From dshelms at comcast.net Mon May 1 21:24:42 2006 From: dshelms at comcast.net (Dave Helms) Date: Mon May 1 21:24:45 2006 Subject: [wxqc] QC Chart Help In-Reply-To: <20060430161145.95386.qmail@web54203.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20060430161145.95386.qmail@web54203.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <4456B4DA.5050700@comcast.net> Hi Steve, What is your CWOP ID? Dave CW0351 Steve Gunn wrote: >I posted, but received no help so I will try again. >Where can I get a good explaination, in laymans terms, >how best to use the QC Charts? >I am particularily interested in the longer time >periods as I am new and just received my 1st chart for >the longer period that looks totally different from >the short term charts. >Thanks, Steve > > >__________________________________________________ >Do You Yahoo!? >Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around >http://mail.yahoo.com >_______________________________________________ >wxqc mailing list >wxqc@lists.gladstonefamily.net >http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/mailman/listinfo/wxqc > >The contents of this message are the responsibility of the author. > > > > From philip at gladstonefamily.net Tue May 2 06:39:29 2006 From: philip at gladstonefamily.net (Philip Gladstone) Date: Tue May 2 06:39:47 2006 Subject: [wxqc] QC Chart Help In-Reply-To: <4456B4DA.5050700@comcast.net> References: <20060430161145.95386.qmail@web54203.mail.yahoo.com> <4456B4DA.5050700@comcast.net> Message-ID: <445736E1.8080906@gladstonefamily.net> > Steve Gunn wrote: > >> I posted, but received no help so I will try again. >> Where can I get a good explaination, in laymans terms, >> how best to use the QC Charts? >> I am particularily interested in the longer time >> periods as I am new and just received my 1st chart for >> the longer period that looks totally different from >> the short term charts. >> Thanks, Steve The long term charts are designed to show the performance of the sensor versus the analysis over a longer period of time. This chart style kicks in at 13 weeks. For the barometer chart, the little circle indicates the average error over the week, while the bar indicates one standard deviation. An ideal chart would be one in which the circles were on the zero line and the bars were short. In practice it doesn't work out this way! The idea is that if you recalibrate your sensor, or resite your temperature sensor, or change the radiation shield, then, after a few weeks, you should be able to see a qualitative difference. The temperature chart is somewhat more complex as it shows the average daytime error and the average nighttime error as well -- these are the yellow dot (think 'sun') and black dot (think 'dark'). Ideally, these averages should be close to each other. In my case (C0003), they are not lined up nicely as there appears to be cool air settling down overnight into my area, and I am often 10 degrees cooler than the analysis. Does this help? Philip -------------- 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/20060502/47e26461/smime.bin From steve_03222 at yahoo.com Tue May 2 16:46:00 2006 From: steve_03222 at yahoo.com (Steve Gunn) Date: Tue May 2 16:46:09 2006 Subject: [wxqc] QC Chart Help Message-ID: <20060502204600.16350.qmail@web54209.mail.yahoo.com> I am cw5443 and yes Phillip your explaination does help. Is it possible to determine from the longer range charts if I should have a red X or green check. At one time before I had the long range charts I noticed that I had red x for Dew Point in all time periods except for the 7 day one. I was curious how it could show bad on the 3 day and the 14 day and good for the 7 day. If on the longer period charts if the red line intersects zero, does that mean it is an acceptable reading? I have issues for the DewPoint/Humidity, all my other readings are showing good, however I would like to get them as close to zero as possible. I did make a change to the pressure early on to get that centered better. My other issue is that for the dewpoint/humidity and the day time/night time temperatures there are sometimes great differences in the readings from other station in my area. I was wondering how the system accounts for others with bad readings? Can they throw the analysis off? The closest station to me is not really that close and in my area the climate can be quite different. I have seen temps at my house often 10 degrees higher than the closest station. I have two thermo readings in different shadded locations in my yard and they are always very close to one another. It can be snowing at my house and 15 miles away raining, this is not unusual. Thanks for the responses. Steve __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From jimwc at frontiernet.net Wed May 3 13:20:19 2006 From: jimwc at frontiernet.net (jim) Date: Wed May 3 13:20:23 2006 Subject: [wxqc] flicker Message-ID: anyone: I finally got my station sighted correctly, I think, I have located the temp/humidity sensor in a 4" pvc "U" shaped duct with the inlet 5' off the ground. Air being drawn from the opposite end using a 4" - 35cfm muffin fan. all housed within a decretive well insulated "Bird house" I would like to send some pictures how can I get them to you using flicker. Jim Crumly CW4367 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/pipermail/wxqc/attachments/20060503/17296c2d/attachment.html From jimwc at frontiernet.net Wed May 3 17:48:07 2006 From: jimwc at frontiernet.net (jim) Date: Wed May 3 17:48:14 2006 Subject: [wxqc] new pictures Message-ID: I finally got my pictures uploaded to Flickr. the "Bird House" has my Temp/Humidity sensor mounted at the top and towards the intake end of a elongated "U" shaped duct with the intake 5' from the ground. The air is being pulled through from the other end of the Duct with a 35CFM muffin fan. The "Bird House" is insulated with 1" Styrofoam garage door insulation on all sides and roof to minimize solar heating. Jim Crumly CW4367 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/pipermail/wxqc/attachments/20060503/8270420f/attachment.html From kdietrich at dplanet.ch Thu May 4 12:57:02 2006 From: kdietrich at dplanet.ch (Karlheinz Dietrich) Date: Thu May 4 12:57:14 2006 Subject: [wxqc] re flicker Message-ID: Perhaps I do not understand it correctly, but, in order to adjust with ficker pictures, must one there be announced. My pictures are up: http://www.flickr.com/photos/karlheinz The remainder is simple - only the instructions follow. Karlheinz From wx at w0lta.net Thu May 4 23:05:46 2006 From: wx at w0lta.net (Rick Patterson) Date: Thu May 4 23:05:44 2006 Subject: [wxqc] AR797's frustrations with his neighbors Message-ID: Greetings All, Please take a look at the links bellow. Then please provide any comments, insights or advice on how one deals with life in the jaggies barometer zone. I have contacted one station and asked them to review and calibrate their barometer but that seems to have fallen upon deaf ears. Any other ideas or just ignore the graph and continue to know that the data I am contributing is of par with the local ASOS. Thanks in advance, Rick Patterson w0lta /AR797 http://weather.gladstonefamily.net/site/AR797 http://weather.gladstonefamily.net/site/AR797?baro_date=2006-05-04;days=28;f it=1;asosonly=1 Shameless self plug - http://w0lta.net/weather/Current_Vantage_Pro.htm From James.Dudley at noaa.gov Fri May 5 00:58:13 2006 From: James.Dudley at noaa.gov (James.Dudley@noaa.gov) Date: Fri May 5 00:58:21 2006 Subject: [wxqc] AR797's frustrations with his neighbors Message-ID: Rick, I really don't see any problem with your data. The "check marks" are green, indicating you are in torerlance with most stations. I do see one surrounding station that has a whacked barometric pressure. Yours seems fine. By the way, I like the website. Jim Dudley CW2553 From aam3tva at adelphia.net Fri May 5 05:08:44 2006 From: aam3tva at adelphia.net (Bill Jannisch) Date: Fri May 5 05:09:02 2006 Subject: [wxqc] AR797's frustrations with his neighbors References: Message-ID: <445B161C.000001.00388@COMM-SUPPORT> Rick.. The way I adjusted my barometer was when I adjusted my altitude for the station in which I obtained the information from the nearest national weather service they do work together iin the program, so if one is wrong so is the other Once you get that correct info ,all will be correct. Mapping and cordination is a must for set up or you will just be sending data no one needs !!! Hope this helps Bill aam3tvaweather Va. -------Original Message------- From: Rick Patterson Date: 05/05/06 11:06:56 To: Discussion of weather data quality issues Subject: [wxqc] AR797's frustrations with his neighbors Greetings All, Please take a look at the links bellow. Then please provide any comments, insights or advice on how one deals with life in the jaggies barometer zone. I have contacted one station and asked them to review and calibrate their barometer but that seems to have fallen upon deaf ears. Any other ideas or just ignore the graph and continue to know that the data I am contributing is of par with the local ASOS. Thanks in advance, Rick Patterson w0lta /AR797 http://weather.gladstonefamily.net/site/AR797 http://weather.gladstonefamily.net/site/AR797?baro_date=2006-05-04;days=28;f it=1;asosonly=1 Shameless self plug - http://w0lta.net/weather/Current_Vantage_Pro.htm _______________________________________________ wxqc mailing list wxqc@lists.gladstonefamily.net http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/mailman/listinfo/wxqc The contents of this message are the responsibility of the author. __________ NOD32 1.1521 (20060504) Information __________ This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system. http://www.eset.