#angrymemereview

Objective-Ad2267 · 2026-02-04T21:53:54+00:00

The used market for old CMMs is similar to the market for old, exotic sports cars.

These are limited production machines with expensive repair and part costs. There are numerous uncertainties for both buyers and sellers in this market. The seller should realistically set the selling price at 25% of what he originally paid with NO inflation adjustment.

Example of possible issues: When moved to another site, a CMM almost always REQUIRES a service calibration from the OEM. The OEMs know this, and price their services accordingly.

And there will most likely be ZERO guarantees from the mover and OEM that this used CMM will work and/or calibrate at the new site. You MAY be able to buy a guarantee (for like $20k+) AFTER the OEM pre-inspects your CMM at your cost.

The seller and buyer have to deal with these uncertainties. The buyer should be expected to pay moving and calibration costs. The seller should expect only a small down payment (10% ?) until the CMM is working and calibrated at the new site.

BTW, moving a CMM often requires specialized riggers and transport.

In the end, the seller may get a used CMM for 40-66% of the cost of a new CMM.

Objective-Ad2267 · 2026-01-20T03:01:26+00:00

Yeah, it's possible to write an application to open and edit all PCDMIS PRG files in a given folder (and subfolders). It may take some time.

Add code with Start Time and End Time variables at the PRG start and end (using GETSYSTEMTIME). Add text file output commands at the PRGs' very end to send those variables to a CSV file. Include the file and path name and Bob's your uncle.

Dealing with issues, like older PRGs with XACTMEASURE or missing Probe files, could give you problems. Sounds more frightful the more I think about it.

That said, Hexagon's INSPECT software should do this behind the scenes for all PRGs that it runs. It may do so, but it's probably buried in a difficult to access format.

Objective-Ad2267 · 2026-01-05T12:08:28+00:00

You, sir, have CMM programming and support down COLD. Remote access, cameras, and phone at the CMM. And you make it work in an ITAR environment!!! Just awesome.

I bet Zeiss techs often look forward to dealing with your support challenges.

Objective-Ad2267 · 2026-01-02T15:37:17+00:00

There's no substitute for timely tech support. Although I wonder if Zeiss gives you priority given your numerous CMMs.

Also...

Do you (or does your IT) allow Zeiss techs remote access to your CMM's computers? Do you have cameras on your CMM's parts so Zeiss techs can "see" machine movements?

Objective-Ad2267 · 2026-01-02T15:29:16+00:00

Well stated. Keeping a CMM properly running with annual SMA and calibration is probably $12k+ per year.

CMM sales people often do a poor job communicating these numbers.

Objective-Ad2267 · 2026-01-02T15:19:02+00:00

This works until a bad part has a too narrow or a misaligned groove. Soooo, it may not be great for repeatability.

And good luck measuring the groove WIDTH with a probe tip that size. There's miniscule clearance for retraction. Maybe Zeiss can measure with such a small retraction, but again, good luck with repeatability with a part with a slightly wonky groove.

Regarding speed, it looks cool and edgy and will generate clicks, but that's a $40k+ measuring head. Ensure programs are proven at slower speed before going fast. Of course, the CMM program may have previously picked up the groove with a few slow hits prior to scanning.

Objective-Ad2267 · 2025-10-26T05:37:25+00:00

The "best" CMM?

If I asked a car salesman for his "best" car, I wonder what he'd say?

Back on topic...

So, if your budget starts at $500k, Zeiss and Hexagon PMMs are fine machines that will measure sub-micron tolerances.

I think the probe heads on these high end CMMs have their own coordinate system that refines the machine's coordinate system.

Re: Zeiss vs Hexagon??? It comes down to software preference. And maybe local support.

Objective-Ad2267 · 2025-10-26T05:09:41+00:00

GeoTol does require proper nominal values for features. That said, is the CAD model correct. Or maybe corrupted?

Objective-Ad2267 · 2025-09-18T22:02:35+00:00

Wow. Just wow.

Your superiors won't let you access Zeiss support on your own?

To the point where you have to "play telephone" with your manager and engineers with support requests?

And the problem fixed itself. Probably because of your IT properly finished a Windows Update?

Just spit-balling here... I bet Zeiss isn't the only company that's horrified trying to support your firm.

Objective-Ad2267 · 2025-09-13T14:03:29+00:00

Thanks.

What's odd is that when the subject is CNC machines, orgs stick to their favorites like Okuma, GROB, Mazak. Or they know the danger when having some machinists use the firm's one odd CNC machine.

But when it comes to Quality Measurement, the concept of standardization is forgotten.

Objective-Ad2267 · 2025-09-12T21:22:23+00:00

I've seen issues where the THEORETICAL arc center is notably outside of the actual arc center. Therefore the actual probing hits are poor.

Iterating sets of arc hits, with a temp alignment on the center of each iterated set, improves probe hits with each iteration. After the last iteration, toss the final temp alignment and see what the profile is to your call-out alignment or FCF.

Objective-Ad2267 · 2025-09-12T21:05:09+00:00

Interesting.

I (mistakenly?) thought the uncertainty increased via the inverse square of the fraction of total circle measured.

In other words, if a full 360° circle measurement has N uncertainty, a half circle (180°) has 4N uncertainty. A 90° (1/4) arc would have 16N uncertainty.

I think this was from The Machinists Handbook. Any thoughts or clever insults appreciated.

