problems with viewbase

[Anonymous]

hi 

I am working with autocad 2016 creating ga's of building structures.

all of the parts are xrefs with detail layouts

my problem occurs when i need to change things a little, say extend a column and move a baseplate.

i alter the column xref and reload it in the main dwg, move the base plate.

then when i go back to paper space and update the viewbase, the view now shows the new baseplate shaded as it should, and also shows the old baseplate position not shaded.

I have had this problem of showing historical objects in viewbase layouts. i have tried generating a new viewbase but they are still there. ive tried deleating the layout creating a new one then generating a new viewbase but they sill persist?

the main file size is about 24mb.

im running on windows 10 and running all the updates available for autocad?

any help on how i can recover these viewbases would be very helpful as the last time i encountered this problem i ended up redrawing the whole assembly in a fresh drawing.

thanks in advance 

[Anonymous]

Hi John,

Yes, there are other dynamic blocks in the model. The screwjacks (adjustable feet) are also dynamic. However, we had this issue before I made any of our blocks dynamic.

[justin]

I have the same type of problem and have tracked it down to one issue that I can recreate and correct nearly 100% of the time.  I still consider this a work around but it does seem to work fairly consistently for me so I hope it helps some others.

On my machine I have observed the following:

Any mirrored block will have Properties under Geometry where Scale X,Y or Z is -1.0000.

Some blocks with this Geometry will break the VIEWBASE view and fail to be illustrated.

So far this appears to be more likely with blocks created in previous versions of AutoCAD but to this point I cannot be certain it is only those blocks.

Mirroring the block again around its own axis of symmetry (if possible) and removing the original resets the Scale X,Y, or Z to a positive value.

Alternately, you could manually change the negative SCALE factor to positive and then move the block to where it needed to be, if the geometry allows.

At this point all my views were fixed.

By going through a drawing and reorienting all of the offending blocks, including those nested inside other blocks, I have managed to correct this issue in all single drawings I have tried.

To correct this issue in drawings with XREFs that are flawed, unloading and then reinserting the fixed drawing is the only way that I have had success so far.

It does not appear that a good source file will dynamically update properly once the view fails in an XREF.

Perhaps it's a bit tedious but it's working so far.

Avoiding mirroring blocks in the meantime is probably the way to go.

As an aside, VIEWSECTION and VIEWDETAIL seem to work properly regardless of the parent view if they are taken in locations that do not include the offending block.

I was able to perform this fix on the drawing provided by @Anonymous.

The lower bracket (AP-332A-...) on each diagonal brace exhibits this inverted scale problem.

Removing it for expediency, in this case, seemed to fix the problem completely.

Hopefully this helps or at least gives everyone a bit more to go on.

Thanks,

Justin

[bencrop]

Thank you Justin for finding the secret to our frustrating error.  Seeing that imported blocks or other x-refs have "Properties under Geometry where Scale X,Y or Z is -1.0000."  I tried my own fix and it worked like a charm.  Dirty, but it keeps me moving.

Make sure all layers are active...

• Select All Objects
• Scale to a factor of 1.0001
• Since I am working in architectural scales, this does no change my dimensions.

I hope this helps.

Ben

[Famaice]

Hi,

Viewbase is an essential command when working with 3D model but...The problem is still present in 2023.

I still often encounter this problem with Autocad 2023, regardless of the use of 3D model, block or Xrefs. This leads to wasted time and productivity, and undermines lon-term confidence in the reliability of AutoCAD.
I guess the development team had other priorities since then. But perhaps it is finally time to look at this problem again. don't you think ?
Regards