Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
1
WeatherUnderground / Re: WU Alternative?
« Last post by saratogaWX on Today at 12:59:13 AM »
n.b. from admin: I removed two duplicate postings from two boards with the same content as the original post here. (saratogaWX)

Thank you for your info. Is it OK if we just post a link to this post in the ChitChat board? Because we want to reach as many as possible to participate in order for this project to survive...
There is no need for duplicate postings. When folks use the unread replies at the top of each page, they'll see any new posts you make.  Lots of people use that mechanism to see "what's new" and that obviates the need to post in multiple boards.  Besides, their posts to topics on this thread keeps everything in one place.
2
WeatherUnderground / Re: WU Alternative?
« Last post by webcams.travel on Today at 12:19:27 AM »
Update:
We have two experienced weather enthusiasts on board in this project to make sure we will go into the right direction. And of course, we will stay in touch through your feedback on how to improve and develop what actually makes sense. For example, we already got feedback that it would be enough to update every 5 seconds for rapid fire, since most weather stations won't be able to update every second (as suggested by our survey before).
3
WeatherUnderground / Re: WU Alternative?
« Last post by webcams.travel on Today at 12:11:53 AM »
n.b. from admin: I removed two duplicate postings from two boards with the same content as the original post here. (saratogaWX)

Thank you for your info. Is it OK if we just post a link to this post in the ChitChat board? Because we want to reach as many as possible to participate in order for this project to survive...
4
WeatherUnderground / Re: WU Alternative?
« Last post by webcams.travel on Today at 12:10:33 AM »
@We are not weather enthusiasts ourselves

In that case, you probably need to find some folks from the survey responses to start giving you an idea of what the "average" enthusiast, who's spent many hundreds of dollars setting up a station, would consider the bare minimum before he/she would consider paying you monthly to display their data.

Many of us already have websites so yours would probably be geared toward those who have no desire to maintain a personal website (or don't have the experience to set up a site).

I just get the feeling here that you don't yet have an understanding of the level of effort and scope of work required to make a go of something like this. Better get some advisors on board.

Hi Felix


It is always a good idea to bring an experienced advisor on board! And we actually have two, currently. We should mention that, thank you! And of course, we will also allow and listen to feedback from users.

How many (in %) of you would you estimate, don't have or want to create their own website (i.e. be interested in our service)? And how many of you here are actually using WU currently?
5
Davis Instruments Weather Stations / Re: Repeated signal dropouts
« Last post by dalecoy on Today at 12:02:43 AM »
That still doesn't explain why some VP2 consoles experience this issue and others do not in identical weather conditions. Care to speculate?

Do we have information on VP2 consoles having this issue when only receiving from one transmitter?

Assuming you are talking about VP2 consoles receiving from two transmitters, and situations with the same received-at-the-console signal strengths:

1.  It turns out that the exact combination of Transmit IDs has some effect on the complexity of the situation (due to the timing).  So, what were those choices?  [I don't know what combinations are better than others, but I know there is an effect - how often does the console have to choose between 2 frequencies scheduled for the same exact time]

2.  If the two transmitters react similarly to weather (~~equal frequency drift), that situation would be easier for the console to handle than if the two transmitters have different drift.  [That might be due to different models, housing, location, mounting, or even just the fact that electronic components like resistors can typically vary by 5%].  And there's no easy way to tell if that is the case.

3.  Do we know what else the console is continually doing, in addition to receiving?  Feeding data to some kind of logger?  Responding to software requests?  Those things all take processor resources (cpu cycles), that are not available for the receiving-and-adjusting tasks.

Obviously, if a mild form of the problem occurs, but the console recovers and the operator doesn't notice, then "everything's OK".

And clearly, more than 2 transmitters......
6
My AcuRite smartHUB Software / Re: Will there be a version for the Access?
« Last post by nincehelser on Yesterday at 10:49:51 PM »
Even if you dance around the encryption problem, data is only sent to myAcurite in 5-minute intervals, so that may not be terribly useful.

Sniffing the wunderground stream makes more sense as it is not encrypted and sent in real-time.  The disadvantage is that you'll only be able to pick up data from one sensor.

7
Davis Instruments Weather Stations / Re: Repeated signal dropouts
« Last post by openvista on Yesterday at 10:10:27 PM »
dalecoy,

So, on one hand, we have the older and slower VP2 that struggles keeping up in cold conditions, particularly making frequency corrections in real time across multiple IDs. On the other we have the Vue -- a more capable unit with, perhaps, better firmware (something I posited awhile back in the CC1021 thread).

That still doesn't explain why some VP2 consoles experience this issue and others do not in identical weather conditions. Care to speculate?
8
Davis Instruments Weather Stations / Re: Repeated signal dropouts
« Last post by rdsman on Yesterday at 10:00:35 PM »
Here is some food for thought:

According to the FCC fillings for both consoles (internal Pictures);

Both consoles use the same processor - ATMEGA128L.  The VP2 processor uses an external crystal (shown in the pictures), the Vue apparently uses the internal RC oscillator of the processor (no external crystal shown in the pictures).  Along with keeping up with transmitter frequency drift, both would have to somehow timestamp the packets in order to implement a PLL or PID algorithm to keep up with timing errors.  The VP2 would have to determine the frequency error, calculate a new receive frequency (for each transmitter) and save it into an array.  For the Vue, it can read the frequency error direct and save it into an array (for each transmitter) and simply write the accumulated value back to one register to be applied next time around.  No matter how you look at it, the Vue would be faster at doing this than the VP2 in the case of frequency error.  They would require the same amount of time for timestamping packets assuming they both run at the same processor speed.

I'll go back to sleep now........
     
9
 :arrow: For Tuesday - January 23, 2018  :!:

   :grin:
10
Weather Web Site Help / Re: wxtrends.php
« Last post by yamiacaveman on Yesterday at 09:54:10 PM »
Thanks for clearing that up!!
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10