All Activity

Right click here on them to change them into not workpiece (blue is workpiece). Should prevent merging.

That is disappointing and sad. My workaround currently is deleting and reloading the CAD model. Super-efficient.

They make mold material with extremely low shrinkage rates.

I was able to compare ATOS 5 vs Accura on same part using curves. I've exported nominal points from curve into csv and then imported into Inspect. Then i did intersection with mesh and from those points i did discreet cloud point. Then i did surface profile and instead of mesh i've selected this cloud - result differed 0,01mm on profile ( doubled worst devaiation - so 0,005mm ). I also tried to make 1:1 base alignment - so i was pretty satisfied with result ( having in mind part is sand blasted and was not used any spray ).

I'm doing tests to see the difference between Zeiss Inspect and Calypso calculations, so I'm wondering if I can replicate such Calypso evaluation methods like lines on the cylinder, or several circle sections. For example, I created the cylinder lines from two perpendicular, longitudinal sections, and then I created the circle sections with multisection. From the circles I can calculate diameter, but I don't know how to take the combined arithmetic mean of all of them, or create a cylinder from them. Also, I don't know how to extract a diameter or cylinder form the created lines. Is this possible at all? Or is it recommended to stay with the simple cylinder creation - diameter check?

Calypso will merge your entire model into one model the second you try to capture geometry from it. The only sane way is to assume it will be merged. (I have been told you can exempt things from merging by setting the Workpiece/Workarea flag but I cannot seem to figure it out..... )

Here is what i do for editing part of a curve: make new curve with correct model remove all points except for needed area open old curve and remove points from needed area import new points from curve into old curve. cut and paste new points into correct position. I am not sure if you can open new curve and copy points and then past into another curve. For removing and point modifying you click "Arrow" button under clearance group "CP +Z" Then you have to modify segment data ( i recommend showing all points with numbers ). Also note - if you have masked points, then you have to disable it before point modification.

ATOS 5 is about 880mm acording to Gemini ATOS 5 Airfoil is about 530mm ATOS 5X i also about 880mm So you may be out of focus on this. Airfoil has ability to better scan sharp turbine blades - i would suggest to try contacting ZEISS or reseller and ask for presentation or visit a company to show what types of part it is capable of measuring. Also note to calculate correct measurement volume - it can be bought later, but switching between them means new calibration and more time, than using correct volume. There is also version of ScanBox, which can be automatized with better control of angle scan of certain area.

I have a program that has a 3-D scan of the perimeter of the part that has an update to its configuration. How do I change the segment that is changed in the 3-D Curve feature? The attached screenshot is showing the nominal points of the old version and the cad model of the updated. The program was written by a colleague in Germany who is not available for assistance. Thank you!

I have read about molds, but i fear about shrinkage - customer stated NOK with thread caliper, our caliper was on edge but ok. But our machining is done by 3rd party, so we need some measurement aand numbers to show - they are stubborn 😞

Sorry, but this is not reliable - we are facing potential problem, where thread caliper is not fitting ( small thread ). So we need to measure thread directly - also part itself is a little problematic how to catch thread axis - part putted on a side to have thread in +Z will have tilt about 1° due draft angles. For measuring thread position it's already used like that ( bigger sphere with self centering into thread )

You can also do this by modifying a report, but it is limited on what header fields get saved into the output. https://portal.zeiss.com/knowledge-base?id=513250

Please follow these steps: Open PiWeb Reporting Plus Inside of PiWeb Reporting Plus, the Columns on the Left Hand side are your measurement plans. You can scroll to find the one you are looking for, or you can search for it in the top left window. Please scroll down and find the measurement plan you are looking for – select it. Right click on the measurement plan, and select Show measurements. When the Edit measurements dialogue opens, either select all the data (as shown) or shift click the particular data set you are looking for (you will see time stamps) Once your data set is selected, click on the measured values button as shown below. When the Measured value dialogue is open, first make sure “Show measurement attributes” and “Show characteristic attributes” are turned on – this is a one time thing, so the next time you select data they will already be turned on. Click on the Export measured value table button as shown below. It will prompt you asking where you want to save the data. You will need to know how to use PivotTables inside of Excel. Let me know of any issues or concerns.

