Multileader Landing Distance Changes to Apparent Random Value (e.g. -8"±)

[coopdetat]

I'm having a frequent but random problem with Multileaders where the landing distance will change on its own from its initial standard 1/8 inch to some relatively large negative distance which also causes the landing to disappear altogether. If I use the move trick for resetting all elevations to zero (Move 0,0,10e99 then 0,0,10e-99) the landing will reappear connecting the landing grip at the strange negative offset.

The problem seems only to happen when the leader is connected to the bottom right of the note.

When I remove the leader and add a new leader it appears correct but as soon as I save the drawing the affected Multileaders will again present this problem.

 Does anyone have a clue how to prevent this?

[gr8gonzo0]

This only happens when the leader is attached to the bottom line of the text. Change your style to have the leader attached to the top line. It is a cleaner look and will solve your problems.

[cadtech1986]

Unfortunately our standards are set up to have all text left-align (whether text is to the left or to the right of the mleader), otherwise I would follow your suggestion, or at least have text set to right-align in this situation.

Surely there must be a solution to this, since the option exists in mleader settings:

It took a long time for me to convince the the office to start using mleaders instead of plain qleaders and text, and this is becoming a handicap in our workflow.

[coopdetat]

The standard placement of leaders comes from the earlier days of drafting before CADD.  (I prefer two D's as I believe it is still important to acknowledge both the Design and the Drafting functions that our Computers are Assisting us with... they are different.)

It has been a long established industry-wide drafting standard that leaders should come from the top left or bottom right of a note.  In other words, from the beginning or the end of the note.

It was difficult to layout a note right-justified using pen and ink on a drafting board; therefore, the standard was left-justified for all notes as a matter of practicality.  The companies that I have worked for have a long history and established their standards before computers offered easy methods of accomplishing previously difficult things.  I was taught these standards in both high school and technical school drafting classes before there was CADD.  Since then there has been no compelling reason to change the traditional leader attachment standards.

As for solving this problem in AutoCAD, I wrote a lisp routine to fix the problem for our company.  When it happens our users run the routine and select the offending Multileader(s) which are then conformed to our standard.

I am using AutoCAD C3D 2014

I would be happy to share it.  Since my programming method uses many common subroutines I would need to package it into a ZIP file to include the subroutines.  (If I packaged it in a VLX file it could not be modified to match your Multileader style.)

[Miguelito5]

I'm having a similar problem.  Attached is the dwg. illustrating my Landing Gap issue.  Any help would be greatly appreciated.  

To make the problem occur, just change the text style in properties from STANDARD to any other style and then back to STANDARD.  For whatever reason this landing gap simply will not work right.  

Thanks in advance.

I'm using AutoCAD 2015, Windows 7