Author Topic: Field study thermometer shields FARS 7755, Passive 7714, & new METEOSHIELD (Read 17342 times)

jgentry · « **Reply #175 on:** August 04, 2018, 04:37:42 PM »

Quote from: jerryg on August 04, 2018, 02:25:54 PM

Pictures standard and pro

Those pics are a great help! Thanks! I can mount the Barani mount on my pvc pipe. Planning on using a SHT-75 in the shield.

ValentineWeather · « **Reply #176 on:** August 04, 2018, 05:13:56 PM »

Quote from: jerryg on August 04, 2018, 03:37:47 PM

Short update averages from 10 am to 2:30 pm pro 83.9 standard 84.4 fars 84.5

What sensors in pro again?

jerryg · « **Reply #177 on:** August 04, 2018, 05:25:48 PM »

sht 75

jgentry · « **Reply #178 on:** August 04, 2018, 05:30:28 PM »

Quote from: jerryg on August 04, 2018, 05:25:48 PM

sht 75

Are you using the pro shield for your main station that you have uploading data online?

jgentry · « **Reply #179 on:** August 04, 2018, 06:04:27 PM »

BTW: This is my current setup. Planning on mounting the Barani shield mount on the pvc.

ValentineWeather · « **Reply #180 on:** August 04, 2018, 06:16:27 PM »

Final update today great test day, it couldn't get better with no wind at peak heat of afternoon. High was 1.5° difference with zero wind speeds. Not bad. 88° FARS 89.5 on 7714 shield. Passing grade B-, I'll wait for the meteoshild now unless I see something unusual.

Just entered the witching hour 5pm for passive shields with zero wind at 30'. +1.5 differential on the 7714.
Sure wish I had a Metoshield this doesn't happen often with no wind during heat of day. Shows solar radiation error is
better than many passive shields but still some room for improvement.

[ You are not allowed to view attachments ]
[ You are not allowed to view attachments ]
[ You are not allowed to view attachments ]

Adjust solar level bubble it was off.

jerryg · « **Reply #181 on:** August 04, 2018, 06:17:08 PM »

Yes the pro shield is on my main uploading site and if it keeps working the way it has been it will stay that way from now on. $\:D/$

jgentry · « **Reply #182 on:** August 04, 2018, 07:46:47 PM »

Quote from: jerryg on August 04, 2018, 06:17:08 PM

Yes the pro shield is on my main uploading site and if it keeps working the way it has been it will stay that way from now on. $\:D/$

I know it’s not easy to tell since the temp updates every 10-12 secs and the humidity updates every 60 seconds; but can you tell me if the response time from Barani Shields is the same as the FARS?

ValentineWeather · « **Reply #183 on:** August 04, 2018, 07:51:15 PM »

Jerry did you plug the holes? I would think shield wasn't designed to have air flow coming in bottom middle. Just a thought may change original design.
[ You are not allowed to view attachments ]
[ You are not allowed to view attachments ]

jerryg · « **Reply #184 on:** August 04, 2018, 07:59:04 PM »

No i don't think it's necessary or they would have made the adapter set up air tight because the shield at the top of the adapter is wide open so same-o same-o. Here are my final averages for the day. pro 86.7 standard 87.3 and fars 87.3 how about that match, uncanny how it worked out.

jerryg · « **Reply #185 on:** August 04, 2018, 08:02:18 PM »

Forgot to answer other question, it is more of an educated guess but with the good air flow on the barani shield i really never noticed any real lag time between the two.

CW2274 · « **Reply #186 on:** August 04, 2018, 08:23:09 PM »

Just saw this from Barani's web site:

Removes influences of city walls on temperature
Not affected by radiating heat from city walls, pavement, and sun reflections, real-air-temperature measurements are a reality with the MeteoShield. Urban climate research with WMO accuracy in a dense urban environment is now possible.
Learn to trust your data.

Really?? Someone please explain to me how this shield is so smart it knows where the heat's coming from and how to ignore it?

Like I said before, this shield could be the best thing since sliced bread, but some of their statements are preposterous.

jgentry · « **Reply #187 on:** August 04, 2018, 08:29:00 PM »

Quote from: jerryg on August 04, 2018, 08:02:18 PM

Forgot to answer other question, it is more of an educated guess but with the good air flow on the barani shield i really never noticed any real lag time between the two.

Sounds good. It would be interesting to see under calm wind conditions. How are the morning lows and peak humidities conpare?

ValentineWeather · « **Reply #188 on:** August 04, 2018, 08:39:22 PM »

This is what happened when wind dropped from 3-7 mph down to less than 2 mph and even 0 for extended times today with the Davis passive 7714. So only a calm period will show what the shield can do. I don't doubt shield is good but finding ideal conditions is rare.
[ You are not allowed to view attachments ]

ValentineWeather · « **Reply #189 on:** August 05, 2018, 06:37:41 AM »

Quote from: jerryg on August 04, 2018, 07:59:04 PM

No i don't think it's necessary or they would have made the adapter set up air tight because the shield at the top of the adapter is wide open so same-o same-o. Here are my final averages for the day. pro 86.7 standard 87.3 and fars 87.3 how about that match, uncanny how it worked out.

