Inventor IdeaStation
Share your ideas about how to improve Inventor with the Development Team.
New Idea
111 Kudos

Better surface modeling inside Inventor

Status: Accepted
by Distinguished Contributor Raider_007 on ‎11-16-2012 03:35 AM

Hi we have Inventor and Product Design Suite and various other CAD packages. In our team often we have to do some surface modelling and to be honest Inventor just isn’t great at this at all and then we always have to revert back to Solidworks. Construction surfaces are not always enough guys really!

We need surfacing power like in Alias, Solid Works, Catia please!!! And no we don’t want to learn yet another product (Alias) with a completely different way of working and toolbar layout and , and , and… Solidworks has mastered this “One product many functionalities” approach and it works really great. Once you know SW you get into the other stuff easily because the environment is familiar. With Inventor you have to learn the product every time you want to do surface modelling because lets face it, you might not need to do it or use that functionality for months at a time…

Anyway it would be really cool to see the technology, that certainly exists, filter down into Inventor.

Status: Accepted
Accepted idea. Thanks!
109 Kudos

Please add "Replace Selected"

Status: Accepted
by Valued Contributor Carl_mgfx on ‎08-14-2013 07:15 AM

I've searched the Idea Station but didn't find something quite like this with replace (although I did find a lot of requests to change the replace functionality)


When replacing a component, the only options available are "Replace" and "Replace all".  This can be troublesome when trying to replace only a few items and not all of them e.g. 4 out of 8 dowels.


So to illustrate here is an example:

If you want to replace 4 out of 8 dowels you will have to repeat the "Replace" operation 4 times, as "Replace all" would obviously replace all 8.

If there was the option of “Replace selected”, you could have selected the 4 dowels and replaced them in 1 step.


This is an efficiency enhancement that would make many designers lives much easier! 

Status: Accepted
Accepted idea [US21209]. Thanks!
108 Kudos

Section View cutting through parts

Status: New Idea
by pierre_berube on ‎11-25-2013 12:52 PM

When a section view is cutting through a part, the line where the view is cutting should not be straight, but brocken like in a detail view, to show the part is not fully represented.



106 Kudos

It would be very nice if the pop-up menus, particularly the selection menu that appears on hover, did not obscure the very item we are attempting to select.  For instance, when attempting to select a vertex, I place the cursor over the geometry and wait for the selection menu to block it from my sight. Then I have to move it and select.  The fact that there is no way to distiguish which "vertex" is the vertex I want when several are listed is a subject of a different thread I think.DialogHell.gif

105 Kudos

Diameter dimension

Status: Duplicate
by livewire77 on ‎04-07-2014 09:51 AM

Inventor should recognize this as diameter and automatically place diameter symbol before text. Solidworks can do it.


Status: Duplicate
This is a duplicate Idea of one posted on 4/4/2013. Both Ideas have similar kudo counts, however moving forward please cast your kudos to the Master Idea here as to not split the kudos (votes). Thanks -Dan
104 Kudos

Overhaul the Parameter Interface / Access

Status: Accepted
by Valued Mentor on ‎11-04-2012 09:48 PM


The parameter manager, though certainly good on a very small basic level, can quickly become a nightmare if you're using more than 30~50 parameters. I propose that the entire manager is overhauled to allow for easy parameter group creation / parameter repositions (drag and drop to higher / lower levels in list) / AND parameter color labeling. I will explain each one of these three focal points before moving on to the second aspect of this suggestion (Parameter Access) to better define the goal. 

Easy Parameter Group Creation : About what it sounds. There needs to be a way for me to organize things in groups for when I'm concentrating on different tasks for my assembly. Simply having everything thrown into User Parameters isn't good enough. Even though selecting things as being key or non-key is helpful in filtering out some of the mess, you will quickly become overwhelmed when creating 100+ parameters. Though you can create parameter groups from the API, it should be accessible from your parameter manager! This moves us into my second topic: 
Parameter Re-Positions: Once you create a parameter, that's where it stays! Because there is no way to keep things properly organized as is, I typically find myself doing large chunks of parameters so that I can quickly know where they are at in my user parameters list. This of course goes out the window if there is something that you want / need to add later on, as it could end up being miles away in the same list. Your only option is to sort by name (if you had the forethought to name things in a systematic way), which is fine, but then repositions the relativity of everything else in the list meaning that your other groups are suddenly broken up... This is not an elegant way of doing things. Allowing the repositioning of elements in the parameter list would make life a lot easier. This should also apply to the reordering of custom parameter groups on an independent basis! While we're speaking of keeping things organized... 

