Weather Station Hardware > Remote Weather Monitoring
Remote weather monitoring
johnd:
@d_l
1. Yes - of course. I'm not sure that there would be much point in having 1 minute granularity with 5min uploads, but yes 5- or 10-min granularity with 60-min uploads would make sense. I don't disagree in the slightest that these regimes will satisfy quite a lot of VC customers but, as you say, it won't be real-time data, or close to it. So there will still be a significant constituency of potential users interested in real-time data who won't be fully served by VC.
2. VC will AIUI definitely be available outside the US, but plans still need to be agreed in each OV territory. And exact details, costing etc remain to be seen.
3. I'm not sure where you're taking those capacity/consumption figures from. Are those just the standard Davis figures for the 7707 panel or have you also factored in the modem demand which, even if it sleeps most of the time - as I guess it will - will be quite significant. And the 7707 can be marginal in northerly latitudes - here in the UK it's not uncommon in midwinter to get 5 or 6 consecutive days of 5-6 hours of useful sunlight pre day of no more than maybe 100W/sqm. Possibly Davis might need to reintroduce the 7705 supplementary panel, which IIRC was discontinued some while back.
4. Agreed
d_l:
3. Those are stated 7707 power output capabilities. I have no idea what the cell modem's power draw will be, but perhaps Davis will make power connection provisions to add an auxiliary 7707 to the VC for northern latitudes.
SLOweather:
--- Quote from: johnd on March 13, 2011, 01:59:06 PM ---
2. Although the details aren't clear yet, I'm not sure whether there will be a free choice of network. In any event, I'm guessing that the price won't be the same for each network. And the price, especially if you opt for the more costly 5min rather than 15min or 60min updates, may not appeal to everyone.
--- End quote ---
Based on the catalog pricing, I'd say there's no choice on network. Davis will have had to negotiate a bulk deal to get that kind of pricing, they own the plan, and you pay them for the service, and it's clearly bandwidth dependent. It may well work on many networks. We have a RACO Alarm Agent for our water company controls. It's similarly priced, and RACO didn't even ask which carriers we had around here. I set it up and it just works. It's interface is similarly web based.
The cheapest data only plan I could get for development from Verizon was $40/month for 250 megabytes. My solar station uses about half that at 30 second updates.
Davis probably compresses the data upload to conserve bandwidth even more.
d_l:
--- Quote from: SLOweather on March 13, 2011, 04:28:18 PM ---Davis probably compresses the data upload to conserve bandwidth even more.
--- End quote ---
Why bother? A monthly WLK file at 5-min interval is only 775 KB in size. I doubt that the total monthly bandwidth at a 5-minute data collection rate would be very much larger than that even allowing for inclusion of the WLIP account ID and PW, and CRC checks of the uploads.
johnd:
--- Quote from: d_l on March 13, 2011, 04:56:47 PM ---
--- Quote from: SLOweather on March 13, 2011, 04:28:18 PM ---Davis probably compresses the data upload to conserve bandwidth even more.
--- End quote ---
Why bother?
--- End quote ---
I'm not sure that it actually is compressible. Assuming that the WLIP data format is like a loop or archive data packet then it will already be in a dense packed binary format and not a compressible format like text. I think that the only way of compressing this further would be to delete certain of the data fields.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version