Getting hourly data without logger??

[WXman]

I have a VP2 wireless station and that's all.  No software, no data logger.  Is there any way to get hourly temperature data into a comma delimited text file?  Or do you HAVE to get the data logger to do this? 

[jmcmurry]

Yes, the data logger is the only way that you will get data out of the console.

- Jim

[DaculaWeather]

And if you have a serial port, I would highly recommend that you use the serial datalogger.

[racenet]

You don't HAVE to get anything.

You can look at the console each hour and enter the temp readings into the computer in any format you wish. Of course, this would take up quite a bit of your time.

So yeah, you need the datalogger. I can't understand why the question even needs to be asked in the first place. 


Bob

[dalecoy]

I have a VP2 wireless station and that's all.  No software, no data logger.  Is there any way to get hourly temperature data into a comma delimited text file?  Or do you HAVE to get the data logger to do this? 

You didn't say, but I'll assume you have a computer.

To get YOUR data into YOUR computer, there has to be some interface to the computer.  I can think of one way to do it without a data logger:

Get a webcam, program software to take a snapshot of the screen every hour.  Hire a kid to copy the data into a comma-delimited file (or a spreadsheet).  For reliability, hire a different kid to check the accuracy of data input...

Well, you did ask if there is ANY way...

[WXman]

OK thanks.  I'll look for a serial version.  WeatherLinkIP comes in serial and USB both, correct? Because I've seen both for WeatherLink...but not for the IP version.

[DaculaWeather]

Correct. I use the serial datalogger and it works flawlessly, I've heard mixed results with the USB datalogger. If you want to avoid any problems my recommendation is the serial datalogger. And yes, it comes with Weatherlink software.

[d_l]

WeatherLinkIP comes in serial and USB both, correct? Because I've seen both for WeatherLink...but not for the IP version.

Wait!  There is the Weatherlink serial or USB version and THEN there is the WeatherlinkIP version.  So there are three different interface options to connect your computer to the weatherlink's datalogger that you can choose from when you make the purchase.

Does that clear things up?

[Bushman]

You don't HAVE to have the logger.  You could run a SS scanner and suck the radio signal into your PC.  Parse out the datastream and write to a CSV file.  Of course this is not child's play. 

[dalecoy]

WeatherLinkIP comes in serial and USB both, correct? Because I've seen both for WeatherLink...but not for the IP version.

Wait!  There is the Weatherlink serial or USB version and THEN there is the WeatherlinkIP version.  So there are three different interface options to connect your computer to the weatherlink's datalogger that you can choose from when you make the purchase.

Does that clear things up?

It's not always crystal clear that the WeatherLinkIP does provide a connection to the owner's computer - because the connection is through the network.  That's straightforward if both the console and the computer are on a home network (LAN), and straightforward if they are on different networks.  But it does require that both devices be connected to a network.  WXman didn't actually say that he has network connections.

[d_l]

It's not always crystal clear that the WeatherLinkIP does provide a connection to the owner's computer - because the connection is through the network.  That's straightforward if both the console and the computer are on a home network (LAN), and straightforward if they are on different networks.  But it does require that both devices be connected to a network.  WXman didn't actually say that he has network connections.

That's not so.  With a WLIP, all that you need is a computer with a NIC and the WLIP can be plugged directly to that to simply get the data out into a comma-delimited file.  It is probably expected that you would use the WLIP on a network and that extra capability is fully priced into it, but a full network is not necessary.

[Bushman]

IS there a simple way to get the CSV file  out or is this accomplished using WLIP/WL software?

[johnd]

IS there a simple way to get the CSV file  out...
... or is this accomplished using WLIP/WL software?

Out of what? The logger? The standard (SER/USB/IP) loggers can only output binary data streams. You can certainly access these by writing your own programs, but there are no text data streams available. (Some of the streaming loggers - eg APRS or ERT - can output text strings in their own specific formats.)

Out of the Weatherlink program? Yes. (well strictly speaking TSV, ie tab-delimited, not CSV). Just Browse | Export.

[dalecoy]

It's not always crystal clear that the WeatherLinkIP does provide a connection to the owner's computer - because the connection is through the network.  That's straightforward if both the console and the computer are on a home network (LAN), and straightforward if they are on different networks.  But it does require that both devices be connected to a network.  WXman didn't actually say that he has network connections.

That's not so.  With a WLIP, all that you need is a computer with a NIC and the WLIP can be plugged directly to that to simply get the data out into a comma-delimited file.  It is probably expected that you would use the WLIP on a network and that extra capability is fully priced into it, but a full network is not necessary.

Interesting.  What IP address would the WeatherLinkIP have, if there is no network router?  

I'm interested in hearing from someone who has done that.

[IP addresses are required for the two devices to communicate via TCP/IP, of course]

[johnd]

Interesting.  What IP address would the WeatherLinkIP have, if there is no network router?  

Never done it but I can think of at least 2 ways that would probably/possibly work:

1. Attach the WLIP to a network that does have a DHCP server and allow it to acquire an IP address (that you could determine via the Weatherlink program) before detaching it and connecting direct to a PC (via a revesed patch lead presumably).

