All Activity

Based on your diagram, I think the issue is that the Bottom and Top scans don't share any common reference points. Once Bottom + Middle are aligned using one reference point constellation, the software expects additional datasets to use that same constellation. My thought would be to use the Middle scan as the bridge: Align Bottom ↔ Middle using their common reference points. Keep the Middle scan in the project. Import the Top scan. Create a second reference point alignment between Middle ↔ Top using their shared reference points. In theory, this should allow the transformation chain to propagate Bottom → Middle → Top without requiring Bottom and Top to share reference points. If that isn't possible in ATOS Professional V8, could you share a screenshot of the project tree after combining Bottom and Middle? That should help determine whether this is a workflow limitation or a project setup issue.

This is zeroing in on my issue. Each measurement series is in a separate project. You are correct in that I created the reference point alignment, and Inspect is expecting my 3rd scan to use the same reference point alignment, but it doesn't. It seems like this should be possible, but I can't figure it out. I have an idea of combining two of them using reference points, then turning it into CAD, and then using geometric alignments to combine them, but it seems like I should be able to do this with reference points. Below is a breakdown of what I have:

Not the exact same situation but this KBA may help as well CALYPSO: GD&T Engine: Simultaneous Requirements

I think updating the PC and the software will be a great advancement for your workflow. Please reach out if you need any help along the way with that as well.

Hey Chad, It sounds like the issue may be related to how the reference point alignment was created. Are all three scans in the same project, and do the same reference points exist across all of them? If the third scan uses a different set of reference points than the first two, a slightly different workflow may be needed. My first suspicion is that you're creating a single reference point alignment that contains only the points used for Scan 1 ↔ Scan 2. Once that alignment exists, INSPECT expects all measurement series participating in that alignment to use the same point set.

Hi Chad, Maybe your problem is about measurement dependencies? https://techguide.zeiss.com/en/zeiss-inspect-2026/article/dlg_edit_mlist_dependency.html

Close, but that's Calypso and I need this for my GOM scanner using Zeiss Inspect. Actually, I'm using GOM ATOS Professional V8. Which has pretty much the same interface as Zeiss Inspect. Random side note, soon I'll be getting a new computer for my GOM and latest version of software.

Hello Chad. I think this is the method; if you are combining multiple curves into one curve select all of them then Right click and select: ADD RANGE LIMITS

This one should also be helpful. https://techguide.zeiss.com/en/zeiss-inspect-2026/article/cmd_sys_export_csv.html

You can try to set Autorun to keep the CAD view open at all times (tools menu). This setting did the trick for some other imaging-related issues we had on our O-Inspect. Unfortunately our O-Inspect is in CMM heaven now, so I can no longer investigate...

This might be a beginner question, But I have 3 separate measurement measurement files I want to stitch together and I'm having problems. I fully understand how to combine a top and bottom scans using common reference points. But when I try to import the 3rd scan, it won't let me choose different reference points to stitch that 3rd scan to the two I've already combined. I feel like its something obvious I'm missing here. I can provide more details and screenshots if needed.

Hello, This article should help as well. https://techguide.zeiss.com/en/zeiss-inspect-2026/article/cmd_sys_export_ascii.html

I always did mass changes like this directly in the *.arn file, since the official path dialog is quite cumbersome and long paths are very difficult to handle. So I can cofirm there is no alternative place of storage, but you need to take care of which paths you edit, especially if it is a rather old and grown *.arn file. Apart from the paths listed by Martin, there may also be a variable #nameOfFile containing a path setting. I don't remember which was the crucial one. If you have images loaded to icons, there's also a path line starting with "PICTURE PATH"

Ahaa! ☺️Again, a big Thank You goes out to you! I think I made some substantial progress today.

