We have a number of items on which we have locked length parameters (calculated!). Locking parameters can only be done by editing the .itm file (not in a placed part).  Works as intended in Cad, no issues there. However, if the part is used in Revit, it allows stretching (which in itself is fine), but instead of adding new parts according routing specs (like it does in Cad), stretching is overriding the LOCKED parameter and changes the length (which still is greyed out by the way, so manual change is not possible) removing the calculation. Ofcourse, as Autodesk usually does, they call it by design (they never have a bug). Locked parameters should be respected at all times, they are locked for a reason. If we want them to be allowed to change, we do not lock them. So here's the idea (as Autodesk calls for an enhancement idea instead of bug solving): Respect locked parameters (as you do in CAD)! Attached the movies and pictures that have also been submitted to autodesk as an issue. Show More

I would like to see Autodesk actually make some changes that users are requesting via the Autodesk Idea Station - specifically for Fabrication products - whether in AutoCAD or Revit.  Isn't that what the idea station that Autodesk asks us to use is for?   Here are some statistics from the Fabrication Idea Station since the first post was added to this forum back in 2013: 527 total ideas have been posted 474 of those are "gathering support" 35 of those have been implemented 15 of those are slated for "future consideration" 3 of those are archived So since 2013, only 35 ideas out of the 527 have been implemented.  And what is even worse is only ONE idea has been implemented since 2016.  I believe that is around the time that Autodesk thought they didn't need the services of Andy Robins and his team any more.   So let's look at the number of votes that it takes to get something implemented.  Evidently, there are TWO ideas that were implemented with a grand total of 0 votes.  One would think that not a lot of people want that feature to be included.  Yet it was implemented anyway.  However, there are ideas out there with way more votes that are still "gathering support".  One of those ideas has 95 votes! I guess that is not a feature that many people want?   In conclusion, I have to ask - "what do I think the voting actually does for the product that we depend so heavily on?"  In my opinion - nothing.  I would also ask - "what does the idea station actually do for the product that we depend so heavily on?"  In my opinion - nothing.  I believe we have a product that Autodesk feels is perfect and there is no room for improvement - even though there are a lot of good ideas that people are suggesting.   I apologize for my frustration and this rant, but we continue to try to make the product better (especially in Revit), but it falls on deaf ears.  We need hangers to be more robust in Revit.  We need them to work vertically as well as horizontal.  We need trapeze hangers to have the ability to have more than just single strut as a bearer.  We need hangers to wrap around either pipe or insulation depending on what type of hanger it is.  We need sleeves to wrap around the outside of insulation.  We need sleeves to upsize.  We need sleeves to stretch.  We need hanger information visible in Revit.  We need a way of colorizing our services in Revit without using filters (which Autodesk has stated slows down the modeling process).  We need reloading the configuration to not break all of our content.  We need reloading the configuration to be faster.  We need to be able to modify the database from within Revit as opposed to going over to AutoCAD.  We need more parameters available in Revit for certain things.  We need a million other ideas that people are asking for.  I just ask that Autodesk actually listen to its users that spend thousands and thousands of dollars for software that it depends very heavily on.  Hopefully I get a lot of "votes" for this and it gets "implemented".......but I'm not going to hold my breath.   Show More

As of now the seam for the round collar is applied from the pressure class. Sometimes we need to override that seam. It would be nice to override that seam on the connectors tab. And we would need the ability to change it and lock it via scripting.       Show More

It would be nice if Autodesk would make it standard that when converting Pattern 928 to Pattern 1175 all item properties are read from the 928 and applied to the 1175 and then make it add all common and product listed item properties to a model list of 1175's when you create a model list including diameters as well. As it stands now the process is almost laughable. For each size of Model item you need to use the Convert3dmodel command which will give you a pattern 928 use the connector block to identify the connector shape and size.  Set all the item properties and connectors          Right Click in the white space of the folder where your 928's are and select the new 3d model item command to turn each of the 928's into 1175's.       Once you have all the sizes of the 1175 built make sure all the item properties and connectors are what you want with those by repeating step 2 again, they will default to ductwork and also some bizarre materials etc. I don't know why they don't inherit the properties of the 928..... I think I'll write a ticket on that because this is a tedious process. In the folder where the 1175's are right click and create a new 3d Model list of the 1175's, use Ctrl to select multiples once you have browsed to the folder.   Once all are selected and you hit open you will once again get to repeat setting all the properties in step 2, have fun with that. After setting the item properties you need to open the product list and add and define the Diameter #1, and Diameter #2 Sizes.     You now have a Model listed part, you can add fields to the product List along with any Custom data you may have in your database.   Show More

If a connector is "Locked" on an ITM, it should NOT be allowed to be changed in Revit.    In what world would you ever change the connector or a welded elbow to a different connector?   Can't do it in EST/CAD/CAM without being an Admin, why Revit allow this is beyond me.  Show More

It would be great to have the option to toggle your snap to connect to the 'connection' of a piece of fabrication content.   Like so: Show More

