CivilConnection2021 5.0.1 - test fails

I did a test with “D4R_CivilConnection_TINSurfaceToTopography_LandXMLTriangle” in Revit version 2021.1 and have an error (see fig. 1).

Could this be due to CivilConnection2021 version 5.0.1?
Because in the past I did’t have problems in Revit 2020.2 .

Fig. 1

Fig. 2 = C:\Users\j.boonen\AppData\Roaming\Dynamo\Dynamo Revit\2.6\packages

Fig. 3
Fig. 3 = version Dynamo

Fig. 4 = should I do something with “CivilPython” ?

D4R_CivilConnection_TINSurfaceToTopography_LandXMLTriangles_02_RVT2021.1.dyn (44.8 KB)
Dynamo file

Thanks in advance.


In Revit 2020.2 we only got 1 error and the surface is visible in Revit.
Maybe this is because it is a rather weird surface (see fig. 2 and fig. 3).

Fig.1 = error

Fig. 2 = surface in Revit 2020.2

Fig. 3 = surface in C3D

D4R_CivilConnection_TINSurfaceToTopography_LandXMLTriangles_02.dyn (46.8 KB)

Now get it in order for Revit 2021.1!

Hello @j.boonen,

here is a script update D4R_CivilConnection_2021_TINSurfaceToTopography_LandXMLTriangles_04.dyn (46.4 KB), where you can select surface by name. Here is video from testing



I’ll test it next week and let me know if it goes well!

About this warning you can read in documentation.


Documentation, page 30:
“Set the geometry working range to Medium and ignore the warnings associated to these settings during execution”



I just ran a test with the script “D4R_CivilConnection_2021_TINSurfaceToTopography_LandXMLTriangles_04” in RVT2021

I should get rid of the warning by following the solution in the post “CivilConnection2021 5.0.1 - test fails” (see fig. 2 and fig. 3).

However, it seems that I cannot see the triangles in Revit (terrain model ; see fig. 1)?

Fig. 1

Fig. 2

Fig. 3

Source data:
RVT2021.1.1_D4R_CivilConnection_2021_TINSurfaceToTopography_LandXMLTriangles_04.dyn (47.0 KB)
BA200004.RVT.0127 OT Terrein_RVT2021.rvt (3.3 MB)
BA200004.DWG.0126 OT Terrein_C3D2021.dwg (1.3 MB)

Do you have a solution for that?
Thanks in advance.

Hello @j.boonen, try this:


Unfortunately this is not the solution (see fig. 1).
After “running” the script again it goes completely wrong (see also screencast).

Fig. 1

See also screencast