Currently, the Reset to Crop command always resets Grid and Level extents to the Model Crop Region. Although the Annotation Crop Offset can be adjusted numerically, Datum Elements (Grids and Levels) completely ignore the Annotation Crop and always extend to the Model Crop Region. I understand that Datum Elements are intentionally associated with the Model Crop because they are not purely annotation elements. Autodesk Technical Support has already confirmed that this is the current intended behavior after consulting the internal team. However, this request is not asking to change how Datum Elements work. Instead, I am requesting an optional documentation workflow enhancement that would allow users to choose which crop boundary should be used when executing Reset to Crop. Suggested Implementation When using Reset to Crop, provide an additional option such as: Reset Datum Extents To: Model Crop (Current Behavior) Annotation Crop (New Option) or alternatively, add a View Property: Datum Extents Reference Model Crop Annotation Crop This would work in a similar way to how Grid Extents can already be switched between 2D and 3D. Why This Is Important Architectural documentation frequently relies on: Enlarged Plans Callout Views Dependent Views Detail Plans In these views, the Annotation Crop usually represents the desired drawing composition rather than the Model Crop. Currently, Grid and Level extents must be manually adjusted in nearly every enlarged view because Reset to Crop ignores the Annotation Crop. Providing this optional setting would: Reduce repetitive manual work Produce cleaner documentation Improve drawing presentation Speed up sheet preparation Improve BIM documentation workflows Most importantly, this enhancement would remain fully backward compatible, since the existing behavior could remain the default option. Testing Performed The current behavior has been verified in: Revit 2025 Revit 2026 Brand-new blank projects Floor Plans Callout Views 2D Grid Extents In every case, Reset to Crop always follows the Model Crop Region and never the Annotation Crop. Final Note This Idea is not requesting any change to the fundamental behavior of Datum Elements. It simply proposes an optional documentation feature that would allow users to decide whether Reset to Crop should reference the Model Crop or the Annotation Crop. This small enhancement would significantly improve documentation efficiency while preserving the existing Revit workflow for all current users. Thank you for considering this suggestion. Show More

The workplane viewer inside revit shows that it really is the workplane viewer. The next bit of information is that the currently active workplane is.... Do not get me wrong, the name will come, but you need to drag the window larger to read it. If you are using a localized version of revit the matter gets worse depending on the words for work and plane they came up with in the target language. This idea is to remove the string 'workplane viewer' from said viewer as the nuggets of info following it, give it away anyway. Show More

Simply put, if I have View A and View B, then if I place a callout on View A and have the callout reference View B, the callout should be able to automatically inherit the size, shape, and position of View B's crop.   This should be optional, of course. But 95% of the time, this is the behavior I want. I don't want to have to go manually fix the callout every time the size of View B is adjusted slightly. Alternately, a similar effect could be achieved if I could bind the callout for View B to a scope box (presumably the same scope box that View B is bound to).   Going further, it might be superior to disentangle callouts from views, treating callouts and views as entirely separate objects, allowing callouts to reference any view of any type (even switching a callout from one view to another if necessary) and to automatically take on the size, shape, and position of the referenced view if desired.   It is reasonable to ask why any of this is necessary - just create the callout directly the first time, so it is associated with an enlarged view. I have three reasons for making this request: Sometimes I need an enlarged view to be associated with a different level than the parent view. Currently, the only way to do this is to make a second view (View B) and then put a Reference Other View callout on the overall view (View A). But this requires that I manually update the size, shape and location of the callout, which is tedious. Sometimes people create a view that should be an enlarged view with a callout, but this was either not apparent at the time, or they simply didn't realize this. In those cases, it would be helpful if a callout referenced to the view would behave exactly as if the view had been originally created as a callout. From a UX standpoint, it just seems weird that a callout set to Reference Other View behaves in a totally different manner than a callout connected to a view at the point of creation. Well, that's all I've got to say. Thanks for reading. Show More

