All Activity

I have a similar setup, except its 345mm long. I use: M5, Styli straight, silicon nitride sphere, tungsten carbide shaft Stylus straight M5, DK14 L65 626115-1401-065 and a: Extension Ø11, ZEISS REACH CFX® 3 Extension M5-DG11-L280-1x-M5 626107-1280-100 This also uses a 40mm extension and a 50gr counterweight on the opposite end. I am scanning 13 cylinders in specific locations (They are broken by grooves). This creates a critical Datum D. I will have to look at my rigidity, but I am not having any issues.

Try reinstalling that extension. I've just tested on never used VS code machine and after install i have 4 inputs

I share your assumption. The drawing is kind of bad in that regard. They could have drawn the angel to the axis.

@Jochen Heller There is a runout callout to A, then i assume that 10° is half of that cone or angle of line to A axis. I can not tell more since i don't see if it's full circle/cone or just a half.

@Martin Jánský.2 How do you tell by the information given? The line is clearly on the the "little area". Because it would make sense or any hard tell?

For a cone you need at least two circular paths or helix to obtain it's angle. That 10° is meant from axis - not that little area.

OK, do you have a substitutes for BAT files ready? There are several approaches possible - if you have a substitute, then you can rename text in files from ".bat'" to ".vb'" ( fill your extension ) or we can keep BAT files and do a workaround. I can even make a little EXE which will run that BAT file, but your IT can be against - also i would need to test, if you can fill that path with commands.

So can I scan the 99.5 circle and any circle of the cone and insert it into the cone half-angle feature?

Good morning, I follow this guide: https://zeiss.github.io/zeiss-inspect-app-api/2026/howtos/using_vscode_editor/using_vscode_editor.html but in my case there isn't the space where I can put the API key. Some one could help me please? thank you very much. PS: I use Zeiss 2026 and I installed both the lastest version of VSCode and the extension.

Hi Martin, The problem is that CALYPSO (vwnt.exe) always launches the Windows Command Prompt for external programmes (*.bat) and “CNC process information”. This forces a terminal window to open (shortly). The only way to prevent this completely is to place a wrapper cmd file in the path of vwnt.exe that has been compiled as winexe. This will ensure that no terminal window is opened at all 🙂 Anyway: The link to a script for displaying the CNC sequence information in the event of a programmable stop is stored in the inspection file. To be able to change this via a batch file, I first need to locate it, which means I’d need to know the structure of the file. There could well be several such entries... Example: #Dictionary) #parameters: '') #text: 'Bitte umdrehen' #pathOfFile: '\\fs1\Messmaschinen\Programme\Zeiss\DuraMax\Entwicklung\Z-Autorun\MessAbInfo\QB00031.bat') #( But the information what to display as CNC sequence information as standard ist stored in inspset file like: #( #getActualFailed ' ->' false) #( #graphicUserInfo ' ->' '\\fs1\Messmaschinen\Programme\Zeiss\DuraMax\Entwicklung\Z-Autorun\IconStart\QB00031.bat') #( #hasStartSystem ' ->' false) #(

Looks like the angle is relativ to the the extremly short area (1,924). That is in general not a good idea because minor deviations (form) on that short area will result in big deviations in the angle. Theoretically the angle should be the same as to the area "11,14". But you sould have of course detailled knowledge about the usage/installation to just replace the the one reference of the angle. I would measure both and compare to get a feeling for the situation.

You can either scan it like a cone or like a line. For cone you then report half of it's angle. For line you then report angle between features ( old Calypso has that close to profile callouts )

Good morning, how can I calculate the 10 degrees as shown in detail Y? Thank you.

Hi all, the login should should work again.

The main restrictions in the free version are: - No editing of created elements. Your only option is to delete the element and redo it from scratch - No proprietary CAD formats. Only IGES, STEP etc. - No manual recalculation of the project. It recalculates as soon as you make a change, which can take some time if you have things like surface comparisons in the project.

In Free version you are very limited. No editing parameters, no python, some of methods are out. We thought we could make a scan and a template program on Pro and then evaluate whole program on Free - i think this is not possible, but you can do a whole new program in Free. Only downside is, that some of needed operations in defining measured element is hidden in first creation, so you have to go into editing - and that's not allowed. After your Trial expire, you will see a signs that marks paid options.

