All Activity

I am trying for the first time to create a qualification program. I have a Vast XXT. I am following the instructions in a pdf that has been posted here a few times and it states to change the mode from Qualify Passive Stylus to Geometry Re-Qualification. However when I try to do this on my RC-CAA probes, everything is greyed out. Does that mean you cannot change it and it must remain Qualify Passive Stylus? This seems odd considering that when you qualify it without it being part of a program, it does allow you to select Geo Re-Qual. Also, what is the RS 2 column? It says below that it is for Dynamic Reference Sphere for Navigator only. I don't know what Navigator is, but it has a reference sphere listed in that column for only this probe. The other probes do not list anything in that column.

I recently had a problem that took me way too long to figure out. I had a part that measured great except for the few features that were measured with the angled probe. I beat my head against it and eventually discovered that the issue was the calibration with the regular straight 3mm probe on a 75 mm stem. It was off by almost 0.03". I think that what had happened was that somebody had not revalued the reference sphere before calibration. The interesting thing is that the numbers on the calibration were great. It looked like a good calibration. Good sigma etc. With roughly 100 features measured using over 10 probe orientations of basically every approach angle with that probe it agreed with itself. Holes on one side of the part were directly in line with holes on the other side of the part. I would expect that to not be the case. The Y direction was off by almost 0.03" (not to mention the issues in X though Z was good). So when I am probing from the +X side vs probing from the -X side with a generic probe, if the reference sphere location was wrong by 0.03" I would expect the holes on the two sides to be off by 0.06" relative to eachother. I think the CAA just does a ton of magic to bring those into alignment so that anything with that probe is basically good to other things with that same probe. But if you use another probe with a regular calibration ... especially a good calibration ... the two probes will disagree by the offset in the reference sphere location, or about 0.03" in this case. Does that sound right? Does anybody else have more insight or experience with this? I cannot afford the cmm time to truly test the theory.

@Robert Frisch I am having this also on 7.8 - i do change acis process to High priority

Well the first simulation went smoothly. Went under a different machine tab, to try and run another one, and got this. I double checked, and I do have the correct profile, in nvidia control panel selected.

Testing out simultion now, just to see how it works. First thing I noticed, that my cad model changed in look right away, when starting the simulation. If I cancel it goes back to the view I started with. All the boundry lines disappeared. It's like it changed the view quality, dynamically, to avoid overtaxing the vram on my GPU. If that is the intent, and working properly, I like that. I can program and see the cad clearly when programming, but visual quality means nothing as long as the boundries are correct, for simulation.

https://www.zeiss.com/metrology/en/explore/events/webinars/2026/duramax-8-5-5-flexible-shop-floor-metrology.html?utm_source=eblast&utm_medium=invitation&utm_campaign=GL_IQS_WB_Dec26_8665_DuraMax-855-Launch_US&utm_content=registration&mkt_tok=NzgxLUVYTi02ODQAAAGlS3f9oxGL7XaOqqWJszfg3oPSSA4nqdavomaS5ldVtLdP0g_jbuzyVTSOEN44vIgelVx7AKZs3j74S1RJ4LB8JpbarmmFdDHMEkBdePGyyaIb

Calypso 2027 is online. Careful! There is still plenty of room for improvement! Should the new drivers for the camera and DOTSCAN also be installed?

Yea it is very hideous. They got it right for the features tab and such, but the rest is too dark for black and too bright on the white. Guess it was too hard to look at dark mode for other software, and come closer to that, instead of some weird high contrast black/white from generic windows themes. Yea I am experiencing the same with rotation.

Agree Richard. The sphere I have now is at 135 and 135. One of the probes will not qualify due it being at 30 degree. Im going to get a straight shaft probe as I do not know if I can rotate this one without throwing everything off. Going down roads ive never been!!!

Just tested it and seems marginally better than the dark mode from "special menu" in previous releases. The other things I've noticed is that the model rotates weirdly when holding RMB. I've opened the same plan in 2025 and the model rotates as they did for the past 15 years. So they've definitely changed something. Also there seems to be a weird input lag when rotation the model, it's smooth but slow. I've only tested in on the Offline PC, but I wonder how it would behave on different hardware configurations. I'm not brave enough to put it on production PCs just yet.

@Daniel Scott, I'm curious to hear more about the second part of your post, the LineScan for profile strategy. If appropriate, what type of parts and materials are you planning to inspect with a LineScan? Have you had a chance to converse with Zeiss about the application of this laser line scanner on your parts? Thanks for sharing about this.

You can make your own and place there only "Label" - this allows to use editor and it's multiline

I think 135ish is the limit of max reduction. I would personally only use this as a temporary workaround, and purchase a smaller reference sphere for permanent.

Changed from 180 to 150 and seems to have help radius and deviation.

Yeah I am using Tensor. Guess I need to change the angle and see what works. Gonna be trial and error haha

Martin I was trying to do a report page that allows just text. Which template should I be using?

@Mike Racine This will only work properly if you are using Tensor or Geometry Re-qualification. If you are performing a Passive Qualification, it will shank on the "death-spirals" which will build incorrect bending parameters.

Yeah I am on a Prismo Navigator here. Looking at a 8mm sphere now. I have no idea how to change "working angle" as I have never had to do that. Guess i can rutt around and see where it can be changed... lol

You will need an 8mm to qualify this on an XXT. If you are using this on an active head, you can change the sphere coverage.

Then either annotation or you can use comment on anything from program tree. You can also make your own python app, where it will read txt file with your changes and you will have link to that file through file path and name or any other way. You can also make an report page with comment and hide that page for printing.

Only for passive calibration is working angle range coverage. Or you would need smaller sphere. I think i'll have soon DK8 sphere and 0.8mm probe.

For standard program.

Are you running that program from autorun? Then on right side is check box for manual - it will force to first do manual alignment, then it will run in CNC mode. If you are running that from programming window, then go to editing of start alignment and click on manual run. Both methods will store new origin of start alignment.

Happy Thurs all... I have a DK 0.5 stepped probe (626123-5444-018) that I need to calibrate. But as I thought when I ordered it that it would shanks out on my 15mm ref sphere. Is there a way to set limits etc.. so that it will not shank? OR would I be better off ordering a 8mm ref sphere and change it out for these probes? Never had to use a probe this small lol lucky me I guess. Any help is appreciated