[Me...] Posted March 26, 2019 Share Posted March 26, 2019 I'm wondering how to qualify this new stylus system(containing front and back styli) without shanking on the ref. sphere when checking the bottom. Link to comment https://qualityforum.zeiss.com/topic/16092-qualifying-new-stylus-system-with-short-probes/ Share on other sites More sharing options...
[Da...] Posted April 7, 2019 Share Posted April 7, 2019 add extensions or go with smaller reference sphere Link to comment https://qualityforum.zeiss.com/topic/16092-qualifying-new-stylus-system-with-short-probes/#findComment-89078 Share on other sites More sharing options...
[Me...] Posted April 9, 2019 Author Share Posted April 9, 2019 Yes, it looks like I'll have to go with a smaller sphere. It is not possible to add extensions due to the probes are on a solid shaftshort stylus system.jpg Link to comment https://qualityforum.zeiss.com/topic/16092-qualifying-new-stylus-system-with-short-probes/#findComment-89080 Share on other sites More sharing options...
[Da...] Posted April 10, 2019 Share Posted April 10, 2019 Someone on this or the other forum gave an idea to use bigger ruby tip as an reference sphere. I haven't tried to use it myself, but go for it and report back!smallref.jpg Link to comment https://qualityforum.zeiss.com/topic/16092-qualifying-new-stylus-system-with-short-probes/#findComment-89082 Share on other sites More sharing options...
[No...] Posted April 10, 2019 Share Posted April 10, 2019 And how did he/she determine the exact diameter of that ruby sphere, which is the basis for the whole calibration? 😕 With a known reference sphere you could modify the "opening angle" in the stylus settings in order to avoid collisions, but fur such a short stylus this is no option, as it also narrows down the sector of the ruby that actually gets calibrated. Link to comment https://qualityforum.zeiss.com/topic/16092-qualifying-new-stylus-system-with-short-probes/#findComment-89084 Share on other sites More sharing options...
[To...] Posted May 1, 2019 Share Posted May 1, 2019 To get you through a pinch, you can reduce the Ref Sphere coverage from 180 degrees to something less. I normally reduce the coverage until my sigma values are in line with what I am expecting. Obviously, the more you reduce, the less accurate the qualification becomes. This assumes you have an active head. Just noticed Norbert had the same suggestion. Link to comment https://qualityforum.zeiss.com/topic/16092-qualifying-new-stylus-system-with-short-probes/#findComment-89086 Share on other sites More sharing options...
[CA...] Posted April 5, 2020 Share Posted April 5, 2020 I have a VAST RDS-XXT TL3 as passive head. I can't find the way in order to reduce the sphere couverage when I try to qualify my Pointer Stylus. (0.1mm) If you have some indication or instruction, please I will be thankfull. Link to comment https://qualityforum.zeiss.com/topic/16092-qualifying-new-stylus-system-with-short-probes/#findComment-89088 Share on other sites More sharing options...
[Ün...] Posted April 6, 2020 Share Posted April 6, 2020 Link to comment https://qualityforum.zeiss.com/topic/16092-qualifying-new-stylus-system-with-short-probes/#findComment-89090 Share on other sites More sharing options...
[CA...] Posted April 6, 2020 Share Posted April 6, 2020 I have tried this option, but ever the path around the Reference Sphere is the same, with false contacts. I have changed the Taper Angle but with Passive Qualification, the unique for my RDS-CAA, the 180 degrees are taken by default, I do not know why. Here I show the real problem with this Pointer Stylus (626113-5000-004) Zeiss, the same result with other small Reference Sphere. What to do? Re-qualification considers this Angle? Link to comment https://qualityforum.zeiss.com/topic/16092-qualifying-new-stylus-system-with-short-probes/#findComment-89092 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in