[wxqc] CW4870 Temperature

Wed Jan 4 22:32:47 EST 2006

Hi Charles,

Sounds like you have the sensor siting well in hand.  Russ has a 
radiation resource  page  you may wish to visit:
http://www.wxqa.com/shields.html

Peet uses the passive shield shown in these pages and I think it is a 
good replacement passive shield for the La Crosse:
http://www.onsetcomp.com/Products/Product_Pages/temperature_pages/solar_radiation_shield.html
http://www.provantage.com/davis-instruments-7714~7DAVS008.htm
http://www.metdata.com/radiation_shield/rad_shield.htm
http://www.ambientweather.com/77rash.html

Dave
CW0351

Charles M. Owen wrote:

>I will try to get a picture up, but currently I have no daylight hours
>available to get a picture. 
>
>I have some modest experience from my ozone forecasting days when I set up
>equipment at my county's ozone sites. I had "real" NIST temp probes and such
>at my disposal at that time.
>
>My current site is not quite as good as those monitoring buildings due to
>some limitations I currently have. My temp/RH/Sending Unit is at 2m between
>the anemometer (at about 10m) on the house and the rain gauge as far out in
>the yard as I can place it. I guess I could get an R.M.Young 5 platter
>shield at some point.
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: dshelms at comcast.net [mailto:dshelms at comcast.net] 
>Sent: Tuesday, January 03, 2006 2:26 PM
>To: Discussion of weather data quality issues;
>wxqc at lists.gladstonefamily.net
>Cc: Charles M. Owen
>Subject: Re: [wxqc] CW4870 Temperature
>
>Hi Charles,
>
>Welcome to the group!
>
>We have seen some radiation shield problems with the LaCrosse stations in
>the past, especially the WS2300.  These problems have been mitigated
>successfully  with replacement of the LaCrosse "cone" shield which has very
>high restricted ventilation, with a standard "bee hive" or Gill shield who's
>horizontal plates allow the sensors to "breath" without solar contamination.
>
>In the limited period of record for your station's operation, we are seeing
>a high "negative bias" (e.g. warmer than the surrounding stations, after an
>elevation correction).  This is very preliminary info, and it will take more
>time to get a better picture or performance.
>
>To help us better assess your station's performance, could you please upload
>digital pictures of your weather station sensors to the FLICKR page using
>the instructions on this page:
>http://mywebpages.comcast.net/brookevilleweather/flickr_setup.html
>
>
>Thanks,
>
>Dave
>CW0351
>
>P.S.  Hey Philip:   I don't think the most recent FLICKR "CWOP Metadata
>Group" member's pictures with "CWOP" tags are getting embedded in the WXQC
>station pages.  
>
>
> -------------- Original message ----------------------
>From: "Charles M. Owen" <cmowen at att.net>
>  
>
>>Hi, I am sort of a newbie. I have only had my Christmas present La Crosse
>>WS-3120TWC up for two weeks. These are my first QC reports. I am 27 miles
>>from the closest known site that I am compared with. When should I start
>>worrying about these readings? 
>>
>>   DATE     UTC      SITE  *   ALT    * POT TEMP *  DEW PNT *    DD    *
>>FF    
>>                           *   (MB)   *  (DEG F) *  (DEG F) *   (DEG)  *
>>(KNT)  
>>02-JAN-2006 0813    CW4870 *1013.(-0.2)*
>>59(-6.3)*51.8(-5.3)*199.(132.)*4.34(-2.6)
>>02-JAN-2006 1037    CW4870 *1011.(0.45)*
>>60(-6.9)*53.5(-6.2)*192.(6.08)*4.34(  -4)
>>02-JAN-2006 1052    CW4870 *1011.(0.85)*
>>60(-6.9)*53.1(-5.8)*190.(8.08)*5.21(-4.8)
>>02-JAN-2006 1102    CW4870 *1011.(0.63)*
>>60(-6.8)*53.1(-5.6)*182.(135.)*6.08(-5.3)
>>02-JAN-2006 1117    CW4870 *1011.(0.63)*
>>60(-6.8)*53.1(-5.6)*203.(114.)*6.95(-6.2)
>>02-JAN-2006 1132    CW4870 *1011.(0.63)*
>>61(-7.8)*53.7(-6.2)*249.(68.9)*3.48(-2.7)
>>02-JAN-2006 1147    CW4870 *1012.(-0.7)*
>>60(-6.8)*53.5(-5.9)*206.(111.)*7.82(  -7)
>>02-JAN-2006 1202    CW4870 *1012.(-0.7)*  59(-6.9)*53.5(-4.5)*236.(
>>19)*4.34(-3.6)
>>02-JAN-2006 Errs    CW4870 *   0/87   *  15/87   *   0/87   *   1/87   *
>>1/87   
>>02-JAN-2006 Smry    CW4870 *-0.3(
>>0.5)*-3.7(2.79)*-1.9(2.76)*43.3(76.2)*-3.3(3.01)
>>
>>Note that times are in UTC. The values displayed are  'Observed (error)'
>>    
>>
>The
>  
>
>>error value is 'analysis - observed'. I.e. if your observed value is
>>    
>>
>higher
>  
>
>>than the computed value, then the error will be negative. You have to pick
>>out the reading that is in error. The row with the time of 'Smry' is a
>>    
>>
>daily
>  
>
>>summary and the data is  'mean(standard deviation)' for each observation
>>during that day.
>>
>>Graphs: http://weather.gladstonefamily.net/qchart/C4870?date=20060103
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>wxqc mailing list
>>wxqc at lists.gladstonefamily.net
>>http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/mailman/listinfo/wxqc
>>
>>The contents of this message are the responsibility of the author.
>>    
>>
>
>
>
>
>  
>