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/pipermail/wxqc/attachments/20060505/0ce1487a/attachment.html From ken at ubh.com Fri May 5 10:01:11 2006 From: ken at ubh.com (Ken Whelan) Date: Fri May 5 10:01:29 2006 Subject: [wxqc] Barometer readings Message-ID: <4C7058FCA5307C4BBE440C692631B127386724@pig.uhc.cc> I was also having what I believe to be the barometric pressure problem that Steve describes below. I went and took a look at his VP software and I just wanted to drop a note, if you haven't seen his VirtualVP shareware ($30.00) and you are running a Davis Vantage Pro, it would probably benefit you to do so. This little gem will let you multiplex your serial port so you can run more than one piece of software on your Vantage Pro(maximum 4). Because the Davis communication is two way communication, this little piece of software acts as a traffic cop routing the traffic to each piece of software so there are no collisions. It is really pretty cool. One other thing it does that is useful, it gives you health statistics on your wireless connection to the weather station. (how many packets dropped etc). I'd not seen anything else that does this. One other neat trick it does is to allow you to connect over a network as well, converting serial to TCP/IP. Disclaimer. I have never communicated with Steve and he doesn't know me at all, this is not just a shameless plug, this is truly a pretty innovative tool and if you haven't seen it, it is worth looking at. I am new enough to this list, it may well have been discussed previously but I had not seen the topic in the last month or two. Later Ken Whelan CW5627 ________________________________ From: wxqc-bounces@lists.gladstonefamily.net [mailto:wxqc-bounces@lists.gladstonefamily.net] On Behalf Of spamfree Sent: Saturday, April 22, 2006 8:24 AM To: Discussion of weather data quali Subject: Re: [wxqc] Barometer readings Dan, First, the dewpoint and barometer problems are likely unrelated. the dewpoint looks like it might be off because your temperature is off. However, just because your temperature doesn't match doesn't mean its wrong. It could be your microclimate. If your temperature matches pretty well during the night but gets progressively higher than surrounding stations during the day, then you may have a siting problem where your station is getting too much radiated heat from the surface it is over. A the daytime fan add-on can help the temperature sensor during the heat of the day, and it's less expensive than the fan add-on that runs 24 hours. I'm pretty confident that the barometer issue is the sea level vs. altimeter problem. You are at elevation, and it makes this issue much more noticable. Seal level pressure and altimeter are not the same thing. They are both ways of expressing the raw sensor pressure in a way that allows comparison between stations at different altitudes. The altimeter calculation adjusts only for elevation. The sea level pressure calculation adjusts for elevation, temperature and humidity. At higher elevations the two measures can produce quite different results. For example, looking at your nearby NWS station, the altimeter is 30.01 inHG (= 1016.26 mb), and the sea level pressure is 1010.9 mb. APRS/CWOP wants stations to send the altimeter value. The problem for Vantage Pro owners is that the Vantage Pro pressure value is a sea level pressure calculated within the console. As far as APRS/CWOP submissions go, you have 3 choices: 1) calibrate your station to a nearby reliable station's sea level pressure, and send your station's pressure to APRS/CWOP. I think this is what you're doing now. The problem with this is that your pressure will usually be off in the quality check because you're sending sea level pressure instead of altimeter. 2) calibrate your station to a nearby reliable station's altimeter pressure, and send your station's pressure to APRS/CWOP. This is better than #1, but will still cause you problems. Since the VP console uses temperature in its algorithm to calculate reported pressure, your barometer QC will match right after you calibrate it to a nearby altimeter, but as the weather changes and your average daily termperatures change, you will notice your barometer drifting off in the QC. You will find yourself needing to recalibrate your barometer several times a year to compensate for this. 3) calibrate your station to a nearby reliable station's sea level pressure, but use a weather program for APRS/CWOP submissions that calculates the altimeter value from the VP's sea level pressure. There are two programs I know of that do this: WeatherDisplay (http://www.weather-display.com), and my freeware VPLive (http://www.pensom.org/weather/vptools/vplive.html). Since the VP console calculates sea level pressure slightly differently than your nearby NWS station, you might have to do a onetime small calibration change to make your CWOP altimeter match the NWS station's altimeter. I'm in Idaho, and my barometer QC's were pretty bad until I wrote VPLive and started using it to submit the altimeter reading CWOP wants. They've been great since then, especially when compared to the nearby NWS station, and I haven't had to recalibrate as we moved from winter temps into spring temps. If you want to play around with these barometer issues, you can try this freeware pressure calculator made for Vantage Pro owners (http://www.pensom.org/weather/vptools/vppressurecalc.html). Hope this helps. Steve (CW4409) ________________________________ I'm kinda new to this so bear with me if I sound like a rookie. I recently installed a Davis Vantage Pro and looking at the analysis my barometer readings are off quite a bit. I talked to the NWS in Riverton WY and they told me I could set it using the "Sea level" reading on the local airports site ( http://www.crh.noaa.gov/data/obhistory/KRKS.html ) to set my barometer. I've tried this but still get a huge error in my data. I've double checked to make sure that I have the altitude set correctly in my unit so I'm kinda at a loss. My Dewpoint readings are also off.... are they related? Thanks Dan (CW5688) ________________________________ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/pipermail/wxqc/attachments/20060505/0ea65a9f/attachment-0001.html From steve at steveswww.com Fri May 5 11:17:29 2006 From: steve at steveswww.com (saf) Date: Fri May 5 11:17:48 2006 Subject: [wxqc] Data questions Message-ID: I am noticing that the data being reported on my mesowest chart is no longer at even intervals. http://www.met.utah.edu/cgi-bin/droman/meso_base.cgi?stn=c4759. It is showing data at 10, 15 and 20 minute intervals. I upload my data on 5 minute intervals and I think the mesowest previously reported on 15 minute intervals. Question: Is this normal? My uploads at http://www.findu.com/cgi-bin/wx.cgi?call=CW4759 are listed as expected at 5 minute intervals so the variance doesn't appear to be caused by my equipment. Question: Will this inconsistency in recording frequency have anything to do with Quality checks? Question: Can the Regression Analysis from the http://www.met.utah.edu/cgi-bin/droman/meso_base.cgi?stn=c4759 site be used to provide any valuable information for adjustments on my weather station? Example, my daily quality checks show my current barometer settings passing but the Regressive chart shows me slightly high. Last Question: Is there a chart to show the correlation from headings to data in the Daily Quality Reports? I have a good idea of what it is trying to tell us but two lines of headings and two lines of data seem subject to interpretation errors? sample: DATE UTC SITE * ALT * POT TEMP * DEW PNT * DD * FF * (MB) * (DEG F) * (DEG F) * (DEG) * (KNT) 04-MAY-2006 Errs CW4759 * 0/96 * 0/96 * 2/96 * 0/96 * 0/96 04-MAY-2006 Smry CW4759 *0.24(0.81)*0.41(3.13)*-3.2(2.39)*7.96(100.)