From mark at markwyman.com Wed Jun 8 08:49:32 2005 From: mark at markwyman.com (Mark Wyman) Date: Wed Jun 8 08:49:58 2005 Subject: [wxqc] Quality control suggestion Message-ID: <200506080849156.SM01224@markamd2003> Hi all, BTW I love all of this effort being put into MADIS and CWOP, it is a very cool system to mess around with. I was noticing however there are a lot of people near me that have poor quality measurements, and I was thinking it must be next to impossible to get people to check their weather system's accuracy often enough to keep measurements at their highest quality. What I would like to see that I would think would increase the accuracy of results is a link to an image or message board banner that would represent a seal of approval of the quality of data. In this fashion a person can show support for the project, advertise their support, and also show they are producing accurate data. Even a simple set of texts and hyperlinks may be appropriate that could be linked. i.e, text version. CWOP Member: CW3833 Temp: 73 Dew: 59 Wind: SSW@15MPH,G@20MPH Press: 1010.9mb Precip: 0.00" Time: 8:44AM EST 6/8/2005 Quality of Data: Excellent And this could then be used on a site or linked to on a BBS to show others. Just an idea. -Mark Wyman mark@ramseymail.com http://www.ramseyelectronics.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/pipermail/wxqc/attachments/20050608/d63a31ec/attachment.html From sam at wa4phy.net Wed Jun 8 10:06:33 2005 From: sam at wa4phy.net (Sam Drinkard) Date: Wed Jun 8 10:06:38 2005 Subject: [wxqc] Quality control suggestion In-Reply-To: <200506080849156.SM01224@markamd2003> References: <200506080849156.SM01224@markamd2003> Message-ID: <42A6FB69.20605@wa4phy.net> I like the idea myself, but aside from those of us who look at it, is there anyone who has had requests for past data? I know of one person who does not send data to the MADIS or CWOP, (due to pending move) but he's had a request for wx data every 10 minutes for a year... dunno if they ever got it or not, but the company was willing to pay for it. I also agree a simple text statement would be good, but where would it be generated from? The MADIS QC? That, I suspect would take a good bit of work on behalf of those involved with the program, and I'd venture to guess they already have enough work to do... Comments? -- Snowman From hugal at ott.net Wed Jun 8 18:11:57 2005 From: hugal at ott.net (Al Huggard) Date: Wed Jun 8 18:12:07 2005 Subject: [wxqc] Re: QC sugestions Message-ID: <001f01c56c77$1aeec1d0$64d2f446@al07ti2sxm71qt> Guys and Gals, I to see a large number of what 'appears' to be less than accurate reporting. I am told that there are micro systems that can cause significant deviations from other area weather even very close to each other. I much suggest that each of us contact those members near us that appear to have questionable data as referenced on the "all sites" graphs that Phil Gladstone publishes. Even better we could add the available nearby sites on our individual graphs to see exactly which sites are highly suspect an contact them to assist or suggest that they might check their calibration. This does of course require that each of us who might do this would have to assure themselves that they have very accurate data on their sites. As all of us are volunteering our data, I would think that self policing might be a good start to get our act together rather than involving those who use the data. I have found however, that Russ and Dave are very helpful when you can ask specific questions and I am grateful for their help. Al Huggard CA3525 hugal@ott.net -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature Size: 3143 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/pipermail/wxqc/attachments/20050608/7bf22308/smime.bin From sam at wa4phy.net Wed Jun 8 19:28:28 2005 From: sam at wa4phy.net (Sam Drinkard) Date: Wed Jun 8 19:28:33 2005 Subject: [wxqc] Re: QC sugestions In-Reply-To: <001f01c56c77$1aeec1d0$64d2f446@al07ti2sxm71qt> References: <001f01c56c77$1aeec1d0$64d2f446@al07ti2sxm71qt> Message-ID: <42A77F1C.6010408@wa4phy.net> Good points Al. I assume, although we all know what happens when you assume too many things :-) The QC process does in fact guide us in our endeavors to provide good data, and myself monitor things on a nightly basis. If someone has more suggestions about some type of seal of approval (for lack of better terms) please share this with us. As we are borderline on topic, perhaps we should take this type of discussion to another location, or if it would help, I can add a list to my majordomo server for such topics.. Sam -- Snowman From philip at gladstonefamily.net Wed Jun 8 20:38:30 2005 From: philip at gladstonefamily.net (Philip Gladstone) Date: Wed Jun 8 20:38:38 2005 Subject: [wxqc] Re: QC sugestions In-Reply-To: <42A77F1C.6010408@wa4phy.net> References: <001f01c56c77$1aeec1d0$64d2f446@al07ti2sxm71qt> <42A77F1C.6010408@wa4phy.net> Message-ID: <42A78F86.4030004@gladstonefamily.net> Sam Drinkard wrote: > Good points Al. I assume, although we all know what happens when you > assume too many things :-) The QC process does in fact guide us in > our endeavors to provide good data, and myself monitor things on a > nightly basis. If someone has more suggestions about some type of > seal of approval (for lack of better terms) please share this with > us. As we are borderline on topic, perhaps we should take this type > of discussion to another location, or if it would help, I can add a > list to my majordomo server for such topics.. > > I think that this is the sort of discussion that this list is for (and as the owner, I get to make the rules!). I can produce a 'rating' sticker without a lot of effort, but I do not have the current weather reports for each site (I do a bulk downloaded from the MADIS system on an essentially daily basis). However, I am a terrible graphic artist -- as I am sure that you are all aware! If somebody could mock up a sticker, then I'm sure that I could generate something like it. Philip -- Philip Gladstone * Check out the live pondcam at http://pond.gladstonefamily.net -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature Size: 3322 bytes Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature Url : http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/pipermail/wxqc/attachments/20050608/cd0433f0/smime.bin From gary.oldham at adelphia.net Wed Jun 8 21:03:25 2005 From: gary.oldham at adelphia.net (Gary Oldham) Date: Wed Jun 8 21:03:38 2005 Subject: [wxqc] Re: QC sugestions In-Reply-To: <42A78F86.4030004@gladstonefamily.net> References: <001f01c56c77$1aeec1d0$64d2f446@al07ti2sxm71qt> <42A77F1C.6010408@wa4phy.net> <42A78F86.4030004@gladstonefamily.net> Message-ID: <42A7955D.6090304@adelphia.net> Skipped content of type multipart/alternative-------------- next part -------------- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.323 / Virus Database: 267.6.5 - Release Date: 6/7/2005 From mark at markwyman.com Wed Jun 8 21:26:17 2005 From: mark at markwyman.com (Mark W) Date: Wed Jun 8 21:27:12 2005 Subject: [wxqc] Re: QC sugestions References: <001f01c56c77$1aeec1d0$64d2f446@al07ti2sxm71qt><42A77F1C.6010408@wa4phy.net> <42A78F86.4030004@gladstonefamily.net> Message-ID: <003001c56c92$3b9a7350$628a3243@MARKSCOMPAQ> Oooh, do I ever have contacts for this... I will see what I can make my sister do being the art director she is. I may be able to do something, but horribly busy at the moment. -Mark ----- Original Message ----- From: "Philip Gladstone" To: "Discussion of data quality issues" Sent: Wednesday, June 08, 2005 8:38 PM Subject: Re: [wxqc] Re: QC sugestions > _______________________________________________ > wxqc mailing list > wxqc@lists.gladstonefamily.net > http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/mailman/listinfo/wxqc > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.323 / Virus Database: 267.6.6 - Release Date: 6/8/2005 From sam at wa4phy.net Wed Jun 8 21:28:52 2005 From: sam at wa4phy.net (Sam Drinkard) Date: Wed Jun 8 21:28:57 2005 Subject: [wxqc] Re: QC sugestions In-Reply-To: <42A78F86.4030004@gladstonefamily.net> References: <001f01c56c77$1aeec1d0$64d2f446@al07ti2sxm71qt> <42A77F1C.6010408@wa4phy.net> <42A78F86.4030004@gladstonefamily.net> Message-ID: <42A79B54.6010002@wa4phy.net> Philip, I was not going to push the issue on the discussion, as I felt it was not fully down the pipe of QC problems or such, but I'm glad you consider this thread in compliance. Perhaps a few guidlines from you would help us decide where to draw the line..... Sam -- Snowman From mark at markwyman.com Wed Jun 8 21:31:48 2005 From: mark at markwyman.com (Mark W) Date: Wed Jun 8 21:32:35 2005 Subject: [wxqc] Re: QC sugestions References: <001f01c56c77$1aeec1d0$64d2f446@al07ti2sxm71qt><42A77F1C.6010408@wa4phy.net> <42A78F86.4030004@gladstonefamily.net> Message-ID: <004101c56c93$01315610$628a3243@MARKSCOMPAQ> This is sort of the thing I had in mind: Banner If the above doesn't come through try: http://gfx.statgfx.com/old/folding.cgi?&username=drfish&border=82,146,148&custom=255,255,255&label=255,255,255&header=255,255,255&stats=255,255,255&bgcolor=28,87,128&trans=no&template=techreport&.jpg&cpu=55 You will have to combine all of the seperate lines into one to make it work. It is a graphic generated for folding at home that one of my favorite sites is gung-ho on. http://www.techreport.com A lot of guys use them in the forums as thier "badge of honor". Maybe something a little smaller, or reports in text that a user can overlay on top of thier own banner graphic (much lighter server load). -Mark ----- Original Message ----- From: "Philip Gladstone" To: "Discussion of data quality issues" Sent: Wednesday, June 08, 2005 8:38 PM Subject: Re: [wxqc] Re: QC sugestions > _______________________________________________ > wxqc mailing list > wxqc@lists.gladstonefamily.net > http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/mailman/listinfo/wxqc > No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.323 / Virus Database: 267.6.6 - Release Date: 6/8/2005 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/pipermail/wxqc/attachments/20050608/f355874f/attachment.html From kd7yat at juno.com Wed Jun 8 21:33:54 2005 From: kd7yat at juno.com (kd7yat@juno.com) Date: Wed Jun 8 21:34:40 2005 Subject: [wxqc] kd7yat-3 Message-ID: <20050608.183357.21088.20669@webmail12.lax.untd.com> I seem to be consistant at failing on my Dewpoint (always high) The station sits on the edge of our North Lake in the community, and the sensor is about 12 feet from the waters edge. Would this be the root cause for the error? Ed, kd7yat From sam at wa4phy.net Wed Jun 8 21:46:39 2005 From: sam at wa4phy.net (Sam Drinkard) Date: Wed Jun 8 21:46:44 2005 Subject: [wxqc] kd7yat-3 In-Reply-To: <20050608.183357.21088.20669@webmail12.lax.untd.com> References: <20050608.183357.21088.20669@webmail12.lax.untd.com> Message-ID: <42A79F7F.1000804@wa4phy.net> Ed, you didn't say where you are, or what lake, but I'd suspect being that close might have a pretty decent impact on both humidity and Td, especially if you get any wind off the lake and the warm humid air that might flowing across the sensor. On the other side of the coin, how does the Td and T do in the winter? Does the lake freeze over? Could you temporarily relocate the sensor to an area away from the lake to prove/disprove the theory? -- Snowman From mark at markwyman.com Wed Jun 8 21:52:11 2005 From: mark at markwyman.com (Mark W) Date: Wed Jun 8 21:52:58 2005 Subject: [wxqc] kd7yat-3 References: <20050608.183357.21088.20669@webmail12.lax.untd.com> Message-ID: <004c01c56c95$da1a22c0$628a3243@MARKSCOMPAQ> Seems logical to me that is causing the problem. It would also probably depend on the wind direction, one day you may see the reading "normal" (wind coming from the direction away from the water), the next day far off. A body of water has tremendous heatsinking capability, lowering the nearby temperatures, and raising the dew point. Try living near Lake Ontario in the early spring some time. If the water is warmer than the air (say at night) the dewpoint could go up considerably due to evaporation. Sounds to me like you need to re-position the sensors more inland or at a higher elevation (another 5'-10' up could make a big difference, or 1000' inland or more). However if where it is now is where people in the area are hanging around, it may be what you want to show them. The question then is, provide accurate data for CWOP or for the people you are trying to service? -Mark ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Wednesday, June 08, 2005 9:33 PM Subject: [wxqc] kd7yat-3 > > I seem to be consistant at failing on my Dewpoint (always high) The > station sits on the edge of our North Lake in the community, and the > sensor is about 12 feet from the waters edge. Would this be the root cause > for the error? > > Ed, kd7yat > > _______________________________________________ > wxqc mailing list > wxqc@lists.gladstonefamily.net > http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/mailman/listinfo/wxqc > > From philip at gladstonefamily.net Wed Jun 8 21:53:43 2005 From: philip at gladstonefamily.net (Philip Gladstone) Date: Wed Jun 8 21:53:46 2005 Subject: [wxqc] Quality Control Graphic In-Reply-To: <42A79B54.6010002@wa4phy.net> References: <001f01c56c77$1aeec1d0$64d2f446@al07ti2sxm71qt> <42A77F1C.6010408@wa4phy.net> <42A78F86.4030004@gladstonefamily.net> <42A79B54.6010002@wa4phy.net> Message-ID: <42A7A127.10109@gladstonefamily.net> Sam Drinkard wrote: > Philip, > > I was not going to push the issue on the discussion, as I felt it was > not fully down the pipe of QC problems or such, but I'm glad you > consider this thread in compliance. Perhaps a few guidlines from you > would help us decide where to draw the line..... > > Sam > My feeling is that this is a low traffic list and it should be used for whatever people feel it should be used for. On the subject of the 'seal of approval', the sort of information that I have are: * CWOP logo -- though someone would need to produce a nice smallish version of it. The current one doesn't scale very well. * CWxxxx / Callsign * Lat/long Valid / Invalid / Unknown (presumably valid) * Town / whatever was entered * Barometer: OK / Not Ok / No data (over 28 days?) * Temperature: OK / Not OK / No data (over 28 days). Maybe can break down by day/night as well. * Humidity: OK / Not OK / No data (over 28 days). I guess that I could calculate some sort of percentile for how good each sensor was. (Then maybe have Top 10%, Top 25%, Top 50%, Bottom 50%, Bottom 25%, Bottom 10%) I don't do much with windspeed and direction at the moment. Philip -- Philip Gladstone * Check out the live pondcam at http://pond.gladstonefamily.net -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature Size: 3322 bytes Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature Url : http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/pipermail/wxqc/attachments/20050608/ee8335e0/smime.bin From dshelms at comcast.net Wed Jun 8 22:06:07 2005 From: dshelms at comcast.net (Dave Helms) Date: Wed Jun 8 22:06:09 2005 Subject: [wxqc] Re: QC sugestions In-Reply-To: <001f01c56c77$1aeec1d0$64d2f446@al07ti2sxm71qt> References: <001f01c56c77$1aeec1d0$64d2f446@al07ti2sxm71qt> Message-ID: <42A7A40F.4030003@comcast.net> Hi Al, On offering suggestions how our neighbors might improve their data quality, this is done it should be with the lightest of touch Maybe the best thing to do is say "howdy" and invite them to the party here at CasaGladstone and encourage them to subscribe to the QC list. Dave CW0351 Al Huggard wrote: >Guys and Gals, I to see a large number of what 'appears' to be less than >accurate reporting. I am told