Thanks....Here is cut out , so this area looks open.
[ You are not allowed to view attachments ]

ValentineWeather · « **Reply #190 on:** August 05, 2018, 06:51:23 AM »

Mesowest graphs for Jerrys Meteoshield test yesterday. Wind speeds were high.
[ You are not allowed to view attachments ]
[ You are not allowed to view attachments ]

https://mesowest.utah.edu/cgi-bin/droman/meso_base_dyn.cgi?stn=AT358&unit=0&time=LOCAL&product=&year1=&month1=&day1=00&hour1=00&hours=24&graph=1&past=0&order=1

openvista · « **Reply #191 on:** August 05, 2018, 10:36:05 AM »

Quote from: CW2274 on August 04, 2018, 08:23:09 PM

Just saw this from Barani's web site:

Removes influences of city walls on temperature
Not affected by radiating heat from city walls, pavement, and sun reflections, real-air-temperature measurements are a reality with the MeteoShield. Urban climate research with WMO accuracy in a dense urban environment is now possible.
Learn to trust your data.

Really?? Someone please explain to me how this shield is so smart it knows where the heat's coming from and how to ignore it?

Like I said before, this shield could be the best thing since sliced bread, but some of their statements are preposterous.

Yes, I wondered the same thing. Maybe they mean only the reflected radiation itself (still questionable), but the claim ignores that walls/pavement also conduct heat into the air once they absorb sunshine. That warmed air is certainly not going to be rejected by the shield. That's part of the urban heat island effect. In our small, northerly town that phenomenon is good for at least 1-2F of warming on a sunny, summer day compared to outlying communities at the same elevation.

hwcorder · « **Reply #192 on:** August 05, 2018, 10:46:41 AM »

Quote from: openvista on August 05, 2018, 10:36:05 AM

Quote from: CW2274 on August 04, 2018, 08:23:09 PM
Just saw this from Barani's web site:

Removes influences of city walls on temperature
Not affected by radiating heat from city walls, pavement, and sun reflections, real-air-temperature measurements are a reality with the MeteoShield. Urban climate research with WMO accuracy in a dense urban environment is now possible.
Learn to trust your data.

Really?? Someone please explain to me how this shield is so smart it knows where the heat's coming from and how to ignore it?

Like I said before, this shield could be the best thing since sliced bread, but some of their statements are preposterous.

Yes, I wondered the same thing. Maybe they mean only the reflected radiation itself (still questionable), but the claim ignores that walls/pavement also conduct heat into the air once they absorb sunshine. That warmed air is certainly not going to be rejected by the shield. That's part of the urban heat island effect. In our small, northerly town that phenomenon is good for at least 1-2F of warming on a sunny, summer day compared to outlying communities at the same elevation.

Its basically a poorly phrased way of saying the shield will minimize the effects of long wave radiative transfer from surrounding concrete buildings, asphalt, into the sensor.

jerryg · « **Reply #193 on:** August 05, 2018, 06:24:53 PM »

Going to do max/min temp on the stations. Pro 91.3/73.8 standard 91.3/73.9 fars 91.7/73.7
I need to add the sky conditions to make it more usable. It was mostly cloudy most of the day until late in the afternoon so not much sun to heat things up.

CW2274 · « **Reply #194 on:** August 05, 2018, 06:46:02 PM »

Quote from: jerryg on August 05, 2018, 06:24:53 PM

Going to do max/min temp on the stations. Pro 91.3/73.8 standard 91.3/73.9 fars 91.7/73.7

Not saying it's right or wrong, but certainly one reason the FARS is reading higher is for the simply fact it's drawing air across the sensor allowing for more "direct/instant" reading of the temp whereas the passive is missing it.

ValentineWeather · « **Reply #195 on:** August 05, 2018, 06:58:48 PM »

Quote from: jerryg on August 05, 2018, 06:24:53 PM

Going to do max/min temp on the stations. Pro 91.3/73.8 standard 91.3/73.9 fars 91.7/73.7

Bet you can't wait for a sunny still day and see how these shields perform. I know I can't.
Today's wind speeds looked like:
[ You are not allowed to view attachments ]

ValentineWeather · « **Reply #196 on:** August 06, 2018, 05:13:34 AM »

Got email from Jan, was under impression they were here says.

The MeteoShield Std will arrive in the USA any day now. As soon as they are processed, the MeteoShield Pro and Std will ship your way.

jerryg · « **Reply #197 on:** August 06, 2018, 07:27:30 AM »

Well one of the things about the shield is it is supposed to have good airflow even in low wind conditions giving it it's accuracy. So if that is true then the readings should be close.

ValentineWeather · « **Reply #198 on:** August 06, 2018, 07:41:47 AM »

Jerry was looking at forecast for your area doesn't look like you have any sunny calm wind days coming up.
Looking forward to full sun less than 5 mph at 30' for good test on passive shields.
Can't wait to get my shields hopefully by end of week, I've missed some really good test days already.

You probably know this, staggering your uploads to CWOP 15 minutes they may miss low and high temperatures like yesterday CWOP reported high of 90° but you reported 91°.

jerryg · « **Reply #199 on:** August 06, 2018, 08:40:30 AM »

Yeah i thought about the upload time i might lower it to 5 minutes for test but i am looking at real time here so did not cross my mine. I know, a real bummer, i had 5 days of clear blue skies with light to calm morning winds and seabreeze winds in the afternoon, perfect for testing and no shields

I got just one day and that was afternoon time just before seabreeze hit. I thought i might get a shot this am but clouds and rain already moving in and morning sun is being block by heavy clouds in the east. I would like to get just one good full day of light wind and sun to test things but the weather gods are laughing at me lol.

News:

Author Topic: Field study thermometer shields FARS 7755, Passive 7714, & new METEOSHIELD (Read 17342 times)