Add representation of different equipment nozzle types such as socket-welded, butt-welded or threaded in isometric drawings in AutoCAD Plant 3D. Currently, the equipment nozzle is always represented as a flanged connection regardless the type of nozzle indicated on the equipment. Show More

Hi all,   @h_eger  I’m facing an issue in AutoCAD Plant 3D (P&ID) where the substitution palette for a valve is showing instrument symbols instead of valve types.         Show More

Instead of adding for each symbol separately in the Add to Tool Palettebutton in Project Setup. Is it Possible to please consider a Batch Loading Tool Show More

Hi everyone, I’ve been exploring the AutoCAD Plant 3D forum activity feed, and I noticed a discussion around creating a new BOM table for pipe supports. I’m currently working on a similar project and wanted to ask if anyone here has found an efficient way to customize BOM tables specifically for pipe supports without breaking standard reporting workflows. I’m especially interested in how you handle custom properties, tagging, and ensuring everything updates dynamically when design changes occur. Any tips, workflows, or even small tricks would be super helpful. Also, while digging into different workflows, I realized how much having the right tools (and even brands in other industries) can streamline processes—kind of like how Smoakland focuses on consistency and quality in its niche. It got me thinking about how we can apply that same mindset to our Plant 3D setups—keeping things clean, efficient, and reliable. Would love to hear how you all optimize your BOM outputs and if there are any best practices you swear by! Show More

Adding here for customer (maria_Yemelyanova  email: [email protected])   PLANTWELDADD in Plant 3D Doesn't Work With Custom Connection Ends Currently, PLANTWELDADD command only supports only out-of-the box end connections, due to limitations in the command's functionality. So welds are not created at custom connection ends even when those connections represent valid welded joints.    The requirement we raised is not a custom or exceptional use case. It represents a regular and well-established practice in oil and gas facility design, where isometric file naming must consistently reflect multiple model identifiers or attributes as part of standard deliverables. This behavior is typically expected to be available through supported, out-of-the-box functionality or configuration within the application itself. Relying on custom SQL development presents several challenges for us:   It introduces unsupported modifications that are not maintainable across upgrades. It creates dependency on specialized database expertise that is not always available in design teams. It shifts responsibility for core application behavior away from the product and onto the end user or third-party partners.               In addition, another recommendation provided was to add the model number directly into the pipeline tag. This approach does not resolve the underlying functionality issue. Embedding model identifiers into pipeline tags fundamentally alters established tagging standards and has downstream impacts on data consistency, interoperability, and deliverables. It effectively treats a file-naming limitation as a tagging problem, which is not aligned with industry best practices.   Additionally, during our 3D design application evaluation and onboarding process, this topic was discussed in the context of Autodesk’s commitment to continuously develop and enhance Plant 3D in alignment with established oil and gas industry practices. Our expectation, based on those discussions, is that core production requirements of this nature would be addressed through product development rather than through workarounds or external customization. Regarding the Autodesk Idea Station, we understand the intent behind that process. However, in practice, it is not an effective mechanism for addressing requirements that are already standard across the industry and that directly impact daily production workflows. Submitting this as an idea, awaiting community voting, and then waiting for potential prioritization does not align with the urgency or the fundamental nature of the issue.   Given the above, we believe this matter warrants direct review by the Plant 3D development team. While we recognize that changes through formal development channels may take time, escalation to the developers is necessary to ensure a supported, sustainable, and timely resolution. We would appreciate guidance on how this requirement can be formally logged as a product issue or enhancement request that bypasses the limitations of the Idea Station and is evaluated based on industry practice and operational impact.   Please let us know the appropriate next steps to facilitate this escalation. We remain available to provide additional technical details or real-world examples from active oil and gas projects if that would assist the development team. Thank you again for your continued support, and we look forward to your response.     Show More

When placing equipment from the P&IDs in the 3D model with the current PLANTPIDLINELIST command, it has to already have a line attached to it to show up. In real life we would usually start adding the equipment to the model before the P&IDs are even started. If there is a way to equipment list for modeling like the line list, that would be great.  Show More

Hi, one of our customers asked us for an enhancement. He needs to have END-POSITION-CLEANING and END-POSITION-PRESSURE in addition to END-POSITION-DRAIN and END-POSITION-VENT. In addition he needs to control if the end is VENT or DRAIN or CLEANING etc.   The actual solution with the overwrite rule for SmallBorePiping is not usable for this scenario.   I think the easiest way to solve this is to use a custom part at pipe catalogue that has SYMBOLTYPE set to needed END-POSITION text and a SKEY that allow to map different symbols for presentation at ISO.   Regards Stefan Show More