* 1(1.89) First line..........Errs Date - no problem, easy to understand UTC - Will show UTC time for errors when listed in detail, no question (Yep, I've had errors show up too!) Site - no problem ALT - Altimeter shows zero errors of 96 comparisons POT TEMP - Temp shows zero errors of 96 comparisons (ok, I'm new, what is POT Temp?) DEW PNT - Dew Point show 2 errors of 96 comparisons DD - Wind Direction? shows zero errors of 96 comparisons FF - Don't know what this is... Second line...........Smry (MB) - Millibars? expected .24 (observed .81) assuming this is the difference between what the analysis expected and what it observed? How is it summarized? Average error over 24 hours? (DEG F) - Temp? - expected .41 (observed 3.13) analysis expected a difference of .41 but saw 3.13? (DEG F) - Temp? Dew Point? - -3.12/2.39 says my readings are high? (DEG) - Wind Direction 7.96/100 - I have no idea what this means (KNT) - Wind speed in knots - 1/1.89, again, no idea If there is a location available to us to answer these questions, I haven't found it or noticed it presented to others who have eluded to these questions. I hope asking in this way will be helpful for all of us. Thanks.........Steve Steve Fehlhaber - CW4759 steve@steveswww.com www.steveswww.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/pipermail/wxqc/attachments/20060505/540d828d/attachment.html From radar21 at comcast.net Fri May 5 19:48:30 2006 From: radar21 at comcast.net ([hris }{olmes) Date: Fri May 5 19:48:38 2006 Subject: [wxqc] A better rain gauge? Message-ID: <000001c6709e$6a396d90$6401a8c0@mine0tnred2lxm> http://www.theregister.com/2006/05/05/mobile_mast_meteorology/ New research suggests mobile 3G masts offer a cheap and accurate weather monitoring network. The data, published today in the journal Science, was collected by an Israeli team headed by University of Tel-Aviv professor Hagit Messer-Yaron. Rain, snow, humidity, and other atmospheric conditions affect the strength of electromagnetic signals. Mobile phone operators already collect such data and use the knowledge to boost the network when things turn nasty. The team collated mast strength numbers with recorded precipitation levels. They found that the variation in reception was a better real-time indicator of conditions than current radar techniques. Thanks to the near-ubiquity of cellular networks, mobile mast monitoring is also more widely available, and cheaper than expensive surface rain gauges, they say. The plan now is to up the accuracy even further by taking the affect of users' usage of the network on the signal into account. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/pipermail/wxqc/attachments/20060505/7e925910/attachment.html From philip at gladstonefamily.net Fri May 5 21:13:40 2006 From: philip at gladstonefamily.net (Philip Gladstone) Date: Fri May 5 21:13:54 2006 Subject: [wxqc] Data questions Message-ID: <445BF844.2050102@gladstonefamily.net> saf wrote: > Last Question: Is there a chart to show the correlation from headings > to data in the Daily Quality Reports? I have a good idea of what it is > trying to tell us but two lines of headings and two lines of data seem > subject to interpretation errors? > sample: > > DATE UTC SITE * ALT * POT TEMP * DEW PNT * DD > * FF > * (MB) * (DEG F) * (DEG F) * (DEG) > * (KNT) > 04-MAY-2006 Errs CW4759 * 0/96 * 0/96 * 2/96 * 0/96 > * 0/96 > 04-MAY-2006 Smry CW4759 > *0.24(0.81)*0.41(3.13)*-3.2(2.39)*7.96(100.)* 1(1.89) > > First line..........Errs > > Date - no problem, easy to understand > UTC - Will show UTC time for errors when listed in detail, no question > (Yep, I've had errors show up too!) > Site - no problem > ALT - Altimeter shows zero errors of 96 comparisons > POT TEMP - Temp shows zero errors of 96 comparisons (ok, I'm new, what > is POT Temp?) > DEW PNT - Dew Point show 2 errors of 96 comparisons > DD - Wind Direction? shows zero errors of 96 comparisons > FF - Don't know what this is... > > Second line...........Smry > > (MB) - Millibars? expected .24 (observed .81) assuming this is the > difference between what the analysis expected and what it observed? How > is it summarized? Average error over 24 hours? > (DEG F) - Temp? - expected .41 (observed 3.13) analysis expected a > difference of .41 but saw 3.13? > (DEG F) - Temp? Dew Point? - -3.12/2.39 says my readings are high? > (DEG) - Wind Direction 7.96/100 - I have no idea what this means > (KNT) - Wind speed in knots - 1/1.89, again, no idea POT TEMP is potential temperature. This is a notional temperature that would be experienced at sea level. It makes doing the analysis easier. FF is windspeed in knots. The Smry line contains mean ( std dev ) for that column. Things get a bit easier to read if you switch to the HTML form of the email. Anyway, for temperature, it says, the mean error was 0.41 degrees with a standard deviation of 3.13 degrees. **HOWEVER** I would take these messages with a pinch of salt, and just go and look at the summary page for your site. This allows you to see averages over longer periods of time, and also breaks the temperature down by day and night. For your site, this seems to show that you might have a solar heating problem -- you read (on average) 6 degrees warm during the day and 2 degrees cool during the night. The temperatures shown on your page are *actual* temperatures -- they have been back converted from potential temperatures. Hope this helps. Philip -------------- 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/20060505/d11786fe/smime.bin From mark at markwyman.com Fri May 5 21:16:03 2006 From: mark at markwyman.com (Mark Wyman) Date: Fri May 5 21:18:08 2006 Subject: [wxqc] A better rain gauge? In-Reply-To: <000001c6709e$6a396d90$6401a8c0@mine0tnred2lxm> Message-ID: <20060506011758.A6EC935836F@relay03.roc.ny.frontiernet.net> This will only gauge the rain between the two antennas (transmitter and receiver), and wont give you near as fine a grid as radar does. However it would be a nice supplement to radar estimates since these are closer to the ground. Combine the two for fairly accurate rain fall data. -Mark _____ From: wxqc-bounces@lists.gladstonefamily.net [mailto:wxqc-bounces@lists.gladstonefamily.net] On Behalf Of [hris }{olmes Sent: Friday, May 05, 2006 7:49 PM To: wxqc@lists.gladstonefamily.net Subject: [wxqc] A better rain gauge? HYPERLINK "http://www.theregister.com/2006/05/05/mobile_mast_meteorology/"http://www.t heregister.com/2006/05/05/mobile_mast_meteorology/ New research suggests mobile 3G masts offer a cheap and accurate weather monitoring network. The data, published today in the journal Science, was collected by an Israeli team headed by University of Tel-Aviv professor Hagit Messer-Yaron. Rain, snow, humidity, and other atmospheric conditions affect the strength of electromagnetic signals. Mobile phone operators already collect such data and use the knowledge to boost the network when things turn nasty. The team collated mast strength numbers with recorded precipitation levels. They found that the variation in reception was a better real-time indicator of conditions than current radar techniques. Thanks to the near-ubiquity of cellular networks, mobile mast monitoring is also more widely available, and cheaper than expensive surface rain gauges, they say. The plan now is to up the accuracy even further by taking the affect of users' usage of the network on the signal into account. -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.392 / Virus Database: 268.5.4/332 - Release Date: 5/4/2006 -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.392 / Virus Database: 268.5.4/332 - Release Date: 5/4/2006 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/pipermail/wxqc/attachments/20060505/b436d736/attachment.html From gerry.creager at tamu.edu Sat May 6 01:59:34 2006 From: gerry.creager at tamu.edu (Gerry Creager N5JXS) Date: Sat May 6 02:00:23 2006 Subject: [wxqc] A better rain gauge? In-Reply-To: <20060506011758.A6EC935836F@relay03.roc.ny.frontiernet.net> References: <20060506011758.A6EC935836F@relay03.roc.ny.frontiernet.net> Message-ID: <445C3B46.9030604@tamu.edu> Actually, there are some good signal processing projects using cellular backscatter that have proven the detectability of 'stealth' aircraft. Off the top of my head, I cannot see a good reason why a decent processing algorithm couldn't be developed to use this process for precipitation. NOW: Cellular sites are not near-ubiquitous in rural America, so it's less likely that watersheds would benefit o much as the urban regions, but that could still provide a real benefit. And, lest you think radar can't be done on that scale, the CASA project proposes 10 GHz cellular radars with intelligent signal control to preovent interference, placed on cellular towers. For urban coverage. While we're at it, the current binning for reflectivity is 1x1 km. We anticipate NWS will complete the change to 250x250 meter resolution... if my memory isn't fleeing! ... by the end of the current fiscal year. gerry Mark Wyman wrote: > This will only gauge the rain between the two