All Activity

but i am also looking at the Raw Data.. I see the noise it that even without the GDT evaluation

classic for both... cant really use the new one for this type of eval.

Are you using the new GD&T Line Profile or the Classic Line Profile?

I have done this several ways and i am still getting random noise... I have created noms 3 different ways 1) from recall points , then recalculate.... in order to do this no data can be in the features yet 2) I created a text file with all the nominal points and either "read into" within the curve or use the points set 3) used the cad model to generate the nominals once that was done, i recalled the points using both non-filtered data and checked the filtered data. Every one of those things creates the same random "noise" .... sometimes it is at the end of one curve some times its well into the curve....

It may be "Plane1ba". Martin's data seems to lean on that feature. And I just found the problem. Inside of Plane1ba is an extra Clearance Data and guess which probe is attached to it. I have no clue how an extra Clearance Data was added or how it would have been assigned a probe that isn't being used. 🫣

You can add the probe racks to the simulator, but only virtually. You cannot mount them to your table and do crash detection. (If that changed in version 8, I cant find it!) It would be so nice to be able to simulate and not have to validate on the real machine!

Engineers 🙄 My buddy said, engineers should go back to operating trains... He said it to me 🥲 @Josh Elmore Are you using the classic or new profile? How are you creating the nominals for the recalled curve? My preferred method is using the connect nominal curves If using the "re-calculate nominal geometry" option from the recall feature points pop-up, make sure there is no actual data in your curve I would recommend using the curve results points option when recalling the feature points. This would pull the actual curve points rather than the raw scanned points (generally 3x your actual points)

The Planner seat runs version 7.8. Of the 9 Zeiss CMMs here, six of them can run version 7. A few of our CMMs run XXT and TP20 systems so that's another rack I guarantee doesn't exist in Calypso. The rack modeling is certainly lacking, but more of a want than a need. I'll be leveraging Solidworks for making set-ups, which we 3D print a lot of workholding. Also making a mental note about the holders, thanks!

Do you know the feature which causes the problem? To my mind the technology of this feature has another safety data entry. If the probe system of this one differs to the assigned system of the safety data on top of the technology, this special probe system won't show up at the measurement plan editor features and so on. The only message you get is that this probe system is not available.

I do not mask other than the global "point masking by time interval, but not in the settings of the feature. the bottom scan is the one segment (curve) that is originally evaluated as a profile of a line.. the top scan is the exact same segment, but recalled with the other curves. I have tried both selecting and deselecting the "filter option" that is now available in 2025 when recalling points.. both give me the same error. I have tried increasing the filters in the eval..which does get rid of the noise, but does not match the original scan. Engineering wants to look at both. this particular segment, the nominal points set to 425 with point scan set at 1000

Unfortunately, I can't send you this program, I had to prove US citizenship to be able to work on this project. Its T.S.N.S. Top Secret Ninja Sh*t.

I did not think about groups, according to Martin, the offending feature is in a group.

Are you recalling calculated points or all? Also do you use masking points beggining/end of a scan? You can show your masked ( red ) points on actual scan and i think it will corelate. When i do scans, i always mask curve points at beggining and end of a scan manually - keeping those points for me to review

I have a program that has a profile callout that goes from point A to Point B. Originally I scan this as sever curves because that is what engineering wanted... i e one curve from point A to Point B across several features (radius, cone, radius, diameter..etc). They then came back and asked to separate the curves into individual sections... I did this and for YEARS this was fine. Now they want it back to original 1 scan. Program has evolved to where I do not want to use the original probe I used to get it in one scan. I tried to recall all the individual scan sections into 1 curve, but I am getting random "noise" on the curves. I am using the same filters on the recall... if I increase the filter, i filter out the noise, but then the complete scans do not match the individual scans. Several part runs do, some multiple complete scans have this noise but the rest of the scans match... its all random... NOISE NO NOISE both are from the same scan.. bottom one is the actual scan, the top with the noise is when i recall it.

@Karsten Kankowski The price of just under 1,000 euros for a Zeiss holder is reasonable. In addition to the Contura, we also have a Mitutoyo machine with Renishaw equipment; for that one, a 3-slot rack (which is also just plastic and a few springs) costs 3,000 euros 🤑😭

Hallo Lippert, Sie selektieren ihr Button, wechseln zum Reiter Datenquelle -> Datenbindung und dort auf den Button "Erweiterte Filter" anklicken. Dort definieren Sie Ihre Merkmals- und Messungsfilter. Anschließend geben Sie dem Button zwei Verknüpfungen "Datenbindung der Seite ändern" und "Zeilenvorlagen im Protokoll austauschen". Wenn Sie dabei Unterstützung benötigen oder weitere Fragen haben, hilft Ihnen unsere Hotline gerne weiter: +49 7364 20 6337.