Problems with curves are mostly with it's spline. With small number of points this spline may not follow real defined model. Negative numbers: It gives you because it's smaller than curve ( i see negative tolerance ). Standard will tell only positive number just like profile or form. Since it's a part with which i don't have any experience ( function, critical areas, ... ) i can not tell more. Perhaps with those points you can make a CAD model.

Two of both stands from GOM have got a problem. Moving of vertical direction is not fixed. It looks like it was working fine and then suddenly broke.

Hello, I started using ZEISS INSPECT Optical 3D about 15 days ago with a trial license, which I assume is the Pro version. Before deciding whether to purchase Pro, I would like to understand what the Free version includes. However, I could not find how to activate and use the Free version— could you please help me with that? Thank you!

Quick update - it has been confirmed that CALYPSO patch 8.0.1601 contains additional fixes for the external (outer) torus issues mentioned above. So as of testing today both internal and external torus navigation issues should be resolved in 8.0.1601.

This used to work properly, but starting recently when manually trying to create a line using the linescan option for the camera and I click Create Geometry, the default feature is a point instead of a line. I can't figure out why this changed or how to change it back. I can still select 2d line from the dropdown to force it to create a line but it doesn't make any sense why a line is now defaulting to a point. I'm using calypso 8.0. Thanks for any suggestions.

We're trying to make improvements on a method for inspecting cams for a family of parts. The method we've been grandfathered into uses single points and a probe with the same diameter as the specified follower; it takes hours to program and very slow to run. One of our Contura's has a Curve license, and I've been trying to figure out the nuances of this package. I have a few questions that I'm hoping to get some insight on. Side note, some of the drawings are from the 70s and I'm not sure if there's accurate CAD available. Here's what I've done so far: Imported a text file of the provided angle/radius chart of the cam profile Curve parameters: Space point evaluation, exact number of points in strategy Duplicate curve set as theoretical feature Curve Distance (Pitch Size): Inner Curve = measured curve, Outer curve = theoretical curve; tolerances are max/min of the tolerance band Curve Form (Pitch Shape): Tolerance offset = Average Curve Distance Curve Jump (Pitch Waviness): 2 points, 50% overlap The inspection notes define Pitch Shape as the distance of each inspection point from the average Pitch Size. Pitch Waviness is the max allowable deviation difference per degree. Here's where things are weird. Curve Distance outputs a positive value, but Curve Form the outputs are negative. I've tried reversing the inner and outer curves, but it did not make a difference. My questions are: With Curve, can I use a standard probe instead of the follower specific size? i.e. the follower sizes vary by part, but I always have a 3mm ready to go. Why is Curve Form giving me negative values and is there a way to fix this? Some inspection charts only provide data points in 5-degree increments but still have the 1-degree tolerance. How would you go about calculating that?

@TIM MCKAY I do this often. Especially when I do not have a proper CAD, but need to align the volume to the global axes for normal viewing during clipping. These instructions are for 2023, so it may be slightly different for 2026. Instructions for alignment without a traditional CAD (.stp, etc) Create the solid mesh from your volume Operations>Alignment>Initial Alignment>3-2-1 My go to is using ZZZ, YY, and X to establish a rough alignment normal to the axes. If available, use a flat plane to level in ZZZ Tweak the mesh orientation/rotation in X and Y after the 3-2-1 alignment using Operations>Alignment>Single Element Transformation>Set Matrix With your mesh best effort aligned normal to the global axes, go to Operations>CAD>Actual Mesh To CAD Your mesh turns blue, signifying that it is now considered the reference "CAD" Delete all alignments, and the mesh, leaving the CAD and volume for your part Go to Operations>Alignment>Initial Alignment>Prealignment (Volume) Make sure to check that the target is the CAD, Use only reliable surfaces is checked. If it won't align, use a nominal point on the CAD and an actual point on the volume From the aligned volume, create the mesh again Go to Operations>Alignment>Initial Alignment>Prealignment Inside the part drop down should be the CAD, Aligned Volume, and Aligned Mesh It is the same process with a traditional CAD, except there is no need for the 3-2-1 alignment and alignment tweaking. You align directly to the proper CAD.

@Jackie Williams You're in the Features Setting Editor. You want to be in the Characteristics Settings Editor (found under Resources)

I remember one experience trying to qualify a flimsy star-type stylus system on an XXT. I couldn't get a good qualification and assumed a sensitive probing dynamic would improve my results, but it wasn't until I tried a robust setting that I get a better qualification. It didn't make sense at first but then I thought maybe more pressure helps stabilize the probe. I don't know if that works across the board, but it worked in that instance.