All Activity

Sometimes I need to load a fairly complex CAD model which is annoying because that means an extraordinarily long time programming because of the sluggishness of Calypso. Rotating the model in the cad window is very choppy. If the cad window is being rendered using the GPU this should be as smooth as butter, but when I look at the performance the GPU is doing almost nothing. Does Calypso even utilize the GPU at all? I have a Quadro P5000 which should handle it just fine. Is there a setting I'm missing or is this just how it is?

This section is dedicated to software "ZEISS Inspect" You should have write into section dedicated to "ZEISS Calypso" Mods can move this thread into correct section.

Hello Richard. Thank you for the response. But what do you mean: Zeiss Inspect forum, not the Calypso forum: Members post questions about Calypso all the time. Am I missing something here.

This is the Zeiss Inspect forum, not the Calypso forum. Either way, I typically never scan short or partial cones unless they have a Runout callout on them. If you are just after the angle/diameter calculations; try (3) cross sections with (4) touch points. Then I typically will lock the normal vector of the Cone. Good luck.

If you are able to access the knowledgebase, this article should be a good guide https://portal.zeiss.com/knowledge-base?id=444235

Hi @Charles Bliss. Marcel's list is a great start. If possible, retain access to your previous laptop for a time, perhaps 15-30 days. Usually when I do computer swaps on Zeiss systems, there are files and folders I realize after the fact that I needed. Since I primarily use NVMe SSDs, it's easy enough to retain the old SSD and store it in a USB enclosure. Small footprint and value-added protection.

Hello everyone. Can somebody please share proper settings for Filter & Outlier Elimination when scanning partial section of the Cone. In the attached Image I'm scanning a Nylon Segment Gear that is 30.9258mm in diameter. As you can see Cone angle is only 1 degrees and range of scan is only 162.1473 degrees.

This is nonsense callout. Same like flatness it's reporting distance from MIN to MAX point on plane defined by angle from datum. In this case it would be better to use perpendicularity - it's 90°. But you can not use assymetric tolerance.

Have you tried the option "projected tolerance Zone"? Have not used this myself, but looks like this would provide the function of an offset tolerance zone. Or not...

On old laptop do a backup and then restore on the new one Extras>Settings>Miscellaneous>Maintenance> Backup Turn off windows security temporarily on new laptop (license dongle is CryptoBox which might get blocked) Create exceptions in security for Calypso/PiWeb etc Machine and styli C:\Users\Public\Documents\Zeiss\CALYPSO\Config Programs C:\Users\Public\Documents\Zeiss\CALYPSO\workarea\inspections Saved alignments C:Users\Public\Documents\Zeiss\CALYPSO\workarea\basesystems PDFs/table tiles C:\Users\Public\Documents\Zeiss\CALYPSO\workarea\results Custom header info C:\Users\Public\Documents\Zeiss\CALYPSO\protocol\protform Custom Excel templates C:\Users\Public\Documents\Zeiss\CALYPSO\data\excel_report Licenses C:\ProgramData\Zeiss\license directory (program data folder is usually hidden) If connecting to the cmm machine then make sure the IP for that network is set to: 192.4.1.199, and submask 255.255.255.0

Hi Michael, I am measuring a blisk. I'm limited to programming in Calypso 2023, so I cannot place patterns on a FreeForm Surface, so currently I'm programming it as 3d Curves that I will then recall feature points into a FreeForm Surface. Due to orientation and angles, I'm measuring it as (3) cross-sections, and (2) different angles, so in total it is (6) 3d Curves, per side, so in total there are (12) 3d Curves that make up one blade. I'm looking for an efficient way to correctly recall feature points from the (12) individual 3d Curves into their respective FreeForm Surface. So for the example above, I'd need to pull the points from 3D Curve - 1-1(1), 3D Curve - 1-2(1), 3D Curve - 1-3(1), 3D Curve - 2-1(1), 3D Curve - 2-2(1), 3D Curve - 2-3(1), 3D Curve - 3-1(1), 3D Curve - 3-2(1), 3D Curve - 3-3(1), 3D Curve - 4-1(1), 3D Curve - 4-2(1), 3D Curve - 4-3(1). And that is for just the first blade, there are 115 more to create. It's a lot of manual work that I'm trying to avoid if possible.

