All Activity

completely correct, but as a reminder to all, if you have a measurement strategies cookbook lying around that's the best place to really dial in on what settings are appropriate for your situation.

There has to be a quicker way than all the rotation of axis just to get the top or bottom cad to be level with the part on table from a z+ view perspective.

I can't use the new profile characteristics for other reasons, but both surface and line profiles should at least have unequal distribution available in the little dropdown next to the tolerance.

@Nanno Muehl, Great ! It works with script. I completely missed this feature. Now I can atleast develop script. Thank you so much 😉

Thank you, Richard. I always appreciate your help! I'm currently using 2024 so I'll need to use legacy for now. Thanks again. 🙂

What Sven and Bruce suggested will work for dongle licenses. Here is a step by step guide if anyone runs into this same issue and needs it: https://portal.zeiss.com/knowledge-base?id=1517958 Here is also a document that may help with the other information you will want to bring between computers as well: https://portal.zeiss.com/knowledge-base?id=444235

At this moment you cannot. If you truly need that. If you are on at least Calypso 2025, you can create a GD&T Alignment, that can be used in the Legacy Profile. So say, build a Profile/Position using the new engine with your Datum scheme, then go to Resources - Utilities - GDT Best-Fit, reference your Profile/Position, then drop in a Legacy Profile and use the GDT Best-Fit that you just created.

@Martin Jánský, you are right. I could drag the alignments without re-opening the window. Im looking for a easy script solution. I have many projects like this to move alignments , will be much difficult to do one by one. Also , The script wont work even if we run the same manual recorded steps. I wonder if this has anything to do with version GOM 2020 Python API.

There is a function in Operations -> Alignment -> Edit Alignment -> Move Alignment which worked for me in a simple test project by scripting.

Hello, No, ZEISS does not provide any documentation connecting to your local active directory domain. This would need to be handled by your local IT. If you would like to setup CALYPSO, though, to run programs from your network, you can follow these instructions. https://portal.zeiss.com/knowledge-base?id=552028

I am using surface profile to obtain deviations ( or you can use another methods to obtains heatmap of deviations, like surface check on actuals ). Now in Inspection menu there is Min/Max deviation. Right click on profile callout and click select all points or select by laso only interested part of deviations. It will create Min/Max flag. This flag can be used right away for measuring distance or you can create a surface point and with Ctrl key you can select this flag. Now you can report XYZ

I'm measuring a finished part within a forging. I have a surface comparison on the finished piece measured to the forging to get the minimum deviation of the finished piece. Is it possible to get the measured XYZ value from the minimum deviation label? The XYZ values I am able to get are the nominal values of the finished piece, the Z value does not change between parts. Any help would be appreciated.

Ok thanks for clarifying. Had the purly theoretical thought that there might be an interface the app is pulling the info from, that could be used.

Ah ok, i got that mixed up. I think there was a recent thread for that aswell.

You can do it manually by draging those alignments one by one from current ( Main ) into prealignment. You still have to do it one by one, but better than reopening that window. I will be at Inspect again in monday

This is giving me the nominal value of the deviation label, is there a way to pull the measured XYZ value?

The direction is assigned with the dropdown menu on the right side of the planar option

I've always used a 3d line for clocking, but it's because I've had alignments rarely flip 180 degrees around the axis of rotation when using a point reduced feature for some reason. This has happened in other metrology software I've used, as well. It's rare, but it's happened.

I have a program that runs in AutoRun on a pallet, and I'd like to run a separate program at the beginning using something like a batch file (which I know very little about). The reason why, is I'd like to check a centrally located artifact for probe breakage (0.3mm). If I were to just put the check at the beginning of the program, I believe I would need an artifact at each station of the pallet. My thought is if I have a separate program that only references the pallet alignment, then I should be able to just have one artifact at a fixed location. I could be way off on this approach, but it would still be nice to know if this is possible for other potential applications. Thanks in advance!

@Ryan Borg I can't see the RT BA circle in your screenshot showing the probe being off location.

Hi all, How do you input bilateral/two results and/or unequal distribution of a profile with the new GDT profile characteristic? Thanks for your help!

The scanport app just knows the next nominal calibration position and displays it in its window (left part in the screenshots from above). The right part of the screenshots from above (with the actual live position information) comes from the calibration function inside the "setup workspace", which is not part of the app.

Could it be rounding on the drawing? Are you able to validate the coordinate of the model by other means such as a CAD modeling software such as SolidWorks or CATIA?

The problem is not using a circle for the planar rotation. It is using a tapped hole to clock the part. Even a 3d Line created by recalling the center circle and the planar circle will give you the same problem. Use a better planar feature. In the OP's example, a "single point" created from this circle doesn't need a direction/vector, it only needs the ability to stop rotation about the Z axis, which it can do quite well. The center of this circle is projected to the top plane, so if the hole has an angular deviation from part to part, or you check the same part at different depths, you will not get the same results, even if it is not tapped.

@DWC Please share some data to support your claim. Everyone should keep things civil, but if there is data to backup your claim, we'd all greatly appreciate it.