Inventor 2014 Wish List?

[FProcp]

Maybe the sketch environment could be a little tidier?

1 - I think by default the constraint icons should be smaller so they don’t pile up on top of each other and you can’t see what they are. They appear to be much neater and easier to read in SW?

2 - In the attached sketch it shows there are 3 dimensions needed even though the lines are now dark blue in color showing they are constrained. They are really not fully constrained because the length of both those lines can be changed.

I think there should be a symbol to show those line end points are not locked down. I have drawn “x” marks on those lines to show that. Maybe that or something else would be enough to quickly show not locked. Sometimes on complex sketches I spend much time searching for lines that don’t have their ends locked to fully constrain the sketch. I often use automatic dimension to find where those naughty lines are but an x on the end would be much faster.

The sketch environment is the basic backbone of the entier program and it needs to be perfect. 

[Anonymous]

Thanks Franc, you've captured one of the problems I have been experiencing a lot in the 2013 sketch environment.

When you placed the lines, I bet you thought they would be automatically constrained hey?

But when you go back and zoom in a little you see these kinds of problems, even though the line color suggests otherwise.

Have you also had odd moments when trying to place a line that it doesn't quite want to snap to the place it should be snapping too, like a center point for example?

EDIT: I have found that increasing the size of the constraint icons actually makes things a little easier, it's still a mess, but at least you can see them better and click on them a little easier as well.

Options/Sketch - Constraint and DOF symbol scale. I have mine set to 1.5

[JDMather]

1. SolidWorks does this much better.  If I recall correctly, I think it used to be better in Inventor several releases back.

But then I (almost) never show constraints in Inventor or SolidWorks on my own work - only when checking the work of others.

2. SolidWorks also shows the lines as constrained color, but of course we know they are not - the difference is SolidWorks shows the endpoint of the line as not constrained (rather clearly).  SolidWorks handles this much better.

It is surprising that after all of these years Autodesk hasn't improved this (well, maybe they did when they added the DOF symbols in sketching, but I never turn this on except to check beginner work.

So it seems like these are probably not front-burner issues for experienced Inventor users, but might help beginners, especially those coming from SolidWorks without much experience in that program either.

BTW - the wish list is at AUGI.com

[SBix26]

I agree with your ideas for the most part.  But if you want to see the constrained status of the line endpoints, toggle them to centerpoints and they will show in the proper color (constrained or not) as little cross hairs.  Not automatic, certainly, but may be good enough for occasional use.

[FProcp]

I think we also need the ability to isolate sketches like we can isolate components in assembly's or isolate solid bodies in multi-body parts. Too many sketches make environment very messy. Especially when skeleton modelling.

Another option would be to grey out all other sketches when you edit one sketch so you can see what you are working on. Is there something like this already available?

[JDMather]

One thing I would do (if appropriate for your situation) is turn off the visibility of dimensions of each sketch as you finish it.

If you need to reference dimensions from one sketch to the next (and Project Geometry won't do) simply name your dimensions.

[Curtis_Waguespack]

Hi FProcp

You can request enhancement and new features using the Feed Back link:
http://inventortrenches.blogspot.com/2011/01/feature-request-for-inventor.html

I hope this helps.
Best of luck to you in all of your Inventor pursuits,
Curtis
http://inventortrenches.blogspot.com

[Anonymous]

My wish list includes sheet metal features such as normal cut and the possibility to change a base view to a flat partern after projected view is created. Changes in Base view would not affect projected views. I also would need a partial depth view to the projected view so that we could only see some of the bendings.

Normal cut is an advanced 3D sheetmetal cut function that enables you to generate angular cut solids without unfolding them. It represents correctly manufacturing processes like flame, lase, plasma or water cutting, punching, that are made before sheet metal is bent. It allows much more speed and acuracy to the designer during the 3D development.

Those 2 functioinalities I am waiting since Inventor 2, because it is already on SolidEdge and Solidworks for at least 10 years!!!

[mrattray]

My wishlist for 2014 is very simple:

FIX THE CURRENT SOFTWARE!!!

[richiesuk]

thay cannot, they have to implement many new features and funcy stuff to get the attention of new buyers

... and whats happening with the stability,etc is secondary...

[Anonymous]

No, No, No, ya got it wrong ... They dont start work 'till 10am, then they're off to the pub at 12 .... poor buggers just don't have enough time ...

[Anonymous]

One item that is a must for the next version of Inventor is a COPY WITH BASE POINT and OFFSET WITH SPECIFIC DISTANCE IN X, Y or Z commands like what has been available in AutoCAD for years. Not sure how other users feel about this but I have found that using mirror components or pattern etc. can sometimes be over complex and take a lot of time and sometimes does not product the quick results desired whereas to be able to simply select the items and copy them to a specific location would good (under some circumstances). Maybe something like COPY COMPONENTS WITH BASE POINT with a check box to ADD DISTANCE and DIRECTION ? I know there will be people who would disagree because of the issue with retaining constraints, maybe the COPY WITH BASE POINT could be intelligent enough to understand where the constraints are and retain them on the copy. Just a thought for Autodesk.

