Hello, Revit has recently given a little more control over the layers within the wall assemblies, but I feel that there is more that can be done to better allow for elements such as continuity of a fire separation. Some ideas that might help are:  Give wall assemblies a priority ranking and maybe a drop-down menu on how other wall types should interact with it. Example: Allowing walls with a lower fire-resistance rating(FRR) to terminate at the wall assembly rather than traditionally "joining" into the wall; allowing for walls with a greater FRR to overrule and essentially run right through the wall. Give more operable "wrapping" options/settings, perhaps at an instance level (right click on wall end) or maybe through a series of set conditions (such as open ended wall vs a T-intersection, and so on), for the finish/wrapping (non-core areas) of the finish layers. I know Revit already has the "Wrapping at Ends/Inserts" feature, however I find it inconsistant and provides next to no control. Create a modified/customized wall join function that blends the wall join tool with features similar to the Cut Profile tool. Have this be a 3D property that affects the entire height of the assembly. This would allow for custom wall interaction which is important when you have different wall types intersecting one another where you need certain spaces for materials and properties such as acoustic control and fire-resistance continuity. Also useful for non-typical angle joins, where you may not want a pointed end. Give an option for a wall to join with another wall without physically affecting the wall. Such cases arise where walls adjoin but then one wall is dragged over and out of its originally placing. Currently, I handle situations like this by Disallowing Join then aligning the walls as needed (especially needed when working with Curtain Wall). While I know most of the options have drafting work-arounds, it would be nice to be able to more simply model these with behavioral wall properties. By doing so, it could also allow Revit the possibility to better analyze wall functions such as fire-resistance continuity or even area/room floor-area counts. Show More

Please bring back Autocreated Analytical Model for 2023+ Revits. Although the old algorithm required some time to learn, it worked significantly better than the current automated tool. The new tool was supposed to make our lives easier, but it only complicates things. The number of errors and incorrectly generated elements is alarming. Ultimately, manually correcting these errors consumes a tremendous amount of time. Please restore the option to choose between the old and new approach. By removing the old tool you have destroyed workflow that have been functioning efficiently for years. Show More

If you have two analytical panels that have a common edge (there is no gap between them), and if you move one panel trying to create a gap between them, the moved panel drags the other panel and lengthens its dimension. This behavior is the same for analytical members also. This behavior is not friendly if you try to copy an element right next to the other, then move one of them to create a gap between them.    We should have an option to choose if we want to drag the other connected analytical element if one of them is moved!    Show More

In Revit Structure, stairs are currently treated purely as architectural elements, which prevents them from being included in the analytical model. This presents a limitation when dealing with stairs that clearly serve a structural purpose and are made of structural materials.         Allow stairs to be marked as structural elements when composed of structural materials. Once marked, they should be convertible to analytical panels just like floors or walls. Similarly, Ramps should also be treated as structural floors and allow conversion to analytical panels. Implementing this would greatly improve the workflow for structural engineers, who currently must manually model equivalent analytical panels to represent stairs and ramps. Show More

Currently, Revit limits custom work plane creation to selecting existing physical elements or predefined levels. This is restrictive especially in analytical modeling where elements like inclined panels or members often need to reference non-existent or virtual planes.     Introduce the ability to create a work plane by selecting three points in space or by entering coordinates- similar to the functionality in Autodesk Robot Structural Analysis. This feature would allow users to model inclined analytical geometry more accurately and efficiently, without the need to rely on placeholder physical elements just to define a reference plane. Show More

please create a gumball for Revit elements in perspective views at least, this will make life so much easier, this should be priority number one for  your next release ! Just click the arrow and move or rotate in that direction when you input a value , like why is Revit the only program in the world that doesn't have this !      Show More

Please add "Room Bounding" as an option we can use to create filters with and use in schedules for all elements that have the option.   This is an important QA/QC tool.  When generating an energy model room bounding elements are used to generate analytical spaces and surfaces.  I would like to quickly generate a view that shows me all those bounding elements so I can confirm and troubleshoot what information my energy model is being generated from.   We also use a separate thin floor to model finish floors it is important that these floors are NOT room bounding, otherwise it creates problems for our MEP partners.  Being able to schedule these floors and ensure that they are all not room bounding would allow us to efficiently continually review the settings as new finish floor types are added. Show More

Many engineers are not using RSA because of its' old and weird interface. Although RSA is very capable and full of very advanced features, people won't use it because the interface is a hassle. Advanced features require opening cascading windows, the closing them up. I mean, it's worse than V/G in Revit.  It is a no brainer to have a common interface. It would save a lot of time for both engineers and software maintainers. I prefer a big window with many tabs (like V/G) instead of many small cascading windows. Everybody would be using a large screen these days, we ain't working in Windows XP anymore.  Show More