2. Run a DHCP server on the PC itself and allow the WLIP to acquire an IP address in that way.

[graculus]

I'm not sure #1 would work, but #2 should be OK, I was about to post same suggestion that myself. Don't forget to use a crossover cable.

[d_l]

These methods assume no router is available.

1) I don't know what default IP the WLIP uses  You could set your computer to that default IP subnet if it has one.

2) You could run a DHCP server on your computer as John suggested.

3) I believe the WL software doesn't even need an IP on the WLIP as it has the option of using a discovery packet to find and establish communication with the WLIP. It then would just use the MAC address of the WLIP for communication.

[johnd]

I'm not sure #1 would work

Any ideas why not? Just curious - don't pretend to be a network expert. If the WLIP acquired an IP in a recognised private range and the PC was configured to talk to a LAN device on the right subnet then do you think it wouldn't work?

Don't forget to use a crossover cable.

Couldn't remember the right terminology - that's why it cam out as 'reversed'.

[dalecoy]

Interesting.  What IP address would the WeatherLinkIP have, if there is no network router?  

Never done it but I can think of at least 2 ways that would probably/possibly work:

1. Attach the WLIP to a network that does have a DHCP server and allow it to acquire an IP address (that you could determine via the Weatherlink program) before detaching it and connecting direct to a PC (via a revesed patch lead presumably).

2. Run a DHCP server on the PC itself and allow the WLIP to acquire an IP address in that way.

Sure.  But:

1.  d_l said: "That's not so" (regarding a network connection) and "all that you need is a computer with a NIC and the WLIP can be plugged directly to that..."  No mention of having to do something about IP addresses.

2.  With a DHCP server (commonly a router), you have that additional device - and you do have a network connection (LAN).

3.  Perhaps Microsoft's "Internet Connection Sharing" software and a crossover cable for the WeatherLinkIP?   Or a switch/hub?

But I would say that you have a network if you have two devices communicating (via TCP/IP in this case), regardless of whether you have to add anything extra (crossover cable/router/switch).

[graculus]

I'm not sure #1 would work

Any ideas why not? Just curious - don't pretend to be a network expert. If the WLIP acquired an IP in a recognised private range and the PC was configured to talk to a LAN device on the right subnet then do you think it wouldn't work?

I'm not a network professional either but the only reason I wrote "not sure" is that I don't know enough about the wlip to be sure that it would retain that IP and wouldn't go looking for another one when it found itself connected to a different "network". I guess if the device was first connected to another network and assigned a fixed IP in the same range as the PC there would be no question it should work.

[d_l]

But I would say that you have a network if you have two devices communicating (via TCP/IP in this case), regardless of whether you have to add anything extra (crossover cable/router/switch).

So with just a computer connected by a crossover cable (or a patch cable) to only a WLIP via the Local Device ID option (MAC address) in WL and not by an IP address, you would consider this a network? The original goal was to get the txt data out of the WLIP via WL export and I stated that you only need a computer and the WLIP.  No other network devices, routers or switches, are necessary. Nor is any IP address in the WLIP necessary.

I just tested this by erasing my WLIP's IP address from WL and using only the Local Device ID to download data.  WL couldn't access my WLIP through the Remote IP address option when it was set to blank so therefore I must have downloaded data without using an IP address! It is a little slower using just the MAC address.

Edit: See later post with more complete tests of this subject. The WL-WLIP interaction is more complicated than it appears to the end user.

[DaculaWeather]

If you're going to all this trouble, why not get a serial or USB logger and have everything you need or will need? 

[dalecoy]

But I would say that you have a network if you have two devices communicating (via TCP/IP in this case), regardless of whether you have to add anything extra (crossover cable/router/switch).

So with just a computer connected by a crossover cable (or a patch cable) to only a WLIP via the Local Device ID option (MAC address) in WL and not by an IP address, you would consider this a network?

Entirely off topic, but yes.  I consider two connected and cooperating/communicating devices to be a network.  If you don't think the minimum number is two, then what is the minimum number?

And thanks for doing the test.  Did you use a crossover cable?

[d_l]

Dale, it was all routed through switches. I didn't want to disconnect and move everything to be next to my laptop. The point of the test was without the IP in the WL configuration box, it won't connect, but I could connect with WL using just the MAC address.

I consider a network to be at least three or more devices. The third device may not be in interaction between the first two, but could be, e.g. the computer or the WLIP could send data out through a router, but the router's switch might only be relaying data normally.

Back to the original point, all that is needed to get the data is a computer and one of the three types of data loggers (plus the appropriate cable).  I'm not suggesting that using a WLIP is the best or cheapest way in this situation. Just that it will work.

[dalecoy]

It is very useful for us to know that connecting using just the MAC address is possible.  Thanks for doing that experiment.  Clearly, I was wrong in believing that an IP address would be required.

We seem to disagree (very slightly) on how many devices constitute a network.    

There have been assertions, elsewhere, that the WeatherLinkIP logger will not communicate with the WeatherLink software, unless it is currently able to communicate with (and send data to) the WeatherLink.com site.  That would be one other worry. I found those assertions a bit hard to understand.   Do you happen to know (or want to test) the truth of that assertion?