All Activity

DIN 2768-2 wurde 2021 zurückgezogen und mit der DIN EN ISO 22081 ersetzt

If all your base alignments are shifted by the same amount and direction, you probably have a problem with the CMM reliably detecting its end switches while homing. This can have several reasons, one of them is indeed the controller being faulty. On our old Contura (2001) the end switches were magnets embedded in the ends of the scales and at one time we also had shifted alignments. It turned out that the distance between the magnets and the sensor detecting the magnet's position was too large, so a tech had to readjust it. You see, there are many possible causes for the same error. I don't know how this is connected to Calypso reporting missing CMM data, but all the symptoms you describe together point to a severe hardware problem in my opinion.

Hi, can you describe what feature you used for threads? What are those datums B and A. How your TP callout looks like? Drawn sketch would help also.

Has anyone been able to figure out this stuttering issue. Simulation has been completely abandoned at this point due to this issue.

I’m measuring the true position of two threaded holes using the legacy true position with datum B primary and A secondary. The Y results vary, but the reported Z location is measuring zero. Nominal location being zero. When I switch from a diametral Y/Z tolerance zone to a polar zone, Z variation appears but the drawing does not specify a projected tolerance so I don’t want that. I also changed a feature’s nominal Z from 0 to 0.100 as a test, and its actual Z then reported 0.1000. Anyone know why this is happening? Given the datum structure, rotation is free so is Calypso forcing the feature to the perfect zero? If so, is this ok to leave like this? Note: I’ve also tried using a bore pattern and freeing the rotation. When I do there is variation in both Y and Z but of course TP results significantly increase since there is now another variable to include in the error.

I’m measuring the true position of two threaded holes using the legacy true position with datum B primary and A secondary. The Y results vary, but the reported Z location is measuring zero. Nominal location being zero. When I switch from a diametral Y/Z tolerance zone to a polar zone, Z variation appears but the drawing does not specify a projected tolerance so I don’t want that. I also changed a feature’s nominal Z from 0 to 0.100 as a test, and its actual Z then reported 0.1000. Anyone know why this is happening? Given the datum structure, rotation is free so is Calypso forcing the feature to the perfect zero? If so, is this ok to leave like this? Note: I’ve also tried using a bore pattern and freeing the rotation. When I do there is variation in both Y and Z but of course TP results significantly increase since there is now another variable to include in the error.

In addition, check out this ZEISS Portal Knowledge Base article - https://portal.zeiss.com/knowledge-base?id=1596796. The error messaging is different, but I think the troubleshooting steps will be helpful.

Hello, Looking through some older forum posts, it appears the issue may be related to your graphics card. This post may point you in the right direction.

One on our cmm is constantly throwing this error after the program is finished and creating PDF file. These programs were running without issue since, until a couple of days ago. And I am getting it also now in my laptop using offline planner. Calypso V.6.8 Anybody know what is causing this?

We have something for cleaning granite, but i think those wear stains can not be cleaned. It's polished from using. We have air filters before machine. We had once a chip stuck in that bearing and it was grinding into granite. After replacement it was repaired - it's still visible, but no problems on machine. In job from 2016

So, anyone have any tips on how to clean this? Isopropyl and lint free doesn't seem to be cutting it. The air bearing surfaces don't have anything that you can directly feel, but they have visible wear marks/residue. This stuff when scrubbed with a lint free cloth barely comes up, it turns the cloth black, but it doesn't really remove the streak/shiny spot on top, or the clear line on the side. I'm mainly worried that over time this will harm the machine. The other thought I've had is maybe the bearing surface is porous enough that it has kind of filled itself in with dust and oil in the pores and it's not a real issue, because it isn't abrading anything. I tried running a .00005" indicator over it and saw almost 0 movement.

Yes this is what I used. So your saying I should try rehoming again? Im talking about the base alignments moving and not the Homing issue. I think its a box fault problem.

Hello There is Knowledge base article that will give you step by step instructions on how to fix this error https://portal.zeiss.com/knowledge-base?id=1475168

do you specifically need to be in the "Find Run" menu? Would it be possible to scan barcode from traveler or qr code from the part at the main screen of Auto Run and have it find the program and possibly start it?