Moin Sebastian, wieviel Prüfpläne hast du den immer akut am Laufen'? Hast du auch verschieden Layer im AutoRun probiert? Wie Norbert schon gesagt hat es gibt z.b. von Zeiss eine kostenpflichtige Lösung: FACS-Automationsoberfläche. Wir haben aktuell 25 Stationen. Mega Vorteil ist der Werker kann nur Teilenummer und Auftragsnummer ändern und dann starten! Und du kannst mehrere Stationen Prüfpläne gleichzeitig starten. Diese werden dann je nach Anwahl abgearbeitet, am Schluss siehst du sogar Gut / Schlecht / Warngrenze. KMG fährt nach dem Messen auf eine Parkposition. Wie gesagt die restlichen Felder bzw. das verlassen der Oberfläche ist PW geschützt.

Das bedeutet wohl, dass ihr bei einer Programmänderung einen neuen (anders benannten) Prüfplan anlegt? Denn bei gleichem Namen im gleichen Verzeichnis müsste im Autorun nichts neues angelegt werden. Aber ja, Autorun ist eher eine Hilfe für kleinere oder gelegentliche Automatisierungen (obwohl wir unsere gesamten Produktionsmessungen darüber abwickeln). Wenn man die Programme lokal an jeder Maschine gespeichert hat und bei Änderungen neue Prüfpläne anlegen muss, ist die Pflege extrem aufwendig, da lässt sich auch nicht viel optimieren, wenn die vorgenannten Punkte beibehalten werden müssen. Hat man aber (wie wir) alle Programme auf dem Netzwerk und macht Änderungen in bestehenden Prüfplänen, kann man mit einer Autorun-Oberfläche sogar auf mehreren verschiedenen Maschinen arbeiten. Es kommt halt immer darauf an, wie der Prozess organisiert ist. Wenn Autorun nicht geeignet ist, gibt es von Zeiss die große Automations-Lösung FACS, aber über die kann ich nichts sagen. Da muss wohl auch einiges kundenspezifisch konfiguriert werden. Irgendwo dazwischen gibt es dann noch "Basic Automation", das scheint eine Nummer kleiner zu sein, davon habe ich nur mal eine Bedienungsanleitung gesehen. Über diese Optionen müsstest du dich ggf. mal beim Vertriebler deines Vertrauens erkundigen

Funktioniert das auch mit Inspect Pro 2021 ?

Hi, back to work after holidays :) to do a best fit, you have to check the three box (Rotation and translation Z & X) (like you did it's the equivalent of 5 separate true position)

[smart ass mode on] Please note that in mathematics the term "normalizing a vector" usually means to give it a standard length (like 1). What you did is to constrain the vector (to its nominals). Using the term "normalize" here is quite misleading. [smart ass mode off]

Hi @Shawn this behavior is kind of new within CALYPSO 7.8/8.0 (it started with a ServicePack in 7.8 as far as i know) For internal calculations CALYPSO needs to combine Models which represent your workpiece. You need 1 "file" as your actual workpiece, the others (fixture etc.) need to be unchecked, then they wont be combined with the workpiece file: That merge happens when you define a point/freefrom or when the measurement plan is saved and it cannot be undone! Development is currently working on a better solution for this. Best Regards Marcel

True, unfortunately. 😒 Things have become quite complicated since Zeiss took over.

Looks about right on the picture. Is that the plate for 270? Looks the same size as our 350 plate. for the 350 i had to remove the rotation table to make it work on the scanport. In general: You have two angled positions where you have to move the whole stand facing opposing directions. Inbetween you have two rotate the calibration plate.

@Richard Shomaker i think he is allright. That 4 points in the middle is oriented correctly ( at least from lower camera images ) and accordingly to picture hints. What i don't understand is why there are 4 camera screens displaying different things.

@Cristian S. I believe you have the grid plate rotated 180°.

Hallo Numeric, ich habe nicht viel Erfahrung mit Zahnrädern. Dennoch, nachdem du erklärst, dass Drehtisch und Taster sauber eingemessen sind, würde ich auf das Zentrum (xy0) tippen. Um das zu testen, kannst du aus deinen einzelnen, selbstzentrierten Punkten einen Kreis zurückrufen (Punkterückruf, Gauß) und eine Konzentrizität zum Zylinder auswerten, so siehst du, wie die zueinander liegen.