I'm doing a new project and using Pallet Autorun interface but I'm having an issue with excel report data because Pallet Autorun is not generating an excel report only gave me with PDF report. When I run a single program, it gives me excel and PDF reports but not with the Pallet Autorun interface and on the run screen there is no the option box to check excel reports.  Could anyone please help me with that issue? Thanks very much in advance.

i want plane 1 to be my spatial alignment

Part3.pdf

Our system right now updates the Upper Limit with each new sample. Which then sets the characteristic attribute across the entire inspection plan. I want to differentiate the Upper Limit and the Calculated Upper Limit as it applies to each specific sample.

Most Recent Sample StandardProtocol Printout:

The bonus tolerance for our most recent sample was calculated as 0.3111. This value is then instantly saved as the K2111 Characteristic Attribute, overwriting past values.

Calculated Bonus Tolerance Saved in Planner:

With each sample, the Upper Limit is overwritten.

Samples with Mismatched Upper Limit:

When we pull the data through our multi-piece report later, it only uses the most recent sample's Upper Limit, since that is how Upper Limit is saved. Which is inaccurately calculating conditional formatting rules highlighting outages.

Upper Limit Callout - ${Qdb.Characteristic(2111)}

I am trying to pick brains to see if anyone has a solution to save each calculated bonus tolerance as its own independent variable, on a per sample basis.

Something that takes a snapshot of the Upper Limit after each sample and saves it as a measurement attribute of the sample.

Any tips/tricks would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks! 

While i try to enter some new values or paste them, the value changes for "---" 

On characteristisc like Chord Position or Rotation it work, i just type in and its saved. 

Anybody knows what is the trick in here ? 

1 like its before 

2 while i edit 

3 what need to change 

I am working with a customer who would like to maintain the standard “conforming to print” dimensions on the inspection report, while also including a separate “functionally acceptable” evaluation. Internally, our team would also like to implement a stoplight-style indicator to quickly identify parts that are functionally acceptable.

Currently, I have created result elements for the functional acceptance criteria and applied warning limits. However, when the original print dimension is out of tolerance, the stoplight indicator turns red, even though the functional acceptance result is passing. In this situation, we would ideally like the indicator to display yellow instead of red to show that the part is functionally acceptable, despite not meeting print tolerance.

Any guidance or recommendations on the best way to implement this within CALYPSO would be greatly appreciate

we tested Zeiss Inspect on some PC and it looks good so we asked for the full Version.

But first we wanted to try it on our strongest PC with Windows Enterprise Server.

Sadly the installation of the Quality Suite stops with an Error.

Anyone knows the solution?

Thanks

gibt es schon evtl. die Eistellung für: Quader Größe der automatischen Selektion beim polygonisieren einstellen?

VG

Alexander Eichholz

Metallgießerei W-Funke

We recently upgraded the PC running Zeiss Inspect 2023 for Windows 11. Since this upgrade, we are having several programs where the report pages are experiencing this "denim"-like texturing. For most of the affected pages, the surface comparison is overlayed to CAD, which is made transparent in properties. 

I am uncertain if this is related to Win 11 specifically, or if certain graphics settings were not set the same as they were on the previous setup. The issue seems to be isolated to the report pages, as when you 3D View From Report Page, the 3D scene is fine.

Any troubleshooting tips would be appreciated. 

Thanks! 

I have not been told this directly, but not sure how or who is going to report these.  

We run pretty smooth on all our CMM's. We have some old Sheffield CMM's. One of them check raw castings which can be very imperfect and have excess material in placees.

I'd like to know if anyone else has ran across this. I have yet to meet this gentleman and really don't know what he is trying to accomplish by calling CMM crashes as near misses.

I’m trying to create a scan path along the red line shown in the image. Any help or guidance would be greatly appreciated!

Side question: What’s the best way to mask out small point sections in the bottom corners to help with evaluation?

Is there a step we are missing to get the license transferred to the new computer? Thanks in advance for any insight.

I have new project and need to get 15 pieces run at once which I have not done before. Could you please guide me how set up the pallet run?

Thanks in advance.🙏

Error with stylus system change:   Disk Changed in XXT

I do not know what this means but it will not now do an automatic probe change.

ich habe eine Frage zur korrekten Auswertung nach ISO GPS / GD&T.

Es geht um die Merkmale Pos. 1 und Pos. 7 auf der Zeichnung. B

Meine konkrete Frage ist:

Wie müssen Pos. 1 und Pos. 7 korrekt ausgewertet werden?

Werden diese beiden Angaben zusammenhängend bzw. abhängig voneinander bewertet, weil sie sich geometrisch aufeinander beziehen?

Oder müssen Pos. 1 und Pos. 7 getrennt voneinander ausgewertet werden, also jeweils als eigenständige Merkmale mit eigener Toleranzzone und eigener Bewertung?

Diese Frage kommt bei uns immer wieder in Diskussionen auf, daher wäre ich für eine klare Einschätzung sehr dankbar  gerne auch mit Hinweis auf die relevante ISO-GPS-/GD&T-Logik.

Vielen Dank im Voraus.

My ZEISS INSPECT 2026 is working fine for one day since installation but then keep crashing ever since.

Do you know why this happen?

Also the import gom is working for one day and now suddenly the sys module and gom module can't be found.

Thanks

I.. am baffled.... help!

I have one star stylus that I cannot get to come in when I calibrate it to the reference sphere. All my other probes are running at S values of .0009 or lower.  The problem star probes vary from an S of .0050 to .0020.  So far... I have changed out one probe that was a tiny bit bent, I've put the star on a new plate, we've put the probes on a lathe to ensure they aren't bent, I've cleaned everything, I've looked at the balls under a microscope....  I feel like there must be something incredibly obvious that I'm overlooking.  Any help is appreciated!  🙂

I could not figure out why the nominal keep changing. I have 2 programs one in the server and another one on the desktop and both has part program, but when I ran both and compared the nominal, I got different results with nominal calculation.  Please see reports below.

Thank you.