I have had some success using molds of internal threads and then checking them on a vision system or optical comparator. Depending on how small and class of thread you are working with it may be a lower cost option and you may be able to avoid destructive testing on parts. I have passed government first article inspections by basically digitally recreating the three-wire method on our vision system and measuring the thread mold. Here is the mold kit we use but there may be much more cost effective options. Here is kind of a basic how-to on how to get started using molds for threads measurements.

I'm coming across an odd bug, not sure if others have encountered it. I have a model assembly. In the hierarchy, I can see all the individual models, and I have the ability to hide or reveal any component I want. However, when I use the CAD-create feature tool, Calypso merges everything into one model. Is there a workaround? Calypso 2025 version 8.0.08

there is another alternative son the link bellow https://www.victoryprogramming.com/post/calypso-tip-7-naming-conventions-2-stylus-systems

Hi, looks like the triple scan has a shorter working distance. Do you have space left to bring the sensor further up on that thing?

This is why the new position characteristic makes you select ASME/ISO/LOOSE. It is automatically ensuring compliance with the selected standard and at ALL OTHER TIMES you must account for evaluation manually

My Monday brain led me astray of your question.

I use a similar naming convention on RDS and XT, XTR sensors. Only one caveat, the number one stylus would be 1 A0B0 (Using your examples), number 2 "2 A90B-65". Or your naming: 1 0_0 2 90_-65 Basically, just adding the stylus number indicating the stylus used within Calypso (Calypso doesn't care about the name, it's all about the index number). I have not had any issues with measuring results or qualification.

Richard, Thanks for the description how to calibrate a disc stylus. The issue is not the calibration or using the stylus in physic. It’s simply a question of how to use a button like this in the Planner. In the Button Builder, I can create the button using generic geometries. With the generic button, I can define the flat sides of the button. If I change the radius to 7 mm, I can only use the radius and no longer the flat sides, as a partially invisible sphere with a diameter of 14 is defined.... We need a reliable method in Planner to simulate a disc stylus with both contact surfaces. Just like a real disc stylus..

I tried the TrenProtocol, and it is close to what I need, but engineers would like to see the raw data as an excel or csv file. I can export into Excel for each individual part. 1 part, 1 excel file. What I need to do is figure out how to save all the parts ran with the same program into the same excel file. Each part with it's own row, and headers. Can someone help me figure it out? I do not have pcm, and I'm not allowed to run python scripts on the computer. How do I do this with just PiWeb Reporting Plus?

I can export into Excel for each individual part. 1 part, 1 excel file. What I need to do is figure out how to save all the parts ran with the same program into the same excel file. Each part with it's own row, and headers. Can someone help me figure it out? I do not have pcm, and I'm not allowed to run python scripts on the computer. How do I do this with just PiWeb Reporting Plus?

Hi, we are discussing upgrade options and we want to go from old Atos III triple scan [1] to Atos 5 [2] or Atos 5 Airfoil [3]. Our tilt, swivel, lift unit [1] is still working well, but so far we've got short answer from supplier, that it isn't compatible with Atos 5. Can someone comment on this? [1] - https://youtu.be/eKYCgn1L6yY?t=29 [2] - https://www.zeiss.com/metrology/en/systems/optical-3d/3d-scanning/atos/atos-5.html [3] - https://www.zeiss.com/metrology/en/systems/optical-3d/3d-scanning/atos/atos-5-for-airfoil.html

All you have left to do is change the radius value. After you change the value, calibrate the disc with a Ring Gage then edit the Radius value to match. For using the upper or lower plane surfaces as contact points, I calibrate my Disk styli with a custom program that uses the Reference Sphere. This allows me to control all three axes. When using the Disk, you will have to manually calculate the difference from center of the disk (It is treated as a sphere) to the surface used for probing, I also use this method in my programs. Most reported values I use a Result Element and calculate the difference. When I use this method, I always use one quadrant of the disk (Let's say 3 O'clock) and only about .02" (inch) of depth from the outer radius of the disk due to the disk is never perfectly normal to the surface being probed. All results are verified in some form of a manual measurement and the Result Element adjusted as needed.