: BOUNDARY_DIRECTION_ROT_X = 2 (spring modulus)

I also tested what happen if I set a rotational spring to another line and I see that the value appears. I guess that the issue happens when both Translational + Rotational spring values are set for the BC.

[RPTHOMAS108]

I can't replicate that in 2023 there are two separate BIPs:

BOUNDARY_LINEAR_RESTRAINT_X
BOUNDARY_LINEAR_RESTRAINT_ROT_X

What Revit version are you using?

Also you should try checking outside of RevitLookup to confirm since it is one of those cases where the availability of parameters depends on the value of other parameters.

[jorge.bslu]

Hi @RPTHOMAS108 

Thanks for your replay.

My apologies for omitting the Revit version. Yes, I am using Revit 2023 as well.

Yes, I know that there are 2 BIPs as you can see in my two screenshots 🙂

I tried with my plugin implementation but I mentioned RevitLookup just to consider another tool available for everyone.

As I mentioned, in my case BOUNDARY_DIRECTION_ROT_X = 2 (spring modulus) but the dependent BIP is missing 😞

I am attaching the purged model with just the Physical+Analytical+BC.

The weird location of the analytical member is intentionally in that way to let me test my plugin when the analytical and the physical elements have different locations.

By debugging the incoming Parameters, you can see that only one X Spring Modulus is retrieved by the API.

Thanks

[mhannonQ65N2 · Accepted solution]

That's because you are using ParametersMap instead of Parameters. The parameters map cannot contain two different parameters with the same name.

[jorge.bslu]

Hi @mhannonQ65N2 

Thank you very much. You are right.

I thought that by using the appropriate value for BuiltInParameter was enough, but I did not realize about what you pointed out about the source of parameters.