All Activity

Thank you, as this is what I was searching for. I will see if this helps in our reports. Thanks again!

That did it!! Thank you Richard for all your help, it's greatly appreciated.

Decided to give it another try after the latest patch, and yea, still avoiding 8.0. I tried an uninstall and reinstall with latest SP and patch, and I think it is actually worse than it was before.

Hmm. I've never really seen it do that just because the stylus is that flexible. You could try turning it to Sensitive and Probing Dynamics to 10% to see if that helps.

In feature strategy.

Same probe qualified on a different Duramax, same result.

I turned the speed knob down to about a quarter, and it seemed to get a bit further, but ultimately gave me the same error again.

Here's a tidbit regarding mini-plans. If you select a group to be in a mini-plan, you can drag other characteristics into the group and they become part of the mini-plan.

If you turn the "speed-knob" down, will it run all the way through?

Down probe only, -Z

Is this a 3x125mm star probe or is the stylus facing the -Z?

As for getting the outer tangent. I did a quick test, and here would be my first attempt. Measure the OD, and set that as the X,Y Origin. Create a Theoretical Circle that lives at X=0;Y=0;Z=(whatever height you choose to measure the end arc at);Diam=0 Measure the end arc. Construction - Tangent: Theoretical Circle and end arc Circle. Use either a Theoretical Plane/3d Line for the Centerline Measure the Angle between the two.

I created a new probe and during qualification, I keep getting a "33 Collision: Possible loss of commands" part way through the qualification. It makes a few passes around the qualification sphere, but then for some reason errors out after a few passes. Anyone have an idea why this would be happening? I've checked other probes and they qualify perfectly without any issues. This is a 3x125mm Silicon Nitride probe if that makes a difference.

You can use the slot as your Planar Rotation. You can also use Special option to rotate the -15°, so that your nominals match what is shown here.

Hi Viktor, the "unlock" will come with 2026 Service Pack 2 (it is a bug and will be fixed with this version 🙂)

Once sensor is seeing more than 3 known ref points, then it should rotate model view accordingly.

Anmerkung: Man sollte zwischen der Umschaltung von unabhängig auf abhängig keine Neuberechnung machen. Das bescherte mir einen reproduzierbaren Software-Crash.

We've switched from GOM Inspect 2022 to Zeiss Inspect 2026. There is a function called Rotate 3D View To Sensor and it's not working. Is there any tip or trick to "unlock" this view?

currently trying to figure out how to add a programmable stop. help?

Hi Nanno, Hi Martin! We would like to check a big number of parts (50-1000) that are automatically scanned and I need a quick way to tell the operator which pieces need to be picked from the containers. At the moment I'm trying to use diagrams, but the operator has to scroll through the list to find the part numbers (on top of the page) that needs to be picked out. I'd like to give them a list of some sort that has a single Fail/Pass over multiple measurements for each part. Would it be possible to generate such a page with scripting? I imagine 2 buttons, one for creating an overview (first selection of included measurements, then loop over the individual measurements, compare to tolerance, compose fail/pass list) and one for updating the overview page (load parameters that are somehow saved to the page or project folder, redo the comparing and composing). I don't expect you to write my script, but If you could tell me if this is even thinkable, I would not mind to dive into that myself. 🙂 best Regards

Oh, doch so einfach 🤭 Werde ich heute gleich mal ausprobieren.

If 1, 2 and 3 are sharing the same reference points, 3 into one should work. If 1 and 2 share reference points, and 2 and one: Transform 3 into 2 and 2 into 1. Hope that makes sense 😄

Hi Alaa, this is now in the 'Inspection Details' Tab: Inspection Details

I feel exactly the same @Jack Nelson.2. I would consider taking an in-person Calypso Expert course, but I would not take it online. Hopefully the Maple Grove facility schedules it.

Here is a super rough stech.