Hi, this is more of a continued post from my last... Almost every time now with a full start up I get the CMM data not found error. In the past it was as simple as manually moving the machine to Center and rerunning the homing. Or somehow a smudge on the Z scale. This latest error I couldn't get it to home, so I manually moved the machine as close to the Machine Home and then ran the Homing process. It worked. (The machine travels 75% in Y and once the X travels to the left, it limits out) However, now every single program, Hundreds of them, are off. The machine tries to find them always off in the -X direction and I have to align the Base Alignments. I have read that the error of the CMM data is a possible Control Box being faulty and since this error happens Every..single..full start up now... Is that it? Additionally, at random The machine will have some sort of connection issue and just stop running. Most times this happens at a Probe change. So question 1, How does the Base Alignments shift in every program? Question 2, Is it possibly the control box (joystick box) is faulty. I currently have Calypso 2024. I am trying to narrow it down because its expensive to get a tech to come here if its something I may be overlooking or easily fix myself. Thanks.

The question looks misquoted.... In previous versions of Calypso, it would only say if you wanted to change the nominal if it doesn't sit exactly in the middle of the tolerance range.

Are you saying that this would be flagged as OOT because your nominal is not 2.8575 but the result is within min/max tolerance?

Die Geschichte zur Zeichnungseintragung nochmal präzisiert: "2768-1-mK" ist nach Angaben in den Normteilen (2768-1 Abschnitt 5 und 2768-2 Abschnitt 6) keine normgerechte Eintragung. "2768 - m" für die 2768-1 Toleranzklasse m "2768 -mK" für beides Ich würde das hier im Rahmen des Interpretationsspielraums schon deutlich eher als gleichbedeutend "2768 -mK" deuten, weil explizit eine Toleranzklasse aus 2768-2 angegeben wird. Aber wie auch immer hier hilft nur mit dem Lieferanten ins Gespräch zu gehen.

Use a step stylus. I use 20mm OAL 10mm L and 5 ML Qualify full 180° all the time on a 30mm Sphere on two Micuras.

Das unterschreibe ich sofort 🙂 Was mich besonders verwundert ist die Tatsache, dass die Allgemeintoleranz für Symmetrie (in unserem Fall ja eigentlich ein Sollwert von 0,0mm) eine deutlich größere Abweichung von +/-0,3mm erlaubt, während die kleinste Allgemeintoleranz für Längenmaße bei mK +/-0,1mm beträgt, das ist ja in sich überhuapt nicht stimmig.

Die Allgmeintoleranz wird durch die Benennung aktiviert. Durch die Angabe der Toleranzklasse dann auch die entsprechende Toleranztabelle. Ich kenne allerdings viele Zeichnungen, bei denen das den Entwicklern so nicht klar war und es definitv nicht vorgesehen war auf einmal Form und Lagemerkmale überall drauf zu haben. Ich zitiere hier gerne Herrn Hernla (http://www.dr-hernla.de/Hernla VDI 2017 GPS-Standards.pdf) "Schon heute ist aber kein Konstrukteur auch nur ansatzweise in der Lage, die Konsequenzen seiner Festlegungen zu überblicken. Die meisten scheitern schon am Verständnis für die vielen Symbole und Regeln (das geht übrigens auch den meisten Messtechnikern so)." Ich nehme mich hier auch definitv nicht aus 🙂

Hallo Marc, Ich habe bisher noch keinen Weg gefunden auch nur annährend so schnell zu sein über das Kiosk Interface, wie wenn ich parallel ein Projekt zur Erfassung offen habe und eins zur Auswertung und da die Teile reinlade. Aber das muss ja nicht zwangsläufig der Anspruch sein. Vermutlich wirst du dich mit Python vertraut machen müssen. Was ich gefunden habe: In "KioskInterface_settings.cfg" kann man eine Trendanalyse aktivieren. Die wird dann mitgestartet als extra Projekt und hier werden die Ergebnisse aus den Einzelteilmessungen gesammelt. Brauchst nurnoch ein entsprechendes Script, das da automatisiert rauszulassen im gewünschten Format. Hier gibt es auch eine Einstellung damit man einstellen kann wieiviel Teile man messen will und nicht jedesmal das Kioskinterface neu starten muss.

Nur damit ich das richtig verstehe: Das K aktiviert die Allgemeintoleranz? Wenn also nur ISO 2768-1-m (ohne K) angegeben wäre, dann wrde die Allgemeintoleranz für Symmetrie nicht gelten?

Der große Buchstabe gibt die Toleranzklasse für Form und Lage an und wenn der dabei ist wird das "aktiviert". Damit könnt ihr das so verwenden.

Hallo Jochen, es ist die ISO 2768-1-mK angegeben. Da wäre die Toleranz dann sogar bei 0,6mm. Wir haben Probleme bei der Montage der Bauteile.