All Activity

I will definitely try that when I have some time. I just want to thank all of you for your responses, you guys don't have to help but you do and that means alot!

@Ray Solomon Ok, nevermind. My question would be: Why can Calypso handle this with symmetry point and Inspect not? Why you can use pattern alignment in Calypso and same thing can not be done in Inspect? I hope I know Inspect enough to ask those questions. Only option to handle pattern of 6 points is using RPS. But then i have to make somehow alignment usable in callouts.

https://carl-zeiss-industrial-metrology-llc.helpjuice.com/zeiss_inspect/zeiss-inspect-managing-visibility-and-display-states/version/1?kb_language=en_US

https://carl-zeiss-industrial-metrology-llc.helpjuice.com/zeiss_inspect/zeiss-inspect-understanding-the-workflow-assistant/version/1?kb_language=en_US

Hello, As a new user to the software, I wanted to share a few articles with you that may just help navigate the software a little easier. See below:

I've tried line to line angle as well, and get nearly the same thing as the plane to plane angle. I'm having a hard time understanding the cad evaluation. Wouldn't the shape of the angle measurement be the same as angularity? I'm also not sure why the cad eval doesn't change color when the characteristic is out of tolerance. I'm doing grid scans on the planes.

My apologies, I copied the link to the wrong chat window I had up. for this, I think the issue is not the construction itself, but that MMC/MMR requires a feature of size with an actual size value. The tooth center derived from the two intersections on the basic diameter is only a symmetry point and has no actual size. ZEISS INSPECT documentation states that material requirements require a dimensional tolerance on the element, and symmetry itself is generally not considered an MMC-applicable characteristic. Therefore I don't think INSPECT can represent this callout exactly as drawn. It may be a drawing-definition issue rather than a software limitation.

No... but, whenever I needed to import a second model that needed to be realigned to match the first, I would: import the second model into a new program file, then realign that model to the correct position and save that new program. Then I would import the saved cad model from that newly saved program (model.sab) into the existing program.

I tried building on an existing inspection plan by adding a second model to the file. It would randomly delete the second model from the file and I had to reload it several times. We are using 2024 Calypso. I did most of the added programming with the first model hidden. When I went to test the program it started fine, but then the alignment was super twisted. I would do a manual start alignment and then it would do the basic alignment. The first iteration was fine, but then the second iteration was just wonky and it wanted to crash into the part. I don't think I fiddled with the basic alignment. It was like when I rotated the second model to make it match the orientation and location of the first model that first model (which defined the basic alignment features) rotated even though the first model was directly aligned with the second model.

We have programs made for running qualification checks on the probes that output the sigma value to a report. Once in a while a probe branch will not pass qualification and still output a "passing" sigma. The sigma for each branch is output with a Result Element formula getProbe("Down","3 MM X 50 MM").stdProbeDev. Obviously probes not qualifying is an issue in itself. Are there ways to check the pass/fail status within a program like this?

@Ray Solomon Thanks, but this is not helping in any way. I was trying at home in free version 26 - only option is using 2d lines, so perhaps making it shorter could help.

Unless I am misunderstanding what you're looking for, I recommend using Autorun. You can add a pallet of parts, input the XY offset, and run the entire pallet with a few clicks. This allows you to be able to walk away from the machine while measuring a number of parts. Here is a guide I helped develop in a past job. AutoRun_Guide_2019 (2).pdf

I am trying to update an existing program that requires a max fullness measurement of a helical gear. Originally, the requirement stated the point must lie with ±0.5º (roll angle) of the pitch diameter. When I look at the existing program in GearPro, the tolerance listed in the profile setup for "Profile - position of high point (dc)" shows a max/min value of 0.0661/-0.0661 under user-defined values. The angles are correct on the printout, but I am not sure how the tolerance is converted from the user-defined field to the expected angles. I need to change the expected max fullness point for a revision change, but am a bit stumped as to how I can define the requirement given the entry parameters.

Hey guys, I am not 100% sure why this happens, but we get gaps in the custom printout report. Does anyone know how to remove them or why they appear? We are using the "compressed_tolicon" custom printout template. Not a huge deal for us. I appreciate any help!

I wouldn't try to do a profile evaluation of it... The first feature would be the top face not any symmetry or anything like that... I would either scan a line on top face and a line on the chamfer itself with 0.010" speed and 0.0175-.020" length... Then just do "Angle Between Features" characteristic...... Have the filtering on and evals be LSQ for both features.....

Exactly!

https://carl-zeiss-industrial-metrology-llc.helpjuice.com/zeiss-inspect_main/zeiss-inspectcreating-an-initial-alignment-for-trend-projects?from_search=239465967

You're saying a start alignment set up the way Martin mentioned earlier? (pasted below) "And for those alignments: i've opened measuring program -> placed a part into nest1 -> opened alignment window ( base / start ) -> renamed as "ORIGINAL NAME-p1" and run manual alignment. Repeat for all positions. For 3 parts"

A start system with points and a huge search distance before/after nominal position does the trick.

This may also help. https://carl-zeiss-industrial-metrology-llc.helpjuice.com/zeiss_inspect/zeissgom-inspect-check-position-gdt-position-tolerance/version/1?kb_language=en_US

https://carl-zeiss-industrial-metrology-llc.helpjuice.com/zeiss-inspect_main/zeiss-license-manager-20-managing-license-updates-and-missing-contracts/version/1?kb_language=en_US

It could be anywhere from a fraction of an inch to inches difference

@Jochen Heller While this circle is "refferenced" then i am getting no result with warning. Strange is, that in Calypso i can use Symmetry point ( not symmetry from points ) and it allows me to use MMC. Edit: The Scalar actual data missing

You can`t use "Check Dimension (Independency Principle)" on the circles? Thats weird.

@Jochen Heller I've tried circles. I did center of circle from symmetry point, radius from point ( one of them ) This allows me to finally see GD&T sizes, but it can not calculate 2point distance, so still no MMR in that. I wanted to use just 2 actual points to fit circle inside, but i can not do this either.