All Activity

Pretty sure that I did but I'll try it again. Thank you.

Did you have "Cancel CNC start" selected and program saved before adding the measurement plan to Autorun? If not, and you selected this after you had already added the measurement plan to Autorun you may need to add it again.

In "Define and Activate Limit Values" I have "Maximum permissible time...." set for 2 days. In "Stylus check during CNC start" I have "Cancel CNC start" selected. In Calypso, we get a message when the probes haven't been calibrated within that time frame. In AutoRun, it doesn't give us a message. If I close AutoRun and start Calypso it immediately shows the message when opening a program. Do I need to set something up in AutoRun for it to work?

CMM positions and start/end park positions are sneaky places where probes can be assigned, but are not visible via the Plan Editor.

I have checked the obvious, Measurement Plan Editor, no entries shown. I did find entries in "inspec" and "inspection" files. Editing those entries caused some weird problems (Altered the entries to be Combo86R). 😂 inspec file: inspection file: I could not find an "#identifier" within plus or minus 30 lines of the "Combo86R-2" line.

Please note that while the issue was first observed following the installation of Windows 11 updates KB5077181 and KB5074105, all subsequent Windows updates released since then (early 2026) have exhibited the same behavior.

Have you checked which stylus is used under "Meaasurement Plan Editor Features"? Or are there any known position points that might have been misassigned?

I know that probe names show up in the inspection file if I search for them.

Have you checked the stylus system dropdown in the measurement plan editor features?

I have this one stubborn program, every time I open it, I am warned that a probe is not available. Combo86R-2 It is not used in the program; it has never been used in the program. Any ideas on how I may be able to find a rogue entry in some file?

@Richard Shomaker Well done. Yeah that has been a quirk/peeve of mine about position of cylinders. I would think Zeiss 'should' have a PCM attribute for result at each end of the cylinder. I no longer have access to PCM in my current role, otherwise I would love to dig. You could probably roll all this into a defineFunction() for ease of use later, etc. Have we put this in as a request in MyVoice ? If so let me know I'll be happy to vote it up. Nice work !

I believe you should be using a Spline filter for open curves/features and Gauss for closed loops. I'll let others respond on the best settings.

Hello, I am hoping to get some input on how best to use, or when to use a gaussian low pass filter on a 2D Curve. For some context, my organization does a lot of profile controls - for example all unspecified surfaces are typically controlled by a profile of .020 to DATUM A/B/C. The vast majority of our profile measurements are captured through 2D or 3D curves that are a combination of linear surfaces and radii. (Screenshot of feature below is an example of what our strategy may look like.) Up to this point we have not applied filter/outlier elimination to the features themselves, and typically just insert the raw data into a Line or Surface profile characteristic. After reading up a bit on the Gauss low-pass filter setting that can be turned on/off on our curves I believe it may be appropriate for us to start utilizing that setting at times. So here is my understanding of the usage. -The filter is used to smooth a profile to compensate for surface finish/roughness of material -A minimum of 7 points is required (question here from me is this per wavelength based on the Lc setting, or for the entire curve length?) -The wavelength cutoff setting (Lc) should be selected based on the expected roughness of the surface? (is the surface roughness conversion chart I have in a image below a good resource for selecting 'Cut-off length / Lc?' -What is the 'connect segments' setting is under the filter -In the third image below, is it appropriate to use this filter, on this specific curve when measuring it as a profile, and what should the specific settings be? The maximum allowed surface roughness is 125 (microinches) but will likely fall between 30-62 (microinches.) -Any suggestions on how or when to appropriately apply the Gauss, low-pass filter to a 2D curve feature that is measuring surface profile would be greatly appreciated..