Currently (P3D 2026), if an Adjacent View direction (e.g. Top, Left, SW Isometric, etc.) has been used once in an orthograhic drawing, it cannot be used again. Even if a new view is created that references different 3D models than any existing views, Adjacent View directions that have been used once cannot be used again.    For example, I am currently developing an orthographic drawing with details for several pipe arrangements. I have already created Top, Left, and SW Isometric views for the first pipe arrangement that reference one of my pipe models. The Top view was created using New View, and the Left and SW Isometric views were created using Adjacent View. I'm now creating views with the same three perspectives for a second arrangement. I used New View to create the initial Top view and attached a different pipe model from the one used in the first set of views (not that this should matter). Ideally, I would now create the Left and SW Isomtric views of this second arrangement using the same Adjacent View process. However, these view directions are restricted / disabled on the Adjacent View screen. One workaround is to select an Adjacent View direction that hasn't been used yet and then Edit View to change it to the direction you want.  These are inefficient extra steps, especially if views contain a lot of information and it takes an extended period to process the graphics. If you've used up all ten Adjacent View directions in a given drawing, you need to use New View and adjust the view cube for any subsequent views, which is even less efficient. The screenshot below is the Adjacent View screen for the second set of views described above. Selecting 'Left' results in the View Name field turning red and OK is disabled because 'Left' has already been used once in the drawing.     The single-use limitation on Adjacent View directions seems uneccessarily restrictive and decreases efficiency. Eliminating this limit would be a welcome update and help expedite drawing development. Show More

  Dear Autodesk,   I have been using P3D since 2018. P3D 2026 together with ACC through Desktop Connector, has been the most unstable version we have used to date. Since upgrading, repeated error reports have become a daily part of our workflow. This level of reliability is not acceptable for production use. And why is functionallity like propery manager still so slope when you select an object? Should have been improved a long time ago if you ask me.    Our expectation is that core functionality, stability, and product maintenance take priority. At present, it appears that too much attention is being placed on new initiatives while essential usability and product quality are being neglected. We need P3D to be dependable, current, and fit for professional use. Unless these issues are addressed quickly and clearly, our company will have to seriously evaluate whether we can continue with our Autodesk licenses. We ask that this feedback be escalated internally and that Autodesk provide a concrete response on how these stability and maintenance concerns will be resolved.     Show More

Hi  We need to view supports dimensions used in 3d model because we need to report and list of supports    Show More

I have noticed something in the plant 3D tutorial video when they creating nozzles on the equipment its little bit take time so, what I thinking better to make one nozzle table and easily can enter the nozzle details like a size, out side projection, flange type & ratings, location, orientation  So, once we enter this all it will generate on the equipment quickly.     Show More

It's over 10 years since doing this.... Can anyone help me out with this? I'm trying to add SERVICE (P&ID) Value's Description from "Selection List Property Dialog Box (Properties) to Off Page Connector instead of the value #(PipeLineGroup.Service) Show More

At present, we can only add or remove the sub parts while creating the tag rule format. Its impossible to modify the order of the sub parts or add 1 subpart in between. There should be such functionality added in the rule setup. Show More

We wanted to create a new classes similar to "Pipe Line Group" which should be used for ducts and streams in P&IDs. But we cannot create the any class under "P&ID Class Definition" node in the project setup. This could be very helpful for us. Show More

Currently, there is no way to modify the drawing property names in the Plant 3D project setup. The only way is to delete the existing one and recreate it. This involves lots of re-work for the end users to provide the values again to the property. Modification possibility for the drawing property name should be developed. Show More

In India most of Designer using Indian Standard Structure member, Please Include all Indian Standard Shapes and other Feature in Plant 3d. Show More

主管からの枝管がコネクト接続されません。以前は出来ていたのですが、新規図面から出来なくなりました。 Show More

Dear Forum Experts,   Need your expert opinion on below case:   If any valve or Instrument is mounted on any equipment as a vessel trim. then is there any way to get that Equipment tag in Valve or Instrument Property? Basic purpose is to identify in extracted excel report that the particular valve or Instrument is a part of vessel trim & associated with so & so Equipment?   If i extract the Instrument list or Valve list, then there should be a column Named " Associated Equipment " & it should auto fetch & fill with the connected equipment Tag No.   Kindly Help.         Show More

The "Edit Long Description Style" editor is currently set up such that if you want to add a new attribute / row to a long description style and have it positioned anywhere other than at the end of the current naming convention, it is a tedious task to add a row and then update all rows subsequent to the position of the new attribute. Functionality to move attributes up or down in the list would greatly improve efficiency when editing existing naming conventions.   For example, if I've added the "Schedule" attribute to the below naming convention and want it to come after "End Type" in the long description, I should be able to drag it up to that position. As an alternative to dragging, "Move Up" and "Move Down" buttons could be added to achieve the same. With the current functionality I would need to manually change "Facing" and every subsequent attribute to be one position lower in the naming convention to place "Schedule" after "End Type" and this process would need to be repeated for every part where "Schedule" will be added and positioned as the 3rd attribute.     Thanks       Show More