Description Currently, Revit transfers electrical loads between panels according to the individual load classifications assigned to the connected circuits. This can be limiting in projects where the upstream panel should receive a calculated or predefined aggregate load. The panel electrical connector should provide configurable options for how connected loads are transferred to the upstream panel. Proposed Load Transfer Options 1. Maintain Individual Load Classifications This option would preserve the current behavior: Loads remain separated according to their original classifications. Each classification uses its corresponding demand factor. The upstream panel receives the calculated loads by classification. 2. Combine All Loads Using the Panel Load Classification Revit should provide an option to: Sum all connected loads. Ignore the individual load classifications of the downstream circuits. Apply the load classification assigned to the receiving panel’s electrical connector. Transfer the combined load to the upstream panel as a single load classification. This option would be useful when the demand factor should be determined by the panel rather than by each individual circuit. 3. Transfer Values Assigned to the Panel Electrical Connector Revit should provide an option to transfer predefined values from the panel electrical connector while ignoring the panel’s internal load calculation. The panel could transfer values such as: Total connected apparent power. Total demanded apparent power. Real power. Reactive power. Power factor. Current, where applicable. This option would be particularly useful in apartment buildings, where the estimated demand may be based on the apartment area rather than on the number of receptacles and lighting fixtures—or based on whichever calculated value is greater. Parameters Required for Formulas To make this functionality useful, Revit should expose the following panel-level values for use in formulas: Total Connected Load Total Connected Apparent Power Total Demanded Load Total Demanded Apparent Power Demand Factor Power Factor Calculated Current These values should be available for use in: Panel schedules. Family parameters. Tags. Schedules and quantities. Project formulas. Example Use Case For an apartment panel: Revit calculates the detailed connected load from the apartment circuits. A project-specific formula calculates the estimated demand based on the apartment area or installed loads. The calculated apartment demand is assigned to the panel electrical connector. The upstream distribution panel receives the apartment’s total connected and demanded load. The upstream panel does not recalculate the apartment circuits individually. This would allow users to maintain Revit’s circuit and panel connectivity while applying project-specific demand calculation methods. Benefits This functionality would: Improve flexibility in electrical load calculations. Better support demand estimation methods used in apartment buildings. Reduce the need for manual workarounds. Allow upstream panels to use reliable aggregate load values. Preserve detailed circuit information. Provide better control over how loads are transferred between panels. Make panel schedules and electrical analysis more adaptable to different engineering standards and regional practices. Suggested Implementation Add a parameter to the panel electrical connector called Load Transfer Method, with options such as: By Circuit Load Classification Combine Using Panel Load Classification Use Values Assigned to Connector When Use Values Assigned to Connector is selected, the user should be able to assign or calculate the connected-load and demanded-load values that will be transferred to the upstream panel. The load transfer method should be available as either a type or instance parameter and should work consistently for: Electrical panels. Distribution boards. Load centers. Other electrical equipment with panel connectors. Show More

Currently, the Break option in a Revit tag label only creates a new line when the parameter immediately following the break contains a value. When optional parameters are used, the line break may not work as intended. If the next parameter is empty, Revit skips it and continues to the next parameter containing a value. However, if that parameter does not have the Break option enabled, the content remains on the same line. The proposed enhancement is for the Break option to define the tag layout independently of whether the following parameter contains a value or not. When a break is enabled, the next parameter  should always start on a new line, even when one or more parameters between them are empty. This would make tag composition more predictable and allow tags containing optional parameters to maintain a consistent layout without requiring multiple tag families or complex workarounds. Show More

• Real-World Requirements Conduit routes frequently change because of coordination, site conditions, equipment locations and cost-driven design changes. Designers need to adjust important XYZ positions along a conduit route without disconnecting the system and redrawing or reconnecting affected sections. • Current Revit Problem Changing the elevation of a conduit segment, fitting or connected item can move the entire connected system, including elements that are already correctly positioned. For example, where conduit connects two manifolds, changing the elevation of the first manifold will also move the conduit and the second manifold. To make a local adjustment, users may need to disconnect the system, reposition the required elements and then redraw or reconnect the conduit. • Proposed Solution Introduce an Edit Conduit Path mode using editable control points. Users should be able to: Adjust the X and Y position, reference level and offset of individual points. Keep selected endpoints, fittings or equipment fixed. Add or remove control points. Edit routes in plan, section, elevation or 3D. Maintain spacing when editing parallel conduit runs. When a point moves, Revit should automatically recalculate the affected conduit length, angle, bends and connections without moving correctly positioned elements. • Benefits This would make conduit modelling faster, reduce manual disconnection and redrawing, improve coordination and preserve conduit properties, connections and scheduling information. Show More

There should be back up of sheets from previous package of projects, so you can see what was published during DD or even post IFC without having to go through all of your files. these sheets can also highlight the changes that were made in the phases so you can easily identify where you need to place revision clouds. Show More

Currently in all Revit versions, anyone can use the Move command, with Disjoin option checked, to move and unpin any pinned model elements silently without any warnings. This does NOT align with Revit Help Documentation which states "when a modeling element is pinned, it cannot be moved. To move or delete it, the element must first be unpinned using the pushpin control."   This defect often causes pinned/protected model elements to be unexpectedly moved, unpinned, and potentially deleted. There is an old post from 2021 already talked about this issue.  https://forums.autodesk.com/t5/revit-architecture-forum/move-command-moves-pinned-elements/m-p/10745795#M96126   This introduces a big loophole in the project production workflow, and could cause rework and confusion in model submission. It also adds unnecessary challenges to the Digital Project Delivery workflow.    I highly recommend Autodesk Revit team fix this issue asap.  Show More

Fix Revit so that when I'm trying to do something, I don't get a list of 27000 things that could be wrong.  Tell me what's wrong so I can fix it.  Horrible program with the way it behaves.  Also while you're at it, give some good formatting options for text. Show More

