Topic: Ecowitt Component Station ~ Research / Purchase / Setup / Expansion

[MrM1]

I have that shield (or one that looks just like it), and have yet to mount it  ...

Does it appear  large enough inside to house a WH31/32 box style sensor upright (no probe)?

[Gyvate]

Let the testing begin
But I can see why the Ecowitt RS-00001 would be pretty ineffective except for rain and debris. very small inside, and while the sensor fits nice and snug, it doesn't look like it has much room to breathe at all. looks like the heat of the plastic would just get transferred to the sensor.

the space itself is not necessarily a criterion - there are rather small professional ones with good performance (MetSpec Rad) and rather spacy ones with bad performance (TFA).
It's a combination of material used, shape, radiation reflection/compensation and airflow - quite a piece of science.
3 ft might be too low to avoid radiation effects from the ground (the WMO has good reasons to recommend 2 m / 7 ft above cut grass)  - but if all three are at the same height, you will get at least a comparison between the three.

The sensor has to be placed insulated from the housing material which might be easier with probes than with normal WH32/31 casing.

[Gyvate]

I have that shield (or one that looks just like it), and have yet to mount it because I would have to desolder the 32-EP probe to get it to fit in and mount correctly.  I have a whole box of various threaded adapters I've tried.  I even have a waterproof box with clear door to mount the transmitter.  I have considered cutting the wiring and making a screw together joint so that I can easily replace sensor or transmitter in the future.

that's what makes (amongst other things  ) the difference between the professional pieces and the "consumer" pieces.
A MeteoShield Pro, a MetSpec Rad or a SIAP SmaRTCELLino shield can accommodate the probe properly without having to desolder the probe to fit through the entry piece. It's part of the design.

I have also tried some cheap ones which looked nice, but the performance was not convincing. And there I had to systematically remove plastic from the entry piece to allow for the probe to pass through. Not very intelligently constructed or for mini-probes only ...

[kheller2]

I have that shield (or one that looks just like it), and have yet to mount it  ...

Does it appear  large enough inside to house a WH31/32 box style sensor upright (no probe)?

No, I don't believe it could.

[MrM1]

HP-2550 vs GW1200

I just got the GW1200 and thought I might not  get a display console. But after setting up the GE1200, I realized it only reports every 60 seconds.

My display for the Ambient Weather WS-2000 reports in almost real time. Every 16 seconds.

Is it possible to make the GW1200 report in closer to real time?  To the Ecowitt App? Other?

Does the HP-2550 console report data on the display in near real time?  If the GW1200 cannot its kind of a deal breaker. I'd rather have the console, but I wanted the gateway for better sensor reception.   Is there any reason to have both the HP-2550 and the GW1200?

[Gyvate]

your GW1200 reports realtime, but only readable by the WebUI (http://ip-address-of-your-GW12000) or inside the WS View Plus app, both inside your local network only.

To ecowitt.net it's a 1-minute interval (like reporting to AWN) - shorter only for certain observations like starting rain from a WS85/WS90 or a lightning event. They will be posted immediately to the ecowitt.net dashboard

The HP25x0 consoles also report realtime.

EDIT: added the local network only statement

[Gyvate]

I have that shield (or one that looks just like it), and have yet to mount it  ...

Does it appear  large enough inside to house a WH31/32 box style sensor upright (no probe)?

In a Davis 7714 you can put a WN32 or WH31 - you have to tilt it a bit though what doesn't affect its readings.

An AcuRite 06054M has been reported to work quite well when used in a more shadowy area.

The Ambient SRS100LX has mixed experience reports on Amazon, especially regarding its plastic bracket with doesn't seem to survive stronger winds (> 30 mph).

[MrM1]

your GW1200 reports realtime, but only readable by the WebUI (http://ip-address-of-your-GW12000) or inside the WS View Plus app, both inside your local network only.

Let me say thanks for answering my questions so thoroughly and in such detail.

I did find the Gateway this morning via the WebUI of the GW1200.  So that is good, and so I may hold off on a  buying a HP-2550 for a while to see if the Real-Time meets my needs.

But boy was it a trick finding the IP address of the GW1200.   I have a lot of crowding on my 2.4GHz network (like 65 IoTs items).  In a Network Scan, most report the Manufacture name.  Well The Ecowitt GW1200 did NOT.  The name for the IP address of the Ecowitt came up as  Expressif Inc.  Looking that up, it seems to be the manufacture of the chipset (or some of them).  So it was a bear to fine amidst all my other 65+ IP address.  I had at least 3 IP addresses that identified as Expressif Inc.  I finally found it by trying IP address which my scan tool told me had associated Web UI pages.   

So Note to anyone looking for the GW1x00 WebUI on their network.  I might appear as Expressif Inc in the name.   

[MrM1]

Let the testing begin

the space itself is not necessarily a criterion ...
It's a combination of material used, shape, radiation reflection/compensation and airflow - quite a piece of science.