We constantly encounter space bounding issues and bugs within space colour fill legends, which are hidden within a process that's supposed to be simple and efficient.   This is that much of a problem for us that it has put our engineers off spaces completely and they have reverted back to hatching around areas like you'd do in CAD when producing zoning drawings, not good!   It would be better if the Revit code could reference the Architectural room geometry more closely, which works fine within the linked Architectural model.   When a space colour fill legend is applied, sometimes the colour disappears from certain spaces for no obvious reason and often the fix is to click the link, untick room bounding then switch it back on again afterwards i.e. a bug in the software.   We are an MEP company and have these issues with all of the Architect's we work with, so I don't think this can simply be put down to 'user error' when the results are consistent.   I appreciate this is a complicated issue but I think it needs to be addressed.         Show More

Do not include Filter Override for Analytical Members and Panels Local axis, beacause can't see orientation. See attached picture. Show More

Duct connectors in Revit Families only include Supply, Return, and Exhaust air.  There should be options for either "Makeup-Air" or "Outside-Air" as a System Classification for ducts.    HVAC systems and equipment often pull air from the outside of a building, and this type of air system is shouldn't be stuck using "other"; having a specific System Classification for Outside Air would help clarify the connections' intended use for end-users.   Show More

The current "Orient to View" function in Revit's 3D view right-click menu can be time-consuming, especially on large projects with dozens or even hundreds of views. Users must manually scroll through a nested list of Floor Plans, Sections, Elevations, etc., to find the desired view. This proposal suggests adding a search bar at the top of the "Orient to View" menu, allowing users to quickly locate and select a specific view by name. Benefits: Saves time during coordination and modeling. Improves usability in large projects. Reduces user error and frustration when trying to orient a 3D view. Makes the feature more accessible to new users. Example Functionality: Right-click in a 3D view → Orient to View → A searchable dialog box appears. User types part of the view name (e.g., "Level 2" or "SEC-A"), and matching options filter live. Clicking the result instantly orients the 3D view to the selected view. Show More

Hi!  I have found that steel profile (structural framing) volume/mass differs from table data.  This is because Revit calculates volume only by medium detail level of cross section. For example, if it is closed section like rectangular hollow section (RHS), then in medium detail level cross section is box without radii - volume is apox. 5-7% bigger.  If it is open beam section (H, I or U), then in medium detail level cross section is like welded plates without radii - volume is apox. 5-7% smaller. In small projects mass difference of 5-7% is not significant, but in big project Customer offen checks total mass by table data from internet/book. For example 7% from 500 000kg is 35 000kg! Taking volume from Schedule Material takeoff is not a good idea i think, if we need to do Structural Framing Schedule with steel beam dimensions, count and mass. In short - please let us do volume/mass count by FINE detail level cross section. Show More

Only a minor adjustment, but I find when using the measuring tool it is difficult to see what the measurement actually reads, and when you try to zoom in, the text size stays the same on the screen. It would be great if the text size were to get bigger here along with everything else in the view.  Show More

In order to ensure a complete task of creating the analytical model in REVIT 2024 and to reduce errors with loads that follow the local axes (problem of changing the direction of the local axes of the analytical panels while transefering model from REVIT to ROBOT), it is proposed to have the possibility of adjusting the local axes of the analytical panels in REVIT. The adjustment should be made after drawing the analytical panels using a simple command that rotates the local axes.   Afin d'assurer une tâche complète de création du modèle analytique dans REVIT 2024 et de réduire les erreurs avec les charges qui suivent les axes locaux (problème de changement de direction des axes locaux des panneaux analytiques lors du transfert du modèle de REVIT à ROBOT), il est proposé d'avoir la possibilité d'ajuster les axes locaux des panneaux analytiques dans REVIT. L'ajustement devrait être effectué après avoir dessiné les panneaux analytiques à l'aide d'une simple commande qui fait pivoter les axes locaux. Show More

Hi, there is a new exchange format on the horizon. It's called "Structural Analysis Format" (SAF). It has similarities to IFC (SAV) is however written in table format. So you can open, read and modify it with Excel.    I'm pretty sure your developers are aware of that format. I just want to express my wish, that it would be nice if Revit could also implement the import and export of that format.   Best Regards Lukas Show More

Adding the ability to select "Number of Phases" in the Properties Palette for the Electrical Design Analysis Tool for Revit '23 and newer.   While trying to use the Electrical Design Analytical tool within Revit '23, when entering our electrical loads for calculations they are all locked/greyed out on 3 phase power in the Properties Palette with no option that I see how to change between a 3 phase or a single phase power source.   Ex. If you enter a 120 Volt load it is always locked at 3 phase causing the calculations to be wrong, instead it would need be 120 V single phase load. Show More

I'm sure the provided weather stations for the Philippines are wrong, they are nowhere near the capital city. Also, there are many many more weather stations that are not accessible. See this list. https://bagong.pagasa.dost.gov.ph/automated-weather-station  Could some of them be made available please. Show More

Say you're working in plan view and need to quickly check the changes you made in a 3D view that you have already saved but don't want to open it completely.... enter the quick view panel via the project browser tree. Simply hover over the desired view(could be plan, section, 3D, etc) and up pops the last angle that view was at. \   See attached image. Show More