that there are micro systems that can cause >significant deviations from other area weather even very close to each >other. > >I much suggest that each of us contact those members near us that appear to >have questionable data as referenced on the "all sites" graphs that Phil >Gladstone publishes. Even better we could add the available nearby sites on >our individual graphs to see exactly which sites are highly suspect an >contact them to assist or suggest that they might check their calibration. > >This does of course require that each of us who might do this would have to >assure themselves that they have very accurate data on their sites. > >As all of us are volunteering our data, I would think that self policing >might be a good start to get our act together rather than involving those >who use the data. I have found however, that Russ and Dave are very helpful >when you can ask specific questions and I am grateful for their help. > >Al Huggard >CA3525 >hugal@ott.net > > >------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >_______________________________________________ >wxqc mailing list >wxqc@lists.gladstonefamily.net >http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/mailman/listinfo/wxqc > > From sam at wa4phy.net Wed Jun 8 22:29:32 2005 From: sam at wa4phy.net (Sam Drinkard) Date: Wed Jun 8 22:29:39 2005 Subject: [wxqc] Re: QC sugestions In-Reply-To: <001f01c56c77$1aeec1d0$64d2f446@al07ti2sxm71qt> References: <001f01c56c77$1aeec1d0$64d2f446@al07ti2sxm71qt> Message-ID: <42A7A98C.8010709@wa4phy.net> Al Huggard wrote: >Guys and Gals, I to see a large number of what 'appears' to be less than >accurate reporting. I am told that there are micro systems that can cause >significant deviations from other area weather even very close to each >other. > > -- Snowman From rich.taft at att.net Wed Jun 8 22:31:41 2005 From: rich.taft at att.net (rich.taft@att.net) Date: Wed Jun 8 22:30:28 2005 Subject: [wxqc] Quality Control Graphic Message-ID: <060920050231.26245.42A7AA0D00052BA60000668521602807419B000E9BD2080C079D@att.net> I also agree with the idea of a "gold Seal” It really should be simple, just the logo with a "Seal of Excellence".. or "Data accuracy champion" I would leave off all the pass fail stuff and other "data". Most of our sites have all that data on them to begin with. The sealcould link to our station data accuracy page. Now I am assuming we are talking about putting the seal on our personal site, not on the CWOP personal station site. -- Richard Taft www.taftphoto.com -------------- Original message ---------------------- From: Philip Gladstone > _______________________________________________ > wxqc mailing list > wxqc@lists.gladstonefamily.net > http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/mailman/listinfo/wxqc From dshelms at comcast.net Wed Jun 8 23:00:14 2005 From: dshelms at comcast.net (Dave Helms) Date: Wed Jun 8 23:00:14 2005 Subject: [wxqc] kd7yat-3 In-Reply-To: <004c01c56c95$da1a22c0$628a3243@MARKSCOMPAQ> References: <20050608.183357.21088.20669@webmail12.lax.untd.com> <004c01c56c95$da1a22c0$628a3243@MARKSCOMPAQ> Message-ID: <42A7B0BE.2000003@comcast.net> Hi Ed, You are certainly close to the lake you describe: http://www.acme.com/mapper/?lat=33.35200&long=-112.43033&scale=12&theme=Image&width=3&height=2&dot=Yes ...and you get south screaming southwest to northwest afternoon winds: http://www.findu.com/cgi-bin/wxpage.cgi?call=KD7YAT-3&last=240 ...from your day/night dew point statistics: http://weather.gladstonefamily.net/site/AR464 ... it appear your night mean is -4.6F (too high) and day mean is a mere -1.8F (too high). This tells me that the strong winds off the lake to your west are enough to "mix" the lake moisture into the ambient dew point and keep your dew point close to area humidities. However during the light nightly winds, the local moisture conditions created by your relatively small lake is an area that is otherwise arid really show up in your dew point measurements. On the on hand, I know from personal experience that the Peet Bros humidity sensors run too high (I own a Peet Ultimeter 2100). I think you could probably scale downward your dew point measurements downward by 1-2F (do this during a windy afternoon). Scroll down to the picture at the bottom of my siting pictures to see an opened up Ultimeter temp/humidity circuit board and humidity adjustment screw: http://mywebpages.comcast.net/dshelms/tanterra_sensors.htm (can't recall, but I think one complete rotation of the adjustment screw will change the measured dew point by about 2F) Always make any adjustments incrementally and look at the impact over a period of weeks. I would not move your sensor from the lake as this will not have a big impact whether they are 10 ft or 50 ft from the shore. Its likely your night-time humidity measurements will almost always be "too high" according to QCMS, but they be good measurements for you locations! Hope this helps, DaveH CW0351 Mark W wrote: > Seems logical to me that is causing the problem. It would also > probably depend on the wind direction, one day you may see the reading > "normal" (wind coming from the direction away from the water), the > next day far off. A body of water has tremendous heatsinking > capability, lowering the nearby temperatures, and raising the dew > point. Try living near Lake Ontario in the early spring some time. If > the water is warmer than the air (say at night) the dewpoint could go > up considerably due to evaporation. > > Sounds to me like you need to re-position the sensors more inland or > at a higher elevation (another 5'-10' up could make a big difference, > or 1000' inland or more). However if where it is now is where people > in the area are hanging around, it may be what you want to show them. > The question then is, provide accurate data for CWOP or for the people > you are trying to service? > > -Mark > > ----- Original Message ----- From: > To: > Sent: Wednesday, June 08, 2005 9:33 PM > Subject: [wxqc] kd7yat-3 > > >> >> I seem to be consistant at failing on my Dewpoint (always high) The >> station sits on the edge of our North Lake in the community, and the >> sensor is about 12 feet from the waters edge. Would this be the root >> cause for the error? >> >> Ed, kd7yat >> >> _______________________________________________ >> wxqc mailing list >> wxqc@lists.gladstonefamily.net >> http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/mailman/listinfo/wxqc >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > wxqc mailing list > wxqc@lists.gladstonefamily.net > http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/mailman/listinfo/wxqc > From kd7yat at juno.com Wed Jun 8 23:02:37 2005 From: kd7yat at juno.com (kd7yat@juno.com) Date: Wed Jun 8 23:04:04 2005 Subject: [wxqc] kd7yat-3 Message-ID: <20050608.200319.15923.21896@webmail13.lax.untd.com> Sorry Sam, I am new to this. The lake I am referring to is a small private lake in our community here in Goodyear, Az. The station sits on the eastern edge of the lake and receives a good deal of wind from the southwest. The sensor is on the NW corner of the building. No freezing in winter here. Ed From kd7yat at juno.com Wed Jun 8 23:06:51 2005 From: kd7yat at juno.com (kd7yat@juno.com) Date: Wed Jun 8 23:08:11 2005 Subject: [wxqc] kd7yat-3 Message-ID: <20050608.200726.15923.21943@webmail13.lax.untd.com> Thank you Dave, very good advice, I will make the dewpoint adjustment at the first opportunity. Ed From bweybrecht at bellsouth.net Wed Jun 8 23:29:52 2005 From: bweybrecht at bellsouth.net (Bob) Date: Wed Jun 8 23:30:00 2005 Subject: [wxqc] Weird, choppy analysis for my site In-Reply-To: <42A7B0BE.2000003@comcast.net> Message-ID: <000b01c56ca3$7fe377d0$0a02a8c0@wsr88d> What in the world causes this for the barometric pressure analysis? http://weather.gladstonefamily.net/qchart/C3321?date=20050609 Some sites near me also have the problem. http://weather.gladstonefamily.net/qchart/C2502?date=20050609 And some don't http://weather.gladstonefamily.net/qchart/C2526?date=20050609 http://weather.gladstonefamily.net/qchart/KILM?date=20050609 From mark at markwyman.com Wed Jun 8 23:32:17 2005 From: mark at markwyman.com (Mark W) Date: Wed Jun 8 23:33:08 2005 Subject: [wxqc] Re: QC sugestions References: <001f01c56c77$1aeec1d0$64d2f446@al07ti2sxm71qt> <42A7A40F.4030003@comcast.net> Message-ID: <007201c56ca3$d6270e40$628a3243@MARKSCOMPAQ> That is my thought too, my experience with customers is never criticize them, it is a sure way to alienate them and cause them to never come back again. Buy giving a "reward" for doing the right thing, i.e. coupons and awards, it has quite the opposite effect. Soon they are beaming with pride, and share that with others. It is a way to spread good will. Ok. I spent way too much time screwing around, but then again it is sometimes fun to do something out of the ordinary. I thought this may look neat: http://www.markwyman.com/weather/CWOPBanner.jpg I did this in Photoshop, so all of the text/checks can be altered. Please give some input. I imagine hyperlinks abound on the text so someone can click and jump right to the QC graphs or to the user's page. I'm no pro either, and it is my first Photoshop project with more than two layers. Don't be too harsh. -Mark ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dave Helms" To: "Discussion of data quality issues" Sent: Wednesday, June 08, 2005 10:06 PM Subject: Re: [wxqc] Re: QC sugestions > Hi Al, > > On offering suggestions how our neighbors might improve their data > quality, this is done it should be with the lightest of touch Maybe the > best thing to do is say "howdy" and invite them to the party here at > CasaGladstone and encourage them to subscribe to the QC list. > > > > Dave > CW0351 > > Al Huggard wrote: > >>Guys and Gals, I to see a large number of what 'appears' to be less than >>accurate reporting. I am told that there are micro systems that can cause >>significant deviations from other area weather even very close to each >>other. >> >>I much suggest that each of us contact those members near us that appear >>to >>have questionable data as referenced on the "all sites" graphs that Phil >>Gladstone publishes. Even better we could add the available nearby sites >>on >>our individual graphs to see exactly which sites are highly suspect an >>contact them to assist or suggest that they might check their calibration. >> >>This does of course require that each of us who might do this would have >>to >>assure themselves that they have very accurate data on their sites. >> >>As all of us are volunteering our data, I would think that self policing >>might be a good start to get our act together rather than involving those >>who use the data. I have found however, that Russ and Dave are very >>helpful >>when you can ask specific questions and I am grateful for their help. >> >>Al Huggard >>CA3525 >>hugal@ott.net >> >>------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> >>_______________________________________________ >>wxqc mailing list >>wxqc@lists.gladstonefamily.net >>http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/mailman/listinfo/wxqc >> > _______________________________________________ > wxqc mailing list > wxqc@lists.gladstonefamily.net > http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/mailman/listinfo/wxqc > > From bweybrecht at bellsouth.net Wed Jun 8 23:36:17 2005 From: bweybrecht at bellsouth.net (Bob) Date: Wed Jun 8 23:36:25 2005 Subject: [wxqc] Weird, choppy analysis for my site In-Reply-To: <000b01c56ca3$7fe377d0$0a02a8c0@wsr88d> Message-ID: <000c01c56ca4$652e80f0$0a02a8c0@wsr88d> More info... It looks like it started June 3. What in the world causes this for the barometric pressure analysis? http://weather.gladstonefamily.net/qchart/C3321?date=20050609 Some sites near me also have the problem. http://weather.gladstonefamily.net/qchart/C2502?date=20050609 And some don't http://weather.gladstonefamily.net/qchart/C2526?date=20050609 http://weather.gladstonefamily.net/qchart/KILM?date=20050609 From dshelms at comcast.net Thu Jun 9 00:01:14 2005 From: dshelms at comcast.net (Dave Helms) Date: Thu Jun 9 00:01:34 2005 Subject: [wxqc] Weird, choppy analysis for my site In-Reply-To: <000c01c56ca4$652e80f0$0a02a8c0@wsr88d> References: <000c01c56ca4$652e80f0$0a02a8c0@wsr88d> Message-ID: <42A7BF0A.7020309@comcast.net> Philip calls this situation "the jaggies". The analysis is composed of the nearest 8 reporting stations (not always CWOP stations), which on any given 15 minute time step could be a different set of 8 stations (give or take 1-3 stations) as many stations report at 5, 10, 15, 30, or 60 minute intervals. As different stations have different pressure biases (some with way big biases), they cause the analysis to vary greatly from analysis to analysis. Bob wrote: >More info... It looks like it started June 3. > > >What in the world causes this for the barometric pressure analysis? >http://weather.gladstonefamily.net/qchart/C3321?date=20050609 > >Some sites near me also have the problem. >http://weather.gladstonefamily.net/qchart/C2502?date=20050609 > >And some don't >http://weather.gladstonefamily.net/qchart/C2526?date=20050609 > >http://weather.gladstonefamily.net/qchart/KILM?date=20050609 > >_______________________________________________ >wxqc mailing list >wxqc@lists.gladstonefamily.net >http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/mailman/listinfo/wxqc > > > From kevinandannmarie at cogeco.ca Fri Jun 10 09:19:34 2005 From: kevinandannmarie at cogeco.ca (Ann-Marie) Date: Fri Jun 10 11:10:22 2005 Subject: [wxqc] weather data quality Message-ID: <000a01c56dbf$0b84f090$6500a8c0@KEENANF79D9D01> Hello: I have noticed that I am getting many errors lately in regards to my temperature and dewpoint readings. I have had my thermo-hygrometer housed in a homemade radiation shield for several months now, but have never seen so many errors until now. I know that we are having a heat wave in Southern Ontario where I reside. Would you suggest how this can be fixed? The radiation shield is mounted on the north side of my backyard fence, with lots of space for air to move around it. I am using an Oregon Scientific WMR-968 weather station, and using Virtual Weather Station software. Thank-you, Ann-Marie Keenan, CW2265 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/pipermail/wxqc/attachments/20050610/c1a6a49b/attachment.html From mark at markwyman.com Fri Jun 10 12:13:49 2005 From: mark at markwyman.com (Mark Wyman) Date: Fri Jun 10 12:13:46 2005 Subject: [wxqc] weather data quality In-Reply-To: <000a01c56dbf$0b84f090$6500a8c0@KEENANF79D9D01> Message-ID: <200506101213843.SM01272@markamd2003> I?m going to take a shot at this: From what I can tell, you are turning off your computer for ? the day, so you are loosing many of the points that the quality charts would use to make estimates. It looks like your computer is on during the parts of the day where there are large differences and off when there are probably smaller differences, which could neutralize some of the error. Otherwise it looks like your readings are just fine. The QC errors are probably being caused by your neighbors being in the cooler/drier air coming off of the nearby lakes. The lakes are sucking the humidity out of the air since they are lower in temperature than the dew point. You happen to be in an area where you are missed by that air so your readings are higher in relation, and look like there is a problem when there is not. There is probably nothing you can do in this case but wait until the weather pattern changes. -Mark Wyman _____ From: wxqc-bounces@lists.gladstonefamily.net [mailto:wxqc-bounces@lists.gladstonefamily.net] On Behalf Of Ann-Marie Sent: Friday, June 10, 2005 9:20 