Right now, I tell my operators to run the program as often as they can as they get free time. We have a lot of probe systems and it takes time to populate the database to the point you can detect trends. Then we examine any questionable probes under our microscopes. We have an AmScope and Leica microscopes. I would like to create a more formal system and put this on a set schedule. I have a written procedure and logbook ready to go for this; but I haven't implemented it yet. If you are using a database, you want to make sure your operators are labeling the correct probe. To help with this, I use PCM to pull the probe name and set record head, that way there is no way an operator can name it wrong. Something like this in the PreSettings: Probe=getProbe().confName +" "+ getProbe().probeName setRecordHead("u_IHI_Lot",Probe)

Hi zward, the GPU could be throttled because of overheating (of the PC) SW settings: Please check the Nvidia power settings. The profile should be "Dassault Systemes - V5 / 3DExperience" the windows power settings must not be at a energy saving If the problem persists, please contact your local support Get in touch with our team | ZEISS Industrial Quality Solutions Inspect should be on the newest Service Pack, too. Nanno

@Chad Watton Thanks! That all makes sense. I appreciate the extensive response. Maybe given your tolerance, it doesn't make sense to go down this route. Q-Mark does replace damaged stylus; these repair costs are a fraction of the cost of buying a new stylus. This is very interesting and a great idea! But it also makes the most sense once you dig a little deeper. The stylus arrives with a quantifiable form deviation. To predict/review trends, a baseline would be needed. Are you performing this stylus check as PM (preventive maintenance)? If so, what is your frequency? Or are you only performing this check as needed/before a qualifying inspection? We currently perform a quarterly stylus check as part of our PM, but our method could use improvement. Have you found a way to automate this process? I'm thinking something similar to the "Probing system qualification" characteristic function built into Calypso. This would allow you to select multiple styli. And assuming these styli are properly defined in your system, this could then be treated as a program and run in the background. Normal star stylus would have to be split into two sets; image below, where only red styli are checked against the current ref sphere orientation. But the output would be something more similar to Derek's program. I did not dig too deep into the program, but it appeared that the PCM only recalled the currently active stylus.

Hello, all, @Chris Rotolo was so kind to help me with the original formulas for pulling the actual .X/.Y from the Position Characteristic using the new GD&T engine. GDTPOS=getActual("GDT Position1").extendedProtocol.actualCoord.asArray GDTVAL=getParameterNamed(GDTPOS).first.asString GDTX=strElement(1,"@",GDTVAL) GDTY=strElement(2,"@",GDTVAL) message("X = "+GDTX+" Y ="+GDTY) I haven't used it much, but I have started to, and I'm running into some challenges that while I'm able to overcome it, man does my code get super long and complicated now. The challenge comes from when the Characteristic is measuring a Cylinder. A Cylinder has two points for evaluation (top and bottom). The StandardProtocol only shows the additional report for the worst case, but the formula above pulls both which leads to a challenge - how do you find the worst case? Well, the only way that I could figure it out is to essentially calculate the Position for both end-points, and then use an if statement to find which one is the worst. There were also some silly quirks with how the data is presented for the nominal coordinates vs the actual coordinates. Either way, would someone take a look at this code, and see what I could have done to improve it? //Nominal Defition Position #32-1 GDTPOS32_1_Nom=getActual("#32-1").extendedProtocol.nominalCoord.asArray GDTVAL32_1_Nom=getParameterNamed(GDTPOS32_1_Nom).asString GDTX32_1_Nom=strElement(1," ",GDTVAL32_1_Nom) GDTX32_1_Nom=mid(GDTX32_1_Nom,3) GDTX32_1_Nom1=abs(val(GDTX32_1_Nom)/25.4) GDTY32_1_Nom=strElement(2," ",GDTVAL32_1_Nom) GDTY32_1_Nom1=abs(val(GDTY32_1_Nom)/25.4) //Actual Defition Position #32-1 GDTPOS32_1_Act=getActual("#32-1").extendedProtocol.actualCoord.asArray GDTVAL32_1_Act1=getParameterNamed(GDTPOS32_1_Act).first.asString GDTVAL32_1_Act2=getParameterNamed(GDTPOS32_1_Act).second.asString GDTX32_1_Act1=strElement(1,"@",GDTVAL32_1_Act1) GDTX32_1_Act1_1=abs(val(GDTX32_1_Act1)/25.4) GDTX32_1_Act2=strElement(1,"@",GDTVAL32_1_Act2) GDTX32_1_Act2_1=abs(val(GDTX32_1_Act2)/25.4) GDTY32_1_Act1=strElement(2,"@",GDTVAL32_1_Act1) GDTY32_1_Act1_1=abs(val(GDTY32_1_Act1)/25.4) GDTY32_1_Act2=strElement(2,"@",GDTVAL32_1_Act2) GDTY32_1_Act2_1=abs(val(GDTY32_1_Act2)/25.4) //Deviation Defition Position #32-1 GDTX32_1_Dev1_1=GDTX32_1_Act1_1 - GDTX32_1_Nom1 GDTX32_1_Dev2_1=GDTX32_1_Act2_1 - GDTX32_1_Nom1 GDTY32_1_Dev1_1=GDTY32_1_Act1_1 - GDTY32_1_Nom1 GDTY32_1_Dev2_1=GDTY32_1_Act2_1 - GDTY32_1_Nom1 //Position Defition Position #32-1 GDTX32_1_Pos1=(2*(sqrt((squared(GDTX32_1_Dev1_1))+(squared(GDTY32_1_Dev1_1))))) GDTX32_1_Pos2=(2*(sqrt((squared(GDTX32_1_Dev2_1))+(squared(GDTY32_1_Dev2_1))))) //Comparison Defition Position #32-1 if (GDTX32_1_Pos1 > GDTX32_1_Pos2) GDTX32_1=GDTX32_1_Act1_1 GDTY32_1=GDTY32_1_Act1_1 else GDTX32_1=GDTX32_1_Act2_1 GDTY32_1=GDTY32_1_Act2_1 endif

