All Activity

Move mouse to the end of line from window of your 1st picture ( there is "?" on top ) It will show you what needs to be written

@Martin Krüger Can you post a sketch how your report should look like? Thanks

Hallo alle zusammen, ich versuche gerade den Protokollkopf anzupassen, allerdings bekomme ich es nicht hin, dass die Zeichnungsnummer und der Bauteilname angezeigt werden. Vordefiniert und angewählt sind sie, aber es erfolgt keine Ausgabe auf dem Protokoll. Das Feld Auftrag funktioniert hingegen. Was muss ich im PiWeb-Editor bei Zeichnungsnummer und Bauteilname eingtragen? MfG, Micha

Danke für die Hilfe, aber das ist nicht wirklich praktikabel. Ich weiß auch nicht wirklich, ob die Vorgehensweise auch nur annähernd meinen Wunsch erfüllt. Also ich würde gerne in Spalte 1 alle Stufen untereinander haben (am besten mit dem vergebenen Stufennamen) In Spalte 2 dann die Messwerte von Maß 1 In Spalte 3 dann die Messwerte von Maß 2 usw. Also so ähnlich wie die Vorlage "Statistic RPS" nur halt die Zeilen und Spalten getauscht

Hallo, weiß jemand zufällig wo man den Datensatz für die 3fach (620161-8510-000) oder 1fach (620161-8511-000)Taster Ablage für VAST XXT findet. Ich habe zwar im Installation Pfad bei Zeiss welche gefunden aber nicht die richtige. Vielen Dank für eure Hilfe.

Hi, you can use only pre-alignment if you have good quality of parts - bended and differentiating mesh against CAD model can lead to bad pre-alignment and your nominal elements may be not calculated. Many drawings have RPS and other datum definitions, so you may need alignments or at least datum systems. While using heat map of deviations you want them to be stable, so you would need to make main alignment for that. Also you would like to know what those deviations are teling you. If you have bended parts, then you would need for calculations of elements bestfitting - which will bring mesh closer to nominal element and allow calculation. While you ask for this type of question i would ask with what measuring machine you have knowledge. We are using here ScanMaxes, so to get comparable results we had to use geometry norm instead of ISO/ASME. Also i would suggest training - it's not that simple how it looks - you may have wrong results at reports due overlooked method.

Hi, No, PiWeb does not provide a variable for the automatically generated protocol index. The index "(1)", "(2)", "(3)", etc. is only appended to the filename during PDF export by CALYPSO/PiWeb and is not available within the protocol templates. Solution: If you need the index in the protocol, you can define a custom variable and maintain it manually. What is your specific use case?

Hi All, I have a general question regarding alignments in ZEISS INSPECT. In my workflow, I use Pre-Alignment to initially bring the CAD model and the mesh into the same coordinate system. After achieving a good pre-alignment, is it always necessary to create a Main Alignment as well? I would like to understand: What is the specific purpose of a Main Alignment compared to a Pre-Alignment? In which situations is a Main Alignment mandatory or recommended? If pre-alignment works fine, could those evaluations be used with confidence? I would appreciate any guidance or best practices regarding when to use Pre-Alignment only versus when a Main Alignment should be added. Thanks in advance for your help!

Wenn die Bohrung in einer flachen Ebene liegt, könntest du statt eines selbstzentrierenden Punktes versuchen, mit einem größeren Taststift eine Linie mit sehr hoher Punktezahl über die Bohrung hinweg zu scannen. Dann wertest du die Min-Koordinate der Linie aus, wobei du die Sollinie als Referenz auswählst. Achte darauf, keine Ausreißereleimination o.ä. zu aktivieren. Da der Taststift beim Scannen ein wenig in die Bohrung eintaucht, bekommst du mit dem tiefsten Punkt recht genau die Mittenkoordinate. Du kannst ggf. auch noch eine Linie 90 Grad dazu scannen, um X/Y-Koordinaten zu haben.

@Martin Krüger Hi, so i was testing something and only option would be making an element with defined name. Then editing table formating. You can do it easier way to have named column ( like: Nominal | Stage 1 | Stage 2 ) where "Stage 1" will be name of stage. Or harder way, where you would need to remember that you do it by a point. Steppes: create a point and principle set as copy as measured name that point as "STAGE" use "User defined check" without tolerance and save it as it is go to table editing edit field for actuals have this formula: contains (name, "STAGE")?stage.name:scalar_value == INVALID or result_dimension.is_vectorial?stage.name:format(result_dimension.measured_value, "+", show_unit=false) This will show name of stage name if name of element contains text "STAGE" Or you can place this "STAGE" name into keywords or comment ( change "element_keywords" to "comment" contains (str (element_keywords), "STAGE")?stage.name:scalar_value == INVALID or result_dimension.is_vectorial?stage.name:format(result_dimension.measured_value, "+", show_unit=false) Main condition is this:

UPDATE: Calypso program editor Direct link: (v0.3-alpha) https://github.com/justyand/zeiss_pgm_editor/releases/tag/v0.3-alpha Changelog: corrected parsing, changed UI, added Characteristic, Feature ListView and program Header.