antennas (transmitter and > receiver), and wont give you near as fine a grid as radar does. However > it would be a nice supplement to radar estimates since these are closer > to the ground. Combine the two for fairly accurate rain fall data. > > > > -Mark > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > *From:* wxqc-bounces@lists.gladstonefamily.net > [mailto:wxqc-bounces@lists.gladstonefamily.net] *On Behalf Of *[hris }{olmes > *Sent:* Friday, May 05, 2006 7:49 PM > *To:* wxqc@lists.gladstonefamily.net > *Subject:* [wxqc] A better rain gauge? > > > > http://www.theregister.com/2006/05/05/mobile_mast_meteorology/ > > New research suggests mobile 3G masts offer a cheap and accurate > weather monitoring network. > > The data, published today in the journal Science, was collected by an > Israeli team headed by University of Tel-Aviv professor Hagit > Messer-Yaron. > > Rain, snow, humidity, and other atmospheric conditions affect the > strength of electromagnetic signals. Mobile phone operators already > collect such data and use the knowledge to boost the network when > things turn nasty. > > The team collated mast strength numbers with recorded precipitation > levels. They found that the variation in reception was a better > real-time indicator of conditions than current radar techniques. > > Thanks to the near-ubiquity of cellular networks, mobile mast > monitoring is also more widely available, and cheaper than expensive > surface rain gauges, they say. > > The plan now is to up the accuracy even further by taking the affect > of users' usage of the network on the signal into account. > > > -- > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > Version: 7.1.392 / Virus Database: 268.5.4/332 - Release Date: 5/4/2006 > > > -- > No virus found in this outgoing message. > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > Version: 7.1.392 / Virus Database: 268.5.4/332 - Release Date: 5/4/2006 > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > wxqc mailing list > wxqc@lists.gladstonefamily.net > http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/mailman/listinfo/wxqc > > The contents of this message are the responsibility of the author. -- Gerry Creager -- gerry.creager@tamu.edu Texas Mesonet -- AATLT, Texas A&M University Cell: 979.229.5301 Office: 979.458.4020 FAX: 979.862.3983 Office: 1700 Research Parkway Ste 160, TAMU, College Station, TX 77843 From jjmcnelly at cablespeed.com Sat May 6 19:11:26 2006 From: jjmcnelly at cablespeed.com (James & Julie McNelly) Date: Sat May 6 19:11:25 2006 Subject: [wxqc] Humidity/Dew Point Message-ID: What are some things that I can do to get my humidity readings closer to the analysis readings? I have put my sensor in a homemade Stevenson Screen and have it located about 60" above the ground. My temperatures have stabilized since adding the screen, but I cannot get the correct humidity readings. I am suspecting that it may just be my equipment. I have a LaCrosse ws-2308. I am going to aspirate my screen with a solar fan as soon as I get it. Any ideas? James CW5298 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/pipermail/wxqc/attachments/20060506/03d0f38a/attachment.html From weather at mulveyfamily.com Sat May 6 22:14:15 2006 From: weather at mulveyfamily.com (Rich Mulvey) Date: Sat May 6 22:14:28 2006 Subject: [wxqc] Humidity/Dew Point In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <445D57F7.2070208@mulveyfamily.com> James & Julie McNelly wrote: > > What are some things that I can do to get my humidity readings closer > to the analysis readings? I have put my sensor in a homemade Stevenson > Screen and have it located about 60? above the ground. My temperatures > have stabilized since adding the screen, but I cannot get the correct > humidity readings. I am suspecting that it may just be my equipment. I > have a LaCrosse ws-2308. I am going to aspirate my screen with a solar > fan as soon as I get it. Any ideas? > The goal isn't to match the analysis readings - the goal is to have accurate data. :-) You may very well be in a micro-climate in which the humidity readings are correct. In my case, for example, I'm in a narrow stream valley, and my dewpoint readings are *always* flagged as bad. Nonetheless, they're also totally accurate, when I measure independently using a precision thermometer and sling psychrometer. There seems to be a huge amount of concern on the wx list about making sure that stations agree with the analysis - and that's simply the wrong approach. The analysis is, and will always be, an approximation of reality that doesn't necessarily derive correct results for all stations. There are just too many potential variables that must be accomodated. The analysis is useful to spot trends and flag potential problems - but just because it indicates that your readings are bad doesn't mean that they're bad. To determine that, you need independent confirmation of the values you generate. - Rich From Weather at pdfamily.com Sun May 7 10:54:41 2006 From: Weather at pdfamily.com (Milford Weather) Date: Sun May 7 10:54:46 2006 Subject: [wxqc] Humidity/Dew Point In-Reply-To: <445D57F7.2070208@mulveyfamily.com> Message-ID: <200605071454.k47EsfR12047@plus41.host4u.net> I have to agree with Rich; the goal is to report accurate readings for your location. On calm nights I frequently get a temperature bump around 4am that I do not see on any other station in my area. I live on the side of a hill and attribute it to the cold air settling into the valley and forcing the warmer air upward. I have spent a career of engineering and calibration and maintain my station as accurately as possible so the results are accurate and true. If that is done by each of us, the data will be a true representation of the conditions at our own locations, which is what I see as the goal. Paul CW3414 Weather Spotter http://www.PDfamily.com/weather The goal isn't to match the analysis readings - the goal is to have accurate data. :-) You may very well be in a micro-climate in which the humidity readings are correct. In my case, for example, I'm in a narrow stream valley, and my dewpoint readings are *always* flagged as bad. Nonetheless, they're also totally accurate, when I measure independently using a precision thermometer and sling psychrometer. There seems to be a huge amount of concern on the wx list about making sure that stations agree with the analysis - and that's simply the wrong approach. The analysis is, and will always be, an approximation of reality that doesn't necessarily derive correct results for all stations. There are just too many potential variables that must be accomodated. The analysis is useful to spot trends and flag potential problems - but just because it indicates that your readings are bad doesn't mean that they're bad. To determine that, you need independent confirmation of the values you generate. - Rich _______________________________________________ wxqc mailing list wxqc@lists.gladstonefamily.net http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/mailman/listinfo/wxqc The contents of this message are the responsibility of the author. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/pipermail/wxqc/attachments/20060507/291b08c0/attachment.html From sniadoch at frontiernet.net Sun May 7 11:43:33 2006 From: sniadoch at frontiernet.net (Hank Sniadoch) Date: Sun May 7 11:43:46 2006 Subject: [wxqc] Humidity/Dew Point In-Reply-To: <200605071454.k47EsfR12047@plus41.host4u.net> References: <200605071454.k47EsfR12047@plus41.host4u.net> Message-ID: <445E15A5.4030108@frontiernet.net> That's why I don't change my readings to agree with the analysis. My station(s) are at 1400 ft and typically I get cold air settling .... last night I matched the coldest readings in NY but I know my readings are accurate since I calibrate my stations with thermometers (I have 2) that are calibrated and accurate to within 0.1 degrees .... (cost $300 each) .... sometimes I'm 10-15 degrees colder than a mountaintop 3-4 miles away from me .... I can't believe microclimates !!!! Milford Weather wrote: > I have to agree with Rich; the goal is to report accurate readings for > /your/ location. On calm nights I frequently get a temperature bump > around 4am that I do not see on any other station in my area. I live > on the side of a hill and attribute it to the cold air settling into > the valley and forcing the warmer air upward. I have spent a career > of engineering and calibration and maintain my station as accurately > as possible so the results are accurate and true. If that is done by > each of us, the data will be a true representation of the conditions > at our own locations, which is what I see as the goal. > > > > Paul > > > > CW3414 > > Weather Spotter > > http://www.PDfamily.com/weather > > > > The goal isn't to match the analysis readings - the goal is to have > > accurate data. :-) > > > > You