Color Labeling: Assuming that you keep the basic way of handling parameters around, it means that all new parameters (though no able to be easily placed into groups and repositioned) will still get added to the master list of User Parameters. That is fine, but leaves absolutely no way for the user to see (at a glance) where things are being used. This is where color labeling could really shine. Essentially there is a new column added that shows the current color label of the parameter's row. This label is determined by the color label of group that the parameter is a member of. In this way you can see not only where an individual parameter is being used, but also where (in your list of groups / parameters) your actual groups are when scrolling in the list at a glance.  

Example Time! 
Parameters : A,B,C,D have been created.  A & B are both added to the group Upper_Group, while B,C,D have been added to the group Lower_Group. Upper_Group gets labeled as Red, and Lower_Group gets labeled as Blue.  In the user parameters list, in the color label box next to the parameter you would see the colors as follows. For parameter A, it would be totally red. For B it would be evenly split between both red and blue. For C and D, it would be colored in as totally blue. 
Perhaps not the most elegant way, but having words labels showing just didn't seem to solve the problem but only added more words for your to read before getting the information you truly wanted. 

This brings us to the second part of our wonderful talk about Inventor parameters. 


As of now certain parameters are hidden from the user. If you draw a sketch on a Drawing sheet, you any dimensions that are placed there are practically hidden out of view from the user. Recently on the blog Being Inventive, they (with the help of Brian E.) published a means of accessing those dimensions using what is essentially an iLogic patch. This is, once again, a very non-elegant way of doing something that should be rather simple. Even if every new sketch / draft view parameters set is stored in its own separate group inside of the main drawing's parameter manager, it would be far better than the current situation. Allowing a person to interact with the parametric aspects of sketches + 2D reps of their model will help add another level of technical bliss to drawings (and perhaps even drawing automation) that can't easily be achieved with the current set of tools. 

Thank any of your that take the time to read through this, and I hope that together we can all better shape this wonderful tool that we are using here. 

(if not then I suppose I'll just have to start working on a new plugin :smileytongue: darn it!) 

- Jerk Face 
Status: Accepted

Accepted ideas [US4613] [US14414] [US14415]. Thanks!

103 Kudos

MM = mm / IN = in (Dimensions)

Status: Accepted
by Contributor crmayo on ‎09-09-2013 10:41 AM

Most of the time when I'm drawing, my cap lock are on.  When I type in units in uppercase Inventor doesn't recognize that MM is mm, or IN is in.  I want Inventor to apply the units - proper case or not.




Status: Accepted
Accepted idea [US21122]. Thanks!
103 Kudos

Partial Section view

Status: New Idea
by kim.schroeder ‎07-03-2014 04:27 AM - edited ‎07-03-2014 04:31 AM

There are several occasions when we really are missing a zig-zag line in Inventor!


First of all, when making a partial Section View it would be very useful to be able to get a zig-zag line at the "break" position when a Section View doesn't run through the whole part, please see picture below.  (Now I simply turn off the visibility of that line).

Partial Section View.JPG



Furthermore, it would also be nice to be able to...

...configure "Crop Cut Line" as a zig-zag line.

...change an existing line into a zig-zag line.


As in the already existing zig-zag line in the "Break" view, it should preferably be possible to chose zig-zag symbol size as well as number of such symbols.

102 Kudos

Smarter Diameter Dimensions

Status: Under Review
by *Expert Elite* on ‎04-04-2013 10:46 AM

Shouldn't Inventor know that this is a cylinder and should therefore have a diameter symbol? Let's have it pop in there on its own without me having to do an edit text operation on it and manually add it.