Anyone else having issues connecting to their T-SCAN Hawk 2 since the latest round of Win11 updates? I've tried about everything I can think of, and the best I can get is the Measuring Device Setup sees the sensor, but I get an error when you try to connect. Kind of frustrating because it was working flawlessly before the updates that got pushed on 7/16.

Ivan Servin.2 might be on to something with "Own Geometry" option. The stylus will enter the hole, probe 4 points and determine its location. Then it will measure the hole. I set this example to 4 points, "Own Geometry" will probe 4 points initially prior to actual measurement. The "Search path" would have to be a small value, I would say about the same as the hole size to start. P.s. Don't forget to set a retract value small enough to allow the stylus to enter the hole. Own geometry option.mp4

Anything is possible with PCM. 🙂

If you would use some sort of fixture with ref. points, then you can create a program where it will select box for each part. Also there is an python app for OCR, you just select picture to read it - i have no success with this.

Is there a way in ZEISS INSPECT for the software to automatically recognize the cavity ID of scanned parts and then sort accordingly? Ideally, I'd like to scan eight parts at once, have the software identify and arrange them by cavity number (1 through 8), and then generate a PDF report with the cavities listed in that order?

Eww, good luck not breaking a stylus. I think the self-centering point would have been a good idea. If this were on a fixed-head sensor, I would have used a slightly larger stylus for a self-centering point. This would localize these holes and prevent any misalignment when using the smaller (0.3mm) stylus. This would be great, especially since you have so little clearance between the stylus and the hole. By chance, do you have any broken 0.3mm stylus with the stem still intact? I will sometimes use these 0.2mm stems to localize patterns before measuring with a 0.3mm stylus. The qualification would work similarly to a cylinder stylus. Zeiss also offers a 0.25mm stylus for Vast XXT sensors. I would consider this to increase the clearance between the stylus and the hole. Other sites offer a 0.2mm stylus. I would be less concerned about the stated stylus min and more concerned about the qualification results. And, I would also use some additional settings when measuring this first 0.4mm hole. I would use the Own Geometry option under the Meas. Ref tab in the Projection settings. Then, for the latter holes, I would use the Feature option in the same tab and relate them to the first hole.

Is there a way to run a .xml that can read the number of decimal places in the nominal and give the tolerance based off that value? Example conditions below: 3 place decimals: +/-.005 2 place decimals: +/-.01 Angles: +/- 1.0

If you select mesh, you can create evenly distributed points, which can be used for material thickness. Construct -> Distance -> Material distance Construct -> Point -> Equidistant points -> Surface points evenly Using CAD model would be better option

Let's say you can place User defined value. Perhaps this can be added to report just like dimensions. That would be as you described. But i can not check that until monday

Hi Martin; thanks for your research... No documentation. It took me a few attempts to even work out that the file index ´(x).pdf’ refers to the order of the defined protocols. So I need to open a call to Zeiss PiWeb experts in hope there is an (undocumented) feature...

I did not find anything. No info in Calypso program and no info in PiWeb. There is no text "PiWeb reporting" so it can not be renamed even manually

Moin, Wir haben mehrere PiWeb Protokolle für eine Messung. Z.B. Fertigung, Kunde, Übersicht ,Kurzform, Merkmalsgruppe X usw. Manche werden nur angezeigt, manche wiederum als pdf abgelegt. In der Endung zu *.pdf wird von CALYPSO/PiWeb automatisch die Nummer des protokolls aus der Auswahl "Definition Mehrfachprotokolle" hinzugefügt. Am Ende des Dateinamens wird dann "(1).pdf" für das erste Protokoll und "*(3).pdf" für das dritte Protokoll als Endung angefügt. Gibt es eine Variable in PiWeb die diesen index zur Verfügung stellt? Danke und Gruß Karsten

I found that using "edit_creation_parameters" is more uniformly than using "edit_properties" Here is example of editing creation parameters for diameter of a circle and TP of a circle with editing only tolerance gom.script.sys.edit_creation_parameters ( element=gom.app.project.inspection['Kružnice 1.Ø'], tolerance={'lower': -0.5, 'tolerance_type': 'two_sided_center', 'upper': 0.6}) gom.script.sys.edit_creation_parameters ( element=gom.app.project.inspection['Kružnice 1.Poloha'], tolerance=1.2) Here is example of edit properties - there is tolerance named differently - tol_dimension / tol_gdat gom.script.sys.edit_properties ( data=[gom.app.project.inspection['Kružnice 1.Ø']], tol_dimension_lower=-0.9, tol_dimension_lower_warn=0.0, tol_dimension_upper=0.9, tol_dimension_upper_warn=0.0, tol_dimension_use_lower=True, tol_dimension_use_upper=True, tol_dimension_use_warn_level=False, tol_template='') gom.script.sys.edit_properties ( data=[gom.app.project.inspection['Kružnice 1.Poloha']], tol_gdat_upper=1.4, tol_template='')