Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
1
The problem turns out that not everyone can spend more money on measuring sensors. Hence, for those who own the WS80 and WS90 Wittboy, I recommended buying the Ecowitt WS68, which turns out to be more stable when I tested it with a professional-grade wind gauge in the field for a longer period of time. I had a few reservations about the equipment, but it was generally closer to the truth than the WS80 and derivatives when it came to measuring wind speed.

The release of more firmware versions by Ecowitt for the WS80 and derivatives is due to, among other things, what I detected with the reference equipment and gave the information to Ecowitt with the evidence. Hence, they have been trying to fix the accuracy and stability of the Ecowitt hardware for many months. However, I doubt that with such a hardware layer, subsequent software versions will yield the expected results and it is not a waste of engineers' time and hardware resources. 40Khz transcoders are not very stable relative to 200Khz and are about 20-40 times cheaper than 200Khz transcoders used by reputable companies in the professional segment.

Personally, I think that going into ultrasonic technology was a mistake by Ecowitt, instead of focusing on improving the flaws in their rotary wind meters. It would have made sense if the hardware layer wasn't so cheap with sonic technology, it would have saved us time and wouldn't have required so many software updates, as not everyone has the time to do that and get on masts.

In some time we will check with the reference equipment what Ecowitt has improved in the WS80 and derivatives, but do not expect a breakthrough as long as such large savings on components are made. So we will most likely point out further flaws of Fine Offset in newer software versions for Ecowitt WS80 and derivatives. Perhaps someone will realize that this makes no sense, since Ecowitt doesn't even use professional ultrasonic anemometers in testing, to understand where they are making a mistake and wasting their human resources on fine-tuning a product of questionable accuracy. Not everything can be caught up with software when cheap components fail.
2
AWEKAS / Link Two Weather Stations to AWEKAS
« Last post by parkernathan on Yesterday at 11:02:05 PM »
Is there a way to link two weather stations to one AWEKAS account, or do they both need two separate accounts?

Thanks!
3
I think that's the WS85 sensor:
{ "img": "wh85", "type": "49", "name": "Wind & Rain", "id": "FFFFFFFE", "batt": "9", "signal": "0", "idst": "0" },
sensorID 0x31 = dec 49 (type is the sensor #) - including the WS85 there are 49 sensors possible assuming the max number of each is registered
result of http://IP-address/get_sensors_info?page=1 on a GW1200 1.3.0 resp. a WS3910 on 1.2.9

Yes, that makes sense - thank you.. I have now added this to my ecowitt.h, along with supporting code to the application:
        eWH85_SENSOR = 49,      // 49   0x31

But it still doesn't explain the loss of the WH46 in the v1.3.0 firmware.  I dug around some more, and the firmware does indeed still have the pm1, pm4, and wh46 strings embedded inside.  (There are also quite a few ws85 strings in there - lots of debugging.)

   ---Jonathan
4
I think that's the WS85 sensor:
{ "img": "wh85", "type": "49", "name": "Wind & Rain", "id": "FFFFFFFE", "batt": "9", "signal": "0", "idst": "0" },
sensorID 0x31 = dec 49 (type is the sensor #) - including the WS85 there are 49 sensors possible assuming the max number of each is registered
result of http://IP-address/get_sensors_info?page=1 on a GW1200 1.3.0 resp. a WS3910 on 1.2.9
5
I think I've found a regression here:

1.2.2 - shows WH46 additional information (pm1, pm4) on its web page (liveData.html) and sends via the Ecowitt protocol to EAR, but does not send via the telnet API.

1.2.8 - continues to show WH46 on its web page, continues to send via Ecowitt protocol to EAR, and ADDS that it sends the data via the telnet API.

1.3.0 - does not show anything at all for the WH46 - not on the local web page, not on the EAR submission, and not in the telnet API.  It *does* report the hardware ID in the WH45 slot, as it had been doing previously.

1.3.0 is also the first time that the value "eMAX_SENSOR" (0x31) has appeared at the end of the reply to CMD_READ_SENSOR_ID_NEW - the sensor type of 0x31 is accompanied by by a hardware ID of ff:ff:ff:ff, a battery value of ff, and signal value of 0, as might be expected.  The data ends there. This sentinel value is really only surprising in that it's the first version of the firmware to exhibit this particular behaviour - all previous versions simply used the length to indicate the end of the sensor list.

