All Activity

You know, I was thinking about that when I was writing that, too, but there must be, if only for like force or something like that. I have always been told to "tilt" the probe off of an XXT rather than pulling because of the damage it can do to the spring.

I'm sorry, Carsten, I didn't realize you weren't in North America. For right now, at least, the knowledge base I believe is only accessible from North America. I have heard of talks to have it available outside of that region, but I have no idea where those talks are right now I am afraid....

Took me a while, but I found the knowledge base article, in case that helps. https://portal.zeiss.com/knowledge-base?id=458620

Just as a graphical description of what Martin is saying, this is what you get when you use recall: This is what you get when you do recall feature points: Since you are taking every individual point measured in the circles describing the bore pattern, you get odd results. This document on the knowledge base describes how to set up bore patterns properly: https://portal.zeiss.com/knowledge-base?id=1769725 Hope that helps.

👍

I like the idea of this two-point distance characteristic as it reports out the min and max results and shows up graphically.

Hello, I'm looking for tips on how to measure the OD and ID of some diamond coated cutting tool. Calypso is filtering out highest points because they are the outliers but I would like to measure the diameter only using the highest points. Does anyone have tips on how I can approach this? Thank you!

The symmetry plane itself gives you the distance.

When those two planes are not parallel, then cartesian distance will give you two different results when its Plane1 -> Plane2 and Plane2 -> Plane1 It depends on drawing and usage to answer you question which to use. Both methods varies in usage Edit: On caliper distance you can set min/max from measured points or feature - result can vary

I had this same issue yesterday, didn't get to spend too much time with it yet but I would assume caliper distance uses the two farthest points away from nominal and calculates your min and max values. A better option would probably be to create a symmetry plane between the two and use the two-point distance characteristic.

In the feature evaluation you can set the planes to Inner or Outer Tangential, giving you the min (lowest points) or the max (highest points). That might actually be what the choices in caliper distance are doing. Perpendicular length is what I tend to use a lot.

Hi everyone, I have some basic questions I'm having trouble finding answers to. I'm using an Eclipse with TP20 modules and Calypso 2016, so I'm on an older system. Googling around and whatnot, I'm only finding answers relating to newer systems and non-TP20 probes. Sorry in advance if I use some improper vernacular/jargon, I'm not exactly formerly trained on CMM operation. I was shown enough to get going and have been largely self taught thereafter. My first question is, with this system, can I have 2 separate probe racks? We have a 6 probe rack that's been in use forever on this machine. We also have a Nikon vision system with a 4pc rack, and were recently told the machine can only use 3pc, not 4, so I'm looking to steal that and put it on the Zeiss if possible as we have a few extra probes lying around that we load and unload manually when needed. Not totally ideal. -Follow-up to that is, I'm not quite sure how to locate the rack if I were to move it. The videos I'm finding are the newer systems with an XXT head, and the tool holders seem to have a countersink in them for the software to locate the rack automatically. Our rack doesn't have anything like that, and when I previously tried to follow the steps in Calypso, I was obviously misunderstanding something, because it wasn't working properly. Someone had crashed into the rack which moved it slightly, and the machine was having trouble loading and unloading probes. After my failure to re-align it, I ended up moving it by hand and going trial and error...I think it would be best I learn how to do this properly!

Hi all, This seemed to be a simple question, but I am seeing varying results using both methods and wanted some additional clarification. I have two opposing planes, and I need the minimum and maximum values between the two. My first thought was to use caliper distance as I can easily select those options and refer to my alignment. Is this the ideal way to do this? I tried using the min and max coordinates and then used a cartesian distance between those values (referencing one plane as the axis of rotation) and I see much different results. Is there a preferred method to use and why would I see different results between these types of measurements? Thanks in advance

I was thinking the same - I would just set this as a VARiable using a formula inside the field. Unless for some reason you need to output the value for 'proof' on report... I tested on 2023 and it output proper value. I might give this a try : in the post characteristics (and plan advanced parameters) - declare a variable : PlaneDia(getActual("Plane1").measElement.technology.actSegmentObject.diameter)/25.4 The in Result element choose 'number' instead of Length. If that doesn't work : you may be able to put this variable in the comment field (with formula) of the any feature related to this plane/scan. Good luck !🤔

Recall - it will recall origin point of selected feature/s Recall feature - it will recall measured actuals into features nominals - that's why you cal recall only one feature Recall Feature Points - it will recall all measured points into feature - used when measuring 4 single planes but need to have one from all data

This looks like exactly what I was looking for. Thanks!

Since you can place formula into that diameter - would be better to use this approach? Or why you need to get this "hardcoded" number? Edit: BTW i just tested that formula - if you place getNominal instead of getActual - then it works ( version 6.6 ) - maybe newer version of Calypso will not work.

that is correct - is that my issue? i will give it a go & see if the values change

Are you in New Hampshire?

Hi Keith, I could swear that there used to be a good Knowledge Base article on this. I'm not sure if it's what you're looking for based on what you described, but I think this thread may have the info you want. It's old, but I have used the method that Richard describes as recently as six or so months ago.

So, if Zeiss included all of their software options and charged more, people would say "we don't use that, why do I have to pay for it?"......

my guess is you used "Recall Feature Points" instead of "Recall".

I generate an error. PCM doesn't like "Access Attribute = diameter". Object "#68.3,1c2 Ø.6299 Min" is a Result element.

currently using a pattern to measure 4 circles creating a theoretical circle from these 4 circles the diameter of the theoretical circle is smaller diameter than when i use the R value in a caliper distance. what am i doing wrong?

Thanks for the help, I think I found the errant login.