Topic: Help A New Guy

[TexasPatriot]

From an architecture standpoint, here is what I have been finding.... but please correct this if it is wrong!

ISS [WIFI]> Meteobridge > router > internet (WU, etc)

This would not perform any logging functions, I understand, but for now I am ok with that.

ISS -> meteostick -> meteobridge -> router -> internet

ISS -> 3dr -> raspberrypi -> router -> internet

ISS -> meteostick -> raspberrypi -> router -> internet

lightning_sensor -> sdr -> raspberrypi -> router -> internet

there are no weather stations that communicate with their sensors using wifi - they typically use unlicensed spectrum and proprietary protocols.  the 'wifi enabled' weather stations are actually a bridge between the sensors and wifi.  sometimes that bridge is built in to a console with a display, other times it is a little box with no display.

m

Ok, I think its all coming together now for me!

So if I opted to forgo the lightning sensor (for now at least)... I could get away with this setup:

ISS (Davis 6250) -> 3dr (the SI1000?) -> raspberrypi (running weeWX?) -> router -> internet (WU)

[Bushman]

At the risk of being pedantic, the Weatherhawk 240 uses 2.4gHz.  I think a lot of the wx world will eventually get to direct-to-router via wifi

[TexasPatriot]

At the risk of being pedantic, the Weatherhawk 240 uses 2.4gHz.  I think a lot of the wx world will eventually get to direct-to-router via wifi

Haha... and a mere 10x my budget!  Good to know for future applications.  But that is likely many years down the road for my price range.  Right now, this is a bit of an experiment for me... and hobby.  So the budget is quite low.

[TexasPatriot]

http://www.ambientweather.com/amws1400ip.html#caption


This is essentially what I am wanting, only with faster wind speed updating.  But I can get this for $150 or under.  Having a hard time justifying spending twice the price right now unless someone has some other insight into why its worth it (I'm sure it is - you almost always get what you pay for with technology).

J

[TexasPatriot]

One of the questions you could ask is why you want faster wind updates. In part it depends on what you mean by faster updates. If the system is not able to measure gusts over a 2-3 second interval then you will be underestimating true gust speeds.

But whether or not the updates are passed through to a local computer or remote server at 2-3 second intervals is another question altogether. OK, it may be kool to see a needle flicking every 2-3 secs, but once the novelty wears off then I can't imagine that there are many users glued to their screens watching the wind dial. If I was being provocative I might question whether anyone who simply wants to see a needle flick often is really a serious weather watcher (the implication being that they're more interested in visual effects than in the actual weather readings).

OT, but since we're talking about wind speeds and dials, I can't resist including again a link to Mark's excellent Climatica display simulation:

http://weather.wilmslowastro.com/test/instromet/climatica/climatica.php

Always looks better on a windy day though, which it isn't right now.

My only reason for wanting the faster wind readings is to make sure I don't miss gusts and therefore get accurate information.  Thats really about it, honestly.

[johnd]

Sorry, I deleted my last post because it didn't read how I intended and don't have time right now to edit it more carefully.

But the point is fine - you need a system that measures at 2-3 sec intervals but doesn't necessarily update PCS or servers at that same interval. It's a significant distinction.

[TexasPatriot]

Sorry, I deleted my last post because it didn't read how I intended and don't have time right now to edit it more carefully.

But the point is fine - you need a system that measures at 2-3 sec intervals but doesn't necessarily update PCS or servers at that same interval. It's a significant distinction.

Fair point.  No offense taken by your previous comments.  I am here to learn and ask advice.  Both have been accomplished, and I'm sure will continue.

I very much appreciate all the advice.  I think, at this point, I don't have the time required to mess with the custom setup, as much as I would like to.  The WS-1400 technically functions the way I want and I have learned to adjust my expectations and "requirements" to fit my budget.  Should my needs/desires/geekish pleasures change, then I will consider upgrading the system to the best option available at the time.  This is a learning platform and will certainly serve as such.  Thanks again everyone!

Jason

[Jáchym]

Hmm..

On one hand Jason you want highiy accurate and up-to-date wind readings yet you want to by an all-in-one station, which as I said previously is never ideal, because unless you live in a totally opened unobstructed area (like airport, no buildings or trees around in any direction), your wind will be very biased.

Wind should ideally be measured at 10m height, temperature at 2m. So either one or the other will be inaccurate.

