When picking two points in a sketch it shows the true value of the distance in an inputbox.  When i want to create a "T-shape" with the vertical side 10mm above the horizontal 75mm side, I have to drag the line above the 75mm line first before i can place the 10mm dimension. Surely this can be simplified with a -10mm dimension.   After placing the constraint, the -10mm should become absolute value.    Show More

Hello,   the loft function should be extended to allow you to create solids with a wall thickness directly. Currently, this is only possible by creating two surveys. The first elevation creates the solid with the outer dimensions (see pic. 1). With the second survey, the interior is removed again (see pic. 2).   It should be possible to select the areas between the outer and the inner contour directly.   *************   Die Funktion Erhebung sollte so erweitert werden, dass es möglich ist, Volumenkörper mit einer Wandstärke direkt zu erstellen. Derzeit ist dies nur möglich, indem zwei Erhebungen erstellt werden. Mit der ersten Erhebung wird der Volumenkörper mit den äußeren Abmessungen erstellt (siehe Abb. 1). Mit der zweiten Erhebung wird der Innenraum wieder abgezogen (siehe Abb. 2).   Es sollte möglich sein, direkt die Flächen zwischen der äußeren und der inneren Kontur auszuwählen.   **************   Pic. 1: loft of   Pic. 2: loft as cut to remove the volume created by the lofted feature     Pic. 3: solid with wall thickness Show More

Hi,   what about the possibility to split the current browser into two let say "areas", like an excel spreadsheet or word-doc. This could be a great feature for working in large assemblies or parts with lots of features.   The picture illustrates only an example! Just having two browsers showing the same general situation, but with a different focus!   See slide:   Bye Kay Show More

I'm using Perspective with Ortho Faces as my favorite view setting. Sometimes I have faces that are not perpendicular with one of the origin planes but most of the time it would be very helpful if to switch over to Orthographic view in this case. Is it possible to give 'Look At' the same behaviour as the view cube? Show More

When all items in a folder are suppressed or invisible, the appearance of the folder icon and/or name should change accordingly.  Bonus points for another appearance for when only some contents are suppressed or invisible.     See the folder icons in SolidWorks as an example; Blue is enabled Gray is suppressed Blue/grey is a mix (Never mind the errors... our SW models are a mess) Show More

Some parts end up with a load of redundant sketches and work features which are essentially orphans, unused, empty, junk, it would be nice to be able to purge these out in one swoop to keep the browser tidy. Show More

I would like to be able to lock the top end of the browser to be locked so that I have my view representations and model states always visible as I use them a lot and don't want to scroll up each time I need to use it. See image below Show More

It should be possible to directly copy and paste materials and appearances between parts without having to temporarily add them to a library and get them from there. Show More

Please add the capability to wrap to a face (like the emboss command) for the new Mark feature. It looks like it currently can only mark on a flat surface.   Most of our laser marking is on cylindrical shaped housings which makes this new command of no use to us, We were hopeful that the new Mark command could replace our current practice of embossing shallow text to represent laser marking. Embossing makes the file sizes rather large in comparison to the mark feature. Show More

Please add copy as path to this menu so user doesn't have to open file location and do this in windows explorer.  Right click on any part or assembly in model tree opens menu. It would be great if there was an extra row with "copy path" next to "open file location".   Copy path is useful when replacing components or deriving components. This way you don't have to manually navigate to file location but rather paste the path and press enter.       Show More

Components that you select in the assembly are marked in the browser tree but are not visible if they are in a closed folder. Please highlight the folder or even better let the folder open automatically. Show More

Sometimes with dimensions I need to reduce precision to allow for larger variation (for example: overall dimensions for finished assemblies).   When I create these reduced-precision dimensions, I don't always want Inventor to just round to the nearest unit. Sometimes I want it to always round up (ceiling) or round down (floor) to account for largest or smallest possibilities.   I would like to see maybe some radio buttons or similar added into the Precision section so you can choose how Inventor deals with dimensions.     I found 2 similar ideas from the past as well, so figured I'd mention here as well: https://forums.autodesk.com/t5/inventor-ideas/option-to-round-up-or-down-when-altering-precision-of-5/idi-p/7063959  https://forums.autodesk.com/t5/inventor-ideas/rounding-down-up-dimension-values/idi-p/9995603    Show More

Is it possible to make a feature with wich I can position a half section view parallel to a plane trough an axis or a centerpoint from a hole feature, without having to measure the distance between the plane and the center of the hole. See also the attachments Show More

Ability to designate discrete (different) material assignments to individual bodies in a multi-body part environment. This along with a model-state driven design philosophies will offer a lot to workflows using MB component parts. Show More

