All Activity

Has anyone encountered this error when trying to do a full calibration with the ScanPort? I get this same error when it's on position 12. On the right side it says that it needs to decrease distance, but this is ScanPort automatic calibration, I don't have the option to move the sensor closer. Any guidance is appreciated.

I believe you are correct @Perry Steever2. If the basic dimensions are to planar surfaces, or to other features from planar surfaces, they're asking for TP Ø.020 to the referenced surfaces. Depending on what standard is referenced on the print you'd also get a modifier on those holes too.

If there is nothing else controlling the location of these holes I would assume the design intent is that the datums is the features that the basic values originate from. If there are other dimensions controlling the location I would assume that this is like the lower section of a composite true position. Just these two holes relative each other. I would ask the designer but he is probably retired or dead by now.

If it doesn't come out before December 31st, 2026, I want my 2026 SMA money back . That said, I'd be happy paying for 2026 and 2027 if they changed the icon's back or at least improved them. Especially the ID/OD icon, because who hasn't misinterpreted the small black circle feature icon and crapped their pants when it outside the hole to measure it?

@Tom Oakes, nice job on using the CMM to measure your stylus system angles. You should ditch the aluminum extensions, though. The CFX extensions are a worthy upgrade.

The 1970's are calling. Is this just a TP Ø.020? I dont have any datums, but I do have some basic locations of these hole locations.

@JeffI have created the macro, but I didn't use it much. But that's not entirely true. I did a bunch of testing years ago and the difference between the macro and default concentricity wasn't very much. Not for my parts at least. I'm sure there's some parts where it would make a significant difference, but I'd do the testing before I committed to doing the crazy macro all the time. On the bright side, ASME 14.5 did me a favor and obsoleted concentricity.

Haha I wouldn't go as far as GOAT status but thanks for the kind words, I'm always happy to help!

@Chad Watton, thanks for sharing this PDF and the root cause of projection error in Calypso's concentricity characteristic. Since this PDF was presented during a live Lunch-and-Learn, there are some gaps in the how-to. How do you deal with concentricity in Calypso? Have you created a macro similar to the one described in the PDF?

I've used this and a sine vise to set all of my angles for years now and it works perfectly. Everything is within about .00015" perp and parallel. If you have the opportunity to have one made, I can send you the .stp file? It would save a lot of time setting up stylus systems in the future but doesn't immediately address the issue at hand.

Thank you! I figured it had something to do with it skewing one of the holes and projecting it over the distance between them. I tried what was suggested and got .2mm one direction and .1mm the other direction.

You're almost certainly getting projection error caused by trying to measure concentricity across a distance. A small error on one side is projecting to a much larger error on the other side of the part. I've posted this several times on the forum, but its worth a read if you haven't read it yet. Concentricity across a distance starts about halfway down the PDF. Something like this. Profile_Concentricity_CALYPSO.pdf

If you are using gage, then scan it like one cylinder and use outer tangential. Due to undefined drawing can not tell more.

I getting what I feel are unrealistic results when measuring the concentricity between holes on two plates on a weldment. Callout on one hole is .5mm to the other hole. No other datums. Functional gage passes thru both holes on all pieces, but the CMM is giving a result of 1.2mm to 6mm (wow). I need help figuring out of there is something I am doing that is causing it to skew. Don't judge my terrible drawing skills. I don't have the parts anymore and will not post the drawing, but you get the idea. Basically there is a bottom plate, with a plate perpendicular to the bottom plate on each end. There is a hole in each of the side plates. For my alignment, I used the top side of the bottom plate as my Z and spatial. I made a line across the front side of the bottom plate for Y and planar. I took a point on the outside of the left plate for my X. Information that may or may not be helpful: The left and right plates are perpendicular to each other within .1mm. I first probed them as circles and asked for concentricity. I then probed them as cylinders and asked for coaxiality. The holes are laser cut and sort of rough. Every time I probe them as a cylinder, it thinks its a cone or sphere, and I have to change it to a cylinder. I tried changing from the default ISO to Loose and in some cases, that made it worse. I tried changing the alignment to use the left plate instead of just the single point. I tried plugging additional datums into the characteristics. I tried using a straight down probe with the RDS XXT at 90 and I also tried using a star probe. I cannot get any of the pieces to give a concentricity or coaxiality results below 1.2mm. I don't have the parts anymore, as my manager stated we would send them on the basis that the functional gage passes. I would just like to know what I should do differently in the future.

Well you wrote you are measuring those cylindrical pins against probe to get angle. When i was doing angle i was loosening a screw to adjust angle around Z axis. Then i was measuring with probe shaft the ref. sphere so from measured points i got cylinder - this way i got angle in Z axis and also tilt. What was confusing for you? Definition how to measure adapter pins?

Yes, indeed

@Keith Forche Does this also apply to rotations about the center axis?

IDK... to be honest, 95% of the time I set the angles of the probe visually, with a printed out chart.

@Martin Jánský ????

You're Welcome, I am glad to hear it worked for you!

Isn't this to set rotation on that shaft? For measuring that angle i would use machine and scan a shpere with probe shaft to obtain a cylinder which can tell angle. For your question: if you plan to rotate as my picture, then you should have adapter plate almost fixed - so use it as base alignment with all 3 cylinders. If you want it precise: mesure 3 circles -> contruct a plane from them measure 2 lines per cylinder paralel with previously created plane combine to obtain firm alignment Now measure your angles on future probe shafts.

Hi All, I have tried this yesterday and it seems OK, however I had a program in Calypso where almost every feature was scanned, but after exporting to pc - dmis all features have touch points only. Is there any easy way to change this ?

I am setting up some angled stylus systems. I don't not have a Zeiss tool to set these angles. I am using my CMM to measure the angles. Which features on the adapter plate are the best for setting up a base alignment? I am currently using the setup shown in pic. Is there a better feature for ,the planar, i.e. the slot at 6 o'clock? On a side note, I assumed the 3 pins would be precisely 120° apart but they are not. However, a circle created from the 3 pins shows to be concentric to od.

Google trends is giving me conflicting results for this. In the United States we see two odd spikes for the word Calliope in 2026. But the searches are not coming from where Zeiss has their main offices. You would think insiders would be googling the word Calliope. Worldwide, searches are mostly from Italy, Serbia, and Greece. Not exactly Zeiss hotspots either.