All Activity

Hi DJ Yager, you can edit the creation parameters of the actual parts and select measuring data to polygonize with 'select inside cube' or other selection tools. Nanno

@Zak Stehlin Zak, from your post it appears that if Do not update is active, the qualification of the stylus systems is based on the last known Ref Sphere Position, right?.

@Wojciech Malig This was the issue. Now, the question is "do I need to requalify my probes"? I'm guessing the safest answer is yes.

@Derek Jester Care to elaborate on the details of a more accurate qualification method?

The best time to run my code (from an external PCM file) is something I have yet to figure out. I will probably just read the protocol name from that log and hope it wil already be updated at that time. But thinking about it, the best way to do it would be to retrieve the actual string written by Calypso to the log. That would also avoid possible errors if the configuration is changed in the future. Things from \config\env\values for example. How does one figure out all those queries in the first place? I'm clearly mssing something here although I know the basics.

What kind of settings do you have in mind?

Hello Norbert, the log always mirrors the state of the last run. But the file is only updated at the end of run. Meanwhile it contains the data of the last run. To be save you may delete it at start.

Is this a Inspect airfoil special function? Never used that modul, but there is a free training on youtube.

When creating a profile form and position analysis on an airfoil, the Zeiss software automatically assigns clockwise as the positive direction for rotation (twist) analysis, I cannot find anywhere why this is or see any option to change it. Can anyone tell me why clockwise is positive (looking down the Z- Axis)?

Quick, spontaneous reply for information purposes related or not. Calypso does have a cam evaluation with curve under the size menu. I've used it a few times for automotive cams over the years.

Hi Austin, Possibly the working areas are overlapping, so the sensors do not move at the same time. I would recommend to reach out to your local support with this to check the measuring setup. Nanno

Hi, i am working on implementation of DIN EN 10243-1 norm into Calypso, but everytime i do changes i have to turn off Calypso completely. Is this normal behaviour? Also if anyone knows how to implement different fractions to upper and lower tolerance? For radiuses it's 50% and 25% tolerance - i got only same fraction for both tolerances. Thanks

I think it will be perpendicularity to A using pattern

That circle is too short to obtain plausible result.

Hi, what's the strategy for measuring the "CZ" position tolerance for the 5 cylinders indicated, using the Calypso 2020 release 7.0.12? Also, how is the deviation represented in piweb format? Thanks in advance.

I need to calculate the angle between the Ø99.5 circle and the cone

I found solution. The correct way is this: "C:\Program Files\Zeiss\INSPECT\2026\bin\ZEISS_INSPECT.exe" -eval "gom.script.userscript.Automatic_Control()"

I am not sure if you can do that. But here is a help from web https://zeiss.github.io/zeiss-inspect-app-api/2026/howtos/starting_options/starting_options.html#starting-zeiss-inspect-python-scripts

I found this https://zeiss.github.io/zeiss-inspect-app-api/2026/howtos/starting_options/starting_options.html and I changed the bat file with the correct way for 2026 Zeiss, using this import subprocess subprocess.call ("C:\Program Files\Zeiss\INSPECT\2026\bin\ZEISS_INSPECT.exe" -eval "gom.script.userscript.Automatic_Control()") but it doesn't wotk anymore.

Good morning, I have to automatically start a script and I tried to use this import subprocess subprocess.call ('"C:\Program Files\Zeiss\INSPECT\2026\bin\ZEISS_INSPECT.exe" -eval "import Automatic_Control"') putting it on a bat file, but it doesn't work (it flash a winodow). Automatic control is a simple GUI with a simple "Ciao" write using tkinter. This script works launching it directly from Apps. Ideas? Thank you very much for your support!

One more question: Can we also access other (non-inspection) settings this way? settingGet() seems to be specially deisgned for inspection settings. What about more general settings?

ISO and ASME will make datums as Outer Tangential. Then according to that norm is made measurement on element - geometry will use whatever you have on datum and it's evaluating measured element by it's axis determined by it's evaluation on element. ISO is making many sections of measured element and is making a circle from it - that's why you can not use ISO on cylinders smaller than 180° ( maybe that degree coverage has to be larger than 180° )

Simpel ausgedrückt: Auswertung nach ISO berechnet im Hintergrund alles so wie es die Norm vorgibt. Also wenn du einen Gaußzylinder programmiert hast, wird er für die Koaxialität automatisch in Pferch umgerechnet. Bei Auswertung nach Geometrie passiert das nicht. Da werden die Prüfelemente so berechnet wie sie erzeugt wurden. Gleiches gilt für Bezugssysteme.

Hallo, komplexes Thema. Zu Form und Lage kann ich nur eine Aukom Schulung empfehlen oder als abolutes minimum ein gutes Buch. Kurz: Das eine ist nach Norm (Iso 1101). Das andere nicht. Die Unterschiede hast du selber schon festgestellt (Ausgleichsalgorithmen) https://techguide.zeiss.com/de/zeiss-inspect-2026/article/cmd_inspection_check_concentricity.html#FCT0EEUBG

Ich möchte einen Zylinder auf Koaxialität zu einem anderen Zylinder prüfen. Das Ergebnis erscheint mir jedoch überhaupt nicht plausibel, da die Zylinder nach ISO 1101 als Hüll- bzw. Pferch berechnet werden. Daraufhin habe ich aus dem Bezugszylinder ein Bezugssystem erstellt und dieses im Bezugssystem von ISO 1101 auf Geometrie umgestellt. Das Ergebnis wirkt dadurch deutlich plausibler. Nun stellt sich für mich die Frage, ob ich bei der eigentlichen Prüfung ebenfalls ISO 1101 oder Geometrie verwenden sollte und worin genau der Unterschied zwischen beiden Einstellungen besteht.