[CW2274]

Sorry, I deleted my last post because it didn't read how I intended and don't have time right now to edit it more carefully.

But the point is fine - you need a system that measures at 2-3 sec intervals but doesn't necessarily update PCS or servers at that same interval. It's a significant distinction.

Should my needs/desires/geekish pleasures change, then I will consider upgrading the system to the best option available at the time. 
Jason

Since you have specific wants/needs, I think it might be prudent to save up a few more bucks and get something you'll truly be happy with and hopefully last many years. You'll probably save money in the long run with not having to upgrade and/or replace broken equipment. Just my 2 cents.

[TexasPatriot]

Sorry, I deleted my last post because it didn't read how I intended and don't have time right now to edit it more carefully.

But the point is fine - you need a system that measures at 2-3 sec intervals but doesn't necessarily update PCS or servers at that same interval. It's a significant distinction.

Should my needs/desires/geekish pleasures change, then I will consider upgrading the system to the best option available at the time. 
Jason

Since you have specific wants/needs, I think it might be prudent to save up a few more bucks and get something you'll truly be happy with and hopefully last many years. You'll probably save money in the long run with not having to upgrade and/or replace broken equipment. Just my 2 cents.

Completely understand, but there is a delta between my desires and my budget size haha.  This is what will work for right now and give me a good taste of things.  Should I still desire more functionality or more detailed information in the future, I will allocate the necessary funds to get to that goal.

[Bushman]

Before you click "Add to cart"...  https://wunderweatherstation.wordpress.com/  Very nice system in your budget range.

[CW2274]

Before you click "Add to cart"...  https://wunderweatherstation.wordpress.com/  Very nice system in your budget range.

No idea about the other stuff, but the FARS design looks dubious at best. Hopefully that's not it's normal sitting place either....

[kmahler]

http://www.ambientweather.com/amws1400ip.html#caption


This is essentially what I am wanting, only with faster wind speed updating.  But I can get this for $150 or under.  Having a hard time justifying spending twice the price right now unless someone has some other insight into why its worth it (I'm sure it is - you almost always get what you pay for with technology).

J

The 1400 has a significant number of problems. You say that wind is important to you. My first WS-1400 anemometer cups wouldn't even spin until the wind exceeded 4.5mph. Then it would stop abruptly when it dropped below 3.5mph. The replacement ISS is a little better but still not up to what I would expect. For reference I own 2 x Davis Vantage Vue Pros, a Vantage Vue, WS-2080, 2 x WS-1400-IP, RainWise tipping bucket, 2 x RG11 Rain Sensors and an assortment of home brewed sensors reporting to home brewed Arduino data loggers. I post my data to WU, CWOP, APRS, MySQL, meteotemplate and a few others.

It's very limited as to which services it can report. It was designed for WU. If that's all you care about it's fine. I will say that for a cheap ISS, the rain gauge is pretty accurate. It's pretty consistently within .02 of my Stratus RG202.

If you look through the forum here you'll see a number of us are not happy with it overall.

With your budget you do have some restraints. If you can swing the extra cash to get the Davis Vantage Vue, it would serve you much better than anything else you've listed. All of the Fine Offset/Ambient Weather stations are much lower in quality and serviceability than the Davis stations. The tipping bucket in the Vantage Vue is adjustable so you can dial it in to be pretty accurate. As for the Vantage Vue console, it's really not that bad. I don't use the consoles of most of my stations for anything other than a method to get the data to a meteobridge for reporting. But, for now the Vantage Vue is the only one near me that I look at on a regular basis even though there are two VP2 consoles nearby.

Just my .02 cents worth.

[dport]

Also, to add more info about the ambient ws-1400, the passive radiation shield is not sufficient on sunny days with calm wind.  Middle of the day is fine as the actual unit shades the temp sensor. Later in the afternoon your temps will trend much higher than other stations as the sun beats on the side of the radiation shield. Ambient weather will try to tell you otherwise, do not believe them!

[TexasPatriot]

http://www.ambientweather.com/amws1400ip.html#caption


This is essentially what I am wanting, only with faster wind speed updating.  But I can get this for $150 or under.  Having a hard time justifying spending twice the price right now unless someone has some other insight into why its worth it (I'm sure it is - you almost always get what you pay for with technology).

