All Activity

HI Piotr I have been trying as much as I could and it always has to stop between parts to generate a PiWeb, even if it is not printed, it must save the measures. If I disable all PiWeb it doesn´t save the measures. But I found a way of obtaining a max of 1000 measures per report. It is not very elegant, but is the max you can do, and you don´t necessarily need PiWebPlus to do it. You only need to edit the table Protocol. There are only a few steps, and it is very easy. - First, you must modify the page dimensions. File/Page set up... and increase the width to the max you need. It is not going to be an elegant report, but you can have all the measures on one page... - Then you maximize the size of the protocol area to the new width of the page. - When the report appears, it is going to have only 12 measures. Then you click on "Navigation/Show measurement selection" You open the measurements window and there you can select as many as 1000 measures to print in the report. As I said before it won´t be elegant but everything will be in the same report. I hope you find it useful.

You make a good point. In fact, we'll be escalating this to the development team as a possible new feature in upcoming versions.

try curve polyline

Hy! At the moment it is on a section but I would like to do it on a surface also but with given points. How is it possible in the software?

Hi, you can directly create a section and check it. Do you need the specific points? Something similar was discussed here:

Hy! How can I create a surface profile inspection from surface points? A created a section and surface points but can not check them for profile. BR, Máté

Why is it that despite a lot of convenient functions being added to Calypso, we still have to edit a config file in 90s style from time to time, only to achieve such a simple goal? In the 21st century a "Clear List" button really shouldn't be too much to ask for. 🙄

It depends on a function, but 1 option if ISO is:

Hello Tim, That is right. So you are saying that this is intended behavior with the measurement principle "actual section"? I was under the impression that a parametric software would also change the calculation when creating the actual section, when underlying parameters are changed. I will have look into that, thank you.

Isn’t this already available via the variable strategy editor? They have the cookbook strategies built-in already. I also created a simplified version that just looks at size, length, etc. and chooses the appropriate point density and such. I have not yet found a way to mass update filters and outliers like this, but I’m hoping there is a way.

I want to note that this has not been the case in my experience. The numbers change depending on machine units setting.

Wow thanks. Will try it out.

https://portal.zeiss.com/knowledge-base?id=513250

Possible to output tableprotocol to excel?

If anyone comes across this post in the future and is looking for information on how to use simultaneous requirements, more information can be found in this knowledge base article here: https://portal.zeiss.com/knowledge-base?id=3450000

Remember there is theory vs reality with this software. If you have excellent meshes vs poor meshes can change values quite a bit. Picking up the highs on features can be nice when you have very clean meshes, but not good with artifacts on the meshs.

You probably used the 'actual section' measurement principle instead of using 'Reference Construction'

If you want to remove only CERTAIN programs from the list: Close CALYPSO Navigate to C:\Users\<USERNAME>\AppData\Local\Zeiss\CALYPSOFileDialog.exe and open the user.config file with notepad++ or something similar. 3. Please pay close attention to the differently highlighted lines provided in the screenshot above. Lines 5-8 have a “0” in the key. lines 9-12 have a “1” in the key, so on and so forth. If i want to remove the “GDT Day 4 Ex 2” program, i would delete lines 9-12. 4. The Last step is to ensure that there are no skipped numbers in this file. For all lines below the program which was removed, fix the count to be in order. Using the screenshot above, if you deleted the “1” lines, you will have to go to the next program and change the 2 to a 1 to fill in the gap, and repeat for all later listings.

Thank you for the video, it has given me some ideas but the components that were used do not have the set screw as shown at 0:51 to lock the probe in the correct orientation. Is this what they mean by a cone adaptor for the CF extensions?

If you can make something inhouse, then inspire with rotatable solution on XXT plates. In other words: make an thread adapter for probe make an thead adapter for plate Inspiration here https://shop.metrology.zeiss.com/INTERSHOP/web/WFS/IMT-US-Site/en_US/-/USD/ViewProduct-Start?SKU=626103-8433-053

Not my area of expertise, but I think you could create an intersection between the centerline of the slot and the outer diameter (or any constructed one), then use a polar true position based on radius and angle.

We have a custom mini-star probe that I am having issues aligning to the X/Y axis. There is no adjustment tool like on a standard L or Star probe that I can us to clock the probe in the right orientation. I know it can be done because I am trying to replicate what we already have on our other machine, but I don't know how my predecessor was able to accomplish this. I've tried using washers even to see if I can adjust it but that was not successful.

Hi all, I wanted to pick your brain on how you deal with angled slotted features. It's common on older drawings without GD&T to notate angled feature locations with angle dimensions coming from the center of the part. It's implied that you would origin to the center of the part, create a line/plane to the feature, and dimension that based on the block/feature angle tolerances. This bugs me, because technically an angle controls orientation but not location. You get a pie shaped tolerance zone by doing it this way, where the further from the center you are the greater the location deviation can be. This crosses over into hole patterns dimensioned this way, as well. So how would you convert this to GD&T? My first instinct is to use profile and call it a day. It's not a feature of size, similar to a cone, so I can't use position. Or can I? Here's a simple example to show what I'm talking about. It would be great to get some insight into how other people deal with this type of feature using GD&T.

@Richard Stanich Export points is for when you want it automated, and then you want them sent to a specific place, but they have to be attached to a characteristic.

Hello all, I currently hold a QIF import license, which allows me to automatically import my PMI (Product Manufacturing Information), and I also have a QIF export license, enabling me to generate a QIF file from Claypso. However, we have observed that the exported QIF file does not contain any solids and consists solely of measurements referencing features that are not associated with any geometry. Are there any specific parameters or configurations that would allow us to include solids or ensure the correct association of geometries during this export process? We would greatly appreciate any recommendations you might have on this matter. Thank you in advance for your assistance. Best regards,