Problem statement: Inventor currently does not provide a structured PMI representation for general manufacturing requirements that apply to a part, including: General tolerances for unspecified dimensions, e.g. DIN ISO 2768-cL Edge treatment requirements, e.g. DIN ISO 13715 General surface finish requirements, e.g. Ra 6.3, no material removal Today, these requirements can only be represented as general notes in the Inventor model. While this makes the information human-readable, it does not provide a semantically structured representation that can reliably be consumed by downstream manufacturing systems.   Requested capability: Ability to define these general manufacturing requirements as structured, machine-readable PMI directly within an Inventor IPT/IAM model. The information should be accessible through Inventor's PMI/MBD data model and available to downstream applications and interfaces, rather than being represented only as free-text annotations.   Expected workflow: Inventor IPT/IAM → structured PMI/MBD → downstream manufacturing application (e.g. Fusion CAM) → automated interpretation during manufacturing preparation.   Business value: A more complete model-based definition and manufacturing workflow. It would reduce manual interpretation and transfer of manufacturing requirements, improve data consistency, reduce manufacturing preparation errors, and support an end-to-end digital thread from engineering to manufacturing.   Key requirement: The important aspect is not simply displaying these requirements in the 3D model. They need to be represented semantically/structurally so that downstream software can identify the type of requirement and its value programmatically. Show More

Currently, the Mark and Split features in Autodesk Inventor Professional 2026 do not support Rectangular Pattern or Circular Pattern (Polar Pattern) directly. At the moment, users must create the pattern at the sketch level first and then apply the feature. While this workaround is functional, it adds unnecessary steps and reduces workflow efficiency, especially when design changes are required later. Suggested Enhancement:Enable the Mark and Split commands to be patterned directly using the standard Rectangular Pattern and Circular Pattern feature tools, similar to other Inventor features. Benefits: Faster and more efficient modeling workflows Reduced dependency on complex sketch patterns Easier design modifications and maintenance Improved feature tree organization and readability Consistent behavior with other Inventor features This enhancement would provide greater flexibility and help users create repetitive mark and split operations more efficiently. Show More

The Autodesk Assistant is a promising addition to Inventor, but every conversation currently starts from scratch. Users must repeatedly enter the same instructions, standards, and engineering knowledge. I would like Autodesk to introduce Skills for the Autodesk Assistant. A Skill would be a reusable set of instructions that users can create, manage, and execute on demand. Instead of repeatedly typing prompts, users could simply invoke a named skill. Examples include: Company drawing standard reviews iProperty validation BOM consistency checks Documentation reviews Customer-specific design requirements The real value is not automation itself, but capturing engineering knowledge in a form that can be reused by individuals, teams, and organizations. Skills should: Be easy to create using natural language Be discoverable through the Assistant Support personal, shared, and company-wide skills Be treated as managed assets, similar to external iLogic rules Support versioning and ownership Unlike traditional rule-based automation, like iLogic, Autodesk Assistant can explain findings, answer questions, and help users resolve issues that it identifies. This makes skills accessible to engineers who understand the process but do not have programming experience. During experimentation, I found that a simplified version of this concept can already be achieved today by storing reusable instructions in external iLogic rules and asking Autodesk Assistant to execute them. This demonstrates that reusable engineering knowledge can provide real value within Inventor. More details and an example can be found here: Creating Reusable Prompts for the Autodesk Assistant   If users are already creating workarounds to achieve this functionality, it may be worth considering formal support for reusable Skills within Autodesk Assistant. Show More

Use case We create simplified/substitute representations of assemblies that get placed into large layouts. To make deriving them easier, we first set up a design view representation without Content Center parts. In the simplified model, every hole that defines an interface or mating condition to a neighbouring component must be preserved, while holes and pockets of the same type and size elsewhere on the model should be removed.   Problem In the Simplify property panel, Remove Features lets us set Holes, Pockets, Tunnels etc. to All or Range – but the only way to protect the interface holes is the Preserve selector, and features have to be picked one at a time. There is no multi-select, no window/box selection, and no way to select by geometric context. On models with many interface holes this becomes a long, error-prone clicking exercise. It gets worse because holes also match the Tunnel definition, so removals we did not intend have to be corrected through Preserve as well. Since Simplify in a part is a browser feature that recomputes as the geometry changes, the selection work also has to be revisited whenever the source model is edited.   Requested improvement Make Preserve behave like other selection sets in Inventor: - Multi-select (Ctrl/Shift), plus window and crossing-window selection - Face-driven selection: pick a face and automatically preserve every hole, pocket or tunnel intersecting that face - Select-similar / select-by-size, so all holes of one diameter can be preserved in one step - Easy removal of entries from the Preserve list, and a readable list of what is currently preserved   Benefit Far fewer clicks on large assemblies, reproducible simplified models, less rework after design changes, and a much lower risk of accidentally removing a hole that another component mates to. Show More