may very well be in a micro-climate in which the humidity readings > > are correct. In my case, for example, I'm in a narrow stream valley, and > > my dewpoint readings are *always* flagged as bad. Nonetheless, they're > > also totally accurate, when I measure independently using a precision > > thermometer and sling psychrometer. > > > > There seems to be a huge amount of concern on the wx list about making > > sure that stations agree with the analysis - and that's simply the wrong > > approach. The analysis is, and will always be, an approximation of > > reality that doesn't necessarily derive correct results for all > > stations. There are just too many potential variables that must be > > accomodated. The analysis is useful to spot trends and flag potential > > problems - but just because it indicates that your readings are bad > > doesn't mean that they're bad. To determine that, you need independent > > confirmation of the values you generate. > > > > - Rich > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > wxqc mailing list > > wxqc@lists.gladstonefamily.net > > http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/mailman/listinfo/wxqc > > > > The contents of this message are the responsibility of the author. > >------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >_______________________________________________ >wxqc mailing list >wxqc@lists.gladstonefamily.net >http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/mailman/listinfo/wxqc > >The contents of this message are the responsibility of the author. > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/pipermail/wxqc/attachments/20060507/1a1f1d1a/attachment-0001.html From sam at wa4phy.net Sun May 7 11:49:26 2006 From: sam at wa4phy.net (Sam Drinkard) Date: Sun May 7 11:49:31 2006 Subject: [wxqc] Shameless plug Message-ID: <445E1706.8030807@wa4phy.net> I've updated my website, and added the output from the WRF model I run localy here. Right now, only the 12z model run is available, but hopefully I can add the 00z run as time permits. There is also a link to AMET, which is a meteorological statistical analysis program that tracks the difference between the model output and the data as received by madis. Most features work, with the exception of the precip, which I hope can be available soon as well. The current local conditions are also shown and auto-refresh once per minute. http://wa4phy.net Sam From steve_03222 at yahoo.com Sun May 7 14:47:04 2006 From: steve_03222 at yahoo.com (Steve Gunn) Date: Sun May 7 14:47:11 2006 Subject: [wxqc] Humidity/Dew Point Message-ID: <20060507184705.61110.qmail@web54208.mail.yahoo.com> You mentioned tha you had a LaCrosse Weather Station. Well, I too have one and have difficulty with my Humidity/Dew Point. Now I do agree with the fact that accuracy is the main goal, but I do believe that Lacrosse has a problem. If you go to Wunderground and pick almost any area, go to the google map of PWS and I bet you can pick out the Lacrosse Stations by just looking at their readings. Lacrosse appears to read high in high humidity conditions and extremely low in lower humidity situations. It would be easy to say it is a microclimate situation, but with a Lacrosse Station, I would have to say the LaCrosse is at fault. I really like my Lacrosse 2310, except for the Dew Point/Humidity Readings. I have sent my thermo/Hydro unit back tyo Lacrosse and received a replacement that acted exactly as the previuos unit. WhenI contact them again, their answer is to send the unit back for testing at a cost of $35. Then they will sell you another unit that does the same thing. Steve __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From rmauser at gci.net Sun May 7 16:30:08 2006 From: rmauser at gci.net (rich mauser) Date: Sun May 7 16:30:48 2006 Subject: [wxqc] RE: wxqc Digest, Vol 19, Issue 8 In-Reply-To: <0IYW00DHJJT59KF0@msgmta-3.gci.net> Message-ID: <000601c67215$08e4a640$6601a8c0@jig2> I agree with both of the other statements. I use to pull my hair out about matching the analysis. Rich (4419 - Eagle River, Alaska) -----Original Message----- From: wxqc-bounces@lists.gladstonefamily.net [mailto:wxqc-bounces@lists.gladstonefamily.net] On Behalf Of wxqc-request@lists.gladstonefamily.net Sent: Sunday, May 07, 2006 7:46 AM To: wxqc@lists.gladstonefamily.net Subject: wxqc Digest, Vol 19, Issue 8 Send wxqc mailing list submissions to wxqc@lists.gladstonefamily.net To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/mailman/listinfo/wxqc or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to wxqc-request@lists.gladstonefamily.net You can reach the person managing the list at wxqc-owner@lists.gladstonefamily.net When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of wxqc digest..." Today's Topics: 1. Humidity/Dew Point (James & Julie McNelly) 2. Re: Humidity/Dew Point (Rich Mulvey) 3. RE: Humidity/Dew Point (Milford Weather) 4. Re: Humidity/Dew Point (Hank Sniadoch) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Sat, 6 May 2006 16:11:26 -0700 From: "James & Julie McNelly" Subject: [wxqc] Humidity/Dew Point To: Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" What are some things that I can do to get my humidity readings closer to the analysis readings? I have put my sensor in a homemade Stevenson Screen and have it located about 60" above the ground. My temperatures have stabilized since adding the screen, but I cannot get the correct humidity readings. I am suspecting that it may just be my equipment. I have a LaCrosse ws-2308. I am going to aspirate my screen with a solar fan as soon as I get it. Any ideas? James CW5298 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/pipermail/wxqc/attachments/20060506/03 d0f38a/attachment-0001.html ------------------------------ Message: 2 Date: Sat, 06 May 2006 22:14:15 -0400 From: Rich Mulvey Subject: Re: [wxqc] Humidity/Dew Point To: Discussion of weather data quality issues Message-ID: <445D57F7.2070208@mulveyfamily.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed James & Julie McNelly wrote: > > What are some things that I can do to get my humidity readings closer > to the analysis readings? I have put my sensor in a homemade Stevenson > Screen and have it located about 60 above the ground. My temperatures > have stabilized since adding the screen, but I cannot get the correct > humidity readings. I am suspecting that it may just be my equipment. I > have a LaCrosse ws-2308. I am going to aspirate my screen with a solar > fan as soon as I get it. Any ideas? > The goal isn't to match the analysis readings - the goal is to have accurate data. :-) You may very well be in a micro-climate in which the humidity readings are correct. In my case, for example, I'm in a narrow stream valley, and my dewpoint readings are *always* flagged as bad. Nonetheless, they're also totally accurate, when I measure independently using a precision thermometer and sling psychrometer. There seems to be a huge amount of concern on the wx list about making sure that stations agree with the analysis - and that's simply the wrong approach. The analysis is, and will always be, an approximation of reality that doesn't necessarily derive correct results for all stations. There are just too many potential variables that must be accomodated. The analysis is useful to spot trends and flag potential problems - but just because it indicates that your readings are bad doesn't mean that they're bad. To determine that, you need independent confirmation of the values you generate. - Rich ------------------------------ Message: 3 Date: Sun, 7 May 2006 10:54:41 -0400 From: "Milford Weather" Subject: RE: [wxqc] Humidity/Dew Point To: "'Discussion of weather data quality issues'" Message-ID: <200605071454.k47EsfR12047@plus41.host4u.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" I have to agree with Rich; the goal is to report accurate readings for your location. On calm nights I frequently get a temperature bump around 4am that I do not see on any other station in my area. I live on the side of a hill and attribute it to the cold air settling into the valley and forcing the warmer air upward. I have spent a career of engineering and calibration and maintain my station as accurately as possible so the results are accurate and true. If that is done by each of us, the data will be a true representation of the conditions at our own locations, which is what I see as the goal. Paul CW3414 Weather Spotter http://www.PDfamily.com/weather The goal isn't to match the analysis readings - the goal is to have accurate data. :-) You may very well be in a micro-climate in which the humidity readings are correct. In my case, for example, I'm in a narrow stream valley, and my dewpoint readings are *always* flagged as bad. Nonetheless, they're also totally accurate, when I measure independently using a precision thermometer and sling psychrometer. There seems to be a huge amount of concern on the wx list about making sure that stations agree with the analysis - and that's simply the wrong approach. The analysis is, and will always be, an approximation of reality that doesn't necessarily derive correct results for all stations. There are just too many potential variables that must be accomodated. The analysis is useful to spot trends and flag potential problems - but just because it indicates that your readings are bad doesn't mean that they're bad. To determine that, you need independent confirmation of the values you generate. - Rich _______________________________________________ wxqc mailing list wxqc@lists.gladstonefamily.net http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/mailman/listinfo/wxqc The contents of this message are the responsibility of the author. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/pipermail/wxqc/attachments/20060507/29 1b08c0/attachment-0001.html ------------------------------ Message: 4 Date: Sun, 07 May 2006 11:43:33 -0400 From: Hank Sniadoch Subject: Re: [wxqc] Humidity/Dew Point To: Discussion of weather data quality issues Message-ID: <445E15A5.4030108@frontiernet.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" That's why I don't change my readings to agree with the analysis. My station(s) are at 1400 ft and typically I get cold air settling .... last night I matched the coldest readings in NY but I know my readings are accurate since I calibrate my stations with thermometers (I have 2) that are calibrated and accurate to within 0.1 degrees .... (cost $300 each) .... sometimes I'm 10-15 degrees colder than a mountaintop 3-4 miles away from me .... I can't believe microclimates !!!! Milford Weather wrote: > I have to agree with Rich; the goal is to report accurate readings for > /your/ location. On calm nights I frequently get a temperature bump > around 4am that I do not see on any other station in my area. I live > on the side of a hill and attribute it to the cold air settling into > the valley and forcing the warmer air upward. I have spent a career > of engineering and calibration and maintain my station as accurately > as possible so the results are accurate and true. If that is done by > each of us, the data will be a true representation of the conditions > at our own locations, which is what I see as the goal. > > > > Paul > > > > CW3414 > > Weather Spotter > > http://www.PDfamily.com/weather > > > > The goal isn't to match the analysis readings - the goal is to have > > accurate data. :-) > > > > You may very well be in a micro-climate in which the humidity readings > > are correct. In my case, for example, I'm in a narrow stream valley, and > > my dewpoint readings are *always* flagged as bad. Nonetheless, they're > > also totally accurate, when I measure independently using a precision > > thermometer and sling psychrometer. > > > > There seems to be a huge amount of concern on the wx list about making > > sure that stations agree with the analysis - and that's simply the wrong > > approach. The analysis is, and will always be, an approximation of > > reality that doesn't necessarily derive correct results for all > > stations. There are just too many potential variables that must be > > accomodated. The analysis is useful to spot trends and flag potential > > problems - but just because it indicates that your readings are bad > > doesn't mean that they're bad. To determine that, you need independent > > confirmation of the values you generate. > > > > - Rich > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > wxqc mailing list > > wxqc@lists.gladstonefamily.net > > http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/mailman/listinfo/wxqc > > > > The contents of this message are the responsibility of the author. > >------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >_______________________________________________ >wxqc mailing list >wxqc@lists.gladstonefamily.net >http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/mailman/listinfo/wxqc > >The contents of this message are the responsibility of the author. > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/pipermail/wxqc/attachments/20060507/1a 1f1d1a/attachment.html ------------------------------ _______________________________________________ wxqc mailing list wxqc@lists.gladstonefamily.net http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/mailman/listinfo/wxqc The contents of these messages are the responsibility of the author(s). End of wxqc Digest, Vol 19, Issue 8 *********************************** From tim5719 at chartermi.net Sun May 7 18:12:44 2006 From: tim5719 at chartermi.net (Tim Crummel) Date: Sun May 7 18:12:38 2006 Subject: [wxqc] Humidity/Dew Point In-Reply-To: <20060507184705.61110.qmail@web54208.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <000001c67223$5dd52770$6400a8c0@EMACHINE> HI, I have a Lacrosse 3610 as well as two old heathkit units which I calibrate yearly with two 300$ reference Units. Surprisingly the 3610 seems to be quite accurate however the 2310 does have a problem with humidity. But at night my heathkit units do read higher then others due to my area being surrounded by three lakes so do take the dew point readings with a grain of salt see how you compare in the day around noon or when your readings are around 50% to see. -----Original Message----- From: wxqc-bounces@lists.gladstonefamily.net [mailto:wxqc-bounces@lists.gladstonefamily.net] On Behalf Of Steve Gunn Sent: Sunday, May 07, 2006 2:47 PM To: wxqc@lists.gladstonefamily.net Subject: [wxqc] Humidity/Dew Point You mentioned tha you had a LaCrosse Weather Station. Well, I too have one and have difficulty with my Humidity/Dew Point. Now I do agree with the fact that accuracy is the main goal, but I do believe that Lacrosse has a problem. If you go to Wunderground and pick almost any area, go to the google map of PWS and I bet you can pick out the Lacrosse Stations by just looking at their readings. Lacrosse appears to read high in high humidity conditions and extremely low in lower humidity situations. It would be easy to say it is a microclimate situation, but with a Lacrosse Station, I would have to say the LaCrosse is at fault. I really like my Lacrosse 2310, except for the Dew Point/Humidity Readings. I have sent my thermo/Hydro unit back tyo Lacrosse and received a replacement that acted exactly as the previuos unit. WhenI contact them again, their answer is to send the unit back for testing at a cost of $35. Then they will sell you another unit that does the same thing. Steve __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com _______________________________________________ wxqc mailing list wxqc@lists.gladstonefamily.net http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/mailman/listinfo/wxqc The contents of this message are the responsibility of the author. -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.392 / Virus Database: 268.5.5/333 - Release Date: 5/5/2006 -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.392 / Virus Database: 268.5.5/333 - Release Date: 5/5/2006 From starjunkie at comcast.net Sun May 7 23:55:06 2006 From: starjunkie at comcast.net (Mike Albrecht) Date: Sun May 7 23:55:21 2006 Subject: [wxqc] Possible sensor failure - bad data Message-ID: <445EC11A.9080003@comcast.net> Hello folks, My outside humidity sensor has possibly failed as of this morning. What is the proper thing to do at this point in regards the data being sent to CWOP? Should I just cease sending all data until the problem is fixed or is there a way to send partial data without including the incorrect/faulty values? I discovered the problem a little earlier today and have finished troubleshooting as far as I can go so have now stopped sending data. The humidity data since this morning (I can be more precise with a little checking) that has been sent has been faulty. All other values are, and continue to be (knock on wood), OK. Any help is appreciated. Mike Albrecht -- Grayland Weather & Astronomy Website CWOP ID: CW3507 WeatherUnderground: KWAGRAYL3 -=-=- To find the universal elements enough; to find the air and the water exhilarating; to be refreshed by a morning walk or an evening saunter... to be thrilled by the stars at night; to be elated over a bird's nest or a wildflower in spring - these are some of the rewards of the simple life. -John Burroughs, naturalist and writer (1837-1921) From jjmcnelly at cablespeed.com Mon May 8 21:38:06 2006 From: jjmcnelly at cablespeed.com (James & Julie McNelly) Date: Mon May 8 21:37:49 2006 Subject: [wxqc] Humidity/Dew Point In-Reply-To: <20060507184705.61110.qmail@web54208.