AM To: wxqc@lists.gladstonefamily.net Subject: [wxqc] weather data quality Hello: I have noticed that I am getting many errors lately in regards to my temperature and dewpoint readings. I have had my thermo-hygrometer housed in a homemade radiation shield for several months now, but have never seen so many errors until now. I know that we are having a heat wave in Southern Ontario where I reside. Would you suggest how this can be fixed? The radiation shield is mounted on the north side of my backyard fence, with lots of space for air to move around it. I am using an Oregon Scientific WMR-968 weather station, and using Virtual Weather Station software. Thank-you, Ann-Marie Keenan, CW2265 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/pipermail/wxqc/attachments/20050610/88d92dda/attachment.html From dshelms at comcast.net Fri Jun 10 13:30:43 2005 From: dshelms at comcast.net (dshelms@comcast.net) Date: Fri Jun 10 13:30:55 2005 Subject: [wxqc] weather data quality Message-ID: <061020051730.21079.42A9CE400006AF980000525722007481849C03040A089C0B@comcast.net> Skipped content of type multipart/alternative-------------- next part -------------- An embedded message was scrubbed... From: "Ann-Marie" Subject: [wxqc] weather data quality Date: Fri, 10 Jun 2005 15:10:34 +0000 Size: 666 Url: http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/pipermail/wxqc/attachments/20050610/ba424d71/attachment.mht From harold.lemon at sbcglobal.net Sat Jun 11 18:40:50 2005 From: harold.lemon at sbcglobal.net (Harold Lemon) Date: Sat Jun 11 18:41:40 2005 Subject: [wxqc] kd7yat-3 References: <20050608.183357.21088.20669@webmail12.lax.untd.com><004c01c56c95$da1a22c0$628a3243@MARKSCOMPAQ> <42A7B0BE.2000003@comcast.net> Message-ID: <000b01c56ed6$a094f320$6402a8c0@gateway.2wire.net> Dave, I have the Ultimeter 2100 also but, using the unshielded version of the temp/humidity sensor and have always been getting dinged on dewpoint.. I thought I'd try your suggestion today and opened up the sensor and found the board is just a tiny bit different but, the set screw was there. I gave it one full turn clockwise and it looks like it lowered the humidity by about 6%. The afternoon seabreeze kicks in around this time of day here and the humidity starts going up like a rocket so it is a little hard to tell exactly. Using the stats below from Wunderground, I shut down Weather Display at 13:55 and started it back up at 14:30 and you can see there is quite a difference in humidity however, the dewpoint only dropped by 1%. I'll monitor it now for a while and see what the QC reports look like. Thanks for the tip. Regards, Harold CW3109 Wunderground: KCAUNION2 13:50 72.5 ?F / 22.5 ?C 58.3 ?F / 14.6 ?C 29.85in / 1010.7hPa NW 9mph / 14.5km/h 18mph / 29.0km/h 61% 0.00in / 0mm CLR CLR 13:55 72.0 ?F / 22.2 ?C 57.8 ?F / 14.3 ?C 29.85in / 1010.7hPa NW 10mph / 16.1km/h 22mph / 35.4km/h 61% 0.00in / 0mm CLR CLR 14:30 73.8 ?F / 23.2 ?C 56.6 ?F / 13.7 ?C 29.85in / 1010.7hPa NW 10mph / 16.1km/h 21mph / 33.8km/h 55% 0.00in / 0mm CLR CLR 14:35 72.4 ?F / 22.4 ?C 56.7 ?F / 13.7 ?C 29.85in / 1010.7hPa NW 10mph / 16.1km/h 23mph / 37.0km/h 58% 0.00in / 0mm CLR CLR 14:40 71.4 ?F / 21.9 ?C 56.4 ?F / 13.6 ?C 29.85in / 1010.7hPa NW 12mph / 19.3km/h 22mph / 35.4km/h 59% 0.00in / 0mm CLR CLR 14:45 70.8 ?F / 21.6 ?C 56.2 ?F / 13.4 ?C 29.85in / 1010.7hPa NW 10mph / 16.1km/h 21mph / 33.8km/h 60% 0.00in / 0mm CLR CLR 14:50 70.5 ?F / 21.4 ?C 56.9 ?F / 13.8 ?C 29.85in / 1010.7hPa NW 10mph / 16.1km/h 21mph / 33.8km/h 62% 0.00in / 0mm CLR CLR 14:55 70.3 ?F / 21.3 ?C 56.7 ?F / 13.7 ?C 29.85in / 1010.7hPa NW 9mph / 14.5km/h 20mph / 32.2km/h 62% 0.00in / 0mm CLR CLR 15:00 70.3 ?F / 21.3 ?C 56.2 ?F / 13.4 ?C 29.85in / 1010.7hPa NW 9mph / 14.5k m/h 22mph / 35.4km/h 61% 0.00in / 0mm CLR ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dave Helms" To: "Discussion of data quality issues" Sent: Wednesday, June 08, 2005 8:00 PM Subject: Re: [wxqc] kd7yat-3 Hi Ed, You are certainly close to the lake you describe: http://www.acme.com/mapper/?lat=33.35200&long=-112.43033&scale=12&theme=Image&width=3&height=2&dot=Yes ...and you get south screaming southwest to northwest afternoon winds: http://www.findu.com/cgi-bin/wxpage.cgi?call=KD7YAT-3&last=240 ...from your day/night dew point statistics: http://weather.gladstonefamily.net/site/AR464 ... it appear your night mean is -4.6F (too high) and day mean is a mere -1.8F (too high). This tells me that the strong winds off the lake to your west are enough to "mix" the lake moisture into the ambient dew point and keep your dew point close to area humidities. However during the light nightly winds, the local moisture conditions created by your relatively small lake is an area that is otherwise arid really show up in your dew point measurements. On the on hand, I know from personal experience that the Peet Bros humidity sensors run too high (I own a Peet Ultimeter 2100). I think you could probably scale downward your dew point measurements downward by 1-2F (do this during a windy afternoon). Scroll down to the picture at the bottom of my siting pictures to see an opened up Ultimeter temp/humidity circuit board and humidity adjustment screw: http://mywebpages.comcast.net/dshelms/tanterra_sensors.htm (can't recall, but I think one complete rotation of the adjustment screw will change the measured dew point by about 2F) Always make any adjustments incrementally and look at the impact over a period of weeks. I would not move your sensor from the lake as this will not have a big impact whether they are 10 ft or 50 ft from the shore. Its likely your night-time humidity measurements will almost always be "too high" according to QCMS, but they be good measurements for you locations! Hope this helps, DaveH CW0351 Mark W wrote: > Seems logical to me that is causing the problem. It would also > probably depend on the wind direction, one day you may see the reading > "normal" (wind coming from the direction away from the water), the > next day far off. A body of water has tremendous heatsinking > capability, lowering the nearby temperatures, and raising the dew > point. Try living near Lake Ontario in the early spring some time. If > the water is warmer than the air (say at night) the dewpoint could go > up considerably due to evaporation. > > Sounds to me like you need to re-position the sensors more inland or > at a higher elevation (another 5'-10' up could make a big difference, > or 1000' inland or more). However if where it is now is where people > in the area are hanging around, it may be what you want to show them. > The question then is, provide accurate data for CWOP or for the people > you are trying to service? > > -Mark > > ----- Original Message ----- From: > To: > Sent: Wednesday, June 08, 2005 9:33 PM > Subject: [wxqc] kd7yat-3 > > >> >> I seem to be consistant at failing on my Dewpoint (always high) The >> station sits on the edge of our North Lake in the community, and the >> sensor is about 12 feet from the waters edge. Would this be the root >> cause for the error? >> >> Ed, kd7yat >> >> _______________________________________________ >> wxqc mailing list >> wxqc@lists.gladstonefamily.net >> http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/mailman/listinfo/wxqc >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > wxqc mailing list > wxqc@lists.gladstonefamily.net > http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/mailman/listinfo/wxqc > _______________________________________________ wxqc mailing list wxqc@lists.gladstonefamily.net http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/mailman/listinfo/wxqc From klibby at townisp.com Sat Jun 11 14:24:46 2005 From: klibby at townisp.com (Kenneth A. Libby) Date: Sat Jun 11 21:41:21 2005 Subject: [wxqc] Problem with barometer Message-ID: <20050611182451.2384A2990D@ns5.townisp.com> I'm having trouble getting my barometer calibrated. See recent data here - http://weather.gladstonefamily.net/site/C2572?scale=11;days=3#Data I fixed the "no data" issue - helps to make sure my Ambient Virtual Weather Station SW is running. I'm running Ambient Virtual Weather station software. Elevation at the sensor is 478 feet. I have entered 478 feet as the station elevation in the software. Is there something else I nee to do ? Thanks ! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/pipermail/wxqc/attachments/20050611/e3ab199d/attachment.html From rich.taft at att.net Sat Jun 11 22:04:54 2005 From: rich.taft at att.net (rich.taft@att.net) Date: Sat Jun 11 22:04:58 2005 Subject: [wxqc] Problem with barometer Message-ID: <061220050204.23649.42AB9845000DB0FB00005C6121612436469B000E9BD2080C079D@att.net> You didn't mention what station your using, but you may need to enter your elevation or calibrate your sea level pressure on the station as well -- Richard Taft www.taftphoto.com -------------- Original message ---------------------- From: "Kenneth A. Libby" > I'm having trouble getting my barometer calibrated. See recent data here - > http://weather.gladstonefamily.net/site/C2572?scale=11;days=3#Data > > > > I fixed the "no data" issue - helps to make sure my Ambient Virtual Weather > Station SW is running. > > > > I'm running Ambient Virtual Weather station software. Elevation at the > sensor is 478 feet. I have entered 478 feet as the station elevation in the > software. Is there something else I nee to do ? > > > > Thanks ! > -------------- next part -------------- An embedded message was scrubbed... From: "Kenneth A. Libby" Subject: [wxqc] Problem with barometer Date: Sun, 12 Jun 2005 01:41:40 +0000 Size: 667 Url: http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/pipermail/wxqc/attachments/20050612/7dbf90f5/attachment.mht From bfgiii at adelphia.net Mon Jun 13 14:58:04 2005 From: bfgiii at adelphia.net (bfgiii@adelphia.net) Date: Mon Jun 13 14:58:15 2005 Subject: [wxqc] CW0467 dew point Message-ID: <2194888.1118689084460.JavaMail.root@web5.mail.adelphia.net> Greetings! I hope I'm doing this right! I have been contributing to CWOP through APRS for a couple of years now but have just started with wxqc last winter. I just joined the list last week. My data quality has improved immensely for it. I received this email and it's associated responses: Dave, I have the Ultimeter 2100 also but, using the unshielded version of the temp/humidity sensor and have always been getting dinged on dew point.. I thought I'd try your suggestion today and opened up the sensor and found the board is just a tiny bit different but, the set screw was there. I gave it one full turn clockwise and it looks like it lowered the humidity by about 6%. The afternoon seabreeze kicks in around this time of day here and the humidity starts going up like a rocket so it is a little hard to tell exactly. Using the stats below from Wunderground, I shut down Weather Display at 13:55 and started it back up at 14:30 and you can see there is quite a difference in humidity however, the dew point only dropped by 1%. I'll monitor it now for a while and see what the QC reports look like. Thanks for the tip. Regards, Harold CW3109 Wunderground: KCAUNION2 I own the same Peet Bros. equipment and run Weather-Display too. I recently changed to the shielded sensor in hopes of improving readings. I agree that this equipment reads a little high in both temp and DP. The new sensor has improved the readings and smoothed them out quite a bit, but I still show nearly 2 degrees warm on most of my wxqc graphs. I have the WD offsets at -2.5 degrees for temp and a slope adjust at -6% for humidity now. I compare my reading to the METAR KPYM regularly and my they are usually very close. I am located much closer to the ocean than they are. It would be great to have you look at my stations data and position and make any suggestions that could help improve my contributions. Many Thanks! Ben Goodrich CW0467 From mark at markwyman.com Mon Jun 13 15:35:56 2005 From: mark at markwyman.com (Mark Wyman) Date: Mon Jun 13 15:35:47 2005 Subject: [wxqc] CW0467 dew point In-Reply-To: <2194888.1118689084460.JavaMail.root@web5.mail.adelphia.net> Message-ID: <20050613153562.SM01256@markamd2003> Just be careful in that your local conditions may truly be off by some amount different from the "official readings" further inland or higher in elevation. Trying to make them match a different location is not getting a "correct" reading, but one where the differences are nulled out. Your best bet for checking is use a second set of good instruments at the site you are trying to align. Borrow some from someone, or pick up some mechanical versions for verifications. -Mark W -----Original Message----- From: wxqc-bounces@lists.gladstonefamily.net [mailto:wxqc-bounces@lists.gladstonefamily.net] On Behalf Of bfgiii@adelphia.net Sent: Monday, June 13, 2005 2:58 PM To: wxqc@lists.gladstonefamily.net Subject: Re: [wxqc] CW0467 dew point Greetings! I hope I'm doing this right! I have been contributing to CWOP through APRS for a couple of years now but have just started with wxqc last winter. I just joined the list last week. My data quality has improved immensely for it. I received this email and it's associated responses: Dave, I have the Ultimeter 2100 also but, using the unshielded version of the temp/humidity sensor and have always been getting dinged on dew point.. I thought I'd try your suggestion today and opened up the sensor and found the board is just a tiny bit different but, the set screw was there. I gave it one full turn clockwise and it looks like it lowered the humidity by about 6%. The afternoon seabreeze kicks in around this time of day here and the humidity starts going up like a rocket so it is a little hard to tell exactly. Using the stats below from Wunderground, I shut down Weather Display at 13:55 and started it back up at 14:30 and you can see there is quite a difference in humidity however, the dew point only dropped by 1%. I'll monitor it now for a while and see what the QC reports look like. Thanks for the tip. Regards, Harold CW3109 Wunderground: KCAUNION2 I own the same Peet Bros. equipment and run Weather-Display too. I recently changed to the shielded sensor in hopes of improving readings. I agree that this equipment reads a little high in both temp and DP. The new sensor has improved the readings and smoothed them out quite a bit, but I still show nearly 2 degrees warm on most of my wxqc graphs. I have the WD offsets at -2.5 degrees for temp and a slope adjust at -6% for humidity now. I compare my reading to the METAR KPYM regularly and my they are usually very close. I am located much closer to the ocean than they are. It would be great to have you look at my stations data and position and make any suggestions that could help improve my contributions. Many Thanks! Ben Goodrich CW0467 _______________________________________________ wxqc mailing list wxqc@lists.gladstonefamily.net http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/mailman/listinfo/wxqc From dshelms at comcast.net Mon Jun 13 17:08:32 2005 From: dshelms at comcast.net (dshelms@comcast.net) Date: Mon Jun 13 17:08:36 2005 Subject: [wxqc] CW0467 dew point Message-ID: <061320052108.17668.42ADF5CD0001E7660000450422007621949C03040A089C0B@comcast.net> Hi Ben, Here's you data along with other area stations: http://weather.gladstonefamily.net/qchart/C0467?date=20050613&addnl=AR693&addnl=C0118&addnl=KPYM&Add+to+charts=Add+to+charts&.cgifields=addnl I suggest increasing your pressure (altimeter) by about 0.03 inches or 1.0 millibars to get closer to the KPYM (Plymouth AWOS) pressure, but otherwise your data looks very good. Your winds seem to be down in the "rough" a bit (down in the tree canopy) causing a +2.5 mph positive bias (need to add this to your winds to equal the "mean" wind