All Activity

I'll consider this fixed. We happened to have a zeiss tech here something else whom was able to provide us with a solution. For anyone that might come across the same issue: The wbScanLink-Error was cause by somehow an additional sensor being checked in the sensor list. Linescan as well as the Renishaw TPx were checked despite us not having them: The other issue with the laser scanner was that somehow Calypso was connected to one machine, the ConturaG2_RDS, but there was a second machine profile that despite not being connected to, had the OSIS laserscanner set up and somehow it was drawing from that. We deleted that second machine and it went back to normal.

It's depends how precise your element strategy is are and what are your RPS and how are they distributed Plane / Line / Point is a general idea of setting up the alignment and it's correct as long as it matches the drawing If your results aren't repeatable enough, you might want to try iterative alignment

I would like to see a End time for each Stylus as its qualified in the standard Report (See image). I s this report capable of being modified?

Question on salary range...job posting range is $81,600 - $136,000. This all depends on experience. Contact: jesus.j.quesada.iii@lmco.com for consideration.

Re-establishing the base alignment, which is a fixture, did not help my situation. na_vor quoted my post.

New problem with a contura, wonding if anyone has seen. Just started happening, only thing new that happened is that IT changed the battery in the UPS. On startup there is a very generic error message: "wbScanLink-Error! Maybe its not installed correctly." After startup and homing, calypso doesnt recognize that there is a probe in the sensor. When I tell it to pick it up, it asks me to create a new stylus stystem out of a laser scanner. But, this is a RDS XXT with TL3 sensor, so I dont know why this be happening.

Hello Grant, please have a look at this video. Activating the color deviation with min/max labels is often a good approach to see why a GD&T result is worse than expected.

I think they can be show in CAD hierarchy as regular CAD components, maybe you can delete them there?

I would try and see if the Mitutoyo bottoming bore gage works. I have tons of different Mueller groove gages and don't trust them at all. We've scrapped a lot of parts thanks to them.

I have the free version of Inspect. I need to measure flatness, parallelism and perpendicularity on a part. Are there any videos on this? What I'm getting in the software is off from the real world.

thankyou.. i will give it a shot... so far Calypso 2025 has been the worse version in a long time... looks like they broke planner all the way back to 4.10... the movements are almost identical now that was in 4.10.

Google search: "When scanning a cylinder with a helix, using a Gauss filter at 15upr is a common strategy. However, if the scanning path is helical rather than circular, it is recommended to change the filter method to spline. The spline filter is advantageous for its end-preserving properties, efficient calculation, and good form-following capabilities. It is particularly useful in surface metrology for isolating form, waviness, and surface roughness from finer content such as instrument noise."

Hello, I am unable to generate an Excel report from ZEISS CALYPSO using the characteristic template. My goal is to combine multiple report datasets into a single Excel sheet, similar to process study data. The report only displays the header information (Measurement Plan, Date, Drawing No., Part No., etc.), but the characteristic results (Actual, Nominal, Tolerance, Deviation) are missing. Could this be related to the template configuration? Kindly advise if any settings or steps need to be corrected to include the characteristic results. Thank you in advance for your support.

This is why i never use helix, 🤣

@Ivan Servin.2 I think you can use "Form" to see devations on 3d line with restricting settings.

@Martin Jánský Technically yes. However, from my understanding, curves and 3D lines offer different insights. One significant aspect is the graphical representation. We end up outputting these points to Excel to produce a 2d graph. I was hoping to use a 2d curve to get the graph. With a 3d line, the best graphical option would be straightness, which only controls form, and the graphics do not offer the same insight. Also, and more importantly, is there not a fitting process that CALYPSO uses when recalling to 3d line? It will create the best-fitting line for those points, and in a sense, it will somewhat ignore the nominal points. Especially when outputting to straightness, since only form is restricted. Whereas the curve will output the deviation relative to those specific nominal points.

