Author Topic: The Aculink Bridge and Kevin's Bridge Reader = NICE (Read 4974 times)

skysummit · « **on:** February 02, 2015, 10:33:21 PM »

I've been having my Acurite 5 in 1 for about 3 weeks or so now. I really like the rig and my data has been dead on with accuracy. I was running Weather Display via USB to get my data online, but had consistent USB connection errors. It seemed as though every 30 - 36 hours, the USB connection would drop between the console and laptop causing my data to hose up online.

At first I thought it was because I was running an old laptop with XP on it so I found another laptop with Win 8 Pro. Everything seemed fine for about 2 days, then bam....USB Connection error again. After searching the Acurite forums, it seems as though this has been an issue with these weather station since they were first introduced. Many have had to send their consoles back to Acurite to get it resolved.

Well, instead, I was able to get Kevin's Aculink Bridge reader to work. I'm VERY happy so far. I believe today is the 3rd day with it online and so far no issues. Sure, I no longer have my php/ajax website up since I'm not using Weather Display, but I have found an alternate source.

My question is, am I the only one doing this? I have not found another site doing this for their main page. Basically, I'm using my CWOP data for my main page, including th "panel display" from the CWOP page, along with the graphs. I LOVE IT, and if all continues to work, will definitely be making a donation to Kevin to support his program. You can find his bridge reader here, if there's someone who has not heard of it yet: http://kevin-key.blogspot.com/

Anyone else doing this?

http://www.ponchatoula-weather.com

nincehelser · « **Reply #1 on:** February 03, 2015, 02:23:57 AM »

There are several different techniques for reading the bridge data. I use a Raspberry Pi and weewx for reporting and website generation. It also keeps a local copy of data in an SQL database. http://nincehelser.com/ipwx

Others use meteobridge/weatherbridge.

Search the internet and you'll find a few other methods.

As for your USB problems, I'm guessing you have an 02032c console. Those have had some problems, but AcuRite has several other USB models that have been solid for several years now.

Reporting via USB is likely still the dominate method. Personally I prefer using the bridge method because it allows for multiple sensors.

skysummit · « **Reply #2 on:** February 03, 2015, 02:58:53 AM »

I was just curious if I was the only one utilizing the CWOP data like I am for my website. I'm sure there are others out there, but I haven't run across their sites yet. Really, the only thing I miss is not having my weather banner for forums.

Jack Bowman · « **Reply #3 on:** February 03, 2015, 09:21:06 AM »

I have used the Bridge, and Kevin's program since Kevin released his software. The latest version is rock solid. It just works, and works well!

DoctorKnow · « **Reply #4 on:** February 03, 2015, 10:03:25 AM »

I'm glad to hear your sensor is as accurate as mine. I am very pleased so far with the wind speed too on the dual panel model 06014RM. It is showing the higher wind speeds than my old single panel never seemed to be able to. Yesterday I was seeing 30 MPH readings on there which were very close to the NWS sites.

cguy09 · « **Reply #5 on:** February 03, 2015, 04:16:23 PM »

I recently purchased a package deal from Acu-rite with the dual head, internet bridge and a few extra remote sensors.

Did a bit of research here and elsewhere, and since I had had weewx running on a low end PC prior to moving last fall, decided to go down the "intercept the bridge packet route". I looked at nincehelser's site, used his scripts to confirm that it worked, and then followed down the "Hackulink" driver for weewx. I've since used an old wireless router box to do the interception and send it on to weewx. As of today, I'm just feeding WeatherUnderground with PWS KNCLEXIN18 from weewx every 3 minutes, rather than wait on MBW to send it every 15...

Mark

Jack Bowman · « **Reply #6 on:** February 03, 2015, 07:21:30 PM »

It's really nice to have options in data sharing when it comes to the Acurite family of weather stations. I know there are more individuals out there that are making this happen, but I just want to say thanks to Nincehelser, and Kevin for there work in this area. You both have definitely improved the use of this product, and added much enjoyment for many folks. THANKS!

skysummit · « **Reply #7 on:** February 13, 2015, 04:10:33 PM »

I just realized something today thanks to Brian at Weather Display. He sent me a message saying WD can use Kevin's Bridge Reader's .csv file. I did not know that! Things seem to get better and better now each week

I've decided to keep my current layout, but at least now I know I can always go back to the ajax style if I want, and not have to worry about a USB connection.

bvstation · « **Reply #8 on:** March 14, 2015, 11:34:51 PM »

Quote from: ColoradoWeather on February 03, 2015, 09:21:06 AM

I have used the Bridge, and Kevin's program since Kevin released his software. The latest version is rock solid. It just works, and works well!

agreed... the software is great so far I have it uploading to every source it will go to. Every 18seconds is as fast as I can transmit...I do wish he would add a way to upload faster even if the station itself can't read faster just for the sake of doing it.

nincehelser · « **Reply #9 on:** March 14, 2015, 11:42:23 PM »

Quote from: bvstation on March 14, 2015, 11:34:51 PM

agreed... the software is great so far I have it uploading to every source it will go to. Every 18seconds is as fast as I can transmit...I do wish he would add a way to upload faster even if the station itself can't read faster just for the sake of doing it.