speed): http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/cgi-bin/wxqual.pl?site=C0467 ... you might consider a taller anemometer mast, if this doesn't get you in trouble with the local town council or home owner's association! Heck, ya got 3 green checks! http://weather.gladstonefamily.net/site/C0467 Hope this helps, Dave CW0351 -------------- Original message -------------- > Greetings! > I hope I'm doing this right! > I have been contributing to CWOP through APRS for a couple of years now but have > just started with wxqc last winter. I just joined the list last week. My data > quality has improved immensely for it. > I received this email and it's associated responses: > > Dave, > I have the Ultimeter 2100 also but, using the unshielded version of the > temp/humidity sensor and have always been getting dinged on dew point.. I > thought I'd try your suggestion today and opened up the sensor and found the > board is just a tiny bit different but, the set screw was there. I gave it one > full turn clockwise and it looks like it lowered the humidity by about 6%. The > afternoon seabreeze kicks in around this time of day here and the humidity > starts going up like a rocket so it is a little hard to tell exactly. Using the > > stats below from Wunderground, I shut down Weather Display at 13:55 and started > it back up at 14:30 and you can see there is quite a difference in humidity > however, the dew point only dropped by 1%. I'll monitor it now for a while and > see what the QC reports look like. Thanks for the tip. > > Regards, Harold > CW3109 > Wunderground: KCAUNION2 > > I own the same Peet Bros. equipment and run Weather-Display too. I recently > changed to the shielded sensor in hopes of improving readings. > I agree that this equipment reads a little high in both temp and DP. The new > sensor has improved the readings and smoothed them out quite a bit, but I still > show nearly 2 degrees warm on most of my wxqc graphs. I have the WD offsets at > -2.5 degrees for temp and a slope adjust at -6% for humidity now. > I compare my reading to the METAR KPYM regularly and my they are usually very > close. I am located much closer to the ocean than they are. It would be great > to have you look at my stations data and position and make any suggestions that > could help improve my contributions. > > Many Thanks! > Ben Goodrich > CW0467 > _______________________________________________ > wxqc mailing list > wxqc@lists.gladstonefamily.net > http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/mailman/listinfo/wxqc -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/pipermail/wxqc/attachments/20050613/8ed0db01/attachment.html From dshelms at comcast.net Mon Jun 13 17:18:43 2005 From: dshelms at comcast.net (dshelms@comcast.net) Date: Mon Jun 13 17:18:58 2005 Subject: [wxqc] CW0467 dew point Message-ID: <061320052118.28732.42ADF8300009CB9D0000703C22007621949C03040A089C0B@comcast.net> Hi Mark, Agreed nothing like a second set sensors, if you can get them. I just bought a sling psychrometer from a vendor on ebay. If you cherry pick, they can be purchased from under $20. Slings measure temp and dew point by manually "slinging" (rotating) the glass thermometers, the "wet blub" has a wet sock on it to facilitate evaporative cooling. If you are worried about mercury spills (I have broken several mercury slings in my younger day), get a "red" liquid sling instead. Here's the sling to Ebay that includes slings: http://search.ebay.com/sling-psychrometer_W0QQfromZR40QQpqryZslingQ20pschrometerQQsojsZ1 Dave CW0351 -------------- Original message -------------- > Just be careful in that your local conditions may truly be off by some > amount different from the "official readings" further inland or higher in > elevation. Trying to make them match a different location is not getting a > "correct" reading, but one where the differences are nulled out. Your best > bet for checking is use a second set of good instruments at the site you are > trying to align. Borrow some from someone, or pick up some mechanical > versions for verifications. > > -Mark W > > -----Original Message----- > From: wxqc-bounces@lists.gladstonefamily.net > [mailto:wxqc-bounces@lists.gladstonefamily.net] On Behalf Of > bfgiii@adelphia.net > Sent: Monday, June 13, 2005 2:58 PM > To: wxqc@lists.gladstonefamily.net > Subject: Re: [wxqc] CW0467 dew point > > Greetings! > I hope I'm doing this right! > I have been contributing to CWOP through APRS for a couple of years now but > have just started with wxqc last winter. I just joined the list last week. > My data quality has improved immensely for it. > I received this email and it's associated responses: > > Dave, > I have the Ultimeter 2100 also but, using the unshielded version of the > temp/humidity sensor and have always been getting dinged on dew point.. I > thought I'd try your suggestion today and opened up the sensor and found the > board is just a tiny bit different but, the set screw was there. I gave it > one > full turn clockwise and it looks like it lowered the humidity by about 6%. > The > afternoon seabreeze kicks in around this time of day here and the humidity > starts going up like a rocket so it is a little hard to tell exactly. Using > the > > stats below from Wunderground, I shut down Weather Display at 13:55 and > started > it back up at 14:30 and you can see there is quite a difference in humidity > however, the dew point only dropped by 1%. I'll monitor it now for a while > and > see what the QC reports look like. Thanks for the tip. > > Regards, Harold > CW3109 > Wunderground: KCAUNION2 > > I own the same Peet Bros. equipment and run Weather-Display too. I recently > changed to the shielded sensor in hopes of improving readings. > I agree that this equipment reads a little high in both temp and DP. The > new sensor has improved the readings and smoothed them out quite a bit, but > I still show nearly 2 degrees warm on most of my wxqc graphs. I have the WD > offsets at -2.5 degrees for temp and a slope adjust at -6% for humidity now. > I compare my reading to the METAR KPYM regularly and my they are usually > very close. I am located much closer to the ocean than they are. It would > be great to have you look at my stations data and position and make any > suggestions that could help improve my contributions. > > Many Thanks! > Ben Goodrich > CW0467 > _______________________________________________ > wxqc mailing list > wxqc@lists.gladstonefamily.net > http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/mailman/listinfo/wxqc > > _______________________________________________ > wxqc mailing list > wxqc@lists.gladstonefamily.net > http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/mailman/listinfo/wxqc -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/pipermail/wxqc/attachments/20050613/aa0dae3c/attachment.html From bfgiii at adelphia.net Tue Jun 14 09:36:46 2005 From: bfgiii at adelphia.net (bfgiii@adelphia.net) Date: Tue Jun 14 09:36:57 2005 Subject: [wxqc] CW0467 dew point Message-ID: <32125339.1118756206284.JavaMail.root@web1.mail.adelphia.net> Hello Mark, Thanks for your input. I have a collection of "manual" insruments I started back when I was a Merchant Mariner and have slowly advanced to the system that produces the data for my site. I still check my manual guages to verify my readings and METAR KPYM is really just another easy check. My comparions match the electonic readings very closely. I understand that a METAR 10 miles away will have different readings but it's the only one that I can really trust, other than my manual guages and wxqc. I often get a sea breeze that that they do not. Well, I am getting green checks which is what I had hoped for, so I must be close. Maybe I'm splitting hairs as I'm not using professional gear. I'll never get past my wind errors as I'm surrouned by old Meadow Pines and Oak trees. I'd need a 150 tower to clear this canopy. Many Thanks, Folks. Ben Goodrich CW0467 ---- Mark Wyman wrote: ============= Just be careful in that your local conditions may truly be off by some amount different from the "official readings" further inland or higher in elevation. Trying to make them match a different location is not getting a "correct" reading, but one where the differences are nulled out. Your best bet for checking is use a second set of good instruments at the site you are trying to align. Borrow some from someone, or pick up some mechanical versions for verifications. -Mark W -----Original Message----- From: wxqc-bounces@lists.gladstonefamily.net [mailto:wxqc-bounces@lists.gladstonefamily.net] On Behalf Of bfgiii@adelphia.net Sent: Monday, June 13, 2005 2:58 PM To: wxqc@lists.gladstonefamily.net Subject: Re: [wxqc] CW0467 dew point Greetings! I hope I'm doing this right! I have been contributing to CWOP through APRS for a couple of years now but have just started with wxqc last winter. I just joined the list last week. My data quality has improved immensely for it. I received this email and it's associated responses: Dave, I have the Ultimeter 2100 also but, using the unshielded version of the temp/humidity sensor and have always been getting dinged on dew point.. I thought I'd try your suggestion today and opened up the sensor and found the board is just a tiny bit different but, the set screw was there. I gave it one full turn clockwise and it looks like it lowered the humidity by about 6%. The afternoon seabreeze kicks in around this time of day here and the humidity starts going up like a rocket so it is a little hard to tell exactly. Using the stats below from Wunderground, I shut down Weather Display at 13:55 and started it back up at 14:30 and you can see there is quite a difference in humidity however, the dew point only dropped by 1%. I'll monitor it now for a while and see what the QC reports look like. Thanks for the tip. Regards, Harold CW3109 Wunderground: KCAUNION2 I own the same Peet Bros. equipment and run Weather-Display too. I recently changed to the shielded sensor in hopes of improving readings. I agree that this equipment reads a little high in both temp and DP. The new sensor has improved the readings and smoothed them out quite a bit, but I still show nearly 2 degrees warm on most of my wxqc graphs. I have the WD offsets at -2.5 degrees for temp and a slope adjust at -6% for humidity now. I compare my reading to the METAR KPYM regularly and my they are usually very close. I am located much closer to the ocean than they are. It would be great to have you look at my stations data and position and make any suggestions that could help improve my contributions. Many Thanks! Ben Goodrich CW0467 _______________________________________________ wxqc mailing list wxqc@lists.gladstonefamily.net http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/mailman/listinfo/wxqc _______________________________________________ wxqc mailing list wxqc@lists.gladstonefamily.net http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/mailman/listinfo/wxqc From jwilson at ncfcomm.com Fri Jun 17 21:24:40 2005 From: jwilson at ncfcomm.com (Monty Wilson) Date: Fri Jun 17 21:25:01 2005 Subject: [wxqc] Missing Data Message-ID: <001101c573a4$80dd6170$0300a8c0@JLWILSO> Hi, There is a lot I don't understand about how this system works. Yesterday and today when I look at my station statistics there is a note that indicates no data was received for yesterday and today. However,findu is successfully showing data from my station as is the MesoWest site. Maybe I don't understand what the note means. Can someone explain it? Thanks Monty Wilson, NR0A AP677 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/pipermail/wxqc/attachments/20050617/5c9f508e/attachment.html From philip at gladstonefamily.net Fri Jun 17 22:23:47 2005 From: philip at gladstonefamily.net (Philip Gladstone) Date: Fri Jun 17 22:23:57 2005 Subject: [wxqc] Missing Data In-Reply-To: <001101c573a4$80dd6170$0300a8c0@JLWILSO> References: <001101c573a4$80dd6170$0300a8c0@JLWILSO> Message-ID: <42B385B3.1000407@gladstonefamily.net> Monty, I can explain what the note means: It says that my web logic has a bug in it. What actually happened was that I added code to figure out whether some stations had 'stuck' temperature readings. The code worked for all those stations which did have stuck readings, but, unfortunately, failed to work for those working normally. The good news is that I can rebuild that portion of the database for the last couple of days, and I am doing that as I type this message. Sorry Philip Monty Wilson wrote: > Hi, > > There is a lot I don't understand about how this system works. > Yesterday and today when I look at my station statistics there is a note > that indicates no data was received for yesterday and today. > However,findu is successfully showing data from my station as is the > MesoWest site. > > Maybe I don't understand what the note means. Can someone explain it? > -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature Size: 3322 bytes Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature Url : http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/pipermail/wxqc/attachments/20050617/131febcf/smime.bin From dshelms at comcast.net Fri Jun 17 22:29:37 2005 From: dshelms at comcast.net (Dave Helms) Date: Fri Jun 17 22:29:46 2005 Subject: [wxqc] Missing Data In-Reply-To: <001101c573a4$80dd6170$0300a8c0@JLWILSO> References: <001101c573a4$80dd6170$0300a8c0@JLWILSO> Message-ID: <42B38711.809@comcast.net> Hi Monty, Sending your weather reports to APRS-IS and then FINDU is the first step of many. From FINDU, the data are sent to MADIS, then MADIS generates QCMS statistics, Philip grabs these statistics every night and creates the station QC graphs. It appears the MADIS QCMS statistics generation may have got stuck for a day or two (your's aren't the only station stats to turn up missing). Understand that APRS-IS, FINDU, and Philip's QC graphs are all done using volunteer time and funds to things may break occassionally. That said, the CWOP data processing is really amazingly robust. Also, the MADIS QCMS occurs on a research development area, Forecast Systems Labortory (FSL), in which people do not work 24x7. Again while MADIS processes millions of individual observations for over 10,000 different weather stations, things work rather well. There are efforts to make MADIS a baseline NOAA capability with 24x7 tech support and a hot backup, but you never know in this fiscal environment. I have a little schmatic on the cwop.info page (see "CWOP Data Flow" section) that might provide more info if you are interested. Dave CW0351 Monty Wilson wrote: > Hi, > > There is a lot I don't understand about how this system works. > Yesterday and today when I look at my station statistics there is a > note that indicates no data was received for yesterday and today. > However,findu is successfully showing data from my station as is the > MesoWest site. > > Maybe I don't understand what the note means. Can someone explain it? > > Thanks > > *Monty Wilson, NR0A* > *AP677* > > > >------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >_______________________________________________ >wxqc mailing list >wxqc@lists.gladstonefamily.net >http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/mailman/listinfo/wxqc > > From jwilson at ncfcomm.com Sat Jun 18 08:14:01 2005 From: jwilson at ncfcomm.com (Monty Wilson) Date: Sat Jun 18 08:14:26 2005 Subject: [wxqc] Missing Data In-Reply-To: <42B385B3.1000407@gladstonefamily.net> Message-ID: <001401c573ff$3a42fad0$0300a8c0@JLWILSO> Thanks Philip and Dave for the information and explanations. After I sent my message, I started exploring other stations in my area and noted the same problem with them so then assumed it wasn't a problem with my station. I