All Activity

Agree.

Hallo Friedbert, Du könntest noch einmal prüfen, dass die Objektive und Einstellringe wirklich fest (auch nicht zu fest 🙂 ) sind. Wenn sie das sind und die Referenzpunkte auch frisch sind, klingt es für mich nach einem Fehler im Objektiv. Melde dich dann bitte beim Support Get in touch with our team | ZEISS Industrial Quality Solutions mit der Seriennummer vom System. Nanno

In ARN file there is this [PATH :\inspections\Program 1] And also this [PARAMETERS :add: (#path -> 'C:\Users\Public\Documents\Zeiss\CALYPSO\workarea\inspections\Program 1'); So i think that "PARAMETERS" is more important than "PATH"

If in doubt you can test perpendicularity by constructing a projected line with the same point and zylinder and then check the angles to the zylinder axis.

Once you use projected distance, then use just "L" - using "L" with axis will result in measuring distance depending on active/selected alignment.

Why do you think it is not perpendicular?

I am not able to measure distance in one direction. The distance is not perpendiculare.

You only need it if you run out of memory.

I've been scanning for a couple of days and while doing that, I searched for the setting and it is not available for the hawk2.

This is ISO compliant. Datums are tangential, but measured feature is Gauss. I think only difference about ASME and ISO will be in that feature's evaluation.

Hello everyone, We are frequently encountering measurement‑related questions. Many junior customers keep referring to various international standards such as ISO standards. Our Calypso software has already been configured for ISO‑compliant evaluation. I would like to clarify: when evaluating the position tolerance of a hole, is Gaussian (least‑squares) fitting the default method according to ISO requirements? Which ISO standard and specific clause defines this rule?

In my experience, a user-friendly interface makes it more difficult to program complex measurement tasks. Calypso is more flexible - sometimes too flexible.

No way we are saying Polyworks has a nice GUI. At the end of the day every software has its own strengths and weaknesses when it comes to UIs - except for MCOSMOS 😆

Not sure if it's the same issue, but I've noticed if I rotate the model via "CAD model transformation", some faces will disappear or seemingly refuse to rotate with the rest of the model. CAD > View > Redraw CAD model always fixes it, but it is a recent thing and it's kind of annoying.

Will I get banned if I say Polyworks is another example of excellent, intuitive GUI? Personally, I'd prefer it if Zeiss worked harder on updating the 30 year old spaghetti code than putting a fresh coat of paint on it.

We are located in Dallas - please feel free to reach out directly.

There shouldn't be any other path locations. I have manually edited the arn file before in addition to the path replacement tool without issue. I even made a copy of my arn file just now to change one arbitrarily as a test and confirmed that the change carried over to Autorun.

Thank you for the information. We weren’t aware that the DAKKS certificate might need to be purchased separately. We’ll contact our ZEISS representative for clarification. If your team is able to provide certification depending on our location, please let us know — we’d be interested in that option as well. We are located in San Francisco.

I'm not certain if you have to purchase the DAKKS certification with those or not. I'd reach out to whomever your Zeiss contact is and ask them. Depending on where you are located, we might be able to assist in certifying it for you. 🙂

We recently purchased the PSA 900 artefact from ZEISS, but it arrived without a calibration certificate. Could you advise us on how to obtain the certificate, or confirm where the artefact should be sent for calibration?

I'll look into this - i think it may be same like with tolerance files - whole Calypso needs to be restarted. Perhaps just closing autorun can help. But i'll see tomorrow.

Does anyone know of a way when using the simultaneous requirement option in the new GD&T engine, to separate the bore pattern plots out? It always combines them and can look really messy. Additionally, if there is a profile tolerance included in the simultaneous requirement, it wont plot anything. I know you can make copies of the position characteristics just to calculate the DRF, then use the GD&T best fit alignment to recall that, but was wondering if there was a cleaner way.

if you still have the same issue, you can always go back to your old config folder remove the config folder from C:\Users\Public\Documents\Zeiss\CALYPSO 7.0 folder the one you copy from 6.8 old and once removed, you can rename the config_old folder to config and that will bring you back the old config folder

Hello If 2019 is working and 2020 is not, i would recommend going to C:\Users\Public\Documents\Zeiss\CALYPSO 6.8 folder and copy the config folder. then go to C:\Users\Public\Documents\Zeiss\CALYPSO 7.0 and rename the existing config folder to config_old and transfer the config folder from 6.8 folder to this folder. once it is completed open calypso and check if issue is resolved