Status: Under Review
100 Kudos

Delete All Sick Constraints Option

Status: Accepted
by anders.hagen on ‎11-04-2012 01:47 AM - last edited on ‎11-05-2012 01:01 PM by Employee

Possibility to delete all destroyed constrains in one go


Go to Constrain Doctor. Mark all red crosses and delete all...




anders hagen

Status: Accepted
Idea accepted as [US14236]. Thanks!
99 Kudos

Materials Materials Materials

Status: Under Review
by Mentor on ‎05-13-2013 01:02 PM

The current material situation is a bit cumbersome.

as we have multiple material librarys,  and multiple appearance librarys. and too many combinations theirin.



You are close to the perfect solution for rendering and materials,  nearly anyway.


The materials physical properties alone should set the parameters for appearance.

Lets use aluminum as an example.


Ideal Scenereo - For most industries


1.    MATERIAL: User picks the physical material




2.    ALLOY: User then may check a box for particular alloy if need be, 

          (the default alloy is set to a common standard that is then set as default in the template)

           (the alloy modifies physical properties for the material,  apperance only changes if an alloy has visual affect)


         ALUMINUM - 6061


3.    FINISH: User can then choose the finish or machining operation used on the material. (as material check box)


         ALUMINUM - 6061 - R(x)          sets shine/reflect

         or ALUMINUM - 6061 - Knurled       adds knurl bump map etc...


4.    COATING:  User can then choose a coating option.  Paint, galvanized, anodized, etc.


        ALUMINUM - 6061- R(x) - Paint(RGB) Egshell


This presents the opportunity to add the finish and coating field to the BOM, if needed for finish and paint tracking.

This simplifies the library so I only have (1) aluminum.

If i edit that base material and make variants(with check boxes only),  it auto names them based on the options that have been checked, and you still have the ability to list it in the BOM as just the Base material name if you wish  ie.. Aluminum  as opposed to Aluminum - 6061 - R(x)... etc.  Otherwise the BOM can get too big.


The material library browser could be modified to easily show the check box options for a material in a table format.

The subname for the "user optioned" material in the library would be a combo of the above 4 catagories.

and the name that shows up in the BOM field under material could be listed in this long format, or just show up as Aluminum if a simpler BOM is required. and of course finish and coating could be turned on if needed there too.


With a system closer to this,  you never have to worry about naming, etc.  it is what it is.

Aluminum is Aluminum plain and simple.  it's real world finishes and surface processes modify the appearance further as an overlay to the original material.


Updating a material, would consist of adding more finish and surface options over time, since Aluminum itself does not change its nature... ever.  why would the material need constant updating version to version.

Make it a modular material system,  add modules over time.   So my Aluminum in 2014 will be the same as my aluminum in 2018, perhaps with a few new modules though.


You guys are close to a system that is this simple, intuitive, and realistic,  It's just not there yet.


Eventually this should evolve into a master industry library that covers every program across the planet.

so that my aluminum is the same in my Photoshop, Inventor, Poser, Revit, solidworks, 3dstudio, etc...


The renderers change,  the material charectersitics do not.


overrides will still be possible if you just want to play with funky colors and unrealistic materials though.




Anyway just a though on getting this material system standardized and simplified a bit further.




Status: Under Review
92 Kudos

Insert Item Numbers into Text Boxes In Drawings

Status: New Idea
by Contributor melmo on ‎09-04-2014 07:29 AM

I would like to see the ability to insert a part's item number (i.e. from the BOM/Parts List) into text boxes in drawings, in the same way that you can add a part's model or user parameters. We are often asked to add item numbers into text instructions; currently, we do that manually, which is tedious and a source for confusion when an item's number changes. It would therefore be nice to insert the value from the text box as shown below:


BOM Item Number Into Text Box.jpg


The closest I have come to something along these lines is to use iLogic to create the part number as a user parameter, which I can then insert in the manner described; however, that is not as clean as inserting an item number from the parts list.

91 Kudos

Drawing symbol library stored centrally

Status: Accepted
by Product Support on ‎06-17-2013 05:02 AM

Currently the drawing symbols are stored in each individual drawings.

If you company uses thousands of symbols this is not ideal.


We would like it to be stored in a central library, which we can organize. You should be able to see a preview of the symbol when browsing the library directly from Inventor.

Status: Accepted

Accepted idea [US21875]. Thanks!