Interesting...  I have down-revved to 1.2.8 for now, and things are back to normal.

   ---Jonathan
6
I don't want to get into controversy, I have often read this user's posts, critical but certainly well-founded
the focus of the problem is money, if you have enough money to spend buy Gill, Vaisala, Met-one etc and above all if, as has been said, the data is used in areas that involve the protection of human life, don't even dream for a moment to use an Ecowitt product for these purposes.

Ecowitt will remain faithful to its target, which is not compliance with WMO tolerances but those of a decent entry-level product, it will do its best to get the most out of this level but without distorting it, it is not its target.

May our Polish colleagues get over it, throw away their ws80s and replace them with products suited to their needs.

end

M.
7
Davis Instruments Weather Stations / Re: Help with new vp2 please
« Last post by Ahill on Yesterday at 04:30:14 PM »
This is the only section in the console that has to do with setting the stations.
I was originally just going to do wind readings and told i just needed an anny, a wireless transmitter, and console or other equipment to read the data and display it on a computer or the app.
The only reason i decided to just get the complete station is because it was more economical to do it that way.
The console has the ability to receive from 8 different transmitters or 8 different channels 1-8 to choose from. The transmitters are all the same and just need to be set to to the same channel as on the console. The transmitter that came with the station is by default set to channel 1. In the event someone else nearby is using that channel you can select anyone of the other 7 channels for example channel 2. Or if you have additional transmitters you can assign them to one of the other channels.
All i did was set the transmitter on the anny to channel 2 and set it to channel 2 on the console because in the future when i want to set up the remainder of the system which is by default set to channel 1 i don’t have to change anything.

I guess i  am still a bit confused on what you are implying to just do.
Have 2 transmitters running although i just need 1 for now? It will only work if i use the transmitter that came with the complete weather station, even though i was told i need not an entire weather station to just monitor wind? Switch the transmitter over to channel 1 the factory default, but what if a neighbor is already using channel 1, thats one of the reasons you can choose another channel as i did.
What am i missing here or is the firmware wonky.
8
You don't have to consider my words as an oracle. We have a closed circle of dozens of people in Poland who strive for accurate readings of their microclimate. We check meteorological equipment of different brands, in different regions of our country.

Some are firefighters in firefighting units, and for them, precise wind readings are needed to know whether interventions by firefighting units in a particular region of Poland will be needed as a result of worsening weather or heavy rainfall.

We try to make the readings from our sensors close or even analogous to reality.

You'd be surprised that these closed group of a few dozen people in Poland measure the temperature in a manner similar to the WMO, that is, 2 meters and above the surface of the grass, in an airy and sunny place. We exchange observations on the performance of radiation shields, pointing out their advantages and disadvantages. About this, too, there will soon be an interesting thread in the forum, because there is much to write about in the context of passive shielding.

I myself do not measure the temperature on the balcony and neither do my colleagues. Those who actually can't, have a temperature measurement 2-3 m above the roof, so better than at the railing and balcony, where the temperature measurement is less reliable. It gives them back the microclimate, so to speak, anyway.


Wind measurement in most cases is more than 2-3 meters above the roof and masts, so it makes no sense to measure wind speed and direction on the balcony, because we measure turbulence and distorted flow through the building. That's why the accuracy of sensors to measure wind speed and direction is so important. There's no telling how many uncensored words will go Wittboy and WS80's way when the next software version comes out, which probably won't bring a breakthrough in accuracy. There have already been quite a few questions to me about whether to upload 1.2.8 to the WS80, and I have answered that at my own risk for testing purposes. I made similar statements about the update to Wittboy, admitting that it would not bring a breakthrough in measurement quality. I once told Ecowitt what needs to be done to get closer to the accuracy stated in the product sheet, but as you can see they don't want to listen to someone who has experience with semi-professional and professional WMO-compliant equipment.

What you don't understand is that my field operations require measurement equipment that is similar/compatible with WMO, so that the physical quantities measured are similar or even analogous to those that are present at the time. That's why I look at Ecowitt ultrasound through the prism of low-accuracy products that I have thoroughly tested under many extreme conditions. Both the WS80 and WS90 Wittboy and I found them to be inferior equipment to the Davis.