[Anonymous]

Anthony, that's not a bad suggestion, but the problems with constraints will most likely kill it. 2013 has a problem retaining constraints, especially in older parts, so unless that is fixed first your co-ordinate copy probably wouldn't.

In all honesty, I would really like to see Autodesk ignore the marketers for the next release. Autodesk has already established a good product in Inventor and it has a large and mostly loyal group of supporters that will keep the bean counters happy while they fix the little annoyances that ALL users experience with Inventor.

The next release would truly be a new product even without any new features, if all the existing features worked as the designers intended. Along the way, I'm sure some of the requested features could be added but that should not be a priority.

If Autodesk are to continue making money from Inventor then it is just as important for them to get it right and with a bug free base, they could do just that and more.

The more lemons you sell, the less likely you are to have return customers. It's all connected and it all has an impact.

I just hope that the management at Autodesk have the foresight to deal with these issues now, instead of when it's too late.

[Inv_kaos]

If you want copy with base point for components you might be able to achieve similar results using iMates. Place as many components as you need in the assembly the hold Alt and drag and drop the iMate glyph (base point) to your constraint attachment location.

I would like to have a table or formula pattern. Basically a pattern where you can enter in varying distances for each component in the array. Similar to your offset option I guess.

[FProcp]

Creation trace-ability.

It is sometimes very difficult to work out how a model has been created when working on other people’s 3D models.

We need more aids to teach us how someone else has created the 3D model you are now working on.

One aid could be when a sketch has been projected from another sketch, you could hover over and it would indicate the original point/line/sketch/part it was projected from?

Maybe all dimensions within the actual sketch could be one colour but dimensions to other geometry such as the origin or to other sketches/featues/workplanes could be different colours?

Maybe there should be a way to select something in the sketch that will highlight in the feature tree (or somewhere) the workplane it was created on or the surface it was created on?

[FProcp]

Derive same part but with different dimensions

Have the ability to derive in a part and be able to change multi-value dimensions from that part.

Then you could have one master part file and many versions of it being derived versions of the master part but with different dimensions selected.

The dimensions could be set up as multi-value dimensions in the master part and allow them to be changed in the derived part.

[Anonymous]

All I want in Inventor 2014 is bug fixes.  That is it.  It is one thing too if you only use Inventor, but once you throw Vault into the mix, you have just about the buggiest software I've ever used.  I spent far to much time helping out users work around bugs in Inventor/Vault than I care to do.  

You don't know how frustrating it is when a user is trying to do something using the correct workflow, and Inventor won't let it happen, so you have to teach them some convoluted, backwards way to get around it, that would never normally be recommended to do, but since there are bugs preventing you from working properly, they have no other choice.

Trying to check in a file you've been working on?  Sorry, Inventor wants you to first save files you don't have checked out, and are unable to save.

Want to change states of a file you just opened?  Sorry, Inventor wants you to SAVE and CHECK IN a file that is currently NOT Checked Out and set to the "Released" state (in other words Inventor wants you to do the impossible).

Want to check in a new Library part you just added to your library folder?  Sorry, Inventor wants you to save a Library part (again, a file that CANNOT be saved), before you can check it in.  You try to use a project file that allows editing of library parts, but you can't check it in, because it isn't the proper project file for the Vault you are using.  So you save the library part and go to the correct project file to try and check it in, but for some reason Inventor thinks something has changed just from opening the file.

I know alot of these are Vault related, but they happen when working within Inventor.  Alot of the times the reasoning given for these problems too has to do with how Inventor treats files and how Vault can't handle it.  It seems to me Inventor and Vault are developed in their own little cages, but a product this complex needs to work together.  Inventor/Vault is almost a perfect example of what seems to be two product developement teams that don't work together to achieve the intended goal of the Software Suite, because those two programs seem to be fighting each other every step of the way.

So please, fix the software, because it is driving us CAD managers nuts.  

[Anonymous]

I was looking forward to going home, but a user just e-mailed me a picture of a part they can't check in because Vault says that a file with the same name already exists, but doing a search of the entire vault for that file name, returns no results.  Yay......

[Inv_kaos]

Jeff, do you have any inventor examples of bugs you typically have to provide work arounds for?

Here is one I can think of:

If you create a cut through multiple solids when you try to edit it and add more solids it will only allow you to select one solid, not multiple. The work around would be to change back to join then back to cut and reselect all solids. It used to work fine in 2012.

[Rory_M]

Window select in the Presentation environment for me please!

Rory