J

The 1400 has a significant number of problems. You say that wind is important to you. My first WS-1400 anemometer cups wouldn't even spin until the wind exceeded 4.5mph. Then it would stop abruptly when it dropped below 3.5mph. The replacement ISS is a little better but still not up to what I would expect. For reference I own 2 x Davis Vantage Vue Pros, a Vantage Vue, WS-2080, 2 x WS-1400-IP, RainWise tipping bucket, 2 x RG11 Rain Sensors and an assortment of home brewed sensors reporting to home brewed Arduino data loggers. I post my data to WU, CWOP, APRS, MySQL, meteotemplate and a few others.

It's very limited as to which services it can report. It was designed for WU. If that's all you care about it's fine. I will say that for a cheap ISS, the rain gauge is pretty accurate. It's pretty consistently within .02 of my Stratus RG202.

If you look through the forum here you'll see a number of us are not happy with it overall.

With your budget you do have some restraints. If you can swing the extra cash to get the Davis Vantage Vue, it would serve you much better than anything else you've listed. All of the Fine Offset/Ambient Weather stations are much lower in quality and serviceability than the Davis stations. The tipping bucket in the Vantage Vue is adjustable so you can dial it in to be pretty accurate. As for the Vantage Vue console, it's really not that bad. I don't use the consoles of most of my stations for anything other than a method to get the data to a meteobridge for reporting. But, for now the Vantage Vue is the only one near me that I look at on a regular basis even though there are two VP2 consoles nearby.

Just my .02 cents worth.

I greatly appreciate the info.  I love the idea of the Davis 6250 ISS, but it seemed like it was becoming a degree program to get the data from it, and it just didn't seem worth it to me.

[kmahler]

I greatly appreciate the info.  I love the idea of the Davis 6250 ISS, but it seemed like it was becoming a degree program to get the data from it, and it just didn't seem worth it to me.

Food for thought, is it better to be able to easily log inaccurate data or take the effort to log accurate data?

[Bashy]

Hmm..

On one hand Jason you want highiy accurate and up-to-date wind readings yet you want to by an all-in-one station, which as I said previously is never ideal, because unless you live in a totally opened unobstructed area (like airport, no buildings or trees around in any direction), your wind will be very biased.

Wind should ideally be measured at 10m height, temperature at 2m. So either one or the other will be inaccurate.

|

Having said that, i did read on  siting guidelines that height for the temp placement is not really an issue except
for better circulation being higher. I will try to find what i read, dont hold ya breath though....

[Bashy]

found it, i have highlighted the section, this is taken from this (below) its a good informative read

http://www.urban-climate.org/ITM04-Oke.pdf

3.1. Temperature
Standard thermometry is appropriate for urban observations but radiation shielding
and ventilation is even more necessary. In the UCL a sensor may be close to warm or
highly reflective surfaces (sunlit wall, road, glass or hot vehicle). Hence shields must
block radiation effectively. Similarly, the lower UCL may be so sheltered that forced
ventilation of the sensor is essential.
METEOROLOGICAL MEASUREMENTS IN URBAN AREAS 7
In accord with the above the surface should be typical of the UCZ and the
thermometer screen/shield centred in a space with approximately average zH/W. In very
densely built-up UCZ this might mean it is located only 5 to 10 m from buildings. If the
site is a street canyon, zH/W only applies to the cross-section normal to the axis of the
street. The recommended open-country screen height of 1.25 to 2 m above ground level
acceptable for urban sites but on occasion it may be better to relax this requirement to
allow greater heights. Observations in canyons show slight air temperature gradients in
the UCL (Nakamura and Oke, 1988), so as long as the sensor is >1 m from a wall error
should be small, especially in densely built-up areas. Measurements at heights of 3 or 5 m
are little different from those at the standard height. They even benefit by having larger
source areas, the sensor is beyond the easy reach of vandals or the path of vehicles, and
exhaust heat from vehicles is diluted.
Too often roofs are sites for meteorological observations. This may arise in the
mistaken belief that at this elevation sensors are free from microclimates, such as those in
the UCL. In fact roof tops have strongly anomalous microclimates. To be good insulators
roofs are constructed of materials that are thermally extreme. In light winds and cloudless
skies they become very hot by day, and cold by night, with sharp temperature gradients
near the roof. Roofs design also ensures they are waterproof and shed water rapidly. This
together with their openness to solar radiation and wind makes them anomalously dry.
Roofs are also commonly affected by release of heat from roof exhaust vents.
Air temperatures above roof-level using towers, are influenced UCL and roof effects.
Whilst there is little variation of temperature with height in the UCL, there is a
discontinuity near roof-level both horizontally and vertically. Hence if meaningful spatial
averages are sought sensors should be well above mean roof-level so that adequate
blending is accomplished (>1.5zH if possible). Currently there are no methods to
extrapolate air temperature data from above the RSL down into the UCL. Similarly, apart
from statistical methods that require a large set of training data from a dense station
network there is no scheme to extrapolate air temperatures horizontally inside the UCL.

