Zeiss Contura "MASS" tech - Sensor questions

[[Je...]]

I'm interested to hear from users regarding Zeiss's M.A.S.S. (Multi Application Sensor System) swappable sensor technology on Contura CMMs.

Do you use multiple probe types (XXT, DotScan, ViScan, LineScan, VAST, etc.) on your Contura CMM?  If so, how well does it work for you?

 

• Sidenote #1: but have any of you used ViScan on an RDS?  I wonder how effective this 2D camera on an articulating sensor has been for users.

 

• Sidenote #2:  Have any of you used the new Compact XXT?  How does it compare in performance to the legacy TL3 XXT?

Thanks for your feedback.


 

[[Wo...]]

I'm very interested in the new compact XXT for the Contura we have. I hope they will have it at IMTS in Chicago this year. We do swap sensors on our oldest Accura between XT and RDS. Very simple process - no need to shut down the CMM or Calypso.

[[Ri...]]

I now have XTR and XXT sensors, swapping takes minutes to complete.

As of today, I do not mix sensors in a single program, I don't even know if that is possible or sensible.

As for Probe racks, I designed a custom rack that sits above the XTR MSR 2.0 system (I have posts I the forum on this design). The design works as intended.

In the past I worked on system that had an XT Gold, XTR, XXT, Dotscan and Viscan. The XXT, Dotscan and Viscan are all on the RDS head while the XT and XTR were of course a different system. This place was at the time a Zeiss vendor, I had access to all the goodies you could imagine, and it was glorious.

Scroll through the posts to see the custom rack.

 

Edited Friday at 11:21 AM

[[Ri...]]

We have a Contura with an RDS that has both the XXT and DotScan, we also have it setup for an XTR. Great system, with no issues swapping heads. I even like that the Contura/Micura now have the ability to have a Rotary Table - makes gear inspections a breeze now. 

[[Br...]]

I'm currently running a 2026 Spectrum with a 5° incremental RDS and what I believe is the redesigned TL3 (the black one with the much smaller head). From what I can tell, it seems to be the same probe overall, but I keep running into one major drawback: the back of the probe head is significantly larger than the front.

With the previous TL3 design, I could articulate to B90° and swing over features without any issues. The larger backside on the new design makes clearance much more difficult and has forced me into some pretty awkward fixturing situations.

A lot of the parts I inspect are easily fixtured in a standard machinist vise, but with the new probe head I can no longer clear the tightening end of the vise like I could before. It just means rethinking fixturing for jobs that used to be straightforward. It's not a dealbreaker—just something I've had to adapt to with the new design, and something others may want to keep in mind if they're considering the new TL3.

Also, if sensor matching eventually allows multiple sensors to be used within a single program, that would be a huge improvement. It would make workflows much more flexible and eliminate the need to maintain separate programs for different sensor configurations. And, to be a bit of a metrology nerd, I think that would be pretty cool.

Let me know if what I'm describing with the new TL3 lines up with your experience. I'm newer to this thread, so I just want to make sure I'm explaining it clearly. This forum has been an incredibly helpful resource for me; and I would hate to confuse people. 

 

Brendan Pitzen

[[Wo...]]

Please sign in to view this quote.

That's really good info, thanks!

[[Jo...]]

I had not noticed that the center of rotation has changed!  That geometry would have some downsides for us too.   Bummer was really excited about a "shorter XXT"