Well so far ... a bit to my surprise ...
1. The Ecowitt RS-00001 has Out Preformed the La Crosse Technology 925-1418
- Temps for the sensor in full sun for the RS-00001 were about 2*F lower
- Does not mean the RS-00001 is good ... just that it might be better than the La Crosse

2. I still have an Ambient Weather SRS100LX shield arriving in a week or so.  So will test that too

3. And I might still get then one I found from SeeedStudio just for Kicks and Giggles
- https://www.seeedstudio.com/Solar-Radiation-Shield-for-Outdoor-Sensor-Protection-A10-p-4601.html
- Says it is 200mm tall so it should house a WH32 sensor inside

4. I realize these cheaper alternatives are not the best solution,  but something is better than nothing and I don't want to pay more than about $60 for a shield
- So it will really come down to what works best of the 2 or 3 I end up testing
- And my assumption is ~ "BEST" ~ would mean,  keeping the closest temp in full sun to another reference sensor in the shade

3 ft might be too low to avoid radiation effects from the ground (the WMO has good reasons to recommend 2 m / 7 ft above cut grass)  - but if all three are at the same height, you will get at least a comparison between the three.

Thanks for this.  I have them at 3 ft just for now until I actually put up my full array in a few days.  The lower level was just on a plant stake I found in the garden, but I will mount them higher soon.

But yes,  even at 3 ft, they are at the same hight

[Rover1822]

But boy was it a trick finding the IP address of the GW1200.   I have a lot of crowding on my 2.4GHz network (like 65 IoTs items).  In a Network Scan, most report the Manufacture name.  Well The Ecowitt GW1200 did NOT.  The name for the IP address of the Ecowitt came up as  Expressif Inc.  Looking that up, it seems to be the manufacture of the chipset (or some of them).  So it was a bear to fine amidst all my other 65+ IP address.  I had at least 3 IP addresses that identified as Expressif Inc.  I finally found it by trying IP address which my scan tool told me had associated Web UI pages.   

This is common with a lot of devices, not limited to the GW1200, or even weather station , or even the manufacturer. if your router has the capability, as mine does, you can rename the obscure name it identified with something more , well , meaningful. I also have a ton of stuff on my network, all of which I know , and i rename as needed to identify. I also , once the device is known, , and if device allows it, static the IP from the device , so from that point on, you know what it is on your router interface. If the device does not allow it, then depending on router, you can , within the router , add a preference or router static for that MAC address to always have a certain IP. I try also to keep my DHCP available lease address range  rather low , like 25 spots , and static as much stuff as I possibly can.

Yes I have well over a hundred devices on my LAN , so management is important. But as you have well over 60, you get all this, so I guess,  I'm posting this to others that may encounter this thread

[MrM1]

your GW1200 reports realtime, but only readable by the WebUI

Having now Found the WebUI,  I have a question about Settings in the WebUI

If I am using the WS85 for a rain gauge/sensor,  Do I need to change the setting in the WebUI>Rain Totals: Rain Data Priority (drop down)
from ...
Traditional Rain Gauge
To ...
Piezoelectric Rain Gauge

Are there any other known settings or calibrations that help the accuracy of the rain sensor in the WS85?

 [ You are not allowed to view attachments ]

[MrM1]

once the device is known, , and if device allows it, static the IP from the device , so from that point on, you know what it is on your router interface.

Thanks,  That was my next question.  Can I change the GW1200 address to static in the WebUI. 
1. Does that hurt anything on the network?
2. Is it done from within the GW1200 WebUI?

[Rover1822]

I don't have a GW1200(I have a GW1100 and a GW2000, and a whole bunch of earlier models)  and , but I assume it is possible. But you already know how to navigate the web UI , so you , I am sure, have already figured this out. Be under Local Network.  Also assumes you know your IP ranges , and know an address you can choose. But I figure you already know this , with the amount of devices on your LAN. Again, I'm posting this for others that may read later

[R.Sidetrack]

But boy was it a trick finding the IP address of the GW1200. 

For future reference, using the WSView Plus app on a phone displays IP addresses, see screenshot.

[Gyvate]

once the device is known, , and if device allows it, static the IP from the device , so from that point on, you know what it is on your router interface.

Thanks,  That was my next question.  Can I change the GW1200 address to static in the WebUI. 
1. Does that hurt anything on the network?
2. Is it done from within the GW1200 WebUI?

only in the WebUI you can do this - on the "Local Network" page
and it won't hurt anything ... - the router remembers the static devices

[Gyvate]

your GW1200 reports realtime, but only readable by the WebUI

Having now Found the WebUI,  I have a question about Settings in the WebUI

If I am using the WS85 for a rain gauge/sensor,  Do I need to change the setting in the WebUI>Rain Totals: Rain Data Priority (drop down)
from ...
Traditional Rain Gauge
To ...
Piezoelectric Rain Gauge

Are there any other known settings or calibrations that help the accuracy of the rain sensor in the WS85?

 [ You are not allowed to view attachments ]

you will really save a lot of time when you read the WiKi - read the WS85 and WS90 sections
https://meshka.eu/Ecowitt/dokuwiki/doku.php?id=start#ws85_essence3
regarding wind and rain these two are identical ...

[MrM1]

you will really save a lot of time when you read the WiKi - read the WS85 and WS90 sections
https://meshka.eu/Ecowitt/dokuwiki/doku.php?id=start#ws85_essence3
regarding wind and rain these two are identical ...

