All Activity

Hello! I was recently informed that my company will be investing in planner and simulation so i can make programs while the CMMs are running. To prepare i have been trying to create the probe models off of stylus system creator. Creating the probe models has gone well so far, but one probe setup i cannot find in the drop down menu and there is no documentation to confirm exactly what it is (the setup was created before i started working here) so i measured it and used the generic setups to create it. Which leads to my main question, how can i be sure the placement of the styli on the model, is the same as the placement of the actual styli? I'm not very confident in the way i measured it, so I'm expecting it to be a little bit off. How off can it be for planner before it would start to cause issues? Is there a way to measure distances on the probe model, which i could then hard check to ensure it is the right probe setups? I have just been going off of measurement and looks in order to find these builds since i have no records from my predecessors on what parts were used, so its likely that i selected the wrong one, and I'm worried that it can mess up programs i create via planner/simulation. I will likely be asking more questions about planner/simulation once i actually have it in front of me so any advice is appreciated, thank you!

I would try one of the following: 1. Qualify the camera as a tactile stylus https://portal.zeiss.com/knowledge-base?id=444229 2. Run the TOA program for the affected zoom level, then follow up with the chrome-dot plate 3. Re-create the camera stylus from scratch, starting with the TOA program, followed up with the chrome-dot, and run the TOA once more.

Hi Richard, When you define a plane you have x, y, z and a1, a2. i attached a picture for example . the file you shared is is awesome ! I will try to convert it manually but maybe someone how to proceed automatically in calypso.

7.500 OD , but 5.0mm pro will hit the 11.500 OD. 0.2mm pro will fit well, But can I use 500 Gauss Filter and 4250 points on 0.2mm pro to measure 7.500 OD.

thanks for the help, Richard and Martin.

There is a small (.060 deep x 1.25" long) notch that separates the two planes of Datum A. We machine the entire surface of Datum A with a shell mill prior to any other machining, so I am not too concerned with the "2 SURFACES" being within tolerance.

Did you ever find a solution for this? I'm running into this exact problem with out o-inspect

Correct me if I'm off target, but I think a plane will report in ZX XY, or ZY, XY, etc (A1 and A2) and not vectors like a Point. How ever, you should be able to convert the plane A1 and A2 values to vectors online or maybe this excel file will be of help. I don't recall who the author is. Direction Vector Calculator.xls

Your FCF appears to want "Reference plane in each zone" as shown by "1.00x1.00". Reference Plane in Each Zone = .001 per 1.00 × 1.00 Any local 1.00" × 1.00" inspection area must fit within two parallel planes separated by 0.001. This could also mean sometimes you can't construct a 1.00x1.00 zone, maybe you get a .75x1.00 zone, etc. Each zone as closely related to 1.00x1.00 is treated the same. I don't recall having to use the other method. But it seems like each 1.00x1.00 segment must be within ±.0005 within the entire surface used, not just per segment. Another note: The note "A 2 SURFACES" suggests the flatness may apply to two surfaces considered together. You should get clarification on that. This may force you to use the latter description which I believe is stricter than each segment individually.

I don't know which one to use, but i got to an explanation: Refference plane in each zone: You evaluate each zone independently - each zone has it's own tilt ignoring others Refference overall plane: It's determined one common plane and then each zone is evaluating only MIN/MAX point inside it's zone ( no tilt per zone )

How do you decide which option to use?

Citing manual

What's the difference between "Reference plane in each zone" and "Reference overall plane"

This may also be helpful information for future reference. https://carl-zeiss-industrial-metrology-llc.helpjuice.com/zeiss_inspect/zeiss-inspect2026-extending-the-measuring-volume-with-zeiss-t‑scan-hawk-2/version/1?kb_language=en_US

Go to profile on zeiss portal and edit your location to USA - then relogin

If you don't have "Flatness ref." then i affraid it will be hard. I think it is in 2018. On newer versions it's added even for curves

Does anyone remember a post about compatibility settings? I can't find it.

In the picture below, how would i report the |Flatness|.001/1.00 x 1.00|? In the second pic, you can see the scanning paths I used.

CALYPSO: How To Install a CALYPSO Patch

Noted Bug Fixes: DOWNLOAD LINK

Yes you need both

Hi Bruce, what are the conditions to access this knowledge base? I just realised again, that i somehow don`t meet the requirements I get "page not found" with links that seem to work for other people.

Hi everybody, I have a workpiece to measure but don't have any CAD model of the part, and then no nominal vectors. I would like to know if it was possible to extract the normal vector of a plane (after probing) and to put the values into the i, j and k vectors of a point feature. That way, I'm sure I'll be measuring with the vector that's normal to the surface. After a plane probing and generation, I just have the angle of it in the alignment (A1 and A2). Thanks

Awesome, Thank you for your advices, that really helped me.

As a reminder, for those who may not be aware, the ZEISS Portal includes a Knowledge Base section located on the Home page. This resource contains hundreds of documents that address many of the questions currently being raised in this forum. I encourage everyone to utilize the Knowledge Base as a reference when researching questions or troubleshooting issues.