@Martin Jánský Oh, duh on my part 🤐 didn't even check the forum. Thanks for setting me straight!

Your profile callout to only datum A is just a parallelism - which should give you same result as your profile callout. Are you working with ISO or ASME ( difference would be printed result ). I think new GD&T should give you a result with only A used, but i think you can make it with alignments like this: make fully defined alignment ( ABC ) use this alignment as your feature's alignment ( open feature and on right side there is usually choosed "base alignment" open evaluation tab check bestfit translation only in Z ( i think rotation in Z is useless ) save this bestfit as an alignment use this bestfit alignment in your profile callout And again - it should give you same result as parallelism

Unsure if I can share photos, I'll do my best to describe the situation. First, I've been doing this for almost 6 years. In that time, I have never once had a good grasp on profile, and have mostly learned everything I know on the job from my mentor outside of taking Calypso basic and advanced at Zeiss in 2021 (meaning I may not understand all 'proper' technical terminology). This month is my first month without a mentor and I am now the 'senior' metrologist at my company with nobody to ask any Calypso questions to. I've deeply feared the day I will come across profile again, and of course our first big project after the staffing change has 5 profile callouts and only one with a full DRF of ABC. Any help explaining anything to do with Calypso 8.0 profile techniques would be greatly appreciated!! The new GDT engine makes even less sense to me than the old one. Here's the situation: Print has a full DRF of A being a plane in XY, B being a line along Y, and C being a line along X. They want a profile of a plane that is parallel to datum A and the callout is to datum A only. I know that unfilled alignment elements refer to the BA, which is already comprised of the print DRF. However, I feel like if they wanted it to ABC they would have called it out as being to ABC instead of specifically A? Obviously a plane parallel to the measured feature is not going to constrain much and Calypso makes it clear that just datum A is insufficient. From what I've read here, it looks like I can use alignments and constraints to achieve this profile. Unfortunately, I don't really understand how to do that and I think I am missing basic information that would make the posts about this that already exist clearer to me. I have little (basically zero) experience with freeform, and even less experience with using alignments outside of a standard local alignment. I have seen programs written with constraints applied to radii <180° to get a better radius value, but I have never understood what that is doing. I am unsure if checking a translation/rotation XYZ constraint means it IS constraining that axis or if it is NOT constraining the checked axis. I think in this case I would want to constrain translation along X and Y and rotation around Z, but I don't even know where it would be appropriate to do that (Measurement plane? Datum plane? Geometry best fit alignment? Is it datum A that I would put into the geometry best fit alignment or the profile measurement plane? What is the air-speed velocity of an unladen swallow?) I got blindsided with this huge expedited project Thursday of last week, and I have until the end of the first full week of January to make this CT program happen. Today's my last day in until Jan 5, so I am under a huge time crunch and don't have time to play around with this until I feel comfortable with it.

Have you tried redefining position of all the probe holders? I have had something similar to this in the past and redefining the position of the probe holders seemed to fix the problem.

Danke für die Hilfe. Ich werde im neuen Jahr den Support kontaktieren. Frohes Fest

I created an alignment Friday, saved and exited. When I opened the program this morning, all the feature trihedrons, and their respective alignments are showing on the model, and they won't go away. I've deleted the alignment and the features, ticked off "show local alignment" in CAD settings, and they still persist. Anyone know how to remove them? I'm sure deleting the model and reuploading would correct it, but I'd like to know how to prevent/fix this in the future. Using Calypso 2022, latest service pack.

Hallo, wichtig ist, dass die Kameras über 60 liegen, der Projektor über 50. Sonst bitte mit Seriennummer beim Support melden (+49 7364 20-6337)

Die Einstellung von Optimum und Current stimmten genau überein, bei allen drei Werten.

Hallo, dann müssten wir das wahrscheinlich im Rahmen eines Supporttickets analysieren. Welche Werte haben die drei Objektive (Kameras + Projektor) beim Einrichten als Optimum erreicht?