All Activity

Hallo Erim, gehe zu Prüfplan Editor dann auf Protokolle und dann auf Warngrenzen in %. Dort kannst du verschiedene Sachen einstellen. Vielleicht hilft dir das Gruß Jörg

Any reason you don't use the PiWeb Report where GearPro pushes the data to Calypso - including the PDF images which are then embedded into the report?

Hello experts. I am using calypso 7.4 version but I do not have a PCM license. I would like to see a warning on the screen for a characteristic that is out of tolerance. Could there be a solution to this situation other than PCM? I tried the Message option in the characteristic editor menu, but the system does not work.I searched in the forum. but I couldn't find it. I'm not sure I brought this up to the right group. I'm sorry about that.

Hello Rodrigo, we need way more information. im just thinking in writing ... measurement volume Atos Q surface of the part are you using any matting agent? what exactly are you measuring from that picture? how is the mesh looking in this region in detail? how solid is the mesh aquisition on the scaner? polygonisation which settings? clamping the same way or not at all? why compare single points and not results? that will always put the scaner in a very bad position. Use the information available like you would in real world measuring task and dont try to use the scaner like it is a cmm with a switching probe. Radius: how much of a full circle? point (edge) 4mm vs ballprobe 2,5 mm is a vastly different thing, think about using something else for the scanner. Why is your cmm so inaccurate? Could be a hint to a problem in the approach.

Reference B is the intersection point of the bore and the surface. The 10mm dimension indicates the area within which the surface is to be measured. For RPS alignment, it's crucial that the process runs in loops and that the model is not transformed. Typically, there are 6 points for RPS. We deal extensively with alignment in the automotive sector.

Problem solved! Apparantly, Autosave was enabled in Calypso, which was the cause of the problem.

That’s a very clever question! Is that really the case? Is the projection point the point where the axis of the cylinder intersects the projection plane? Is the point of intersection the point where a line perpendicular to the projection plane intersects the MIDDLE of the cylinder’s axis? What is completely unclear to me is the position of a cylinder in general. This is because the question arises as to which point on the axis of a cylinder is used to determine its position.

@DWC does anyone else use these CT's? I have 50 machinsts wishing all the CMM parts were on the CT at this point....they didn't like the CT until I got it dialed in and now thru correlation with many systems this is almost replacing the CMM as the gold standard....although my heart is always with the accuracy of a good and well calibrated CMM....if I run a part on the CMM and CT I get nearly the same results in PCDMIS. How has no one offered an opinion on the OP's question?

Put some green highlighted points(or section cut) you are using to create a radius on that mesh....no one knows where you are measuring the radius at with just a picture of a mesh.

Hello GOM team, I am currently working on a correlation study between a Scancobot with Atos Q and a CMM using Calypso. We are measuring a radius section of 194 mm on a honeycomb part. We have observed differences in the measurements obtained from both pieces of equipment. Specifically, we are measuring three sections at different heights, over an approximate length of 15 mm, with 7 points per section. On the Scancobot, we use a touch point edge measurement with an edge height of 4 mm. On the CMM, we measure the same points but use a 2.5 mm radius probe. We have noticed that the point-to-point variation is greater on the Scancobot than on the CMM. The dispersion between points on the CMM is about 0.01–0.03 mm, whereas on the Scancobot it is 0.04–0.07 mm. Do you have any recommendations for measuring this type of part?

Intersection would be projected along the axis of the cylinder normal to the axis of the cylinder until it hit the surface you told it to intersect. Projection would be taking the axis of the cylinder and projecting it along the axis of the cylinder normal to the axis of the surface you told it to project to. if the two surfaces aren’t very square to each other then you would see vast differences.

I think ellipse is the least usable element. What you want to achieve? Sketch maybe? 🙂

Yea, after more thought, that is the conclusion I have come up with as well.

PiWeb 2025, I can't figure out why it does not show my probe radius in the PlotProtocol page.

Can we do this, intersect an Ellipse to a Cylinder?

@DWC This is what I'm leaning towards. Especially since it seems to happen on all teeth scans, which are by definition, larger than the 4 tooth scans. My next step is to carefully track exactly when GearPro finishes generating the report, haven't had time to test it today. I should be able to check the report status window to narrow down exactly where Calypso is in the report phase. I'm using the function below in Calypso: I've looked thru the GhostScript documentation, but without knowing exactly how Zeiss implements it I can't see exactly what the triggers are or when it times out. I was hoping for an easy button where someone else had seen the exact same thing.

@RPSmetrologyTech It took me awhile to be able to articulate to bosses and peers what the base alignment was exactly, and how it doesn't have anything to do with DRFs. For any new guys reading this - the base alignment defines how the part is oriented and positioned in space for stylus navigation by establishing a coordinate system. The end. 🙂

2 years ago during my first year as a programmer, I was under the impression that the DRF should be the BA if possible. Just recently I switched my method to relying on secondary alignments rather than all the characteristics under the base alignment.

Thank you, the typo of 50 instead of 5 was indeed the issue. Thankfully it is only on that one feature.

Hey Everyone, Just need to double-check my work on the true position of a hole pattern to a single datum. Do these need to be measured as cylinders or is circle on a cylinder allowed? Here is my characteristic with redacted info. Here is a mockup drawing. Appreciate the help!

Ding ding ding. You outlier eliminated all of the points. lol.

I could work with you to show you some proof of concepts of an idea. Shoot me a DM.

@Chad Watton I have absolutely no experience with Ghostscript, GearPro, or even gears. I did a quick a quick search on here about how people are using Ghostscipt, and it seems some people are using it with PCM. This part stood out to me - In most scripts (the good ones at least), there is error handling to include timeout logic for a function, and if the function cannot be completed within a certain amount of time, it will silently fail and continue processing the script. This prevents a script from hanging. Perhaps there is a timeout setting being tripped where GearPro PDF is not fully written before stitching starts? Perhaps adding a delay in the script or with PCM will fix the timing issue. This is interesting, and may point to temp files not being cleaned up correctly (or maybe Ghostscript runs out of memory or hits temp file limits?) When the stitching fails, is the GearPro PDF already generated? Or does it generate seconds AFTER Ghostscript completes the stitching?

Yes, I do have PCM but i know very little on how to use it. I have done some formulas within the calypso (i know that is very basic PCM) but I know there is a pcm license here.

I would think Calypso would default to empty Primary, Secondary and Tertiary windows and not auto-populate with Base Alignment. How many users think "I created my BA using the DRF, I must be all set."