Hallo zusammen, gibt es mit PCM die Möglichkeit nach dem leeren des CAD Fensters mittels clearCAD() die Geometrieelemente einzublenden? Quasi die Funktion des Buttons:"Zeige alle Geometrieelemente im CAD"

Danke dir Nanno,ich werde das bestimmt ausprobieren.Mal sehen wie wird das funktionieren.Ich gebe dir Bescheid. Imrich

Hallo Imrich, man kann den Augmented Reality Mode unten in der Werkzeugleiste aktivieren. Der Modus zeigt verschiedene Inspektionen in 2D und das verwendete Gerät muss sich an Referenzpunkten am Messaufbau orientieren. Das müsste vermutlich auch mit einer 3D-Brille funktionieren, wenn sich die Brille orientieren kann (=Kameras hat). Die Ansicht ist aber soweit ich weiß auf 2D begrenzt. Ich zeige die Anfrage auf jeden Fall der Entwicklung. 3D Brillen sind ja mittlerweile weit verbreitet. Nanno

Thanks everyone for the help. Much appreciated! I got everything going. Here's some information in case anybody else is setting up a rack for the XXT in the future. The plates can only store in the rack in one orientation with the 2 gold connectors being at the back of the probe pocket. With the rack being at the end of the machine in Y+ the XXT angle is A90B0 to store the probe. I actually didn't even have that angle/orientation as an option for my probes, so I added it to each of my probe calibrations. Then you just select A90B0 as your angle to go to after calibration. Since it's already at that orientation after it picks up the probe, it directly rotates to the angle of the feature being measured next. If your rack is mounted on the side of the machine, you would just change you're angle after calibration to whatever it uses to access the rack.

Hallo ich hätte eine Frage an euch: Kann man in der Software Zeiss Inspect eine 3D-Brille anschließen,um eine Zusammenbau der Karosse zu darzustellen?Danke . Imrich

I would incline to STEP version as AI suggested. If you have something like Total Commander to view RAW file you can find at beggining a version of that file. I had same problem with SAT file, where SW was storing it in version 34 ( i think ) and for our old Calypso i was able to open only version 27. I viewed both files and saw that header version. Unless you have problem even with files which were working before.

While testing to make sure everything was working the same in 2025 vs 2022 after installing the t-hawk 2 license, the 3D view within the project was skipping all over the place/ lagging while scanning around the part and this "GPU slow" icon popped up. Hardware rendering is enabled as it should be. I created a new measuring device configuration after installing the new t-hawk 2 license, as well as calibrated with the panel/hyperscale. The nvidia drivers are up to date, and windows is set to force the GPU as the rendering device. The only thing i'm noticing that may be an issue (i might be wrong) is that the inspect 2025 is showing both T Scan Hawk and T-Scan Hawk 2 tabs. Is the original t-hawk license somehow interfering with the new scanning? Any help is appreciated. Thank you

thanks Zak - this is the log file