agree with Dave that the CWOP network is an amazing network that works very well considering it is a volunteer work. To all who keep it working, my thanks and congratulations on keeping it going!!! Monty Wilson jwilson@ncfcomm.com -----Original Message----- From: wxqc-bounces@lists.gladstonefamily.net [mailto:wxqc-bounces@lists.gladstonefamily.net] On Behalf Of Philip Gladstone Sent: Friday, June 17, 2005 21:24 To: Discussion of data quality issues Subject: Re: [wxqc] Missing Data Monty, I can explain what the note means: It says that my web logic has a bug in it. What actually happened was that I added code to figure out whether some stations had 'stuck' temperature readings. The code worked for all those stations which did have stuck readings, but, unfortunately, failed to work for those working normally. The good news is that I can rebuild that portion of the database for the last couple of days, and I am doing that as I type this message. Sorry Philip Monty Wilson wrote: > Hi, > > There is a lot I don't understand about how this system works. > Yesterday and today when I look at my station statistics there is a note > that indicates no data was received for yesterday and today. > However,findu is successfully showing data from my station as is the > MesoWest site. > > Maybe I don't understand what the note means. Can someone explain it? > From gary.oldham at adelphia.net Sat Jun 18 11:53:36 2005 From: gary.oldham at adelphia.net (Gary Oldham) Date: Sat Jun 18 11:53:46 2005 Subject: [wxqc] New WeatherLink version Message-ID: <42B44380.2030809@adelphia.net> Skipped content of type multipart/alternative-------------- next part -------------- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.323 / Virus Database: 267.7.7/20 - Release Date: 6/16/2005 From dshelms at comcast.net Sat Jun 18 12:44:49 2005 From: dshelms at comcast.net (Dave Helms) Date: Sat Jun 18 12:44:53 2005 Subject: [wxqc] New WeatherLink version, "NOAA" verses "APRS" Winds In-Reply-To: <42B44380.2030809@adelphia.net> References: <42B44380.2030809@adelphia.net> Message-ID: <42B44F81.7040502@comcast.net> Hi Gary, Issue #1. Russ and I have been communicating with the Davis folks about WeatherLink's coding of the APRS message. In our discussions, we asked that Davis WeatherLink include the gust report and 1 hr and 24 hr precip support within the APRS message. Issue #2. Russ and I have also been working within APRS community to update the APRS message protocol standard to be consistent with international and ASOS wind reporting standards; specifically, modifying the APRS protocol to require a 2 minute mean (average) wind and a 10 minute peak gust (highest wind speed measurement in the 10 minutes prior to the message valid time). Russ has probed the APRS community on updating the APRS protocol standard, but we have not yet gotten the requested changes into the protocol yet. One concern is that there will be a range of wind reporting "standards" as various developers introduce software updated supporting the new standard and it will take years to work through the upgrades through the developer and user bases (we have 16 data logging applications that support CWOP currently). In our discussions with Davis, we informed them of our efforts to modify the APRS protocol. We encouraged Davis, since they were considering adding the wind gust anyway, to consider being an "early adopter" of the draft APRS wind reporting standard. Apparently, Davis decided to hedge their bets and code to the 1) current APRS standard and the 2) draft "NOAA" standard for winds. It doesn't not look like they fully succeeded in coding to the "NOAA" format winds as they have a 5 minute wind gust, instead of a 10 minute wind gust. In either case, WeatherLink produces a message using the APRS formatting conventions that is readily decoded by FINDU and MADIS. I suggest Davis WeatherLink users thinking about upgrading to version 5.6 configure their APRS (CWOP) messages to support the "NOAA Standard" for winds. The longer averaging time (from 1 to 2 minutes) for the mean wind will result in "smoother" winds (e.g. less jaggy) which are more representative for your location and (this is important for a meteorologist perspective) provide an apples-to-apples comparison with the airport ASOS/AWOS winds (yes different siting, but at least we are sampling the data using the same (similar) data processing methods). Thanks for raising these issues, Dave CW0351 P.S. As VWS, WeatherLink, and several applications refer to "APRS" rather than "CWOP" on their setup menus, I typically use APRS/CWOP on my setup helper pages to try and minimize potential confusion. In fact, APRS is the Ham Radio message protocol which CWOP uses to format its messages; while CWOP is the entire community of weather observers, both Ham Radio and Internet, who voluntarily contributing weather data, code, bandwidth, servers, and their time in support of our hobby. Gary Oldham wrote: > Dave and others: > > What a nice day we're having after all these 90+ days! > > While I should be outside mowing my lawn and doing other things to > take advantage of the day, I'm futzing with a brand new beta release > of WeatherLink (v5.6). Actually has some substantial improvements > over earlier versions, and the big news in my book is that Davis has > finally figured out the concept of wind gusts... sorta.... > > Now for CWOP reports, which Davis persists on calling APRS reports - > undoubtedly causing some confusion, especially for non-hams - the user > can select two different reporting formats. Classic good news and bad > news in my book. The two formats are these, differing only in wind > speed and gust reporting: > > The "APRS Standard" - shows one minute average wind speed and gust > within the past five minutes > The "NOAA Standard" - reports two minute average wind speed and gust > within the past five minutes > > Now, unless I'm really missing something - always a possibility - it > would seem that the only format that CWOP/MADIS and other NOAA/NWS > users would want is the "NOAA Standard". Any suggestions on how we > might get the word out to users to utilize that standard rather than > the APRS one? I will be happy to post on the Weather Matrix forum as > well as the WeatherLink forum, but perhaps CWOP should contact Davis > and request that they at least include some language asking CWOPers to > use the "NOAA Standard"? > > Thanks in advance for your thoughts... > > Gary > CW0146/N6SKK > www.ag-weather.com > >------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >No virus found in this outgoing message. >Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. >Version: 7.0.323 / Virus Database: 267.7.7/20 - Release Date: 6/16/2005 > > >------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >_______________________________________________ >wxqc mailing list >wxqc@lists.gladstonefamily.net >http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/mailman/listinfo/wxqc > > From gary.oldham at adelphia.net Sat Jun 18 13:11:52 2005 From: gary.oldham at adelphia.net (Gary Oldham) Date: Sat Jun 18 13:11:58 2005 Subject: [wxqc] New WeatherLink version, "NOAA" verses "APRS" Winds In-Reply-To: <42B44F81.7040502@comcast.net> References: <42B44380.2030809@adelphia.net> <42B44F81.7040502@comcast.net> Message-ID: <42B455D8.8020509@adelphia.net> Skipped content of type multipart/alternative-------------- next part -------------- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.323 / Virus Database: 267.7.7/20 - Release Date: 6/16/2005 From dshelms at comcast.net Sat Jun 18 13:48:09 2005 From: dshelms at comcast.net (Dave Helms) Date: Sat Jun 18 13:48:23 2005 Subject: [wxqc] New WeatherLink version, "NOAA" verses "APRS" Winds In-Reply-To: <42B455D8.8020509@adelphia.net> References: <42B44380.2030809@adelphia.net> <42B44F81.7040502@comcast.net> <42B455D8.8020509@adelphia.net> Message-ID: <42B45E59.2010002@comcast.net> Hi Gary, That is good news. More motivation to use the "NOAA" standard. This will result in generally higher gusts which can be compared with the professional ASOS/AWOS stations (CWOP stations will be generally be lower gusts than ASOS/AWOS stations as a result of CWOP canopy siting in most cases). Dave Gary Oldham wrote: > Thanks, Dave, for the clarifications. One item, though, bears a > little more examination. Davis states that their "NOAA Standard" > provides the two minute average wind and ten minute gust, and looking > at a series of my own obs from last night and this morning, that > appears to be correct, e.g., the Davis implementation of the NOAA > standard uses the 2/10 minute winds vs. the 1/5 minute winds in the > APRS format. > > Gary > > Dave Helms wrote: > >> Hi Gary, >> >> Issue #1. Russ and I have been communicating with the Davis folks >> about WeatherLink's coding of the APRS message. In our discussions, >> we asked that Davis WeatherLink include the gust report and 1 hr and >> 24 hr precip support within the APRS message. >> >> Issue #2. Russ and I have also been working within APRS community to >> update the APRS message protocol standard to be consistent with >> international and ASOS wind reporting standards; specifically, >> modifying the APRS protocol to require a 2 minute mean (average) wind >> and a 10 minute peak gust (highest wind speed measurement in the 10 >> minutes prior to the message valid time). Russ has probed the APRS >> community on updating the APRS protocol standard, but we have not yet >> gotten the requested changes into the protocol yet. One concern is >> that there will be a range of wind reporting "standards" as various >> developers introduce software updated supporting the new standard and >> it will take years to work through the upgrades through the developer >> and user bases (we have 16 data logging applications that support >> CWOP currently). >> In our discussions with Davis, we informed them of our efforts to >> modify the APRS protocol. We encouraged Davis, since they were >> considering adding the wind gust anyway, to consider being an "early >> adopter" of the draft APRS wind reporting standard. Apparently, >> Davis decided to hedge their bets and code to the 1) current APRS >> standard and the 2) draft "NOAA" standard for winds. It doesn't not >> look like they fully succeeded in coding to the "NOAA" format winds >> as they have a 5 minute wind gust, instead of a 10 minute wind >> gust. In either case, WeatherLink produces a message using the APRS >> formatting conventions that is readily decoded by FINDU and MADIS. >> >> I suggest Davis WeatherLink users thinking about upgrading to version >> 5.6 configure their APRS (CWOP) messages to support the "NOAA >> Standard" for winds. The longer averaging time (from 1 to 2 minutes) >> for the mean wind will result in "smoother" winds (e.g. less jaggy) >> which are more representative for your location and (this is >> important for a meteorologist perspective) provide an >> apples-to-apples comparison with the airport ASOS/AWOS winds (yes >> different siting, but at least we are sampling the data using the >> same (similar) data processing methods). >> >> Thanks for raising these issues, >> >> Dave >> CW0351 >> >> P.S. As VWS, WeatherLink, and several applications refer to "APRS" >> rather than "CWOP" on their setup menus, I typically use APRS/CWOP on >> my setup helper pages to try and minimize potential confusion. In >> fact, APRS is the Ham Radio message protocol which CWOP uses to >> format its messages; while CWOP is the entire community of weather >> observers, both Ham Radio and Internet, who voluntarily contributing >> weather data, code, bandwidth, servers, and their time in support of >> our hobby. >> >> >> Gary Oldham wrote: >> >>> Dave and others: >>> >>> What a nice day we're having after all these 90+ days! >>> >>> While I should be outside mowing my lawn and doing other things to >>> take advantage of the day, I'm futzing with a brand new beta release >>> of WeatherLink (v5.6). Actually has some substantial improvements >>> over earlier versions, and the big news in my book is that Davis has >>> finally figured out the concept of wind gusts... sorta.... >>> >>> Now for CWOP reports, which Davis persists on calling APRS reports - >>> undoubtedly causing some confusion, especially for non-hams - the >>> user can select two different reporting formats. Classic good news >>> and bad news in my book. The two formats are these, differing only >>> in wind speed and gust reporting: >>> >>> The "APRS Standard" - shows one minute average wind speed and gust >>> within the past five minutes >>> The "NOAA Standard" - reports two minute average wind speed and gust >>> within the past five minutes >>> >>> Now, unless I'm really missing something - always a possibility - it >>> would seem that the only format that CWOP/MADIS and other NOAA/NWS >>> users would want is the "NOAA Standard". Any suggestions on how we >>> might get the word out to users to utilize that standard rather than >>> the APRS one? I will be happy to post on the Weather Matrix forum >>> as well as the WeatherLink forum, but perhaps CWOP should contact >>> Davis and request that they at least include some language asking >>> CWOPers to use the "NOAA Standard"? >>> >>> Thanks in advance for your thoughts... >>> >>> Gary >>> CW0146/N6SKK >>> www.ag-weather.com >>> >>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>> >>> >>> No virus found in this outgoing message. >>> Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. >>> Version: 7.0.323 / Virus Database: 267.7.7/20 - Release Date: 6/16/2005 >>> >>> >>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> wxqc mailing list >>> wxqc@lists.gladstonefamily.net >>> http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/mailman/listinfo/wxqc >>> >>> >> >> >------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >No virus found in this outgoing message. >Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. >Version: 7.0.323 / Virus Database: 267.7.7/20 - Release Date: 6/16/2005 > > From kd5hqq at eastex.net Sun Jun 19 05:20:15 2005 From: kd5hqq at eastex.net (Don Revel) Date: Sun Jun 19 05:20:01 2005 Subject: [wxqc] New WeatherLink version In-Reply-To: <42B44380.2030809@adelphia.net> Message-ID: Hello All, Just a thought from a rank beginner, how about posting the ASOS/NOAA standards for all WX data measurement everywhere you can and include the contact information for the APRS community. Also include info for all vendors of WX HW and software. Ask users to contact the appropriate organizations for their individual equipment configuration requesting ASOS standards are adopted universally on the grounds of data integrity and uniformity. I maybe wrong, but I would think this is covered somewhere under the ISO. (Maybe) APPLES-TO-APPLES should apply across the board to all WX measurements and data protocols universally for this reason. As a beginner, I find this all very confusing and fascinating at the same time. WX station ID could also fall under this standardization issue with one ID for all networks and still be identified for their type. After all, a WX station IS a weather station, be it private or ASOS and the others. Station calibration could be mentioned when a new station requests registration for the same reason of accuracy. Thanks to Russ for showing me CWOP as I came in as an APRS station with WX. As Dave knows I am new to all this and need the help I receive from the list. I have learned a lot from all of you and had many questions answered in the past 6 months without even asking. I have many questions to ask starting with DP. How is it derived and what data is used to calculate this value? I am working on resolving my errors regarding this value. Phil?s charts are a blessing as I get to understand them better. (AR689 on WXQA) I am aspirating my sensor as soon as I get to town for supplies to see if it helps. I will also be changing location at the same time and installing a shield according to the CWOP installation guide for sensor sighting. I am located in a hole and close to water, with, at times very little wind to mix the air. My HUM is always high because of this, I suspect, and thus effecting my DP. If I have learned anything from the list, it is that DP is as flakey as the Pillsbury Dough Boy. HEHE One more question for now. I have found a program called Digital Atmosphere Workstation and have been using it. It models the atmosphere. Hence my question, what elevation corresponds to the different MB levels used in the models? (i.e. 950, 900, 850 ect) Elevation is proportional to pressure due to atmosphere density (weight), which decreases with altitude effecting BP. (Hope I got that right) I realize this is approximate because of Temp and Hum changes also. Past discussions about BP related to elevation and local monitored stations for comparisons has been a great help here. More questions here later. Thank you all for your explanations and answers. More questions to come later. Any comments on DAW would also be welcome! Please e-mail me at kd5hqq@eastex.net for DAW information and comments. I don?t know if atmospheric modeling would be welcome here or not. It has helped me to understand the BP/SLP/ALTITUDE relationship much better. God Bless . 