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: I am going to get a sling psychrometer and use a psychrometric chart to determine what the RH should be over a couple of days and then see if I can somehow calibrate it using my Weather Display software settings. Jim -----Original Message----- From: Steve Gunn [mailto:steve_03222@yahoo.com] Sent: Sunday, May 07, 2006 11:47 AM To: wxqc@lists.gladstonefamily.net Subject: [wxqc] Humidity/Dew Point You mentioned tha you had a LaCrosse Weather Station. Well, I too have one and have difficulty with my Humidity/Dew Point. Now I do agree with the fact that accuracy is the main goal, but I do believe that Lacrosse has a problem. If you go to Wunderground and pick almost any area, go to the google map of PWS and I bet you can pick out the Lacrosse Stations by just looking at their readings. Lacrosse appears to read high in high humidity conditions and extremely low in lower humidity situations. It would be easy to say it is a microclimate situation, but with a Lacrosse Station, I would have to say the LaCrosse is at fault. I really like my Lacrosse 2310, except for the Dew Point/Humidity Readings. I have sent my thermo/Hydro unit back tyo Lacrosse and received a replacement that acted exactly as the previuos unit. WhenI contact them again, their answer is to send the unit back for testing at a cost of $35. Then they will sell you another unit that does the same thing. Steve __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From jimwc at frontiernet.net Wed May 10 10:47:04 2006 From: jimwc at frontiernet.net (jim) Date: Wed May 10 10:47:06 2006 Subject: [wxqc] Sling Psychrometer Message-ID: Anyone I just received my Sling Psychrometer from Ben Meadows. It seams relatively easy to use. My question is. Is there a proper technique to get the most accurate readings? should the readings be taken in the sun or shade (I'm thinking shade)? is there a website I can download a Humidity Chart should I need to replace the one that came with the Psychrometer? Jim Crumly CW4367 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/pipermail/wxqc/attachments/20060510/64adbdf7/attachment.html From sniadoch at frontiernet.net Wed May 10 11:01:04 2006 From: sniadoch at frontiernet.net (Hank Sniadoch) Date: Wed May 10 11:01:13 2006 Subject: [wxqc] Sling Psychrometer In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <44620030.1080408@frontiernet.net> Shade is right. You must keep taking readings until the wet bulb temperature is the lowest of all the wet bulb readings and stops dropping. Keep track of the dry bulb temperature and make sure it isn't going up .... if that's the case, rewet the wet bulb thermometer and start over .... jim wrote: > Anyone > > I just received my Sling Psychrometer from Ben Meadows. It seams > relatively easy to use. > My question is. Is there a proper technique to get the most accurate > readings? should the readings be taken in the sun or shade (I'm > thinking shade)? > is there a website I can download a Humidity Chart should I need to > replace the one that came with the Psychrometer? > > Jim Crumly > CW4367 > > >------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >_______________________________________________ >wxqc mailing list >wxqc@lists.gladstonefamily.net >http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/mailman/listinfo/wxqc > >The contents of this message are the responsibility of the author. > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/pipermail/wxqc/attachments/20060510/c67cdce4/attachment.html From flcyclone at tampabay.rr.com Wed May 10 12:12:40 2006 From: flcyclone at tampabay.rr.com (Thomas Giella KN4LF) Date: Wed May 10 12:12:57 2006 Subject: [wxqc] Sling Psychrometer References: <20060510160058.34DFF5CC65@willers.employees.org> Message-ID: <000b01c6744c$8fcdbf00$6401a8c0@thomas> Skipped content of type multipart/alternative-------------- next part -------------- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.392 / Virus Database: 268.5.5/335 - Release Date: 5/9/2006 From steve_03222 at yahoo.com Wed May 10 12:18:28 2006 From: steve_03222 at yahoo.com (Steve Gunn) Date: Wed May 10 12:18:31 2006 Subject: [wxqc] Dew Point Vs Humidity Message-ID: <20060510161828.43140.qmail@web54212.mail.yahoo.com> I am CW5443. Could someone that understands the QC charts take a look at my chart for yesterday 5/9/06 and explain what looks to me like a humidity charts that's not too bad and a dew point chart that to me looks bad. The temperature & pressure seem OK. I see large spikes in the Analysis, not sure what that means. Maybe I am looking at them incorrectly or seeing more than is really there. Also, while there could someone look at my long term chart and give me their opinion on what it tells them. I would appreciate this as I am trying to learn more about these charts. Steve __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From ken at ubh.com Wed May 10 22:58:29 2006 From: ken at ubh.com (Ken Whelan) Date: Wed May 10 22:58:35 2006 Subject: [wxqc] CW5627 Message-ID: <4C7058FCA5307C4BBE440C692631B127386769@pig.uhc.cc> For some unknown reason, CW5627 sent a few incorrect barometer readings today (5/10). The pressure jumped super high and then dropped back down to its correct readings. Is there any way to fix this information so it doesn't affect my readings in the future? This is the first time I have seen this happen. It was definitely the weather station that did this. Two different pieces of software picked up the same readings. Thanks. From philip at gladstonefamily.net Wed May 10 23:07:06 2006 From: philip at gladstonefamily.net (Philip Gladstone) Date: Wed May 10 23:07:21 2006 Subject: [wxqc] CW5627 In-Reply-To: <4C7058FCA5307C4BBE440C692631B127386769@pig.uhc.cc> References: <4C7058FCA5307C4BBE440C692631B127386769@pig.uhc.cc> Message-ID: <4462AA5A.7070406@gladstonefamily.net> Ken Whelan wrote: >For some unknown reason, CW5627 sent a few incorrect barometer readings >today (5/10). The pressure jumped super high and then dropped back >down to its correct readings. Is there any way to fix this information >so it doesn't affect my readings in the future? This is the first time >I have seen this happen. It was definitely the weather station that did >this. Two different pieces of software picked up the same readings. > >Thanks. > > > I've deleted today's summary record from my database. This means that it will not affect your green check mark. 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: 3389 bytes Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature Url : http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/pipermail/wxqc/attachments/20060510/7633d84c/smime.bin From gerry.creager at tamu.edu Wed May 10 23:08:24 2006 From: gerry.creager at tamu.edu (Gerry Creager N5JXS) Date: Wed May 10 23:08:35 2006 Subject: [wxqc] CW5627 In-Reply-To: <4C7058FCA5307C4BBE440C692631B127386769@pig.uhc.cc> References: <4C7058FCA5307C4BBE440C692631B127386769@pig.uhc.cc> Message-ID: <4462AAA8.5060501@tamu.edu> What significant meteorological phenomena occurred there today? Or, did someone do some electrical work near your barometer? C3927 also saw a spike at about the same time. This was followed by a decrease in ALT. Suggests something happened in the area and your sensor just decided to extend the excursion. gerry Ken Whelan wrote: > For some unknown reason, CW5627 sent a few incorrect barometer readings > today (5/10). The pressure jumped super high and then dropped back > down to its correct readings. Is there any way to fix this information > so it doesn't affect my readings in the future? This is the first time > I have seen this happen. It was definitely the weather station that did > this. Two different pieces of software picked up the same readings. > > Thanks. > > _______________________________________________ > wxqc mailing list > wxqc@lists.gladstonefamily.net > http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/mailman/listinfo/wxqc > > The contents of this message are the responsibility of the author. -- Gerry Creager -- gerry.creager@tamu.edu Texas Mesonet -- AATLT, Texas A&M University Cell: 979.229.5301 Office: 979.458.4020 FAX: 979.862.3983 Office: 1700 Research Parkway Ste 160, TAMU, College Station, TX 77843 From philip at gladstonefamily.net Wed May 10 23:19:19 2006 From: philip at gladstonefamily.net (Philip Gladstone) Date: Wed May 10 23:19:29 2006 Subject: [wxqc] CW5627 In-Reply-To: <4462AAA8.5060501@tamu.edu> References: <4C7058FCA5307C4BBE440C692631B127386769@pig.uhc.cc> <4462AAA8.5060501@tamu.edu> Message-ID: <4462AD37.5090003@gladstonefamily.net> Gerry Creager N5JXS wrote: > What significant meteorological phenomena occurred there today? Or, > did someone do some electrical work near your barometer? > > C3927 also saw a spike at about the same time. This was followed by a > decrease in ALT. Suggests something happened in the area and your > sensor just decided to extend the excursion. > > gerry > > Actually, a bunch of stations in that area saw something odd -- including KFYV, KXNA, CW4438, etc. Something pretty radical moved through....... 