The Timing Belt design functionality in Autodesk Inventor is currently very limited for metric applications. In practical mechanical design, I often need to use other software pachages such as MITCalc to property select and design metric timing belts because Inventor soes not provide enough metric belt profiles, standars, and design options. This is inconvenient because I would prefer to complete the entire mechanical design process directly in Autodesk Inventor instead of switching between different software applications. I believe the Timing Belt Generator should be expanded to support a much wider range of metric timing belt standars, profiles, tooth pitches, pully specifications, belt selections, and manufacturer data. For example, better suppport for commonly used metric profiles such as HTD GT, T-series, AT-series, and other industrial metric timing belt profiles would be very useful for mechanical engineers. Autodesk Inventor is already a powerful mechanical design platform. Improving the metric Timing Belt functionality would allow engineers to complete more of their power transmission design directly inside Inventor and reduce the need for external software. I strongly recommend expanding and improving the metric Timing Belt design capabilities in Autodesk Inventor. Show More

It would be nice if it was possible to hide user work planes, axes and points without having to create a new view. I would like to hide them and be able to save the primary view. Show More

Currently, our organization uses a proven workaround to reduce model file sizes by converting an IAM to an RVT (all-in-one element with internal parts removed and voids filled) and then exporting it to STEP. This process worked effectively in Inventor from 2022 to 2024 and has been successfully used for the past four years. significantly reduced the file size. After migrating to Inventor 2026, the workflow still works, but the resulting STEP file size has increased by approximately 500%. While we understand Autodesk's explanation regarding the previous behavior, the earlier output was highly beneficial and supported our established processes. We kindly request that Autodesk consider adding an option in the export settings to retain the previous behavior. This would help organizations like ours continue using a long-standing and efficient workaround without the impact of significantly larger file sizes. Show More

When working in a sketch with multiple lines constrained at the same point it can be difficult or impossible to delete the constraint you want to. In the example below I'd like to delete the constraint for the green line and there is a 25% chance I'll delete the correct one. My idea is to have the ability to show all constraints for a single line by selecting a line, right clicking, and choosing Show All Constraints for Selected. The command Delete Coincident Constraint when you right click on a line sounds good, but it appears to delete the newest constraint and is not affected by which line you click on. If this command could be changed to delete the Coincident constraint affecting the line clicked on that would also be an improvement. Show More

Hi there,   For us who work between multiple projects, with many parts/assemblies in common, it would be great if we could just copy-paste parts/assemblies directly from one Inventor instance's graphics window to another instance. At the moment I have to use "Place" or drag from the explorer's folder. I would be simpler if I can just copy-paste the part/assembly when I'm looking at it, from one window to another.   This update will help a lot of people!!   All the best RB Show More

Hello, Its visually not clear if you can edit iproperties or not. Only the date box is grayed out here.     This causes confusion, because  you want to change some i properties, so you try to edit some but no text is appearing, with no explanation why.   also idea  https://forums.autodesk.com/t5/inventor-ideas/editing-iproperties-vault-check-out-request/  would be nice  Because I find it dumb that I can change geometry, save and check out later but not with Iproperties.         Show More

It would be nice if the Status Bar was more visible or could be made to be more visible with colors, font changes, text height, etc. It's easy to overlook.   It would also be nice if there were more options for customization of forms Show More

The place and insert works well but it needs these extra features The source select just allows edges and we need faces as well as this helps with countersunk screws. Also allow the target to then select the mating face. See image below.   Also it has lock rotation but allow us to decide if we can lock a face at a certain angle or parallel to another face. Random locking creates more problems than it solves. Like in this case I want to lock the countersunk screw assembly in a certain fashion so that the T nut is always in a certain direction Show More

