All Activity

Hello I'm trying to use PiWeb Monitor, but the connection fails. The strange thing is that it works with one user but not with another, on the same computer, which is the one I need. I also tried it on another computer and the same thing happens: it connects with one user but not with another. I'm using Windows user authentication. The PiWeb server is on the same network segment as the computer I'm trying to connect from. Does anyone have any idea what this could be? I'm using Windows Server Standard 2022 and PiWeb Monitor 8.4.42.0. A screenshot of the error is attached. Thanks!

I'm using a Triple scan. I understand that this unit is no longer supported and was hoping to replace with the Comet.

For gits and shiggles, place the same code in a Result Element and see if it is correct all the time. My initial thought is this in the Post settings may not get the new value until the program is completed, which is after Post settings have been run. Using a Result element may show us something, and it may not.

As a side note, using Calypso v2022, if you save the PMI enabled CAD model from within Calypso it appears to lose the PMI information.

As far as I know, and I have never tried it, you will need a separate profile name. I don't know how that would work when using Chip ID's, which I use that all the time.

I failed to mention my setup is in the +Y axis, not -Z.

Here is what you typically can expect on a Contura equied with the sensor you specifed. Zeiss limit values: PLTI 20µm PLTE 10µm Actual values: PLTI 12µm PLTE 6µm

I opted for a dell precision 7780 laptop (i9, 64gb ram, NVIDIA® RTX™ 3500 Ada Generation, 12 GB GDDR6) just in case i want to be able to use it on the go. In hindsight i would go for a more powerful stationary system.

Possibly you can upgrade your laptop https://www.dell.com/support/manuals/en-uk/precision-17-7750-laptop/precision_7750_specs/paměť?guid=guid-f07064b8-2eb4-49ec-88a8-43b102e42417&lang=en-us

Hello everyone, I've realized that the PC I'm using for Zeiss Inspect is hampered by its specification. We produce larger parts for different customers that we weld and machine inhouse and we use hawk 2's to evaluate many of these parts. My current PC is a Dell 7750 with a I7 10850, 32 GB RAM and a Quadro RTX 4000, the issue I've run into many times is the lack of RAM. I've talked with a colleague that has a Zeiss-laptop and he has also ran into the issue with lack of RAM during the scanning of parts, but not as frequent. And we have talked about getting laptops from Zeiss to not have to worry about compability issues, but our supplier can't do any changes to those computers as I want a swedish keyboard and more RAM than it's equipped with. We've talked about buying laptops ourselves from Dell that is the same model as the Zeiss-model, but with the changes that I need. We've also talked about ditchning the laptop and getting a regular computer that has even more RAM and better GPU. But I thought that maybe some of you might have some insight to share about what route to follow. And I apologize in advance for any troubles with reading my english, it's been a while since I've written in english.

Hallo, das mit dem RDS-CAA ist so eine Sache. Der Hersteller macht darüber keine Angaben wie hoch die Grenzwerte dafür sind. Es bleibt dem Anwender überlassen, abzuschätzen wie "genau" man damit ist. Es gibt Vorgaben aus Normen, z. Bsp. die Mehfachtaster-Antastabweichung mit der man zum Beispiel seine Grenzwerte ermitteln kann, sowohl beim empirischen einmessen als auch beim abgeleiteten einmessen. Ich habe festgestellt, dass die Genauigkeit sehr stark von Faktoren wie, Umgebungsbedingungen abhängig ist. Es bleibt dir nichts anderes übrig, deine Grenzwerte für diese Messmaschine selber zu definieren. MfG Volker

We aren't using it yet, but look forward to. That's a great idea. @Marcel Hartmann are you in?

Hi, Instead of automatically generating the PDF document after the CNC process, you could use the AcceptProtocol. You could assign an additional action to the existing “Block Measurement” button to export the PDF file with the desired filename.

