One of the biggest sources of error in BIM is manual type naming. A simple yet powerful improvement would be a native Revit feature that allows users to auto-generate Type Names by concatenating selected parameters.   For example, a window type name could be built from: [Width] - [Height] - [Frame Material] → 1200 - 1500 - Alum   This would: Reduce manual errors Enforce consistent naming Make schedules and tags more reliable   Ideally, the Revit template could select 2–3 parameters in the Family Editor or Type Properties dialog, choose a separator, and have Revit build the name automatically.    BIM is only as good as the data we put in — and naming mistakes shouldn't compromise that.   Would love to hear if others see value in this or have workarounds without dynamo work arounds.  Show More

Overview: We are requesting the ability to assign and control Design Options within linked Revit models via instance parameters in the host model. Current Limitation: When a Revit model containing multiple Design Options is linked into another model (such as a site or masterplan), the displayed design option must be manually set per view via Visibility/Graphics (VG). This is view-specific, not instance-specific, and cannot be controlled parametrically or scheduled - making it impractical for large-scale developments. Real-World Context: I work for one of the top 10 house builders in the UK, where we regularly deliver large residential masterplans with over 100 housing units per site. Each housetype may have multiple variants (Detached, Semi, End-Terrace), and we need to swap between these variants frequently during feasibility and planning stages. The lack of instance-level control over Design Options is the sole reason we still produce our early feasibility layouts in AutoCAD. This missing functionality severely limits the potential for full adoption of Revit in the early design and option testing phases. I’m confident that enabling this feature would significantly accelerate the transition from AutoCAD to Revit for large residential developers across the UK and beyond. Proposed Feature: Introduce a new instance parameter (e.g., "Design Option Override") on Revit Link instances, allowing users to select which Design Option should be displayed per instance, rather than globally or per view. Benefits: Massive time savings on large developments. Clean, scalable workflows for residential layouts. Avoids bloating the model with multiple linked files for each variant. Enables BIM-driven feasibility and planning, rather than 2D CAD workarounds. Improves Revit adoption across large design teams and developers. Optional Enhancements: Allow Design Option value to be tagged or scheduled per link instance. Support view filters or colour schemes based on the selected Design Option. Allow API/Dynamo access to control link instance options programmatically. Show More

✨ Problem: When editing a loaded family in a Revit project, upon reloading it back into the project, Revit only gives us two options: Overwrite the existing family and its parameter values. Overwrite the existing family but preserve existing parameter values. However, both options replace the original family and do not allow keeping the original version. This can lead to lost data, unintended changes in the model, and lack of version control. --- 🎯 Proposal: Add a third option when reloading a family: > ✅ “Keep Both Versions” – Revit keeps the original version in the project and loads the new one with a suffix or user-defined name, such as: FamilyName_v2 or FamilyName_Modified   --- 🛠️ Suggested Behavior: When reloading a modified .rfa, show this dialog: > Do you want to: 1️⃣ Overwrite the existing family and its parameters 2️⃣ Overwrite the family but keep existing parameter values 3️⃣ ✅ Keep both versions (rename the new one to FamilyName_Copy or prompt for new name)   Show More

When uploading parameters to the Autodesk Cloud Parameter Service today, users have no way to choose which parameters to transfer when selecting 'active model'. Instead, they must resort to work-arounds: Clean the model. Strip out every unwanted parameter so that only the ones you want remain, then upload. Use a Shared Parameter file. But this sacrifices the convenience of the “Active Model” option (see red rectangle in screenshot). Proposed Workflow Upload to Cloud Parameter Service User selects Active Model (or Shared Parameter File / Text-File Import). Ask user for confirmation to get all parameters from the model Display a multi-select list of all shared parameters in the model. Adjust Categories Give the user the option to change the applied categories for each shared parameter (for example to add revit categories which become available in new revit versions. Give the user the option to change standard categories in the properties menu, like Identity Data, Underlay, Graphics, etc. Final Confirmation from the user to transfer the shared parameters to the Cloud Parameter Service   Steps 4–6 would also be useful when importing from a Shared Parameter file, as this format has no category-and-property metadata. (Or add an extra option to the import method where the user can select a textfile with the extra data (like category-and-property metadata) Show More

I would like to propose that system families could also read the information of the rooms they belong to in the schedules like the loadable families, they could even use <varies> when they exist in more rooms   Show More

Adding shared parameters you should be able to select all and add to a family at one time. Instead of having to add each one individually. Show More

