Author Topic: Barani: too good to be true...  (Read 15959 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Meteorology fan

  • Senior Contributor
  • ****
  • Posts: 283
Re: Barani: too good to be true...
« Reply #375 on: July 07, 2024, 03:16:28 AM »
Wind gusts reach around 5-9 km/h in my valley today. As you can see, Barani keeps overheating for several hours after sunrise. If a front had passed at this point, Barani would have ended the day with an inflated maximum air temperature.
« Last Edit: July 07, 2024, 04:18:48 AM by Meteorology fan »
Ecowitt WS90 1.3.8, WS80 1.2.5, Ecowitt WS68, Ecowitt WH31EP/WH32EP, WH40, WH57, WN34L, WH51, WN34D, HP2560_C, HP2550_C, GW1100, GW2000. Davis Vantage Pro 2, Davis Vue, Davis 6313, Hongyuv WDS2E

Barani Meteoshield Pro II, III, Davis FARS 24H

Offline ivano

  • Senior Contributor
  • ****
  • Posts: 282
    • http://www.supermeteo.com/stazione/ortelle/
Re: Barani: too good to be true...
« Reply #376 on: July 07, 2024, 05:51:49 AM »
Wind gusts reach around 5-9 km/h in my valley today. As you can see, Barani keeps overheating for several hours after sunrise. If a front had passed at this point, Barani would have ended the day with an inflated maximum air temperature.
Hi, it distorts the temperature data in moments when the wind is very low or absent, compared to a ventilated screen, but this is obvious, try to think the opposite, on a day with higher winds 10/15 km/h would be the fars to distort the temperature value, therefore it is essential to design the weather station based on the place where it is installed, if it is an area where the wind is almost absent, it is obvious that you have to put a ventilated screen there, if instead it is located in a hum fairly ventilated area should be a passive screen,  [ You are not allowed to view attachments ]  if you look at the graph I can say that it is the fars that distorts the temperature data when the wind starts to blow ;)  ;)
« Last Edit: July 07, 2024, 05:53:43 AM by ivano »
1)3 gw1000 +1 GW2000
2)hp2551
3)ws80
4)ws68
5)2 wh32 EP
6)5 wh31 EP
7)2 meteoschield pro 3 gen
8)1 Fars meteoshield pro 3 gen
9) davis 7714 Black
10)wh40
11)schermo solare RAD-14 Metspec
12)schermo solare RAD-02 Metspec
13)Meteorain 200 compact (Barani)
14)davis ventilato h24
15) Davis vp2 pro ventilata
16) GW1001 ecowitt
17) Wittboy ecowitt
18)schermo solare  Comet system da Cometeo
template http://ortellemeteo.altervista.org/pwsd/
webcam :https://rtsp.me/embed/tRhazi3z/
http://www.supermeteo.com/stazione/ortelle/

Offline Jasper3012

  • Senior Contributor
  • ****
  • Posts: 192
Re: Barani: too good to be true...
« Reply #377 on: July 07, 2024, 06:20:10 AM »
Wind gusts reach around 5-9 km/h in my valley today. As you can see, Barani keeps overheating for several hours after sunrise. If a front had passed at this point, Barani would have ended the day with an inflated maximum air temperature.

The FARS has the same kind of error but during the time of day where the max is actually recorded and on a much more frequent basis, so you end up with an error much more frequently than with the Barani.

Offline Jasper3012

  • Senior Contributor
  • ****
  • Posts: 192
Re: Barani: too good to be true...
« Reply #378 on: July 07, 2024, 08:08:19 AM »
Second time in 24 h that the temp drops a lot quicker in the Barani compared to the FARS during a heavy shower, up to a 0.8C difference even (13.8C vs 14.6C). Not sure why this is? You'd expect the opposite with the active ventilation of the FARS generating a quicker response time.

 [ You are not allowed to view attachments ]

Offline bianconero57

  • Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 147
    • Valdefensch@57
Re: Barani: too good to be true...
« Reply #379 on: July 07, 2024, 09:53:14 AM »
 ](*,) what time constant of your sensors
because it continues to not be clear at all  :!:
what do you have as a WMO reference  :?:

Offline Jasper3012

  • Senior Contributor
  • ****
  • Posts: 192
Re: Barani: too good to be true...
« Reply #380 on: July 07, 2024, 10:16:46 AM »
20 sec at 1 m/s , probe measures every 8 sec and the reported min and max are the lowest and highest 1 min averages

Offline Jasper3012

  • Senior Contributor
  • ****
  • Posts: 192
Re: Barani: too good to be true...
« Reply #381 on: July 12, 2024, 05:44:14 PM »
Updated graph with the comparison. The graph itself should be clear but I'll explain it again here, the blue line is the difference in the recorded min, with a negative value representing a cooler value on the Barani and a positive value a cooler value on the FARS. In this case, you'll (mostly) see a positive value for the blue line, indicating that the FARS is usually cooler than the Barani. The red line is the same but for the recorded max, you'll see that the Barani usually gets a cooler value. The difference between the two with both min and max has been shrinking in recent days due to the very poor weather here, a lot of cloud and wind, which tends to generate more equal temps between the shields. The summer overall has been poor and that will have suppressed the difference between the shields. Nevertheless, the Barani has so far been the clear winner by day, with the FARS performing slightly better than the Barani by night.

 [ You are not allowed to view attachments ]

Offline Jasper3012

  • Senior Contributor
  • ****
  • Posts: 192
Re: Barani: too good to be true...
« Reply #382 on: July 12, 2024, 05:49:55 PM »
Not directly relevant for this thread but to indicate how poor it has been here... which in turn does influence the comparison obviously. Very cool, wet and not much sun at all.

 [ You are not allowed to view attachments ]

Offline bianconero57

  • Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 147
    • Valdefensch@57
Re: Barani: too good to be true...
« Reply #383 on: July 13, 2024, 07:14:33 AM »
 :?: :?: hmm is your probe from your Davis 24h shelter also the one with a constant of 20s/1m/s  :?: :?:

Offline Jasper3012

  • Senior Contributor
  • ****
  • Posts: 192
Re: Barani: too good to be true...
« Reply #384 on: July 13, 2024, 01:28:46 PM »
Yes, the exact same probe as the MS Pro.