Nach Rücksprache mit dem zuständigen Kollegen für PMI aus der Anwendungstechnik ist PMI definitiv kostenlos, lediglich für die native CAD Schnittstelle (außer .Sab/.Sat) muss bezahlt werden:

I am evaluating internal gap using a surface comparison in ZEISS INSPECT/GOM. For a virtually fitted implant component (local best fit with tolerance/outside target element), practically all valid deviations are positive because penetration is prevented by the alignment. Therefore, I expected the software-reported signed mean distance to be approximately equal to: Integrated signed distance / Area of valid distance and also approximately equal to: Integrated absolute distance / Area of valid distance However, in one example I obtained: Mean distance: 0.0858 mm Integrated distance: 31.1040 mm³ Integrated absolute distance: 31.1040 mm³ Area of valid distance: 175.5282 mm² Thus: 31.1040 / 175.5282 = 0.1772 mm which is about twice the reported mean distance, despite the absence of relevant negative deviations. Could ZEISS please clarify the exact calculation of the following surface-comparison statistics? Is Mean distance calculated as an unweighted average of geometry inspection values, mesh vertices, CAD vertices, or another set of evaluation points? Are individual values weighted by the associated triangle or surface area? How is Distance standard deviation calculated, and does it use the same weighting as Mean distance? Is avg(inspection.value, index='geometry') mathematically identical to the Mean distance shown in the properties? Is there a built-in method to calculate a genuinely surface-area-weighted mean and standard deviation? Does the tessellation density or triangle-size distribution of the nominal CAD influence Mean distance and standard deviation? My aim is to report the physical mean internal gap over the complete valid surface. At present, I calculate this as integrated distance divided by valid area, but I would like to understand precisely how this differs from the built-in statistics.

When i try to take a shot in photogrammetry i get the same error, I'm able to program it offline and run the program when online. However if i try to manually take a shot it refuses to do so and I'm at a loss

@Jochen Heller Thank you for the link. Unfortunately, it doesn't quite address my situation. I actually have a copy of ASME Y14.5-2018 and it doesn't cover my specific situation either. I think the engineer that marked up the drawing might be taking some liberties with the interpretation of the standard.

Sort of! It has to be a separate stylus system. You will have to manually reassign which probe is in your probe holder, the regular or the CAA probe, to switch between the two. But there is no problem having both set up and qualified.

Hi Travis, GOM Inspect cannot be used to measure with the Comet, but you could import the mesh into Inspect to keep evaluating with Inspect. Measuring is done in "Colin 3D" apparently with the Comet. What ATOS sensor are you currently using? Nanno

Hello Fellow Calypso Users I dug into this more and here’s what I found. When you fire up Calypso, login and launch the program from AutoRun, the failure (live image on and off) always occurs. It will continue to fail, unless you go into Calypso desktop, run it from there (always successfully), come back into AutoRun where it will also run successfully from that point forward. So the initial launch of the program from AutoRun appears to be the culprit. Unfortunately this is how operators/technicians will run the program; I do not give them access to Calypso desktop. FYI, completely shutting down and firing-up the PC and the CMM did nothing to change the outcome. I even added a tactile point measurement on the cylindrical portion of the micro-Vblock that proceeds the manual optical measurement point (red crosshairs) hoping that starting the program with the tactile sensor prior to engaging the optical sensor might fix things, but to no avail. I look forward to your thoughts and insights. Thank you Mike Roterdam Senior Metrology Engineer

Hello, maybe you find what you need here:

This is the first time I've seen a dynamic profile this and need a little help with setting this up in Calypso 2023. This a marked up drawing so excuse the lack of exactness on the profile callout. I think I'm all set with the upper tier but not sure about the lower tier, especially with the unequal distribution. Any feedback would be greatly appreciated.

this is here because there is no "delete post" option.

@Derek Jester Thank you for the detailed info above. To be honest, I thought you meant you had a more accurate method for qualifying the CAA version. My bad.

Ich klär es mal eben mit der Anwendungstechnik, nicht das meine Info falsch ist 🙂