A button to move directly a parameter to the top/end of a list. Useful in case you have to deal with a large amount of parameter list.   Show More

Hello,   The implementation of phasing within View Filters is great, but it would be very useful in some scenarios to be able to make these relative. Right now, you have to select a specific phase for your Filter Rules. This can be handy, but having some relative options would also be very useful.   If we would like to implement some standards around visibility of things based on phasing, we would want to set this up within our template. We don't know what a project's phases will look like down the road, but we might know that this filter should override ANYTHING that is considered "previous" to any given view. If we could select an option for "Phase Created: is less than: Current Phase of View" this would solve having to create duplicate filters for the same thing OR ensuring that a user is adjusting the filter to the latest phase each time, etc.    Most things about phasing and phase filters on views is relative to that view, it only makes sense to make the View Filters have the same options. Show More

Most improvements in new Revit versions, while beneficial, often consist of minor adjustments that could easily be included in an upgrade or service pack. Adopting this approach would allow more time and focus for deeper, more meaningful enhancements. It would also help standardise the software version used across different projects. Currently, the constant release of new versions leads to several issues: Projects often rely on different Revit versions, creating inconsistencies; Multiple installations take up significant disk space; Upgrading families and project files becomes more complex; Opening older projects can be confusing or problematic. Additionally, a typical construction project — from early design stages to completion — usually spans around four years. This means users often end up having at least four different Revit versions installed simultaneously, just to keep up.   One ideia could be to release a new version every two years for example. Show More

Would be great to be able to rotate dimension string text to orient in a different way Show More

Please let us create multiple dependent views with one click and select how many dependent views I want. This would significantly improve the workflow of the plan creation Show More

In Revit the  lines types you can have is really pathetic compared to AutoCADs - dashes, dots and continious lines. (And the ofcourse the Insulation that has its own button to make, and the revision cloud if that counts...). Would be very helpful to be able to make various line types with shapes in 2d - like tracks, talus and I thing that was already suggested - with text in it. Out from deperation (again) we are using detail line family with text in it to display  ELEC, HYDRO, Xs (for fence), etc... but comes a curve and there the solution stops. We are also forced to do untinkable things to a surveyors drawings in order to preserve their line types in Revit. Show More

Currently, the setup of the default setting for open Worksets is possible only when saving a new central file. The alternative is to use the Options while opening the file, which must be adjusted each time.     The suggested functionality will be to have the opportunity to change the default settings for open Workset for an active central file without creating a new central. This would avoid the creation of a new central file and thus maintain the version history and the link connection between the files.   Show More

Hi Autodesk, We need this API to help developers able to update data in models using Revit Design Automation, if not I belive it's is really hard to use Revit Design Automation on cloud. What I'm expecting : - One API input the urn model to force Relinquish of all users owner that model, not only my self.   What is current now : There are APIs available to check the checkout status of elements—for example,  WorksharingUtils.GetCheckoutStatus() . However, there are currently no APIs that allow relinquishing ownership of elements not checked out by the current Revit user. The  RelinquishOwnership()  method only works for elements that are checked out by the current user. Show More

Too often we have to check against a saved survey file, or early versions of drawings to check that walls, floors, roofs haven’t inadvertently moved due to a misalignment between new construction elements and existing. This usually happens accidentally, or when a new wall is attached to an existing one, and the new wall is moved or aligned to something else. Its a nightmare to check and keep on top of. Show More

Right now in schedules there is the possibility to change only one single value at a time, but very often we have the same elements which receive a new value for a parameter. It would be helpful if we could change this value for all of them at once and not need to highlight them in the model and then change the parameter value in the model. Show More

There is currently no "Or" capability in filter rules, which makes it very difficult/inefficient at times to filter.  For instance: assume I only want to see walls that contain CMU or Concrete in the type name.  I can create a filter for Just the concrete walls easily, and do the same for the CMU.  But one filter with OR could easily accomplish the task. Show More

I would love to be able to access loaded families while in the Type Properties for System families.  Quite often I'm editing something like wall sweeps, or hosted profile sweeps, railings, etc. and need to load or edit a family that's selected in the System Family.  So I have to hit OK multiple times to get out of whatever dialog box I'm in, go find the profile or other loaded family in the Project Browser, then make my way back to whatever family I was previously editing.  If we could access loaded families, or anything else in the Project Browser, while a dialog box is open, it would be a huge time-saver. Show More

I believe it would be interesting to be able to include a field with the IDs of the model objects in the schedules   Show More