It seems as though between 2021 and 2024/2025 the progress bar had the Autodesk Inventor Professional and the Inventor logo removed. Please add it back.    Forum Post.  https://forums.autodesk.com/t5/inventor-programming-ilogic/2025-inventor-progress-bar-no-inventor-logo-or-quot-autodesk/m-p/12973207/highlight/false#M171006   2021   2024     2025   Show More

Dear Autodesk Development Team and Community, I am an active user of Autodesk Inventor and would like to propose a feature that I believe would significantly enhance the usability of the software. In CAD software like Fusion 360 or SolidWorks, there is a feature that allows real-time dynamic dimension display when a user simply selects geometry (lines, arcs, planes, etc.). This is incredibly convenient because it eliminates extra clicks for measurements and allows users to quickly access the necessary geometric information without having to invoke additional tools like Measure. Currently, in Inventor, to check, for instance, the length of a line, the workflow involves several steps: Select the Measure tool in the Inspect menu. Click on the element to view the measurement in a separate dialog box. This process requires more time and distracts from the design flow. What do I propose? Implement functionality that displays the dimension (length, angle, radius, etc.) immediately upon selecting an element in the workspace (similar to Fusion 360). Optionally, allow users to toggle this functionality on or off based on their preferences. What are the benefits? Significant improvement in productivity. A more intuitive user experience, especially for quick geometry analysis. Alignment with modern CAD system standards. Thank you for your attention! I hope this suggestion will gain support from users and be considered by the development team. Best regards. Show More

Dear Community, I'm sure that this idea isn't new. But we heavily miss this feature in Inventor - and we switched from PRO/E to Inventor so the users have this feature in mind and have lots of effort to work around in Inventor. Every year we expect that it's added to Inventor, but until today it isn't  We've often feature or component patterns which cannot be patternded by the Inventor feature but by a table. For Inventor this is mission impossible, for Pro/E or SWX no problem. Have a look at SWX online help how the feature table driven pattern works: http://help.solidworks.com/2014/English/solidworks/sldworks/HIDD_PATTERN_TABLE2.htm The same for Pro/E http://www3.eng.cam.ac.uk/DesignOffice/cad/proewild3/usascii/proe/feature/part_six_sub/example__creating_a_table_pattern.htm     SWX hasn't a table driven component pattern, but you can reference the component pattern to a table driven feature pattern. In this point Pro/E (Creo) is more powerful. Unfortunately I did not find any nice description for the Pro/E component table driven pattern, only the description how to launch: http://www3.eng.cam.ac.uk/DesignOffice/cad/proewild3/usascii/proe/asm/asm_four_sub/to_assemble_comps_to_a_table_pattern.htm Please excuse if this isn't a new idea, I searched for it but had no matches for this keywords  Cheers, Thomas     Show More

The Problem: Some assembly constraints do not show in the model browser tree under all the components involved in the constraint.  This needs to be fixed as soon as possible.   Effects: There is no quick or easy way to determine all the ways some components are being constrained, so if we later want to change or redefine how they are constrained, there is no quick or easy way to do so completely.  This can be misleading, confusing, and very time consuming to try to figure out later.  We can delete or suppress all constraints listed under a component in the model browser tree, yet the component is still being constrained somehow, with no clear/easy way to figure out how/why.  Even if we select the component, then right-click in the graphics area and choose the use the 'Selection' slide-out, then the 'Constrained To' tool, it will not select the other two components who's faces it is symmetrically constrained between.  And when selecting either of those other two components who's faces are involved, and doing the same context menu steps, then one component in the middle is not selected.  We do not want to have to delete that occurrence, then place it back into the assembly, then re-constrain it again.  We do not want to have to expand the 'Relationships' browser folder then click on every single constraint in the entire assembly (could be hundreds), while watching to see if that one component gets highlighted, just to find that one constraint later.  This is completely ridiculous.   When/How it happens: This usually happens when component work features (such as the component's Origin work planes) are used to define some portion of a constraint.  A good example of this is when using the 'Symmetric' constraint, where we choose the flat face of one component, the flat face of a second component that is parallel to the first selected face, then an origin work plane of a third component (one of its center planes, for example) that we want to be centered between those two other component faces.  After we create this constraint, that constraint object is listed in the model browser tree under the first two components who's faces we selected, but not under the third component who's origin work plane we selected.  It is not even listed under that component's work plane when we expand the Origin folder under that component in the model browser tree.  The result is the third component is being constrained between two other component faces, but there is nothing under that component letting us know about that constraint/association, or the other two components involved.  Then later, we can not figure out what is constraining it in place, so we can not change, suppress, or delete that association, because we do not know what is causing it.   Suggested Solution: The Inventor developers at Autodesk should make sure a constraint object (browser node) gets listed under the assembly component occurrence when any of its work features are being used to define any type of assembly constraint, at any time. Show More