All Activity

This is spline corner chamfer measurement; you can measure this with a Contour measuring device.

Hello all, I attached a blue print below. The dimensions highlighted in yellow, I would like to inspect but am unclear where to look. Been looking through the profile section of Gear Pro I am missing it or I am in the wrong section. Was hoping someone could point me in the right direction. Thank you for any assistance. Regards, Lou

Any updates @Marcel Hartmann? Has anyone heard any rumors of what updates/improvements will be included in Calypso 2026?

You would probably need to perform calibration or at least hyperscale.

Absolutely. https://portal.zeiss.com/knowledge-base?id=3794258 https://portal.zeiss.com/academy/video-tube/imt/87496/Cee6NyY5M3YMmcbBrbzdSv You can also test the new GD&T engine in 2023 by activating the license, and then reloading Calypso. https://portal.zeiss.com/knowledge-base?id=2022494

is it worth it to upgrade from CALYPSO 2023 to 2026? Are you able to add MMC bonuses for the secondary or tertiary datums in the control frame. Can you visualize more than one features measured data simultaneously? In other words can I detect a problem without looking at a report. Is it possible to see a problem by just looking at the CAD model? What are other pros? Thanks!

The part is aluminium and sanded, I can't use visibility spray because of cleanliness. So it is quiet shiny. The part is scanned within 3 minutes with focus on getting as much mesh as possible around the datums. For every measurement position I manually set the exposure time. Do you have advice on how I can get less holes whilst not adding more scanning positions?

I do not know what happened, but after shutting both the PC and CMM down, restart, it is working normally.

@Norbert Bendl Is the drawing located in the software files?

I think your problem is not so much the parameters of the measuring principle, but the scanning coverage of the part surface. With so many holes in the mesh I'm not surprised you get a bit of spread in your results. How do you prepare the part before scanning? 344 points should be enough, but it depends on how they are distributed around the cylinder.

When calibrating using RDS CAA, an articulation should clear up in Z axis (that is working), move the Z mast over the center of the Master Sphere, articulate to the new angle, Clear in its respective axis and proceed with calibrating that particular articulation. In this case, it is clearing in +Z, moving in +Y, -X (maybe 6 inches), articulating, then over travels in -X axis. the expected articulation is A0B97.5, which it does articulate to those angles.

I am trying to run a calibration on an existing probe, all of a sudden on the first CAA articulation, it over travels in -X axis. The second articulation moves oddly, first move is in the +Y,-X axis, then -X axis where it over travels. The first articulation should be A0B97.5, it does the proper articulation. Has anyone ran into this issue? Calypso v2022 RDS XXT CAA

Cylinder diameter 3.8, axis length is 7. I have 334 points on that cylinder for example, that is quiet high I assume. What kind of setting would you recommend? I will try out a couple of your tips.

Can you elaborate a bit more on what you mean by "small cylinders"? Is it a "short" cylinder (large diameter, short axis) or is it just a cylinder that is so small your scanner resolution doesn't give you enough points to work with? Short axis cylinders are generally susceptible to a certain amount of tilting when their mesh surface is not perfectly even. All that was said above CAN help, but depending on how much the surfcae deviates from a perfect cylinder, you may still end up with a tilted result. If all else fails your last resort is to add constraints in the measuring principle. For example, if the cylinder protrudes from a flat plane and you know it is perfectly rectangular, you might set the cylinder's axis orientation to that of the plane's normal.

Increasing Max. angle can bring more selected mesh. For bestfit - you can select areas on mesh, which can bring mesh into a correct position. If it's rotary part, then it will help only with rotation. Otherwise if you have problems with depth and or angle, then you can select only one mesh-cylinder for bestfit and measure only this one within bestfit alignment. You can select measured cylinder and in properties you can select to calculate it only in certain alignment.

Hi Martin, Thanks for fast response. Angle selection of fitting element U mean to play with the Max Angle in fitting element; Your second remark: I already have a pre alignment with best fit of full part. You say it will help if I create another best fit alignment based on area's on datums or area around it? This means I have to select MESH data manually with select through surface and make a new best fit alignment? This scanning program needs to run via kiosk without any manual steps, is this possible?

You can play with angle selection of fitting element. Also you can use bestfit on certain areas of a mesh to improve CAD<->mesh fitting

Currently we are validating geometric quality of 3D printed parts with narrow tolerances. On TPD drawing datum system ABC is applied on small planes/cylinders for long parts. I tried to gather as much mesh on or in these spots so that the fitted planes and cylinders are as reliable as possible. Before the ABC alignment a pre alignment is set where the whole part is best fit. I notice that whenever I rescan the same item, the results of position accuracy tolerancies vary and in some occasions lead to out of specs. My question is via which ways I can improve the fitting of small cylinders? Sometimes the fit results in a slightly different direction and has big impact on all other measurements. I read on internet that a possible solution is to make sections where circles can be fit. With these circles I can construct a more reliable cylinder.

Funny enough, when you ask chatgpt about MIBA errors now. Its like "oh and also here is how to change the background color" for no reason whatsoever other than Jeff asked a bonus question three years ago 😄 😄😄

I think you have to just iterate through scans and measurements. I can not verify this but something similar should do the trick: for mserie in gom.app.project.measurement_series: for measurement in mserie.measurements: left = gom.api.project.get_image_acquisition (measurement, 'left camera', [0])[0] right = gom.api.project.get_image_acquisition (measurement, 'right camera', [0])[0] Also you can use numbers instead of names ( example: gom.app.project.measurement_series[0] instead ...measurement_series['Scan1'] ) I often checking results via print to see what is in there.

Übungswürfel_Zeichnung.tif

Hello everyone, There have been changes to the technical drawing and a D reference has been added. Along with this, the runout value has also changed. I need to check the runout based on 2 plane points and one cylinder point. In Calyso, I can select 2 references for runout: 1 plane and 1 cylinder. I haven't seen 2 different plane points for runout before. I'm using Calyso 2021. Could this be related to the new GD&T? Benim düşüncem,

I've created a python scrip that access the image acquisition for each scan to extract a circular object. I'm doing this many times <100 for a part so this lends itself to automation. The issue is that the background changes across the part - while the object i'm extracting stays the same. From what i understand the image i'm accessing as the default exposure associated with it, or maybe the first. But the scans that i've taken have more than one. How do I access these additional images? I am using the way the scripting documentation shows how to access them to begin with: left = gom.api.project.get_image_acquisition (measurement, 'left camera', [0])[0] right = gom.api.project.get_image_acquisition (measurement, 'right camera', [0])[0] The measurements here are taken from one of the measurements in the series - generally more than 10 of them: scanImages = gom.app.project.measurement_series[measurement_series_name].measurements Can someone help point me in the direction if i'm going down the wrong path. ideally i'd like to use the different exposures to threshold out the object i'm looking for instead of forcing something from the base exposure.

Richard - I'll give that a try. Thanks. Ivan - That would still be a pre-defined starting point. It would be the same as the original scenario except now it would be in a different spot. It still wouldn't be a true best fit. A best fit allows the bolt circle centerpoint to move around so that all of the error from all of the individual holes is minimized. That will give a better picture than just an average, or a location to a pre-defined point. Make sense? Did I explain that sufficiently? Hope that helped.