73'S DON REVEL KD5HQQ on findu www.sharkclub.org www.eastex.net/kd5hqq/kd5hqq.htm Weather Display Under Heavy Construction! BEWARE! -----Original Message----- From: wxqc-bounces@lists.gladstonefamily.net [mailto:wxqc-bounces@lists.gladstonefamily.net]On Behalf Of Gary Oldham Sent: Saturday, June 18, 2005 10:54 AM To: wxqc@lists.gladstonefamily.net Subject: [wxqc] New WeatherLink version Dave and others: What a nice day we're having after all these 90+ days! While I should be outside mowing my lawn and doing other things to take advantage of the day, I'm futzing with a brand new beta release of WeatherLink (v5.6). Actually has some substantial improvements over earlier versions, and the big news in my book is that Davis has finally figured out the concept of wind gusts... sorta.... Now for CWOP reports, which Davis persists on calling APRS reports - undoubtedly causing some confusion, especially for non-hams - the user can select two different reporting formats. Classic good news and bad news in my book. The two formats are these, differing only in wind speed and gust reporting: The "APRS Standard" - shows one minute average wind speed and gust within the past five minutes The "NOAA Standard" - reports two minute average wind speed and gust within the past five minutes Now, unless I'm really missing something - always a possibility - it would seem that the only format that CWOP/MADIS and other NOAA/NWS users would want is the "NOAA Standard". Any suggestions on how we might get the word out to users to utilize that standard rather than the APRS one? I will be happy to post on the Weather Matrix forum as well as the WeatherLink forum, but perhaps CWOP should contact Davis and request that they at least include some language asking CWOPers to use the "NOAA Standard"? Thanks in advance for your thoughts... Gary CW0146/N6SKK www.ag-weather.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/pipermail/wxqc/attachments/20050619/b78e5315/attachment-0001.html From gary.oldham at adelphia.net Sun Jun 19 09:29:38 2005 From: gary.oldham at adelphia.net (Gary Oldham) Date: Sun Jun 19 09:29:47 2005 Subject: [wxqc] New WeatherLink version In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <42B57342.6080000@adelphia.net> Skipped content of type multipart/alternative-------------- next part -------------- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.323 / Virus Database: 267.7.8/22 - Release Date: 6/17/2005 From James.Dudley at noaa.gov Sun Jun 19 13:59:37 2005 From: James.Dudley at noaa.gov (James Dudley) Date: Sun Jun 19 13:59:36 2005 Subject: [wxqc] New WeatherLink version Message-ID: <91eea040.a04091ee@noaa.gov> All, As a National Weather Service forecaster and CW2553 operator (if you can call me an operator), I am very pleased that Davis is allowing the wind gust to be transmitted via Weatherlink 5.6. I downloaded the beta version last and am running it now. Of course as soon as I started running it, my aging old Weather Monitor II had to glitch out (not related to software) and report a low of 23 degrees....hmmm a little chilly for Central California in the summer. I took care of that problem and I really like what I see so far with the gust generation. I know that there will always be issues concering wind format (1 min gust vs 2 min gust). The way I see it now, is I'll take the gust...any gust, whether it is a 1 or 2 min variety. In the NWS warning program, we collect data from many sources, some have 10 min gust or even gust within the past hour. This is a really good thing that Davis is finally doing and it has apparently been a long time coming. I will keep running the 5.6 and see just how it behaves. Regards Jim Dudley CW2553 Lead Forecaster NWS Hanford CA Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=------------070203040402080308060305 --------------070203040402080308060305 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Dave and others: What a nice day we're having after all these 90+ days! While I should be outside mowing my lawn and doing other things to take advantage of the day, I'm futzing with a brand new beta release of WeatherLink (v5.6). Actually has some substantial improvements over earlier versions, and the big news in my book is that Davis has finally figured out the concept of wind gusts... sorta.... Now for CWOP reports, which Davis persists on calling APRS reports - undoubtedly causing some confusion, especially for non-hams - the user can select two different reporting formats. Classic good news and bad news in my book. The two formats are these, differing only in wind speed and gust reporting: The "APRS Standard" - shows one minute average wind speed and gust within the past five minutes The "NOAA Standard" - reports two minute average wind speed and gust within the past five minutes Now, unless I'm really missing something - always a possibility - it would seem that the only format that CWOP/MADIS and other NOAA/NWS users would want is the "NOAA Standard". Any suggestions on how we might get the word out to users to utilize that standard rather than the APRS one? I will be happy to post on the Weather Matrix forum as well as the WeatherLink forum, but perhaps CWOP should contact Davis and request that they at least include some language asking CWOPers to use the "NOAA Standard"? Thanks in advance for your thoughts... Gary CW0146/N6SKK www.ag-weather.com --------------070203040402080308060305 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Dave and others:

What a nice day we're having after all these 90+ days!

While I should be outside mowing my lawn and doing other things to take advantage of the day, I'm futzing with a brand new beta release of WeatherLink (v5.6).  Actually has some substantial improvements over earlier versions, and the big news in my book is that Davis has finally figured out the concept of wind gusts... sorta....

Now for CWOP reports, which Davis persists on calling APRS reports - undoubtedly causing some confusion, especially for non-hams - the user can select two different reporting formats.  Classic good news and bad news in my book.  The two formats are these, differing only in wind speed and gust reporting:

The "APRS Standard" - shows one minute average wind speed and gust within the past five minutes
The "NOAA Standard" - reports two minute average wind speed and gust within the past five minutes

Now, unless I'm really missing something - always a possibility - it would seem that the only format that CWOP/MADIS and other NOAA/NWS users would want is the "NOAA Standard".  Any suggestions on how we might get the word out to users to utilize that standard rather than the APRS one?  I will be happy to post on the Weather Matrix forum as well as the WeatherLink forum, but perhaps CWOP should contact Davis and request that they at least include some language asking CWOPers to use the "NOAA Standard"?

Thanks in advance for your thoughts...

Gary
CW0146/N6SKK
www.ag-weather.com
 --------------070203040402080308060305-- -------------- next part -------------- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.323 / Virus Database: 267.7.7/20 - Release Date: 6/16/2005 -------------- next part -------------- _______________________________________________ wxqc mailing list wxqc@lists.gladstonefamily.net http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/mailman/listinfo/wxqc From philip at gladstonefamily.net Sun Jun 19 20:56:32 2005 From: philip at gladstonefamily.net (Philip Gladstone) Date: Sun Jun 19 20:56:36 2005 Subject: [wxqc] RH / Dewpoint formula In-Reply-To: <42B57342.6080000@adelphia.net> References: <42B57342.6080000@adelphia.net> Message-ID: <42B61440.2090306@gladstonefamily.net> Gary Oldham wrote: > The calculation for dew point is below, courtesy of weatherwise.org > (publishers of Weatherwise magazine, which I highly recommend if > you've got the "bug"): > > "Set x = (1 ? 0.01 RH) > > where RH is the relative humidity expressed as a percent (a number > between 1 and 100). If the relative humidity is 38 percent, x = 0.62. > > Then calculate > > DPD = (14.55 + 0.114T)x + > > ((2.5 + 0.007T)x)to the third power + (15.9 + 0.117T)xto the 14th power > > where T is the temperature in degrees Celsius. This calculation yields > the difference between the temperature and dew point in degrees > Celsius. Finally, compute the dew point TD = T ? DPD. The answer is in > degrees Celsius." > > (which can, of course, then be converted to degrees Fahrenheit.) > This formula is completely different to the one that I use to convert dewpoint & temperature back into relative humidity. my $e = 6.11 * 10 ** (7.5 * $td / (237.7+$td)); my $es = 6.11 * 10 ** (7.5 * $t / (237.7+$t)); my $rh = $e / $es * 100; where $td is the dewpoint in C, and $t is the temperature in C. Notably, this does not depend on the pressure at all! Somebody in the current processing chain from APRS message to MADIS output does RH + Temp => dewpoint. Does one of the NOAA guys know which formula they use there? Philip -- Philip Gladstone * Check out the live pondcam at http://pond.gladstonefamily.net -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature Size: 3322 bytes Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature Url : http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/pipermail/wxqc/attachments/20050619/98c79457/smime.bin From mark at markwyman.com Sun Jun 19 21:45:27 2005 From: mark at markwyman.com (Mark W) Date: Sun Jun 19 21:46:27 2005 Subject: [wxqc] RH / Dewpoint formula References: <42B57342.6080000@adelphia.net> <42B61440.2090306@gladstonefamily.net> Message-ID: <001d01c57539$bc15d420$628a3243@MARKSCOMPAQ> That seems odd that it doesn't take air pressure into account, typically things dissolve into other things more readily if under greater pressure, all else including temperature the same. i.e. Quartz (SiO2) will dissolve as well as table salt in water given a high enough pressure, but does not dissolve at all at only a few ponds per square inch. Well, it is hurting my brain because relative humidity is simply a percentage of the saturation of the air, no matter the conditions of air pressure or temperature, so I suppose air pressure may be neutralized out. For example if air was 50% saturated (50% humidity) at 1atm, and you removed 1/2 the molecules for 1/2atm, you have also removed 1/2 the water vapor. So with an ideal situation, you would still have 50% humidity still as long as the temperature still matched. But of course if you remove 1/2 the volume, you drop the temperature so the relative humidity will rise accordingly. Dewpoint should remain the same though. However I don't know if water dissolves more readily in air under higher pressures, and if so, that means you would have to take air pressure into account when deriving dewpoint. By dissolving more readily I mean if air saturated at 30C at 1atm can have 1 water molecule for every 10 of air, but for 30C at 2atm can hold 2 water molecules for every 10 of air. My meteorology books are at work, so I cannot find an answer tonight. Just jabbering. Newb at the weather scene. -Mark ----- Original Message ----- From: "Philip Gladstone" To: ; "Discussion of data quality issues" Sent: Sunday, June 19, 2005 8:56 PM Subject: Re: [wxqc] RH / Dewpoint formula > _______________________________________________ > wxqc mailing list > wxqc@lists.gladstonefamily.net > http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/mailman/listinfo/wxqc > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.323 / Virus Database: 267.7.8/22 - Release Date: 6/17/2005 From Michael.F.Barth at noaa.gov Mon Jun 20 11:00:11 2005 From: Michael.F.Barth at noaa.gov (Michael F Barth) Date: Mon Jun 20 11:00:32 2005 Subject: [wxqc] RH / Dewpoint formula In-Reply-To: <42B61440.2090306@gladstonefamily.net> References: <42B57342.6080000@adelphia.net> <42B61440.2090306@gladstonefamily.net> Message-ID: Both these formulas (rh->td, and td->rh) are correct, and we use them when we need to do these calculations. Note, however, that for APRS/CWOP MADIS isn't the one doing the conversions. Both rh & td are in the raw data we get from findu. I think this is done by the software used to upload the data from the weather stations. Mike On Sun, 19 Jun 2005, Philip Gladstone wrote: > Gary Oldham wrote: > >> The calculation for dew point is below, courtesy of weatherwise.org >> (publishers of Weatherwise magazine, which I highly recommend if you've got >> the "bug"): >> >> "Set x = (1 — 0.01 RH) >> >> where RH is the relative humidity expressed as a percent (a number between >> 1 and 100). If the relative humidity is 38 percent, x = 0.62. >> >> Then calculate >> >> DPD = (14.55 + 0.114T)x + >> >> ((2.5 + 0.007T)x)to the third power + (15.9 + 0.117T)xto the 14th power >> >> where T is the temperature in degrees Celsius. This calculation yields the >> difference between the temperature and dew point in degrees Celsius. >> Finally, compute the dew point TD = T — DPD. The answer is in degrees >> Celsius." >> >> (which can, of course, then be converted to degrees Fahrenheit.) >> > This formula is completely different to the one that I use to convert > dewpoint & temperature back into relative humidity. > > my $e = 6.11 * 10 ** (7.5 * $td / (237.7+$td)); > my $es = 6.11 * 10 ** (7.5 * $t / (237.7+$t)); > > my $rh = $e / $es * 100; > > where $td is the dewpoint in C, and $t is the temperature in C. > > Notably, this does not depend on the pressure at all! > > Somebody in the current processing chain from APRS message to MADIS output > does RH + Temp => dewpoint. Does one of the NOAA guys know which formula they > use there? > > Philip > > -- > Philip Gladstone > * Check out the live pondcam at http://pond.gladstonefamily.net > > From harold.lemon at sbcglobal.net Mon Jun 20 14:50:02 2005 From: harold.lemon at sbcglobal.net (Harold Lemon) Date: Mon Jun 20 14:50:20 2005 Subject: [wxqc] kd7yat-3 References: <20050608.183357.21088.20669@webmail12.lax.untd.com><004c01c56c95$da1a22c0$628a3243@MARKSCOMPAQ> <42A7B0BE.2000003@comcast.net> Message-ID: <002701c575c8$deda88e0$6402a8c0@gateway.2wire.net> Along with Dave's suggestion for adjusting the Peet Bros RH sensor, here is Peet Bros' official procedure for calibrating the sensor. I finally obtained a psychrometer and found that the sensor was still reading 5% too high. After giving the set screw another half turn, it seemed to put it right in the ballpark. Thanks for the tips. Harold CW3109 Quote: Humidity sensors may be recalibrated in the field by the following procedure: Items Required: -Jeweler's Screwdriver -Small Philips Screwdriver -Humidity Standard (instrument displaying correct RH% at your location) NOTE: Humidity readings vary by location. A reading from the airport or weather bureau is not likely to be the same as that for your location. Procedure 1) Open Humidity Sensor Housing by removing the four Philips screws from the bottom of the housing. 