SMACNA has updated their oval specifications. The do not go by LS/SS but by flat span. It would be nice to see this and to see stiffeners for oval added.  Round needs to be able to have stiffeners as well.    While it would be nice, I don't even care about visual representation - I just want it to be reportable so the shop knows how to build it without having to reference a SMACNA chart. This is pretty important for fabrication and shouldn't be ignored any longer. Show More

Need 2875 to be able to be stretched and work with "optimize lengths".   Make a new pattern if needed but saddles of a fixed length require an added weld typically. If someone's laze and doesn't manually calculate and adjust the branch length, it's going to be a minimum $100 bill each time in labor.    Think of the waste this creates.  Show More

It would be an absolute game changer for our business and save countless hours of drawing work if the process of converting Revit services to Fabrication CADmep could work how it was supposed to. All my attempts so far to convert Revit items to Fabrication items have ended up with errors stopping the process working how it should. My process at the moment is to export the design line from Revit and use the processrun command in CADmep to import the items, but this still leaves a lot of work afterwards as the mapping process never ties in completely.   Could somebody point me towards a guide on how to use our Fabrication database/specification to convert Revit items to Fabrication items within Revit so that it could just be exported as a maj file into Fabrication CADmep? Show More

It would be great is when you define the Rise and Fall Symbols in Fabrication. They behaved as described by Autodesk.  https://knowledge.autodesk.com/support/revit/learn-explore/caas/CloudHelp/cloudhelp/2019/ENU/Revit-Model/files/GUID-7DD57A79-E578-4F75-B40D-D2404B95E4BC-htm.html See Case ID: 17976601 An Even Better Idea would be to be able to use the Symbols available In Revit for System Families (Duct,Pipe,etc) Show More

I would like the Notes and Custom Data fields that we set up in our Fabrication databases to be accessible in Revit.  For Notes, it would help with standard notations via a drop down list that we can apply to any Fabrication elements within the model.  With Custom Data, we can automatically include additional data to an ITM or a user can fill the data in and it could be reportable.  As it is now, the end user has to come up with their own Fabrication Notes for each project file in order for it to include a drop down list to choose from.  And custom data is not accessible for any fabrication elements.  If the Notes and Custom Data sections of the database were automatically brought in with all the other things that are loaded when you reload the configuration, these lists would already be populated. Show More

In Fabrication CADmep, can we have section box like Revit? Show More

Generic revit RFA duct let’s you do liner (inside duct) and wrap (outside duct) insulation on the same piece of duct. With ITMs/Fab parts it only lets you do one or the other and not both.  I know it’s rare having both on a single piece of duct, but it’s a pain when it happens. And if you can do it with generic revit RFA duct then you should be able to do it with an ITM fab part duct.  Show More

We have noticed that in CAMduct 2024, with the "Notch for Connector Split" pattern development setting being set to "None", we are still seeing notches on the female connector split (1/2 inch female laps) on square to round patterns 8 and 28. See the attached images for further detail. We should not see any notch with this setting toggled the way it is.    This setting works as we expect in all other releases of CAMduct.  Show More

In Fabrication Cad MEP software we are unable to slicing any pipe in front elevation. Is there any possibility to do so? Show More

Can you please make a CID pattern number that will allow me to add a clearance zone with assignable dimensions and a color to cable tray. This has been asked for in so many message boards and nothing has been done in Revit or Fabrication programs. As it seems,Autodesk does not want to alter revit cable tray to allow us to do this.  With this being the case please add this possiblity in fabrication software. All I want to do is have dimensions I can alter determine a clearance zone around clearance trays. Clearance zone needs to have the option to change color and transparency.  I would prefer it in revit but Fabrication parts seem like the easiest option and the only thing I have gotten any feedback on.  Here are some links to requests that have been ignored for years.  Solved: Cable Tray Clearance - Autodesk Community - Revit Products Cable Tray Clearance 2018 - Autodesk Community - Revit Products Cable Tray Clearance added to system family - Autodesk Community Show More

As you can see in the pics, in previous versions of Fabrication, there was a data tab that allowed you to name a Blank Object. The highlight of this method was that if you unchecked "Show Description" on the General Tab, it would show the field's description but omit the colon that separates data. This data tab is not there in version 2022 so you can no longer title a Blank Object. Also, you cannot rename any prior "Blank Objects". Autodesk Support says this is by design. To add (essentially) a label to a report, I should use the Item Custom Data field. This field has no way of removing the punctuation from the description. Neither does any other data field. Removing the punctuation seemed unique to the Blank Object field.    I would like that data tab reinstated or an alternative method for adding a text string to a report. Having a colon appear after several various labels in a report does not look at all professional. Show More

I think it would be great if when you imported a button report that has different information in the fields the import function actually changed the fields as you intend. As of a few minutes ago, it doesn't work on the condition1 field. Another great idea would be the ability to multiselect buttons in the template editor to edit conditions.  Show More