These 40Khz transducers are the key to why Ecowitt has a problem and is releasing more software versions for the WS80 and derivatives for ultrasonic wind measurement. Someday they may understand this mistake, while your narrative will suddenly change. It's better than it was in the beginning when these Finne Offset products came out, but it's still far from perfect and the declarations in the product sheets. Especially with the increased airflow, which show temperature drift when measuring wind.

You laugh at Hongyuv, and all it takes is testing equipment with 200Khz transducers once, and looking at equipment like the WS80, for example, through the prism of a toy with low accuracy and slow refresh rates. Several colleagues acquired, for example, the Hongyuv WDS2 after my suggestions. They said that the return to Wittboy on the main measurement is not there. More are asking, too, because they are annoyed by the constant shortcomings of Ecowitt wind meters and the fact that they are Fine Offset testers for their money. They paid money and got an underdeveloped product and are fed up with the constant climbing of roofs and masts.

No one here is saying that you need to measure only Hongyuv wind, there are other companies like Gill, Vaisala, which are even slightly better in our opinion, but also more expensive. We also have access to such equipment at a fraction of the price from companies that equip AWOS systems and the military, among others, with meteorological instruments with the most accurate readings. Both new units and used ones at attractive pricing and software. In our opinion, whoever tries such equipment once, will not want to look at wind measurement equipment from Fine Offset, seeing how full of flaws and shortcomings it is.

If one has a limited budget and doesn't want super accurate measurements, go for the ultrasonic measuring products from Ecowitt. Myself and several of my colleagues, after the adventures with this equipment, the next copies of WS80 and derivatives will not be until the hardware layer and accuracy is improved, even at the expense of the quality of the equipment. There is good cloud and iot services, but the hardware is mostly low-end with questionable accuracy. Most of it is suitable for purely amateur measurements, maybe semi-professional, but not much.

@Gyvate I know that you cooperate with Ecowitt and you can't say anything bad about their equipment. People who cooperate, who distribute their equipment, are not objective testers. Nobody bribes me and I tell what the truth is. I don't like to live in lies and hypocrisy.

I'm not happy with equipment that shows random numbers, because I know what kind of bundle to have similar data to nearby professional stations. Equipment is the basis for good measurement, then sensor placement and data visualization. Ecowitt's iOt services are good, but the strong savings on components are then reflected in the constant attempt to refine the firmware in ultrasonic wind meters. About, among other things, poor and unstable connectivity could also be written quite a lot, because it also reports many complaints in Poland. Here Ecowitt should look in the direction of Lorawan.
9
I'm always amazed about the presentation of an enormous (pseudo?) self-confidence in these Arkadiusz_w posts:

"We Poles ..." - the self-crowned Weather King of Poland who represents all Weather enthusiasts in the Republic of Poland - and most of them even don't know this Arkardiusz. And being repetitive on this, almost every post comes with such statements, and thinking one needs to underline and make one's points stronger by such statements has no meaning. Maybe psychologically interesting ...

Advice would be to drop this melagomaniacal wording and accept that you just speak - if at all - for a handful of Polish people.
OK - your approach may be the charta of this little group of Polish Weather enthusiasts, fine, but
we (the majority) here in the forum don't (doesn't) need a White Knight who fights for his understanding of the Weather "Truth".

And, of course, if someone else has different readings, this can only be the fault of the hardware as @Arkadiusz_w or "The Poles" cannot make mistakes ...

Consumer grade weather station manufacturers neither claim nor really want to follow strictly WMO recommendations
(beyond usual marketing terms of which every child already learns to take them with a grain of salt).
Only a few want to copy WMO setups resulting in a standardized but artificial weather observation reading.
Suitable for scientific research and weather forecast but little for practical local life.
Most people want to know what their microclimate is like.

The real temperature on their balcony is more important for many than a WMO standard. If your balcony is not over grass and 2 m above ground, so what ?  Very few really care about the wind situation on their roof (unless the shingles are in danger), but if the wind blows your flower pots from the balcony reeling is important to know. Etc.

Maybe sometimes things are simply not that simple  8-)

the permanent attempt to resurrect the meanwhile dead WS80/WS90 transducer-horse doesn't make things better. But in a way these posts are also amusing and bring some different wind into our forum - which unfortunately cannot be measured by a  Hongyuv device  :lol: \:D/.
10
New assembly
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10