Hi everyone, I could use some help here. I have a drawing that specifies an angularity check with an asymmetrical tolerance zone. How do I inspect this? I’ve already constructed the feature to be inspected and the datum. However, when I try to check the angularity, I can't set an asymmetrical tolerance—like you can for a surface profile, for example. Does this actually work for angularity, or do I need to inspect it differently? Thanks in advance for your help!

I just received a new laptop and need to know what folders I will need to keep from the old laptop. I don't really want to have to re-define all of my probes/tips. I currently have 5 different machines, with each on having at least 30 different tips defined. Is there a folder on the old laptop that I can just copy over to the new one? And still have them defined.

Thanks Lucas. I don't use an RDS so that explains why I haven't heard of it.

Thank you for your feedback. This would be why I am considering a Fitting Position.

Then i'm affraid only option would be separate application which would take out information from files ( .hdr, .chr, .fet ) or excel and make own protocol.

Hi Martin, Thanks a lot for your answer. I had already suspected as much, but there are so many hidden paths in CALYPSO. MyVoice isn't an option! If you just look at Zeiss's response to it (years of dithering...), MyVoice comes very close to being a black hole.

As far as i know this is not doable in Calypso - perhaps in PiWeb app, but that would not be automatical. I would suggest to place this in MyVoice - it should be easily implemented, since it wouldn't alter inner structure of a measuring program much.

Please get in touch with the ZEISS support team if the mentioned steps don´t work.

Moin, Ich habe einen Prüfplan mit 42 Prüfmerkmalen.😁 Davon möchte ich zwei getrennte PiWeb Protokolle erstellen und anzeigen lassen. Einmal mit 15 Prüfmerkmalen und einmal mit den übrigen 27 Prüfmerkmalen. Bisher haben wir dafür entweder Merkmalsgruppen genutzt was aber dazu führt, das wir zwei mal messen müssten. Oder die nicht benötigten Prüfmerkmale markieren und einmal mit und einmal ohne "Ausblenden der markierten Prüfmerkmale" ausgeben. Das führt aber dazu das ich einmal ein Protokoll mit 15 Prüfmerkmalen habe und das andere mit allen, also 42 Prüfmerkmalen. ( Hier muss ich auch noch das PiWeb Template kopieren und zwei Namen vergeben weil ansonsten nur das erste definierte Protokoll auf dem Bildschirm angezeigt wird 😞 ) Wie kann ich also (elegant) diese zwei PiWeb Protokolle mit unterschiedlichen Prüfmerkmalen ausgeben?

Hello Richard, I didn't fully understand what you're trying to achieve. Could you post a few pictures of your current setup and what you're aiming for?

In my opinion, the idea of evaluating a surface profile in only one direction is contradictory in itself. It's like if you say "I want to calculate a line, but I have only one point" If you recall the definition of a surface profile, the tolerance zone is derived from placing an infinite number of virtual spheres with their center point on the nominal surface and their diameter being the tolerance width. The actual zone are two tangential surfaces touching the spheres from both sides. How could this be calculated in only one direction? The only way would be to use a line profile instead.

Here is cutout from "Function-descriptions_ZEISS-INSPECT-Optical-3D-2025_EN.pdf" which i could find on the internet. There is a way to remove artifacts due fixture shadows ATOS_shadows_artifacts.pdf

in my case after uncheck all the boxes teh elements still remaining.

Does anyone know of an efficient way to Recall Feature Points from a Curve that has a Pattern on it? In my example, I have a group of (4) curves that has a 116x pattern on them. I need to then create a FreeForm Surface for each 4x group of curves - so essentially I need to create 116x FFS that pulls from the correct set of (4) curves. Any and all help is greatly appreciated.