Calypso program editor: Win32/64 application in Delphi for editing programs without Calypso Now it's in a stage ALPHA where it reads "inspection" and "inspset" file and shows parsed content in TreeView component. Search is available. For a start this will be only a viewer, then i'll start to adding editing functions. Now next step will be conversion to and from XML My GIT repository ( private now ) :https://github.com/justyand/zeiss_pgm_editor Direct link: *not yet*

CalypsoAPI: From me is only compilation for .NET4.8 - all credits goes to authors and contributors dotNet api class for communication with Calypso ( i assume ) My GIT repository: https://github.com/justyand/CalypsoAPI Direct link: https://github.com/justyand/CalypsoAPI/releases/tag/Calypso

Are we talking about the XXT probe plates (in SSC models) or a model of the rack? The plates are in the stylus creator (you need to start a new probe by clicking on the "new" button in the tool bar, then you can select your probing system from a list). Note that you probably need to rotate XXT plates by 90 degrees to get the correct orientation. An XXT rack however is indeed missing from the rack building module, as is any kind of movable rack (MSR, ProMax,...). That mndule was introduced years ago in a basic version for fixed racks and since then nothing new was added. It's kind of a DOA feature, like so many others in Calypso.

probe2csv: LUA script for extracting probe data from programs. Whole script with LUA interpreter can be downloaded here: My GIT repository: https://github.com/justyand/zeiss_probe2csv Direct link: https://github.com/justyand/zeiss_probe2csv/releases/tag/v1.0

Hallo Herr Mundt, grundsätzlich sollte das möglich sein, das hängt aber von ein paar Rahmenbedingungen ab. Damit wir gezielt helfen können, bräuchte ich noch ein paar Informationen: Arbeiten Sie mit PiWeb Reporting oder mit PiWeb Essential / Enterprise? Welche PiWeb-Version setzen Sie ein? Soll der Button zum Öffnen des zusätzlichen Reports nur dann sichtbar/ausgeführt werden, wenn im Protokollkopf „Letztteil“ ausgewählt ist? Mit Protokollkopf meinen Sie wahrscheinlich die Messungsauswahl "Letze Messung". Zusätzlich wären für eine genauere Analyse hilfreich: beide verwendeten Report-Templates und ein Datenbankauszug (*dfs bzw. *qdb). Am effizientesten ist es vermutlich, wenn Sie sich direkt bei unserer Hotline melden. Dann können wir das gemeinsam direkt auf Ihrem Rechner ansehen: ZEISS PiWeb Hotline: +49 7364 20 6337

@Piotr_Pawlak Hi, that's not necessarily needed here. Anyways that curve has data only for sloped lines. For lines in Z axis there are no green dots representing measured point ( or evaluated, i am not sure ). I don't know dimensions so i would reccomend increasing search distance - this can lead to unexpected missing scanned data. Unless you have segments only for those slopes. With no scanned data you can not have calculated 3 2d lines in Z axis, so no calculation of intersection also.

Hello Daniel, Welcome to Planner & Simulation. Which version of CALYPSO are you using? There are no XXT socket holders in versions prior to 8.0. I very much doubt that there will be any development for XXT and MSR mini holders from version 8.0 onwards. Generally speaking, Planner is a rather neglected software module. There has been no further development for many years. The current version 8.0 is virtually unusable. Let’s see what works in version 8.2, whenever that comes out. We use Planner/Simulation extensively and are now well aware of many of its pitfalls and glitches; yet we still come across something new from time to time. I'll keep my fingers crossed that you'll be able to get the offline station working reasonably well. P.S. We now 3D-print the XXT probe socket ourselves. Just under €1,000 for a bit of plastic and three springs isn’t in line with market prices; not even if it says ‘Zeiss’ on the plastic 🙂 Regards Karsten

After some successful hunting and seeking, I got our first CMM set up for offline simulation. I was tinkering around with setting up the stylus racks and holders and hit a snag there. We run XXT probes, but the only models loaded are for Vast XT plates. Has anyone had any success with loading the probe socket holders into their simulation environments?

@Marcel Hartmann I've found that in "inspection" file there is twice section of "OMTecSafety" in which is one probe system and i secondary there is another probe system. All other features have only one definiton of that "OMTecSafety" Not sure how that happened, but Richard has my findings even which feature it is, so i hope it will be founded.