Uggh. Yeah... there are people on wunderground already faking their readings trying to be faster than the "other guy".

That behavior shouldn't be encouraged.

Jack Bowman · « **Reply #10 on:** March 15, 2015, 10:52:16 AM »

Kevin's Software waits for a bridge transmission to occur before updating WU, or any of the other supported sites. I think that is around 18 seconds most of the time. It really serves no purpose to upload faster than the Acu-Link Bridge can transmit though. This would just be a waste of bandwidth, and server resources. Optimally it would be nice to have more wind gust detail, but the rest of the sensor information seems more than adequate.

Inverno · « **Reply #11 on:** March 15, 2015, 07:42:30 PM »

If weather underground didn't want us doing it, they would restrict the timing somehow. Weather changes in the blink of an eye!

Bushman · « **Reply #12 on:** March 15, 2015, 08:13:44 PM »

Go ahead and try it. Wanna bet your external IP address gets blocked? Most large outfits watch for such behaviour. Besides, what is the point of submitting 87 identical reports (assuming 1/sec)?

Jack Bowman · « **Reply #13 on:** March 15, 2015, 08:20:21 PM »

Your missing the point. Unless your instrumentation is capable of the frequency in updates, then it is just duplicate data. It serves no purpose whatsoever in relaying accurate weather data. We complain about WU service to no end, but this kind of abuse is part of the problem. If you want faster updates it starts with the weather sensor equipment first, then the software support.

Inverno · « **Reply #14 on:** March 15, 2015, 08:22:13 PM »

My post may have been confusing. I'm using Kevin Key's program. Whatever speed it uses is what I'm set at...18 seconds?

nincehelser · « **Reply #15 on:** March 15, 2015, 09:01:27 PM »

Last year a couple of people contacted me about modifying the scripts to make their station "report" faster. From what I could gather, the "faster" station would get more prominent placement on wunderground's map (or at least they thought it did, I really don't know).

That was before the interface revamp. Now that I look at it seems they've de-emphasized Rapid-Fire a bit from what I remember. Or maybe they aren't pushing the flash-based stickers anymore.

For the last week or so I've been plotting 18-second updates via my scripts vs 1-minute updates via weewx. KNEPERU2 is 18-seconds via a script, KNEPERU3 is 1-minute via weewx. They look pretty much alike, except for the wind data. I imagine weewx is aggregating the data to 1-minute, while I'm just reporting wind values as I get them.

FYI, here are the reporting intervals for Acurite gear. The 5n1 sends out two alternating information sets, with wind speed being the only one common between them, thus wind speed is 18 seconds, and everything else 36 seconds:

Wind speed: 18 seconds
Wind direction: 36 seconds
Temp/Humidity: 36 seconds
Rainfall: 36 seconds

The tower reports Temp/Humidity every 16 seconds.

The bridge reports barometric pressure every minute.

Jack Bowman · « **Reply #16 on:** March 15, 2015, 09:43:08 PM »

Quote from: Inverno on March 15, 2015, 08:22:13 PM

My post may have been confusing. I'm using Kevin Key's program. Whatever speed it uses is what I'm set at...18 seconds?

"Kevin's Software waits for a bridge transmission to occur before updating WU, or any of the other supported sites. I think that is around 18 seconds most of the time."

Inverno · « **Reply #17 on:** March 16, 2015, 06:57:19 AM »

George, good comparison. It seems to make a noticeable difference in temperature spikes that you can see. I think the 1 minute interval "looks" better since its smooth somewhat. Just my opinion.

Looking at Kevin's blog, the older versions allowed the user control on how often they could transmit to their weather sites of choice. I wonder why that was taken away in the newer version? I'd probably slow mine down if there was control.

aweatherguy · « **Reply #18 on:** March 19, 2015, 09:37:44 PM »

I'm with Colorado on this one. As the author of a free weather program (WSDL) I have had many requests for rapid fire WU uploads ...usually they want the uploads to run much faster than data becomes available from the station.

Does anyone understand why users are so attracted to this? It sure seems to be a popular request for something that at least to me does not seem all that useful... I don't get it and would like to at least understand why folks see this feature as valuable.

Zug · « **Reply #19 on:** March 22, 2015, 02:41:03 AM »

thanks for posting about this.. I bought an Aculink only to be disappointed that it won't pass rain gauge info to WU, I have a 3 in 1 and got the rain gauge with the aculink in a recent bundle. So if this does the trick I'll be happy

News:

Author Topic: The Aculink Bridge and Kevin's Bridge Reader = NICE (Read 4974 times)