[TexasPatriot]

found it, i have highlighted the section, this is taken from this (below) its a good informative read

http://www.urban-climate.org/ITM04-Oke.pdf

3.1. Temperature
Standard thermometry is appropriate for urban observations but radiation shielding
and ventilation is even more necessary. In the UCL a sensor may be close to warm or
highly reflective surfaces (sunlit wall, road, glass or hot vehicle). Hence shields must
block radiation effectively. Similarly, the lower UCL may be so sheltered that forced
ventilation of the sensor is essential.
METEOROLOGICAL MEASUREMENTS IN URBAN AREAS 7
In accord with the above the surface should be typical of the UCZ and the
thermometer screen/shield centred in a space with approximately average zH/W. In very
densely built-up UCZ this might mean it is located only 5 to 10 m from buildings. If the
site is a street canyon, zH/W only applies to the cross-section normal to the axis of the
street. The recommended open-country screen height of 1.25 to 2 m above ground level
acceptable for urban sites but on occasion it may be better to relax this requirement to
allow greater heights. Observations in canyons show slight air temperature gradients in
the UCL (Nakamura and Oke, 1988), so as long as the sensor is >1 m from a wall error
should be small, especially in densely built-up areas. Measurements at heights of 3 or 5 m
are little different from those at the standard height. They even benefit by having larger
source areas, the sensor is beyond the easy reach of vandals or the path of vehicles, and
exhaust heat from vehicles is diluted.
Too often roofs are sites for meteorological observations. This may arise in the
mistaken belief that at this elevation sensors are free from microclimates, such as those in
the UCL. In fact roof tops have strongly anomalous microclimates. To be good insulators
roofs are constructed of materials that are thermally extreme. In light winds and cloudless
skies they become very hot by day, and cold by night, with sharp temperature gradients
near the roof. Roofs design also ensures they are waterproof and shed water rapidly. This
together with their openness to solar radiation and wind makes them anomalously dry.
Roofs are also commonly affected by release of heat from roof exhaust vents.
Air temperatures above roof-level using towers, are influenced UCL and roof effects.
Whilst there is little variation of temperature with height in the UCL, there is a
discontinuity near roof-level both horizontally and vertically. Hence if meaningful spatial
averages are sought sensors should be well above mean roof-level so that adequate
blending is accomplished (>1.5zH if possible). Currently there are no methods to
extrapolate air temperature data from above the RSL down into the UCL. Similarly, apart
from statistical methods that require a large set of training data from a dense station
network there is no scheme to extrapolate air temperatures horizontally inside the UCL.

HOA rules don't allow for the ideal placement here. This is a temporary solution for the next year/year and a half.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Bashy]

That's what I'm saying, you can put the temp at 3 meters and it would make a lot of difference to be in the open with no restrictions

[DoctorKnow]

On Ebay, you can get a WH-1090 weatherwise for $80. That is a deal for this station, however, no lightning sensor. It can be used with a meteobridge. I would recommend buying a solar radiation shield for it. You want to take the temperature in the sunshine, and the shield that comes with this model is poor. I would buy this before I would buy the all in one sensor from Ambient.

If you want a little better quality, the acurite with a smarthub isn't too bad either, has lightning detector option (the wind works well at low speeds, and has a fan) but again you will want the meteobridge, or use Kevin Keys reader.

[Jáchym]

Thats exactly what I recommended in my first answer of this thread, i can confirm that my WH-1080 is not that bad given its cost and I have also used my own DYI solar shield .

[DoctorKnow]

The station is cheap enough, and Texas could hold out for the Atlas from Acurite...

[Bushman]

I do wonder how well a WH-1080 would stand up to a Texas thunderstorm though.  When we got storms in Houston, they were Texas-sized storms with Texas-sized hail. 

[kmahler]

The WH-1080 is the same instrument set as the WS-1080. My 1080 held up well to mid Atlantic weather for 8ish years. I'm it has it's warts but overall it was my starter station and it's not bad for the money.