All Activity

Hi all, hoping someone's run into this. I keep getting a warning "Caution, stylus not qualified no. 5" The catch is my active stylus system only has one stylus, stylus 1. So there's no stylus 5 to qualify. The warning only pops up after I remeasure a feature, not on load or qualification. That makes me think a few features are carrying an old "stylus 5" assignment in their strategy how can i get rid of this?

Hello, My guess is that the sign is tied to the section/airfoil orientation rather than the global Z-axis direction.

Hey Zach, Please reach out to cic.metrology.us@zeiss.com to get a help ticket created and we will direct this to our accounts team to see what we can do for you.

Do this instead. Select the Actual Section - File - Export - Geometry - ASCII. The .ascii file it creates is just a txt file. You can use that however to your liking.

I'm looking to export a single section from an offset plane as a csv (i.e. the points that the section is made out of). When I go to Export -> Geometry -> CSV and click on the section, it says: An error occurred during executing the XSLT file. Choose or enter a delimiter. I then select Semicolon as my delimiter it then says: There is no valid element selected in the explorer. Please select exportable elements. This export format does not support element "Plane Y +5.000 mm". I have tried selecting the points of the element, just selecting the element, neither. But I can never enable the OK button.

@Richard Stanich You can use regex (regular expression) to enforce the length, allowed characters, and character positions and patterns of the desired string. Lets say the Work Order is exactly 10 characters, the first two characters are letters (perhaps WO), and the remaining 8 characters are numbers. In PowerShell, that snippet would look like this (copy into PowerShell ISE to test functionality): # Work Order format: # - Exactly 10 characters # - First 2 characters must be uppercase letters (A-Z) # - Last 8 characters must be digits (0-9) # Example: WO12345678 $WORegex = '^[A-Z]{2}[0-9]{8}$' do { $WorkOrder = Read-Host "Enter Work Order Number" if ($WorkOrder -cnotmatch $WORegex) { Write-Host "Invalid Work Order Number." -ForegroundColor Red Write-Host "Format must be 2 uppercase letters followed by 8 digits (Example: WO12345678)." -ForegroundColor Yellow } } until ($WorkOrder -cmatch $WORegex) Write-Host "Accepted: $WorkOrder" -ForegroundColor Green

Thanks Rich, what exactly should I be editing in the inspset file? Should I just be removing the entire line or replacing what's in the ' ' with something else? If for some reason this doesn't work. Is there an easy way to "copy" the features of the program into a new one? Thanks.

You could do something like this using the spring locator pin with 2 dowels. This could either be printed or machined at low cost. spring locator pins can be purchased on mcmaster-carr.

Hallo Manuell, Flasche hatte ich noch nicht. Demletzt hatte ich ein rotationssymetrisches Bauteil mit Gewinde und die Ausrichtung zum 3D-Modell war nur bedingt möglich, weil das Ist-Gewinde nicht genug Ähnlichkeit mit dem Sollgewinde hatte. Falls das bei dir möglich ist, würde ich erstmal einen Flächenvergleich auf Ist erstellen. Min/Max Abweichungsfähnchen .... Hier sollte die Fehlstelle gut sichtbar sein. Du könntest auch eine Kurve auf der Helix anlegen und als Linienprofil auswerten.

A good method is using curve create a segment that goes up and down the helix. Then output profile plot or curve form plot. Eine bewährte Methode besteht darin, mithilfe einer Kurve ein Segment zu erstellen, das entlang der Helix verläuft, und anschließend ein Profil- oder Kurvenformdiagramm auszugeben.

Does your question regarding "Undercut" refer to a company standard or a competitor evaluation? I´m asking because acc. to my experience "Undercut" is not what you showed in your sketch on the upper left side. I mean undercut in root relief zone means no allowance of +material. So for this reason starting with GEAR PRO 2024 the characteristic ffamax was introduced: For a better explanation I did some comments in your report as follows: Cf (grenn) is clear, depending from the settings in the GEAR PRO tab you get different intersection points for evaluating the amount of root relief. ffaCf (blue) is the form only in the root relief zone, in your case between 2.5 and 5.8. ffamax (red) is the "Undercut" characteristic as I think you are interested in. The regression element from the main evaluation zone (crowning) is extended and parallel shifted to the max material intersection. The distance is the value for ffamax. (Accordingly there exists ffamin which you can use for min material issues). The only think which does not fit to your sketch is the red marked case as ffamax will detect this as NOT OK: I´m not sure if this explanation helps you but maybe as a start for an internal discussion? Does anyone in the forum has other ideas or interpretation of undercut?

Hi Leute! 👋 Hat von euch schon mal jemand eine Helixbahn am Flaschenhals gescannt, um eine lokale Rille/Fehlerstelle als Formplot auszugeben? Eine einfache Geradheit bringt hier ja verfälschte Ergebnisse. Über welches Element/welche Messstrategie wertet ihr sowas am liebsten aus? Bin für jeden Tipp dankbar! Beste Grüße Manuel

I saw that yesterday, just got busy.

Agree. Calypso 2025 has been a disaster, especially for off-line simulation. Both of mine are still working poorly. I even replaced one of the confusers with a new one to see if that would help.

Chad, can't get the pictures to show. Is there a different way to post them?

Thanks guys for the comments but regarding the precision of the CAA version anyone have idea what kind of precision i can have with the CAA version using a angle that is not one of the 12 calibrated angles regarding the standard method that angle is calibrated using the function calibrate passive stylus?

I'm just trying to say that you'll never report an accurate radius using less than 60 degrees. In the pictures below, math will never let you fit a circle to the orange lines that accurately describes the radius. Consider using a radius gage.

Goodmorning, Unfortunately, I haven't had any luck for a few weeks now.

@Chad Watton using profile is the same like using constrained radius.

Joe is correct, this isn't a measurement strategy issue, its a math issue. You can't get an accurate diameter on short radii. There's several good white papers online that describe how much uncertainty you accumulate as you make your radius smaller. My analogy is this is like trying to calculate the circumference of the Earth by going out and measuring your parking lot. Would it be acceptable to use profile instead? A profile would ensure your radius is in the correct location and is the correct size.

Hello, Are you reports saving on a network drive? The most common issue for a "freeze" or delay, is network instability. To test this, move your results to the local drive and test.

What are you trying to accomplish? Preventing programs from running with a probe sigma outside of your chosen tolerance?

Is it just me? Have not been able to log in in over a week. It just gets stuck in a refresh loop and still says im logged out. Can log into forums okay still of course.

hello, here is the result with wedges and mid planes both NOK

The math for radiuses can get very weird.... 60 degrees is well into the zone where it can be just impossible for it to calculate a sensible radius.