Thanks

Reading the WiKi
Found the page for the Rain Sensor Calibration
- Did the Firmware update on the WS85 from 1.0.7 to 1.0.9

The table in the WiKi is for the WS90
- The most recent firmware in the table for the WS90 is 1.4.7
- Yet the Firmware update for the WS90 is currently 1.5.2
- Is the Table up to date?
- Would I use the calibration settings for the WS90 v1.4.7 in the WS85 v1.0.9 ??

Thanks Again

[Gyvate]

you will really save a lot of time when you read the WiKi - read the WS85 and WS90 sections
https://meshka.eu/Ecowitt/dokuwiki/doku.php?id=start#ws85_essence3
regarding wind and rain these two are identical ...

Thanks
...

The table in the WiKi is for the WS90
- The most recent firmware in the table for the WS90 is 1.4.7
- Yet the Firmware update for the WS90 is currently 1.5.2
- Is the Table up to date?

it doesn't say that the most recent firmware is 1.4.7 - only the last tier baseline example is for firmware 1.4.7
the firmware version tables are all up to date - you are speaking of the proposed baseline table for the tier settings ... - different things

These are baseline suggestions on which you have to build your own, individual tier calibration.
If you read the text more clossely, you will understand.
It can change with every firmware version.

There is also a WS85 review in the WiKi with some tier suggestions --> Reviews

[MrM1]

it doesn't say that the most recent firmware is 1.4.7 - only the last tier baseline example is for firmware 1.4.7
the firmware version tables are all up to date - you are speaking of the proposed baseline table for the tier settings ... - different things

These are baseline suggestions on which you have to build your own, individual tier calibration.
If you read the text more clossely, you will understand.
It can change with every firmware version.

There is also a WS85 review in the WiKi with some tier suggestions --> Reviews

Got it.  Thanks for the Clarification

[MrM1]

In General,  With Comparing Radiation Shields,  Is the Goal to have a lower reading in full sun and heat?  In Other Words,  for comparing radiation shields (all conditions being equal), is a Lower Reading better?  That would be my assumption,  but what do I know?   

[kheller2]

In General,  With Comparing Radiation Shields,  Is the Goal to have a lower reading in full sun and heat?  In Other Words,  for comparing radiation shields (all conditions being equal), is a Lower Reading better?  That would be my assumption,  but what do I know?   

The goal would be to match a properly shielded mercury one.  Or whatever super accurate device is used by the weather folks these days.
But as a general yet inaccurate statement, yes, you would want the lowest heat/radiant/solar influence on the device.
Same as in the shade.

[MrM1]

The goal would be to match a properly shielded mercury one.  Or whatever super accurate device is used by the weather folks these days.
But as a general yet inaccurate statement, yes, you would want the lowest heat/radiant/solar influence on the device.
Same as in the shade.

Thanks for checking my "logic".  Makes sense

I do have a reference device in the shade too. 

BTW, the La Crosse 925-1418 shield I have that I am testing with seems to be the TFA Protective Cover 98.1114.  And so far is basically not good except for protection for rain and debris.

[Gyvate]

In General,  With Comparing Radiation Shields,  Is the Goal to have a lower reading in full sun and heat?  In Other Words,  for comparing radiation shields (all conditions being equal), is a Lower Reading better?  That would be my assumption,  but what do I know?   

during direct sunshine exposure - yes
after longer rainfall - no
during the night - no
different conditions with impact on the so-called time-constant of the shield (shortest response time)
it's not only the temperature itself but also how fast changes are recorded - similar aspects apply for the humidity readings
when you compare you have to use the same type of sensor during that exercise

[MrM1]

Got the Build Going.  (pictures in a few days).  But wondering, at what height do you think there might be a need for Guide Wires on a 1.5" steel pole that is supporting a WS85  by itself (no other sensors)?
- I am currently at 9 ft high over my ground
- but I am on a lake front "sea wall".  So the WS85 is 9ft above my ground,  but 14 ft above the water

[Rover1822]

What is the length above ground  and type of pole? . I know you said steel, but what kind of pipe, EMT? , Schedule 40 ?, etc. Also how is it anchored, just stuck in the ground or did you anchor it with a bit of concrete, or something else. You can easily go 8' with just straight EMT, If you used schedule 40 easily 10 feet or more. The heights I mentioned you can do without without guy wires, the weather unit weighs next to nothing. But more details are needed.

Edit: I see you say 9 feet above ground , that is all that matters. Since most of these pipes are sold in 10' lengths , and you really need about 1.5 foot of that , in the ground. Tell us a bit more on the pipes.

Edit 2: If it is 1.5" schedule 40 , than at least bury 2 or more feet, that is one heavy pipe, . I would concrete the base or sleeve into another pipe  that is concreted so you can take the unit down easily. If it is EMT , probably follow the same , although a lighter pipe.   Essentially at those heights with a decent base, you do not need guys. Trust me , I live on the coast and have wind turbines etc, and my stuff mounted. Guys at under 10 feet with 1.5" , either pipe or just going to be a thing to trip over