All Activity

That should do it. Thank you!

Result Element, formula: deg(getActual("circle1").coordPolAngle)

File "inspection" contains almost everything tied to features and characteristics. File "Inspset" is mainly some settings, but there is stored also default probe system and unit setup. Other files are not that important - perhaps model 🙂 Then you can find any app to do checksum for all files in program folder. Perhaps doing zip archive ( or tar ) without compression would do the trick for only file

Mesure the ring faces to level up the plane and in the special button rotate 30° coordinate system on Y axis

Hi, I have question regarding true position plots, I saw the same question in previous posts, bet there wasn`t clear answer. I have bore pattern of 16 M12 holes. My question is why I have the result of hole bore pattern, but I don`t get result for every individual hole, I mean illustration? Is there possibility to leave illustration of hole bore pattern, but turn of this individual bores? Thanks in advice 🙂

Hallo zusammen, hab eine Interaktion gefunden die auf die NOT TO DO Liste kommt.. Keine Leere Geometrie erstellen und dann einen Punkterückruf machen. Gehabt euch wohl, Grüße YM

Be aware of 3D lines: If the two points you are using are at different heights, measuring the angle between them may introduce errors due to the inclination of the 3D lines. The best approach is to measure the circles and use the Projection option under Under Construction to project the centre of each circle onto a plane. Always use the same reference plane for all projections. You can then construct the 3D lines based on these projected points. I have never had any problems measuring angles when using this method. est

Hello Benjamin, the X/Y/Z values are the distances to your Masterprobe: Best Regards Marcel

Joe, Overall, it depends on which compiler ZEISS uses and with which flags. The OP code (binary instructions for the respective hardware CPU) depends heavily on these flags. Standard arithmetic is certainly the same on every platform. Complex mathematical functions (such as sin(x) or ln(y)) are implemented in a library. How this ultimately generates op-codes – that is, the precise instructions for a specific CPU – depends, in turn, on the compiler. If you want absolute precision, the only solution is to use statically linked libraries, which ensure that fixed and verified OP code is used, regardless of the compiler employed and its flags Ultimately, I don’t think there are any noticeable differences depending on whether you use an AMD or Intel CPU for CALYPSO. Rather, the interesting question is whether things like the GPU, threads and massively parallel processing will be used.. 🙂

I am guessing here. Is this an ID?

Hi, Is it possible to output an entire Calypso program as a text file? Our customer is asking for the program in a document form to be reviewed by a Checksum app to be sure no changes are made in the future without validation. Thanks, Mike

We are measuring a part that has several holes going around the perimeter and for two holes on the bottom have to switch to an L-probe. Really its a star probe that we only put one leg on. And it works ... until it doesn't. So it works for a week or a month then it stops working. We don't have a reason why. So I get introduced to the problem and my first thought is that the parts are actually bad. We verified with two separate independent machines that the part is good. The part is measuring oot in the +Y direction on just the one machine. So I inspect the program and it seems fine. No changes. It is still running fine on other machines and comparing the programs they match. So I am thinking maybe it is the probe or probe calibration. They build a new probe from a working set. Same problem. We delete the probe and recreate it. Same problem. So I start looking closer at the calibration and I guess I don't know what I am looking at. Forgive me that the probe numbering does not follow convention. For whatever reason, they made probes 2 and 3 and those are the only orientations that are actually used. I made the rest of them just to have more data. Probes 1,2, and 4 are done on one reference sphere location. Probes 3, 5, and 6 are made on the other. So, what does the X, Y, and Z mean? The main stem is maybe 3 inches long and the probe sticks out to the side maybe 1 inch. So when A = B = 0 the main stem sticks straight down and the probe sticks out to the left in the -X direction. When A= -90, B = 0, the main stem sticks straight down and the probe sticks out in the -Y direction. I haven't been able to think of anything that makes sense of the XYZ for any two probe orientations.

I would be looking at Ryzen 7 Pro 9745's, with 64gb ddr5 and an RTX 2000 Pro Blackwell, if buying AMD for the production CMM's. Ryzen 9000's have pretty good single threaded performance.

I was finally able to get it working. The owner of the company that services the machine used to work for sheffield. He got me the right switch settings, after sending pictures of my old boxes and the new one. Problem was while in the middle of my attempts to get things to work, I did a driver update of the NZDI driver. That was a bad idea. 2022 isn't supposed to work on Win 11, and you have to do things just right, with regards to service pack and such to make it work. So had to uninstall everything Calypso and SQL, use an older revision of CCleaner to get rid of all lingering registry entries, as the latest version failed to do so. Reinstalled everything, and was able to get the software working again. Now just getting all of my stylus systems setup, and qualified again. So far, it's working. Tomorrow, I will work on some base alignments, if the qualifcation is successful.

I think the plot orientations are related to the alignment of the feature? You could theoretically either assign a different alignment to the feature and/or recall features into new constructed features and assign alignments to them that would generate the plot orientation you want. Less than elegant, but it should work in a pinch.

Thanks for your replies. @Chad Watton i didn't know there is such solution - but i think very outside our possible budget 😞 But definitelly i'll keep it in head for later problems 🙂 @Wojciech Malig and @Perry Steever2 very nice tools - i'll try to find something similar in our reach - i think it's better invested money, than buying new sphere, tips and tryharding solution with noone would sign under that measurement 🙂 Also if anyone has another solution i am one ear 🙂 Thanks a lot.

This forum is my failure simulation minigame 😄😄 (neat idea!)

I believe all of the math determinations would be made by the compiler at compile time. The compiled code would return the same results on any system that would run it, so this sort of verification is appropriate (Correct me if wrong?)

Some microscope software can create a 3d topology that you can then section like an optical comparator. I'm thinking of the Zeiss AxioZoom and Keyence VHX. We used to have the Zeiss AxioZoom but now use the Keyence VHX. You'll have to cut the part to get the inner threads under the microscope. I just measured flank angle on a thread this morning using our Keyence VHX.

Close the Status Window, then restart it. Im pretty sure it clears itself.

Or this: https://willrich.com/product/fowler-screw-threads/ I'm not sure you'll be able to measure the thread that small. We do check the pitch diameter on some threads, but you would need a stylus close in size the the thread wire for that pitch. What's the pitch on that thread btw?

Something I saw recently and was interested in was an internal thread mic found here: https://willrich.com/product/multi-ball-internal-thread-micrometer/

Hi, I am facing a problem with customer stating small inner thread. I would need to measure all what can be measured. We have: Accura with VAST XT head -> what probes and cal. spheres we need? ATOS 5 MV500 -> only measurement with cutted part to examine thread - i believe we would need much smaller MV ( around 50 or 100 ) Contourgraph -> we have only onsided blade - i am not sure how to connect two contours scanned with two tips ( one - only Z+ - second only Z- ) Any ideas what would we need to properly measure this small thread ( a hole thats above ⌀20 mm )? I would use Accura - buy two small tips ( R < 0.5mm ), DK 8 cal. sphere and make holder to have both tips against each other to be able to measure oposing curves. We would like to have at least something to show - thread caliper is used, but this is not enough ( told by higher ups ) Thanks for suggestions and tips.

@Martin Jánský.2 is right, that is the only option within PiWeb: But you cannot choose a mirror axis as you could within the "old" Protocol (i also couldnt figure out about what axis the rotation gets done): In your case i would suggest to turn the CAD View to match the PiWeb Plot as an "easy" solution. In general an entry in the "My Voice" Area within the Zeiss Portal would be a good idea to ask for the same functionality as it was in the "old" protocol. Best Regards Marcel

Use 3D line from center to center ( aka use "recall" - not recall features or recall measured points )