In previous releases of Revit there was an options bar that automatically appeared when modeling piping. Here, you could type in the diameter, elevation, and hit apply a few times to easily create risers with all options being conveniently right next to each other. With the new release of Revit 2027, I asked the AI assistant how to make this menu appear and it said this feature was intentionally removed. Could this be added back in? I feel like it made life much easier.  Show More

Hello! Please add the ability to assign elevation marks to elements added to the project from the ReCap Mesh plugin. Show More

In workshared Revit models, certain settings that are effectively personal workspace preferences are shared between users through the project. As a result, engineers and designers frequently open a model only to find that aspects of their workspace have been changed by whoever worked in the model last. Examples include Project Browser expansion states, selected family types, and other session-specific workflow settings that do not affect the model, project standards, or deliverables. These settings provide little or no collaborative benefit when shared, yet they create daily workflow interruptions and force users to repeatedly restore their preferred working environment.   Autodesk should review which settings are currently shared through worksharing and move any non-project-critical, user-specific preferences to the local user profile. Settings that impact project standards, model content, or coordination should remain shared, while settings that only affect an individual's workflow should remain personal. This would reduce user frustration, improve productivity, and create a more consistent experience across multi-user projects. Show More

I'm currently making a lot of schedules for my job right now, and I'm struggling with some of the options for the Header or Footer filters you want to add.   Currently it shows : Title, Count, and Totals Title and Totals Count and Totals Totals Only Essentially what I'm trying to Accomplish Would be to Display Would be: The Family Showing Then Part Number Then The Individual Length of Each Piece The Item Number Then on The Footer Line ID like it to show: The Count (How Many of those pieces in total) Then Under the Length ID like it to Show to total length of all the count added up.   Then At the Bottom Id like To Display GRAND TOTAL of Number of all Count and ALL Lengths  Currently I use the Title, count, and Total And It gets pretty busy on the schedule. But currently its the only way I can keep the individual sizes on my schedule. If I only choose Count and Totals It Just Displays My total Length for All Pieces on the main and footer line for Length.  Thanks for your time and if there is a way to accomplish what I'm trying to accomplish I'm all ears! Show More

Basically anything that uses the sketch draw tools.   Show More

Let me register the following enhancement request on behalf of a customer: Add space parameter for lighting fixtures in Revit. Show More

Actualmente, al realizar modificaciones de terreno complejas o terraplenes detallados utilizando "Componentes in situ (Formas vacías)", Revit ejecuta el corte volumétrico 3D de manera correcta. Sin embargo, el programa falla al representar o proyectar las curvas de nivel sobre las nuevas caras inclinadas de la superficie modificada. La herramienta nativa "Excavar" está limitada a proyecciones verticales simples (basadas en suelos o cimentaciones), lo que nos obliga a usar Vacíos in situ para geometrías e inclinaciones complejas. Al hacerlo, perdemos la representación gráfica normativa en los planos de planta. Show More

When exporting sheets to DWG legend views should be ignored when determining the origin. The support article indicates "No issue has been identified and the software is behaving as designed." https://www.autodesk.com/support/technical/article/caas/sfdcarticles/sfdcarticles/Location-of-the-origin-in-an-exported-DWG-is-determined-by-a-legend-rather-than-a-model-view-in-Revit.html I cannot imagine a scenario where a legend view determining the origin of DWG in model space would be desired. As a result exported sheets have differing origins for the model in model space and DWGs cannot be reliable aligned. Show More

Can the "Autodesk Project" in the Revit homepage be listed above the "Recent" option as a default?     Show More

Structural analysis tools can determine whether a design is safe, but structural engineers still spend significant time manually reviewing utilization ratios, resizing members, evaluating cost impacts, updating BIM models, and repeating analyses until an optimal solution is found.  I would like to see an AI-powered structural optimization capability directly within Revit that can use structural analysis results (from Revit or connected analysis applications) to generate intelligent, explainable optimization recommendations.  Proposed workflow: Read structural analysis results. Analyze utilization ratios, internal forces, deflections, material quantities, costs, constructability constraints, and design-code requirements. Identify optimization opportunities across the entire model. Generate multiple optimization scenarios (minimum cost, minimum material, lowest carbon, faster construction, balanced design). Highlight affected elements directly in the Revit model using their unique element IDs. Estimate savings in material, cost, and embodied carbon. Provide explainable recommendations with confidence scores and validation requirements. Allow engineers to approve, reject, or modify recommendations. Re-run structural analysis to validate proposed changes before implementation.  For each recommended element, Revit could provide: Current and suggested dimensions Utilization ratios Expected material savings Cost reduction estimates Embodied carbon reductions Structural impact assessment Reason for the recommendation AI confidence score Verification status  This would transform Revit from a BIM authoring software into an Engineering Decision Intelligence software, helping engineers make faster, data-driven decisions while keeping the engineer fully in control of final approval. Show More