With the introduction of DIN 2769 in combination with ISO 22081 and ISO 8015, more companies are starting to use the new general tolerancing concept on engineering drawings. In our Inventor workflows we need to display the symbols: AD (circled) add (circled) within drawing notes and title block text fields.   Currently these symbols are not available in the AIGDT font and therefore cannot be inserted through the standard Inventor text editor like other GD&T symbols.   As a result, users must rely on workarounds such as manually creating sketch symbols. Adding these symbols to the font would improve support for companies adopting the newer ISO 8015/ DIN 2769 tolerancing standards and help maintain consistency with existing GD&T workflows.   Requested enhancement: Please add circled "AD" and circled "add" symbols to the AIGDT font and make them available through the Inventor symbol insertion menu. Thank you for considering this improvement. Show More

I find it frustrating that we have to manually scroll from the top to the bottom of the Parts/Model Browser Side Bar.   It would be help full if we had the use of the Home, End and Page Up/Down Keys to navigate the side bar     Show More

In Inventor we have only the ability to design only circular gears not bevel gears, worm gears, gear rack, etc. Can you introduce them all in the Gear Component Generator.  Show More

Add a built-in tool that steps through every sick (broken) constraint and joint in an assembly, one at a time: it zooms to each one, opens its edit dialog automatically so you just re-pick the lost reference, and then jumps straight to the next until they're all fixed. It can also auto-accept the intermediate "assembly cannot be solved" prompt. Today this is a slow manual hunt through the browser; on big assemblies with dozens of broken relationships it's painful. This turns it into a continuous, guided workflow — for both constraints and joints. I built a working iLogic prototype to prove the concept (see video). I'd love this as a native Inventor feature. Show More

When we need an interactive model presentation we have two solutions: 1) We can make a video inside Inventor; 2) We export the Assembly to an other programs like 3D max then to 3D game engine to add interactivity to a parts. For example, the robotic arm rotate up when I press a button. Why you cannot add a specif module to a program to do this interactivity. Think you. Show More

This would let you select a pair of faces on one component and a matching pair on another, and have Inventor constrain centre/align both components. It's especially useful when working with components that have a clearance or interference fit, but really it applies to any components that need to be centred to each other.   This functionality already exists, to some extent, within Inventor's joint relationships. However, as proven by the number of questions on the Inventor forums asking how to constrain components this way, it clearly isn't easily available or intuitive for quick, simple constraining. Joints are powerful and offer plenty of options, but using something like an "in-between faces" planar joint to centre two components quickly becomes a complex process. It has its own quirks - it moves components, strips grounding from grounded components, and requires a specific order of face selection and origin definition. It's also prone to user error along the way, taking upwards of 12 mouse clicks just to set up.   A similar result can be achieved by constraining origin centre planes, but only if the component is symmetrical and the planes are in the right place - which very often isn't the case, especially with imported STEP files.   I believe we need a dedicated constraint purely for this scenario - one that simply asks the user to select two faces on one component and two faces on another, then constrains them at the mid-distance between both selections.   Ideally this wouldn't be limited to a single pair of mating components either. At assembly and sub-assembly level, it would be just as useful to centre one component between faces belonging to multiple other components, rather than being restricted to one matching part.   A demo of this constraint type in action can be seen in the videos below.       The demo above shows an iLogic "Mid-Align" constraint I built using the existing "in-between two faces" planar joint definition via the iLogic API, simplifying the user's input down to just four face selections and adding some extra logic to handle the definitions automatically. Full code can be found in this topic: Solved: Re: How to get a non-circular part (square or other) into center of a non-circular hole. - Page 2 - Autodesk Community   I believe having this built natively into Inventor's Place Constraint / Assembly Constrain command would be a huge workflow improvement for a lot of scenarios, and would quickly become one of the most commonly used constraints - improving Inventor's overall ease of use and constraining intuitiveness. Thanks! Show More

It always feels like my lucky day when "Auto-reattach Orphaned Annotations" actually works. For other cases, I'd love an option to delete them all at once - perhaps even with a dialogue box asking if I'd like to delete when auto-reattach fails. Thanks! Show More