All Activity

Another try (other part) without succes, I 've done a large surface of recovery, projection of the two circle, put Z points in first, and the CMM mesure the Z point , and try to mesure the first diametrer 1cm beside this position. I have no guide when I move the part, Have I to respect the spatial rotation of the first Alignement, does it matter if I move the rotation slightly ?

I am not sure if that helps, but we have updated the zeiss-inspect-api wheels on PyPI: For ZEISS INSPECT 2025: zeiss-inspect-api 2025.4.0.398 For ZEISS INSPECT 2026: zeiss-inspect-api 2026.3.0.984

At my planner seat with vast XTR I can change the vector.. but you can try with PCM: setNewGeoStatToActualProbe(0,0,0,0,0,-1) setNewRadiusToActualProbe("2.5") that should work

I use Navigator on our small parts (they´re all small) only at cylinders and circles, only with big tolerances, and only while tangential probing for speed and angle range. I set the number of points by myself, to make sure, that my filters fit

Was möchtest du denn messen? Kreisbahn auf Ebene kann gescannt werden oder mit Einzelpunkte dann fährt das KMG den kürzesten weg außer man aktiviert den Fixierten Fahrweg dann nicht mehr. Wie gesagt nur bei Einzelpunkte. Wenn du Kreise in Bohrungen oder auf Wellen machst fährt das KMG immer in Kreisbahnen ob Einzel oder Scanning.

We are not using it, but i would imagine when you want to reduce measuring time, that you will tryout where you can speed up.

I don’t use it much anymore, I used to but trust it but I took another path. I run the part, features/ characteristics set to the Cookbook, then increase the speed slowly, if needed, until I get an unsuitable variation from my slower speed. In some shops speed and throughput are the focus, but accuracy should prevail. I’m willing to speed it up a little but won’t sacrifice accuracy over speed.

I think Navigator also has worse repeatability than the cookbook values for active heads, so I would only bother using it if I'm really short on time and have a wide enough tolerance band that the measurement variance isn't an issue.

It only activates for cylindrical parts is my understanding. I'll need to test this, but it doesn't activate for planes or lines does it? I really don't use it. Not that I don't like it, but it makes correlating with suppliers difficult. I want to know exactly how fast, how many points, and what angle range I'm using. The following would just make me sound silly: Supplier: "What's your measurement strategy for this circle" Me: "The optimum strategy" Supplier: "Ok, but how many points" Me: "The optimum number of points" Supplier: "Ummm, Ok, but how many do you want us to use?" Me: "Consider your evaluation settings, diameter of feature, weight of stylus, rigidity of stylus, and type of qualification, then do a proprietary calculation; There you will find the optimum." Supplier: "Can't you just tell us how many points and how fast?"

Thank you all for the help here on my topic. It is very much appreciated for sure. I have explained how Best Fit works the way that i was taught and understand it. I too explain it as taking all the features and the movement of all is the deviation between the nominal and actual at the smallest. I also explain it as all the features move to try to fit within the position tolerance. There could be one feature using more than another feature and that it would use that to move closer to the position called for. Thank you for the explanation on the 'View Tolerance' Best fit method for functional gage. I won't use this too often but definitely for the future. All of the responses were great, this is why i am constantly on the forum, learning all the time. So, the final verdict on the program and TP callouts. I used Datum -A- callout as a Line on the side face per the customer on how they set it up in the X axis and Datum -B- is a 2D Line from left to right. The alignment used were only reporting -A- in the X and -B- in the Y. They used circles instead of cylinders like i used the first time and i used a plane for Datum -A-. The outcome they were satisfied and engineer too.

An engineer disagrees with the part being out of spec? I've never had that happen before. Do I need to add " I'm joking" ?

What about the vector? I can't edit that.

Not a new situation. I always edit the R to 2.5 and move on. Doesn't seem to come into play until you start defining holder locations on your probe rack.

@Clarke Gilbert That was always my understanding but now I have larger round parts.

Hallo Messtechniker, zuerst vielen Dank für die Antworten. Punkt 2 hat gut funktioniert, also die Speicherung von Formplots neben den Messergebnissen. Punkt1 funktioniert nicht. Fixierter Fahrweg geht bei Kreismessungen nicht und bei Ebenenmessung funktioniert es nicht bei Scanning (Einzelpunkte geht bei Ebene). Vielleicht fällt euch noch etwas ein. Danke!

I was told that that this function is for very large parts?

I created a new tab in planner. Opening a program, I checked the MasterProbe geometry and its wrong? Wrong vector direction and no radius?

Hi Richard, could you contact your local support with the Suite log files? They are located in "C:\ProgramData\Zeiss\QualitySuite\USER\Suite.log" A gomsic from Inspect should also contain the Suite logs.

Hmmmm...... Very weird behaviour. So the first app takes like 5 minutes to launch, and then after that they all launch normally. Edit: Nevermind - it's borked.

I just updated my ZQS to the latest version, and now the launcher doesn't work, so I cannot launch any applications from inside of ZQS.

Do you need all of them on one protocol or you want to have one protocol for each one of part? If you are running Calypso then use CNC autorun and make a pallet. Now you will have one program for one part measured on matrix ( example 10x10 ) nests and after one measured part you will obtain one protocol - then it's measuring next part.

Most likely this was due to the Base Alignment and the Machine Coordinate System being wrong. This is very common in the Planner world if you just bring in a model and don't perform any CAD Model Transformation - instead you just select the axis manually inside of the Base Alignment. Maybe this wasn't your case, but I've seen this personally so many times.

Hi all, Do you have defined processes/procedures for programming at your respective workplaces? If so, what sort of information is flowed down? If not, what information do you use to inform your decision-making when programming? The Zeiss Cookbook is a great starting place for establishing point densities, scanning speeds, filter/outlier settings, etc. What about the other considerations surrounding metrology? I am looking to create a standard work procedure that covers CMM programming across multiple disciplines including Zeiss, Camio, etc. What sort of information would be useful to include? I have a running list of things so far, including: Scope Roles/responsibilities Environment controls Machine/probe calibrations Fixture considerations Measurement planning/strategy Feature/characteristic naming conventions Data filtering/evaluation Reporting Change control Feel free to chime in or share your expertise. I look forward to hearing from everyone. Thanks in advance. -Don

Hello Brad, These Knowledge Base articles may be of assistance: https://portal.zeiss.com/knowledge-base?id=483015 https://portal.zeiss.com/knowledge-base?id=1525824

I was able to resolve this by using my template and creating a new program from features and characteristics of the original program. Same model. Same Features. Same Characteristics. Same Base Alignment. Same, same.