Revolved Sections are not allowed in the ASME Y14.41-2012 Standard, Digital Product Definition Data Practices, (Mandatory Appendix I, Section 3.6(b)(6)) and ASME Y14.3-2012 Standard, Orthographic and Pictorial Views, (Section 188.8.131.52(c)), and as such, 3D Revolved Sections aren't supported in PMI to my knowledge.
I am curious though, can you provide some information about why you need a Section View to define a Diameter? Doesn't the 3D Geometrical Topography of the Model define the Basic Diameter? If you need to apply some tolerance, wouldn't it be better to apply an appropriate GD&T FCF to the applicable surface on the model?
You can apply Profile Tolerance controls on diametral features...
Hope that helps. If I'm missing the mark, please explain with some more detail (if possible, a picture is worth a thousand words ) so I'll be able to better understand your issue.
@JTMeeks is right. You can refer the standard ASME Y14.41-2012 or ISO 16792. Lot of depend upon what is your intent/ design requirement. It's always good to ensure the clarity about it. Even your client must have following some standard. You should talk to them and have the clear picture about it.
A revolved section view is a drawing convention introduced to reduce the number of views on a drawing sheet and/or drawing package. The geometry in a view is distorted to display sections on either side of a axis. As has been mentioned by others this is not supported by 3D Annotation Standards; however, the result can be acheived in 3D by creating two individual planar section views.
I understand you are not able to show customer data, but perhaps if you are able to provide a simplified example of the dimension you are not able to produce we can offer some advice.
Thanks Henrik. As you know I’m always open to listen to input; however, I am reluctant to invest in enhancements that appear to solely mimic drawing-based workflows. A revolved section view seems to fall into this category; however, if you or anyone else can help to convince me why this is important and how it supports your Model Based Definition strategy I am certainly open to listen. Thank you.