2) Determine the amount of correction as follows: Subtract the humidity reading displayed on the weather station keyboard from the reading of your humidity standard. Multiply the difference by .35 to get the required number of turns of the calibration potentiometer. Example: Weather Station Reading 42% Humidity Standard Reading 49% ( 49 - 42 ) x .35 - 2.45 turns 3) Unplug the Humidity Sensor cable from the junction box "Outdoor model) or keyboard/display (Indoor model) Wait until the humidity reading displayed on the keyboard is"----%". 4) Locate the blue calibration potentiometer on the circuit board. Using the jeweler's screwdriver, rotate the brass screw on the top of the potentiometer by the required number of turns (counterclockwise to decrease the humidity reading displayed on the weather station, clockwise to increase it). 5) Plug in the cable and wait for a humidity reading to appear on the keyboard/display (about 20 see). 6) If the reading is still different from the reading on the humidity standard, repeat steps 2-5. If recalibration can not be accomplished satisfactorily, return the humidity sensor circuit board assembly for factory service and recalibration. 7) Close the housing and reinstall the four screws. Unquote: ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dave Helms" To: "Discussion of data quality issues" Sent: Wednesday, June 08, 2005 8:00 PM Subject: Re: [wxqc] kd7yat-3 Hi Ed, You are certainly close to the lake you describe: http://www.acme.com/mapper/?lat=33.35200&long=-112.43033&scale=12&theme=Image&width=3&height=2&dot=Yes ...and you get south screaming southwest to northwest afternoon winds: http://www.findu.com/cgi-bin/wxpage.cgi?call=KD7YAT-3&last=240 ...from your day/night dew point statistics: http://weather.gladstonefamily.net/site/AR464 ... it appear your night mean is -4.6F (too high) and day mean is a mere -1.8F (too high). This tells me that the strong winds off the lake to your west are enough to "mix" the lake moisture into the ambient dew point and keep your dew point close to area humidities. However during the light nightly winds, the local moisture conditions created by your relatively small lake is an area that is otherwise arid really show up in your dew point measurements. On the on hand, I know from personal experience that the Peet Bros humidity sensors run too high (I own a Peet Ultimeter 2100). I think you could probably scale downward your dew point measurements downward by 1-2F (do this during a windy afternoon). Scroll down to the picture at the bottom of my siting pictures to see an opened up Ultimeter temp/humidity circuit board and humidity adjustment screw: http://mywebpages.comcast.net/dshelms/tanterra_sensors.htm (can't recall, but I think one complete rotation of the adjustment screw will change the measured dew point by about 2F) Always make any adjustments incrementally and look at the impact over a period of weeks. I would not move your sensor from the lake as this will not have a big impact whether they are 10 ft or 50 ft from the shore. Its likely your night-time humidity measurements will almost always be "too high" according to QCMS, but they be good measurements for you locations! Hope this helps, DaveH CW0351 Mark W wrote: > Seems logical to me that is causing the problem. It would also > probably depend on the wind direction, one day you may see the reading > "normal" (wind coming from the direction away from the water), the > next day far off. A body of water has tremendous heatsinking > capability, lowering the nearby temperatures, and raising the dew > point. Try living near Lake Ontario in the early spring some time. If > the water is warmer than the air (say at night) the dewpoint could go > up considerably due to evaporation. > > Sounds to me like you need to re-position the sensors more inland or > at a higher elevation (another 5'-10' up could make a big difference, > or 1000' inland or more). However if where it is now is where people > in the area are hanging around, it may be what you want to show them. > The question then is, provide accurate data for CWOP or for the people > you are trying to service? > > -Mark > > ----- Original Message ----- From: > To: > Sent: Wednesday, June 08, 2005 9:33 PM > Subject: [wxqc] kd7yat-3 > > >> >> I seem to be consistant at failing on my Dewpoint (always high) The >> station sits on the edge of our North Lake in the community, and the >> sensor is about 12 feet from the waters edge. Would this be the root >> cause for the error? >> >> Ed, kd7yat >> >> _______________________________________________ >> wxqc mailing list >> wxqc@lists.gladstonefamily.net >> http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/mailman/listinfo/wxqc >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > wxqc mailing list > wxqc@lists.gladstonefamily.net > http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/mailman/listinfo/wxqc > _______________________________________________ wxqc mailing list wxqc@lists.gladstonefamily.net http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/mailman/listinfo/wxqc From dshelms at comcast.net Mon Jun 20 17:37:37 2005 From: dshelms at comcast.net (dshelms@comcast.net) Date: Mon Jun 20 17:37:49 2005 Subject: [wxqc] RH / Dewpoint formula Message-ID: <062020052137.21409.42B7371E0001A794000053A122007623029C03040A089C0B@comcast.net> Skipped content of type multipart/alternative-------------- next part -------------- An embedded message was scrubbed... From: "Michael F Barth" Subject: Re: [wxqc] RH / Dewpoint formula Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2005 15:00:45 +0000 Size: 714 Url: http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/pipermail/wxqc/attachments/20050620/304810a9/attachment.mht From dshelms at comcast.net Mon Jun 20 21:22:40 2005 From: dshelms at comcast.net (Dave Helms) Date: Mon Jun 20 21:22:50 2005 Subject: [wxqc] New WeatherLink version In-Reply-To: <42B57342.6080000@adelphia.net> References: <42B57342.6080000@adelphia.net> Message-ID: <42B76BE0.30607@comcast.net> Don, The UIUC 2010 page is a great on-line source for weather info: http://ww2010.atmos.uiuc.edu/(Gh)/guides/mtr/fw/prs/prssfc.rxml DaveH CW0351 Gary Oldham wrote: > Hi, Don > > Dew point oversimplistically is derived from the ambient temperature > and relative humidity, with calculations of vapor pressure thrown in > for good measure. Dew point *can* be measured directly but the > instrumentation is very expensive and won't be showing up on any of > our consumer type weather stations, even the very high end stations. > The calculation for dew point is below, courtesy of weatherwise.org > (publishers of Weatherwise magazine, which I highly recommend if > you've got the "bug"): > > "Set x = (1 ? 0.01 RH) > > where RH is the relative humidity expressed as a percent (a number > between 1 and 100). If the relative humidity is 38 percent, x = 0.62. > > Then calculate > > DPD = (14.55 + 0.114T)x + > > ((2.5 + 0.007T)x)to the third power + (15.9 + 0.117T)xto the 14th power > > where T is the temperature in degrees Celsius. This calculation yields > the difference between the temperature and dew point in degrees > Celsius. Finally, compute the dew point TD = T ? DPD. The answer is in > degrees Celsius." > > (which can, of course, then be converted to degrees Fahrenheit.) > > On the heights for different MB, here's a handy chart, courtesy of Unisys: > > *Pressure* *Approximate Height* *Approximate Temp* > *Sea level* 0 m 0 ft 15 C 59 F > *1000 mb* 100 m 300 ft 15 C 59 F > *850 mb* 1500 m 5000 ft 5 C 41 F > *700 mb* 3000 m 10000 ft -5 C 23 F > *500 mb* 5000 m 18000 ft -20 C -4 F > *300 mb* 9000 m 30000 ft -45 C -49 F > *200 mb* 12000 m 40000 ft -55 C -67 F > *100 mb* 16000 m 53000 ft -56 C -69 F > > > > Hope this helps. Thanks for joining in CWOP and for your ongoing > thoughts and ideas. It's great to see folks take so much interest in > this program, the contirbutions it makes, and helping to extract the > highest degree of accuracy possible. Thanks again, > > Gary > www.ag-weather.com > CW0146 > Don Revel wrote: > >>Hello All, >> >>Just a thought from a rank beginner, how about posting the ASOS/NOAA >>standards for all WX data measurement everywhere you can and include the >>contact information for the APRS community. Also include info for all >>vendors of WX HW and software. Ask users to contact the appropriate >>organizations for their individual equipment configuration requesting ASOS >>standards are adopted universally on the grounds of data integrity and >>uniformity. I maybe wrong, but I would think this is covered somewhere under >>the ISO. (Maybe) APPLES-TO-APPLES should apply across the board to all WX >>measurements and data protocols universally for this reason. As a beginner, >>I find this all very confusing and fascinating at the same time. WX station >>ID could also fall under this standardization issue with one ID for all >>networks and still be identified for their type. After all, a WX station IS >>a weather station, be it private or ASOS and the others. Station calibration >>could be mentioned when a new station requests registration for the same >>reason of accuracy. Thanks to Russ for showing me CWOP as I came in as an >>APRS station with WX. >> >>As Dave knows I am new to all this and need the help I receive from the >>list. I have learned a lot from all of you and had many questions answered >>in the past 6 months without even asking. I have many questions to ask >>starting with DP. How is it derived and what data is used to calculate this >>value? I am working on resolving my errors regarding this value. Phil?s >>charts are a blessing as I get to understand them better. (AR689 on WXQA) I >>am aspirating my sensor as soon as I get to town for supplies to see if it >>helps. I will also be changing location at the same time and installing a >>shield according to the CWOP installation guide for sensor sighting. I am >>located in a hole and close to water, with, at times very little wind to mix >>the air. My HUM is always high because of this, I suspect, and thus >>effecting my DP. If I have learned anything from the list, it is that DP is >>as flakey as the Pillsbury Dough Boy. HEHE >> >>One more question for now. I have found a program called Digital Atmosphere >>Workstation and have been using it. It models the atmosphere. Hence my >>question, what elevation corresponds to the different MB levels used in the >>models? (i.e. 950, 900, 850 ect) Elevation is proportional to pressure due >>to atmosphere density (weight), which decreases with altitude effecting BP. >>(Hope I got that right) I realize this is approximate because of Temp and >>Hum changes also. Past discussions about BP related to elevation and local >>monitored stations for comparisons has been a great help here. More >>questions here later. >> >>Thank you all for your explanations and answers. More questions to come >>later. Any comments on DAW would also be welcome! Please e-mail me at >>kd5hqq@eastex.net for DAW information and >>comments. >>I don?t know if atmospheric modeling would be welcome here or not. It has >>helped me to understand the BP/SLP/ALTITUDE relationship much better. God >>Bless?. >> >>73'S >>DON REVEL >>KD5HQQ on findu >>www.sharkclub.org >> >>www.eastex.net/kd5hqq/kd5hqq.htm >>Weather Display Under Heavy Construction! BEWARE! >> >> >>-----Original Message----- >>From: wxqc-bounces@lists.gladstonefamily.net >>[mailto:wxqc-bounces@lists.gladstonefamily.net]On Behalf Of Gary Oldham >>Sent: Saturday, June 18, 2005 10:54 AM >>To: wxqc@lists.gladstonefamily.net >>Subject: [wxqc] New WeatherLink version >> >>Dave and others: >> >>What a nice day we're having after all these 90+ days! >> >>While I should be outside mowing my lawn and doing other things to take >>advantage of the day, I'm futzing with a brand new beta release of >>WeatherLink (v5.6). Actually has some substantial improvements over earlier >>versions, and the big news in my book is that Davis has finally figured out >>the concept of wind gusts... sorta.... >> >>Now for CWOP reports, which Davis persists on calling APRS reports - >>undoubtedly causing some confusion, especially for non-hams - the user can >>select two different reporting formats. Classic good news and bad news in >>my book. The two formats are these, differing only in wind speed and gust >>reporting: >> >>The "APRS Standard" - shows one minute average wind speed and gust within >>the past five minutes >>The "NOAA Standard" - reports two minute average wind speed and gust within >>the past five minutes >> >>Now, unless I'm really missing something - always a possibility - it would >>seem that the only format that CWOP/MADIS and other NOAA/NWS users would >>want is the "NOAA Standard". Any suggestions on how we might get the word >>out to users to utilize that standard rather than the APRS one? I will be >>happy to post on the Weather Matrix forum as well as the WeatherLink forum, >>but perhaps CWOP should contact Davis and request that they at least include >>some language asking CWOPers to use the "NOAA Standard"? >> >>Thanks in advance for your thoughts... >> >>Gary >>CW0146/N6SKK >>www.ag-weather.com >> >> >> >>------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> >>No virus found in this incoming message. >>Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. >>Version: 7.0.323 / Virus Database: 267.7.8/22 - Release Date: 6/17/2005 >> >> >------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >No virus found in this outgoing message. >Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. >Version: 7.0.323 / Virus Database: 267.7.8/22 - Release Date: 6/17/2005 > > >------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >_______________________________________________ >wxqc mailing list >wxqc@lists.gladstonefamily.net >http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/mailman/listinfo/wxqc > > From mark at markwyman.com Tue Jun 21 09:38:21 2005 From: mark at markwyman.com (Mark Wyman) Date: Tue Jun 21 09:39:33 2005 Subject: [wxqc] New WeatherLink version In-Reply-To: <42B76BE0.30607@comcast.net> Message-ID: <200506210938859.SM01248@markamd2003> Hmm, makes me think that you could slap a cheap dew sensor on the back of a Peltier device along with a temperature sensor. Set up a feedback between the dew sensor and the Peltier to make sure the dew sensor is always at its 99-100% humidity value. The dew sensors go low impedance right around 95%, so that part is easy, but you have to avoid 100% since you cannot measure 101% humidity to tell the device when to warm a bit. Then have the temperature sensor report back the current temp of the dew sensor. I don't think dew sensors can show 100% humidity below freezing though, only above. It would be a neat project, but the Peltier devices typically take a lot of current so for any wireless apps, it would require when heck of a solar cell. I have a capacitance humidity sensor sitting on by workbench here, aching for a unique application like this, I wonder if I can pry open the casing and try this out without harming the sensor too much. -Mark Wyman mark@ramseymail.com http://www.ramseyelectronics.com -----Original Message----- From: wxqc-bounces@lists.gladstonefamily.net [mailto:wxqc-bounces@lists.gladstonefamily.net] On Behalf Of Dave Helms Sent: Monday, June 20, 2005 9:23 PM To: Discussion of data quality issues Subject: Re: [wxqc] New WeatherLink version Don, The UIUC 2010 page is a great on-line source for weather info: http://ww2010.atmos.uiuc.edu/(Gh)/guides/mtr/fw/prs/prssfc.rxml DaveH CW0351 Gary Oldham wrote: > Hi, Don > > Dew point oversimplistically is derived from the ambient temperature > and relative humidity, with calculations of vapor pressure thrown in > for good measure. Dew point *can* be measured directly but the > instrumentation is very expensive and won't be showing up on any of > our consumer type weather stations, even the very high end stations. > The calculation for dew point is below, courtesy of weatherwise.org > (publishers of Weatherwise magazine, which I highly recommend if > you've got the "bug"): > > "Set x = (1 - 0.01 RH) > > where RH is the relative humidity expressed as a percent (a number > between 1 and 100). If the relative humidity is 38 percent, x = 0.62. > > Then calculate > > DPD = (14.55 + 0.114T)x + > > ((2.5 + 0.007T)x)to the third power + (15.9 + 0.117T)xto the 14th power > > where T is the temperature in degrees Celsius. This calculation yields > the difference between the temperature and dew point in degrees > Celsius. Finally, compute the dew point TD = T - DPD. The answer is in > degrees Celsius." > > (which can, of course, then be converted to degrees Fahrenheit.) > > On the heights for different MB, here's a handy chart, courtesy of Unisys: > > *Pressure* *Approximate Height* *Approximate Temp* > *Sea level* 0 m 0 ft 15 C 59 F > *1000 mb* 100 m 300 ft 15 C 59 F > *850 mb* 1500 m 5000 ft 5 C 41 F > *700 mb* 3000 m 10000 ft -5 C 23 F > *500 mb* 5000 m 18000 ft -20 C -4 F > *300 mb* 9000 m 30000 ft -45 C -49 F > *200 mb* 12000 m 40000 ft -55 C -67 F > *100 mb* 16000 m 53000 ft -56 C -69 F > > > > Hope this helps. Thanks for joining in CWOP and for your ongoing > thoughts and ideas. It's great to see folks take so much interest in > this program, the contirbutions it makes, and helping to extract the > highest degree of accuracy possible. Thanks again, > > Gary > www.ag-weather.com > CW0146 > Don Revel wrote: > >>Hello All, >> >>Just a thought from a rank beginner, how about posting the ASOS/NOAA >>standards for all WX data measurement everywhere you can and include the >>contact information for the APRS community. Also include info for all >>vendors of WX HW and software. Ask users to contact the appropriate >>organizations for their individual equipment configuration requesting ASOS >>standards are adopted universally on the grounds of data integrity and >>uniformity. I maybe wrong, but I would think this is covered somewhere under >>the ISO. (Maybe) APPLES-TO-APPLES should apply across the board to all WX >>measurements and data protocols universally for this reason. As a beginner, >>I find this all very confusing and fascinating at the same time. WX station >>ID could also fall under this standardization issue with one ID for all >>networks and still be identified for their type. After all, a WX station IS >>a weather station, be it private or ASOS and the others. Station calibration >>could be mentioned when a new station requests registration for the same >>reason of accuracy. Thanks to Russ for showing me CWOP as I came in as an >>APRS station with WX. >> >>As Dave knows I am new to all this and need the help I receive from the >>list. I have learned a lot from all of you and had many questions answered >>in the past 6 months without even asking. I have many questions to ask >>starting with DP. How is it derived and what data is used to calculate this >>value? I am working on resolving my errors regarding this value. Phil's >>charts are a blessing as I get to understand them better. (AR689 on WXQA) I >>am aspirating my sensor as soon as I get to town for supplies to see if it >>helps. I will also be changing location at the same time and installing a >>shield according to the CWOP installation guide for sensor sighting. I am >>located in a hole and close to water, with, at times very little wind to mix >>the air. My HUM is always high because of this, I suspect, and thus >>effecting my DP. If I have learned anything from the list, it is that DP is >>as flakey as the Pillsbury Dough Boy. HEHE >> >>One more question for now. I have found a program called Digital Atmosphere >>Workstation and have been using it. It models the atmosphere. Hence my >>question, what elevation corresponds to the different MB levels used in the >>models? (i.e. 950, 900, 850 ect) Elevation is proportional to pressure due >>to atmosphere density (weight), which decreases with altitude effecting BP. >>(Hope I got that right) I realize this is approximate because of Temp and >>Hum changes also. Past discussions about BP related to elevation and local >>monitored stations for comparisons has been a great help here. More >>questions here later. >> >>Thank you all for your explanations and answers. More questions to come >>later. Any comments on DAW would also be welcome! Please e-mail me at >>kd5hqq@eastex.net for DAW information and >>comments. >>I don't know if atmospheric modeling would be welcome here or not. It has >>helped me to understand the BP/SLP/ALTITUDE relationship much better. God >>Bless.. >> >>73'S >>DON REVEL >>KD5HQQ on findu >>www.sharkclub.org >> >>www.eastex.net/kd5hqq/kd5hqq.htm >>Weather Display Under Heavy Construction! BEWARE! >> >> >>-----Original Message----- >>From: wxqc-bounces@lists.gladstonefamily.net >>[mailto:wxqc-bounces@lists.gladstonefamily.net]On Behalf Of Gary Oldham >>Sent: Saturday, June 18, 2005 10:54 AM >>To: wxqc@lists.gladstonefamily.net >>Subject: [wxqc] New WeatherLink version >> >>Dave and others: >> >>What a nice day we're having after all these 90+ days! >> >>While I should be outside mowing my lawn and doing other things to take >>advantage of the day, I'm futzing with a brand new beta release of >>WeatherLink (v5.6). Actually has some substantial improvements over earlier >>versions, and the big news in my book is that Davis has finally figured out >>the concept of wind gusts... sorta.... >> >>Now for CWOP reports, which Davis persists on calling APRS reports - >>undoubtedly causing some confusion, especially for non-hams - the user can >>select two different reporting formats. Classic good news and bad news in >>my book. The two formats are these, differing only in wind speed and gust >>reporting: >> >>The "APRS Standard" - shows one minute average wind speed and gust within >>the past five minutes >>The "NOAA Standard" - reports two minute average wind speed and gust within >>the past five minutes >> >>Now, unless I'm really missing something - always a possibility - it would >>seem that the only format that CWOP/MADIS and other NOAA/NWS users would >>want is the "NOAA Standard". Any suggestions on how we might get the word >>out to users to utilize that standard rather than the APRS one? I will be >>happy to post on the Weather Matrix forum as well as the WeatherLink forum, >>but perhaps CWOP should contact Davis and request that they at least include >>some language asking CWOPers to use the "NOAA Standard"? >> >>Thanks in advance for your thoughts... >> >>Gary >>CW0146/N6SKK >>www.ag-weather.com >> >> >> >>------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> >>No virus found in this incoming message. >>Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. >>Version: 7.0.323 / Virus Database: 267.7.8/22 - Release Date: 6/17/2005 >> >> >------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >No virus found in this outgoing message. >Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. >Version: 7.0.323 / Virus Database: 267.7.8/22 - Release Date: 6/17/2005 > > >------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >_______________________________________________ >wxqc mailing list >wxqc@lists.gladstonefamily.net >http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/mailman/listinfo/wxqc > > _______________________________________________ wxqc mailing list wxqc@lists.gladstonefamily.net http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/mailman/listinfo/wxqc From mark at markwyman.com Tue Jun 21 22:30:42 2005 From: mark at markwyman.com (Mark W) Date: Tue Jun 21 22:31:41 2005 Subject: [wxqc] RuhRoh... Weatherlink 5.6 Beta 1 issue? Message-ID: <000901c576d2$636dd800$628a3243@MARKSCOMPAQ> Or me? Something strange is going on, I installed Weatherlink 5.6 Beta 1 two days ago, and all was working well, gusts and all. Today I had to restart the PC this morning, and forgot that the startup still pointed to the old version of WeatherLink. I closed the old version, ran the new, and it seemed to be posting the new gusts etc again until I checked a few minutes ago: http://www.findu.com/cgi-bin/wxpage.cgi?CW3833 Now it seems all of the new data points since I closed the old version and started the new have gone away! Now there is no data at all since I closed one and opened the other, so it means some records have simply been deleted. Can someone help me please? (And no doctor recommendations please!) -Mark -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/pipermail/wxqc/attachments/20050621/b487e4d6/attachment.html From mark at markwyman.com Tue Jun 21 22:41:01 2005 From: mark at markwyman.com (Mark W) Date: Tue Jun 21 22:41:54 2005 Subject: [wxqc] RuhRoh... Weatherlink 5.6 Beta 1 issue? References: <000901c576d2$636dd800$628a3243@MARKSCOMPAQ> Message-ID: <000e01c576d3$d442c5d0$628a3243@MARKSCOMPAQ> Well, I tinkered a little, and I'm still not sure what is up. WeatherUnderground data is fine for the period, just CWOP is kinda messed up. However I restarted and it then posted the data again, though there is a large hole in the wind data, which seems typical during WeatherLink down time. Temp, dew and barometer are all up to date now. BTW is that a known issue that the wind data is lost if cached when WeatherLink is not running (i.e. off playing PC games for an hour or two)? Thanks BTW my GUI controls for weather stuff are coming along nicely. I have to add a few things for more universal uses, but they should be very easy to use. Since they are ActiveX they could be embedded in a web page, but nobody trusts ActiveX these days. -Mark ----- Original Message ----- From: Mark W To: Discussion of data quality issues Sent: Tuesday, June 21, 2005 10:30 PM Subject: [wxqc] RuhRoh... Weatherlink 5.6 Beta 1 issue? Or me? Something strange is going on, I installed Weatherlink 5.6 Beta 1 two days ago, and all was working well, gusts and all. Today I had to restart the PC this morning, and forgot that the startup still pointed to the old version of WeatherLink. I closed the old version, ran the new, and it seemed to be posting the new gusts etc again until I checked a few minutes ago: http://www.findu.com/cgi-bin/wxpage.cgi?CW3833 Now it seems all of the new data points since I closed the old version and started the new have gone away! Now there is no data at all since I closed one and opened the other, so it means some records have simply been deleted. Can someone help me please? (And no doctor recommendations please!) -Mark ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ wxqc mailing list wxqc@lists.gladstonefamily.net http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/mailman/listinfo/wxqc -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/pipermail/wxqc/attachments/20050621/47954e1f/attachment.html From gary.oldham at adelphia.net Wed Jun 22 07:38:31 2005 From: gary.oldham at adelphia.net (Gary Oldham) Date: Wed Jun 22 08:09:53 2005 Subject: [wxqc] RuhRoh... Weatherlink 5.6 Beta 1 issue? Message-ID: <6662084.1119440311781.JavaMail.root@web3.mail.adelphia.net> The new wind gust calculation is only available when WL 5.6 is running; it has no effect if an older WeatherLink .exe file is run. And in 5.6, gust speed only shows the gust since the program has started up until 10 minutes have elapsed. And one of the "real time" screens must be active - Bulletin, Summary, the alarm screen, or one of the graphing screens. >From the "Beta Instructions" file included with the distribution: "In addition, if a real-time window is open when an Internet Upload event takes place, the new wind speed data is available for use in HTML weather templates and is used in APRS data packets." So unless version 5.6 is running and one of those screens open, you won't be seeing or sending gust data. gary.oldham(at)adelphia.net ---- Mark W wrote: ============= Well, I tinkered a little, and I'm still not sure what is up. WeatherUnderground data is fine for the period, just CWOP is kinda messed up. However I restarted and it then posted the data again, though there is a large hole in the wind data, which seems typical during WeatherLink down time. Temp, dew and barometer are all up to date now. BTW is that a known issue that the wind data is lost if cached when WeatherLink is not running (i.e. off playing PC games for an hour or two)? Thanks BTW my GUI controls for weather stuff are coming along nicely. I have to add a few things for more universal uses, but they should be very easy to use. Since they are ActiveX they could be embedded in a web page, but nobody trusts ActiveX these days. -Mark ----- Original Message ----- From: Mark W To: Discussion of data quality issues Sent: Tuesday, June 21, 2005 10:30 PM Subject: [wxqc] RuhRoh... Weatherlink 5.6 Beta 1 issue? Or me? Something strange is going on, I installed Weatherlink 5.6 Beta 1 two days ago, and all was working well, gusts and all. Today I had to restart the PC this morning, and forgot that the startup still pointed to the old version of WeatherLink. I closed the old version, ran the new, and it seemed to be posting the new gusts etc again until I checked a few minutes ago: http://www.findu.com/cgi-bin/wxpage.cgi?CW3833 Now it seems all of the new data points since I closed the old version and started the new have gone away! Now there is no data at all since I closed one and opened the other, so it means some records have simply been deleted. Can someone help me please? (And no doctor recommendations please!) -Mark ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ wxqc mailing list wxqc@lists.gladstonefamily.net http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/mailman/listinfo/wxqc From mark at markwyman.com Wed Jun 22 08:52:00 2005 From: mark at markwyman.com (Mark Wyman) Date: Wed Jun 22 08:54:22 2005 Subject: [wxqc] RuhRoh... Weatherlink 5.6 Beta 1 issue? In-Reply-To: <6662084.1119440311781.JavaMail.root@web3.mail.adelphia.net> Message-ID: <20050622085200.SM00652@markamd2003> Well, hmm, I had two of the windows open (strip charts and gauges) and it appeared to be posting the data at regular intervals, but when the existing data that was posted earlier disappeared and no new data showed, it made me very suspicious, especially when it was posting data just fine to WeatherUnderground. Now that it is re-started it looks fine again, and all is OK. I would still like to know why the wind data is lost during down time, but all else is maintained, and rain data is not seen in the tables, but only on the graphs. I have to look into writing a service for Windows boxes that can be run apart from WeatherLink to post CWOP/WeatherUnderground data if WeatherLink is not running. Then this service can also maintain a database and provide data links to GUI software. I was trying to do some contracting on my computer last night and the upload window/process kept "locking" my computer during its execution, making me have to wait until it finished. I have a sneaking suspicion th