91 Kudos

Give me the option to use Design Doctor.   If I don't know what created the error I have to click the cross and waste my time clicking thru buttons in this dialog box.  I just want to know where the error is - I can fix it.  Display some type of indication in the model tree by the part or assembly that has an error - you could us the red cross.


design dr sucks.JPG

91 Kudos

Add a "Negative" radius for clearance

Status: New Idea
by *Expert Elite* on ‎10-14-2014 08:10 AM

When providing for clearance in corners, we are sometimes required to provide for a "negative" corner radius.  Presently, Inventor does not allow for this and we have to use other means to place this feature (new sketch and extrude, ifeatures...etc).  I would like to be able to either enter a negative value for the fillet, or have an option in the fillet command to run the fillet the opposite direction.  In the image below, I show the "negative" fillet.






89 Kudos

New Feature Sweep solid

Status: New Idea
by marco.takx on ‎10-13-2014 02:32 AM

Hi Autodesk,


Now we have Autodesk Inventor HSM, it will be nice to have a new feature that sweeps a solid allong a path.

When you use a profile milling it is hard to design the result.

But when you simulate it within Inventor HSM, you see how the results look.


So please make a feature to design easier results like this.





88 Kudos

save to a previous version

Status: Under Review
by Active Contributor alundr on ‎12-19-2012 06:40 AM

Can we save/"save a copy as" to a previous version of inventor.  This is a great tool in autocad and it would be great to see it in Inventor.  We have sister companys that are currently using a newer version of Inventor and as a result, we can't open their files.  

Status: Under Review
86 Kudos

Solid Body Palooza!

Status: Accepted
by Distinguished Contributor MRanda on ‎01-17-2013 05:59 AM

I have seen a post similar to this where the writer wished the ability to access the visibility of a solid body via iLogic. I am asking for the ability to suppress via the solid body. As things are now, if I want to suppress a solid body, I have to suppress every feature within the body separately! When doing this via iLogic, it creates a mess! Currently I may be forced to suppress dozens of features –and I I add new ones, I need to remember to add those to the code as well. 


The multi-solid body layout part workflow is easily the most powerful design paradigm in Inventor, but the ball was definitely dropped on this one. It was thrown out there and immediately orphaned. We should also have the ability to:


  • Add iProperties to the solids that will transfer to the part. Color, Material, Cost, and all of the rest.
  • Ability to organize solid bodies to groups –which become assembles when the “Make Component” command is evoked. Ability to suppress an entire group!
  • A visual indicator of which solid body a feature belongs to would be nice as well. It’s hard to organize a feature tree, but any focus on that would be a help. We finally got folders in assemblies after years of requests, it’s about time to look into cleaning up a parts tree as well. For instance, I put ALL sketches before features (projected geometry is all sketch to sketch –far more stable). I would like to be able to group and hide them. There can be thirty or forty of them and the tree gets incredibly long!
  • Attaching iLogic that would survive the “Make Components” process and become a rule on the other side would be killer as well.

I’m sure I’ll come up with more. Have a great day!


Mark Randa
Applied Design Intelligence



Status: Accepted

Accepted ideas [US14617] [US14618]. Thanks!

86 Kudos

Borders on feature patterns

Status: Under Review
by Valued Mentor on ‎03-28-2013 11:45 AM

We often make custom laser cut guard panels.  To do so we have to create the hole pattern we use laid out on the panel as we want to see it so we can get a cut path for the laser.  Very rarely do we create a panel that is just square with no other cutouts.  Many time these have cuts holes and odd shapes to the panels.  So when we create a hole pattern for the mesh guard we want we need to suppress many many holes to set it up while keeping a  border around the pattern.  It woul be nice if there was some way that we could say create this patten on this face keeping at least 1" of space between the edges of the part and the hole pattern.  See the attached pic for a simple guard I am currently drawing.  Anyone else think this might be useful?



Status: Under Review
83 Kudos

Hello When you create, you can choose constraint to the midpoint of the line, and when you put dimension is impossible. Why not do it for dimension.






Submit Your Ideas

Share and shape product ideas.

New Idea
You are not logged in.

Log into access your profile, ask and answer questions, share ideas and more. Haven't signed up yet? Register

Inventor Exchange Apps

Created by the community for the community, Autodesk Exchange Apps for Autodesk Inventor helps you achieve greater speed, accuracy, and automation from concept to manufacturing.

Connect with Inventor