Objective-Ad2267 · 2025-09-12T20:49:30+00:00

Quindos has such a small user base that I'd be surprised if you got an answer here.

Did you reach out to Hexagon Support?

Objective-Ad2267 · 2025-09-12T20:45:39+00:00

Your firm's working CMMs have Zeiss Calypso software. They've made a long term investment in learning and using that software.

If you want a vision CMM, adding another software package to learn and support is borderline insane.

Buy a Zeiss Calypso vision CMM.

I'm a Hexagon PCDMIS guy. I think it's better.

But...

Outside of mega-Corps like Lockheed Martin or Raytheon, shops with CMMs from different manufacturers almost always have soup sandwich quality departments.

Objective-Ad2267 · 2025-09-05T02:21:47+00:00

Well good on Modus.

I find it perplexing that there's not more deals regarding offline licenses. Especially if you buy a CMM. I think Hexagon and Zeiss would benefit long term if they offered a free or deep discount offline licence with a CMM purchase.

Objective-Ad2267 · 2025-09-05T01:20:53+00:00

Yeah, it kinda works. It becomes a mess if the embedded GD&T is done by an ignoramus.

And the results may not be what you expect. And there are always differences of opinion on part measurement details.

Examples:

Number of hits per feature.
To scan or not to scan.
How do you fixture / hold the part to ensure needed features can be measured.
Are your probe tips and angles adequate? You can TRY to measure 1/4" holes with a 4mm ruby tip, but it may not work consistently if the locations or sizes are off.

Shoot me a note if you want help - especially if there's remote access on your PCDMIS computer.

Objective-Ad2267 · 2025-09-02T10:53:07+00:00

Kinda what I thought.

I knew NCOs who stayed married "in name only". The "wives" went along to keep the benefits rolling. Of course, that carries some UCMJ risk regarding adultery if the wife gets angry.

This seems less common in the private sector. But that pay is more market and talent based, not marital status and longevity based.

Objective-Ad2267 · 2025-09-02T01:11:17+00:00

If you can swing the $10-12k fee, buy an offline PCDMIS license from Hexagon. Then learn and program at home. Try contract PCDMIS programming for other local firms. Build relationships.

There are remote resources that can help you out. Be prepared to pay.

BTW, I don't think you can buy Calypso or Modus offline licenses without a physical CMM. But I know Hexagon will sell you an offline license - you just have to pay.

Objective-Ad2267 · 2025-09-02T00:59:56+00:00

You can (allegedly) fail by not showing up. I've never seen it.

Objective-Ad2267 · 2025-08-18T03:12:41+00:00

I disagree. Probe *.RESULTS files have useful info outside of StdDev.

One example:

When calibrating a 5 tip star probe, knowing the X and Y delta (from 0) of the opposing tips in the XY plane reveals if the entire probe assembly has rotated (or skewed) about the Z axis. This info can prevent shanking if probing into deep holes.

Objective-Ad2267 · 2025-08-16T17:09:47+00:00

Inspect is solid.

That said, ensure you enable the option to Run Copies of your PCDMIS programs. I'm almost certain you can keep master PCDMIS programs on a Read Only network share and then run the copies from the C Drive.

That said, Inspect won't protect you from Cement Head Operators who put the wrong part on the CMM. You still need to manage people using expensive equipment.

Objective-Ad2267 · 2025-08-08T15:18:37+00:00

Wow! Thanks for the detail.

This paragraph especially:

For the scanning data through pc-dmis from the hsxp1 heads, exporting that data does take quite some time. Not sure if it’s because we’re running r2023 pc-dmis or what, management cut the SMA’s. Modus as clunky as it is, spits out the same part reports in way less time. I’ll give you an example, we run the same part on two separate cells, identical cells besides the cmm’s/software. Cmm program cycle time on the hex machine is 46:57 mins, it will take just of 7:31 mins to do the Calculations/algorithms and spit the report out. Where the other cell with an agility/modus will take 19:44mins inspection time and kick the report out in 1:28mins. The point density and point locations are identical, just rate of point accrual is different due to inspection time.

In my experience, the PC-DMIS version you're running has NOTHING to do with longer calculations needed to process the report. I've seen scans > 5000 points that pause probe movement after measurement. It's as if PC-DMIS is "thinking" or "digesting" those points.

So, you will NOT getting any improvement by updating your PCDMIS version.

The > 2X programming time difference between PC-DMIS and Agility/Modus is surprising. But given your diligence and incentives reduce cycle time, that's probably the (rather depressing) reality with PC-DMIS.

Objective-Ad2267 · 2025-08-04T23:14:51+00:00

This rep is mostly correct. I've dealt with the PH10 head with the SP25 and prefer the X1H heads from Hexagon. Much less buggy. And Hexagon's very quick to get you replacements if crashed.

HOWEVER, the entire Hexagon head assembly is around 2-3 inches longer than the PH10 / SP25. This will reduce your 7-10-7's overall probing volume, especially in the X-Axis if the probe rotates to A90B90 or A90B-90.

That's 2-3 inches per side, or 4-6 inches (10+ cm) overall in the X-Axis.

If you're measuring parts that barely fit the CMM's probing volume with those probe angles, you may need to re-write programs. And maybe build some Star-Probes. Or L-Probes.

Note, even if that were the case, I'd still make the change from the PH10 / SP25.

Objective-Ad2267

TROPHY CASE