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: 3389 bytes Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature Url : http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/pipermail/wxqc/attachments/20060510/f8f6e977/smime-0001.bin From ken at ubh.com Thu May 11 00:02:33 2006 From: ken at ubh.com (Ken Whelan) Date: Thu May 11 00:02:40 2006 Subject: [wxqc] CW5627 Message-ID: <4C7058FCA5307C4BBE440C692631B12738676A@pig.uhc.cc> There were some storms coming through around that time. Best guess is a lightning strike but I wasn't watching close enough to correlate. I hope it is not an intermittent hardware issue that crops up again. I can say for sure that C3927 is nowhere close to the spike mine saw. Mine went from 1004mb to 1098mb and back down to 1004 in about 30 minutes. I'm quite certain the actual pressure didn't change that much. Thanks. kw -----Original Message----- From: wxqc-bounces@lists.gladstonefamily.net [mailto:wxqc-bounces@lists.gladstonefamily.net] On Behalf Of Gerry Creager N5JXS Sent: Wednesday, May 10, 2006 10:08 PM To: Discussion of weather data quality issues Subject: Re: [wxqc] CW5627 What significant meteorological phenomena occurred there today? Or, did someone do some electrical work near your barometer? C3927 also saw a spike at about the same time. This was followed by a decrease in ALT. Suggests something happened in the area and your sensor just decided to extend the excursion. gerry Ken Whelan wrote: > For some unknown reason, CW5627 sent a few incorrect barometer readings > today (5/10). The pressure jumped super high and then dropped back > down to its correct readings. Is there any way to fix this information > so it doesn't affect my readings in the future? This is the first time > I have seen this happen. It was definitely the weather station that did > this. Two different pieces of software picked up the same readings. > > Thanks. > > _______________________________________________ > wxqc mailing list > wxqc@lists.gladstonefamily.net > http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/mailman/listinfo/wxqc > > The contents of this message are the responsibility of the author. -- Gerry Creager -- gerry.creager@tamu.edu Texas Mesonet -- AATLT, Texas A&M University Cell: 979.229.5301 Office: 979.458.4020 FAX: 979.862.3983 Office: 1700 Research Parkway Ste 160, TAMU, College Station, TX 77843 _______________________________________________ wxqc mailing list wxqc@lists.gladstonefamily.net http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/mailman/listinfo/wxqc The contents of this message are the responsibility of the author. From flcyclone at tampabay.rr.com Thu May 11 00:15:24 2006 From: flcyclone at tampabay.rr.com (Thomas Giella KN4LF) Date: Thu May 11 00:15:38 2006 Subject: [wxqc] My Email Post? Message-ID: <005001c674b1$86a8ca40$6401a8c0@thomas> Skipped content of type multipart/alternative-------------- next part -------------- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.392 / Virus Database: 268.5.5/335 - Release Date: 5/9/2006 From wolfstalks at gmail.com Thu May 11 00:22:19 2006 From: wolfstalks at gmail.com (Bob Johnson) Date: Thu May 11 00:22:22 2006 Subject: [wxqc] My Email Post? In-Reply-To: <005001c674b1$86a8ca40$6401a8c0@thomas> References: <005001c674b1$86a8ca40$6401a8c0@thomas> Message-ID: Tom, I received your post earlier today as follows, if there was another then I didn't see it... From: Thomas Giella KN4LF Reply-To: Discussion of weather data quality issues To: wxqc@lists.gladstonefamily.net Date: May 10, 2006 12:12 PM Subject: [wxqc] Sling Psychrometer Jim, You use it in direct sunlight as the rotation of the thermometers will counteract any direct insolation error. Shade readings will be just as inaccurate as placing an instrument shelter under a tree or on the north side of a building or structure. Shade readings will be lower temperature wise and higher dewpoint and relative humidity wise. If your Stevenson Screen instrument shelter is properly constructed and exposed, then direct sun readings from a sling psychrometer will be the same. Take Care, Thomas F. Giella, KN4LF Retired Meteorologist & Space Plasma Physicist Lakeland, FL, USA flycylone@tampabay.rr.com NWS Tampa Bay, FL SKYWARN Observer #POL-10A Lakeland, FL NWS CWOP Weather Station #AR692/KN4LF 3 Second Data: http://www.kn4lf.com/index1.html Lakeland, FL NWS CWOP Weather Station #AR692/KN4LF 3 Minute Data: http://www.kn4lf.com/index.htm Lakeland, FL Daily Climatological Weather Data Archive Blog: http://www.kn4lf.com/kn4lf22.htm Florida Daily Weather Discussion: http://www.kn4lf.com/flwx1.htm Man Induced Climate Change Refuted: http://www.kn4lf.com/globalwarminglie.htm -Bob On 5/11/06, Thomas Giella KN4LF wrote: > > > Russ, > I could be badly mistaken but it appears that the owner of the wxqc list > censored one of my emails posted to the e-list today. If this is the case > then I'm pulling my weather observations out of the CWOP program and you can > totally delete AR692/KN4LF from the system. > > I'll let you know after I find out. I'm not going to tolerate Marxist > censorship of an email. I've spent 32 years in weather forecasting, 41 years > in weather observing and 3 years in the CWOP. If I post something it's > correct. > > Take Care, > Thomas F. Giella, KN4LF > Retired Meteorologist & Space Plasma Physicist > Lakeland, FL, USA > flycylone@tampabay.rr.com > > NWS Tampa Bay, FL SKYWARN Observer #POL-10A > > Lakeland, FL NWS CWOP Weather Station #AR692/KN4LF 3 Second Data: > http://www.kn4lf.com/index1.html > Lakeland, FL NWS CWOP Weather Station #AR692/KN4LF 3 Minute Data: > http://www.kn4lf.com/index.htm > Lakeland, FL Daily Climatological Weather Data Archive Blog: > http://www.kn4lf.com/kn4lf22.htm > Florida Daily Weather Discussion: http://www.kn4lf.com/flwx1.htm > Man Induced Climate Change Refuted: > http://www.kn4lf.com/globalwarminglie.htm > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Thomas Giella KN4LF > To: wxqc-owner@lists.gladstonefamily.net > Sent: Thursday, May 11, 2006 12:03 AM > Subject: My Email Post? > > > Hello, > > What happened to the email I posted earlier today? > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: Thomas Giella KN4LF > To: wxqc@lists.gladstonefamily.net > Sent: Wednesday, May 10, 2006 12:12 PM > Subject: Sling Psychrometer > > > Jim, > > You use it in direct sunlight as the rotation of the thermometers will > counteract any direct insolation error. Shade readings will be just as > inaccurate as placing an instrument shelter under a tree or on the north > side of a building or structure. Shade readings will be lower temperature > wise and higher dewpoint and relative humidity wise. > > If your Stevenson Screen instrument shelter is properly constructed and > exposed, then direct sun readings from a sling psychrometer will be the > same. > > Take Care, > Thomas F. Giella, KN4LF > > > > It was posted to the e-list earlier today but now it looks like this: > > Thomas Giella KN4LF flcyclone at tampabay.rr.com > Wed May 10 12:12:40 EDT 2006 > > > > > Previous message: [wxqc] Sling Psychrometer > Next message: [wxqc] Dew Point Vs Humidity > Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] > ________________________________ > Skipped content of type > multipart/alternative-------------- next part > -------------- > No virus found in this outgoing message. > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > Version: 7.1.392 / Virus Database: 268.5.5/335 - Release Date: 5/9/2006 > > ________________________________ > > > > > > Did you censor my post? Please advise. > > Take Care, > Thomas F. Giella, KN4LF > Retired Meteorologist & Space Plasma Physicist > Lakeland, FL, USA > flycylone@tampabay.rr.com > > NWS Tampa Bay, FL SKYWARN Observer #POL-10A > > Lakeland, FL NWS CWOP Weather Station #AR692/KN4LF 3 Second Data: > http://www.kn4lf.com/index1.html > Lakeland, FL NWS CWOP Weather Station #AR692/KN4LF 3 Minute Data: > http://www.kn4lf.com/index.htm > Lakeland, FL Daily Climatological Weather Data Archive Blog: > http://www.kn4lf.com/kn4lf22.htm > Florida Daily Weather Discussion: http://www.kn4lf.com/flwx1.htm > Man Induced Climate Change Refuted: > http://www.kn4lf.com/globalwarminglie.htm > > > > > No virus found in this outgoing message. > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > Version: 7.1.392 / Virus Database: 268.5.5/335 - Release Date: 5/9/2006 > > > _______________________________________________ > wxqc mailing list > wxqc@lists.gladstonefamily.net > http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/mailman/listinfo/wxqc > > The contents of this message are the responsibility of the author. > > -- JaxWeather.net Jacksonville, Fl (Lakeshore, 32205) Local Weather http://JaxWeather.net A WolfStalks Network Property http://WolfStalks.com From kdmiller at oldsgmail.com Thu May 11 00:43:36 2006 From: kdmiller at oldsgmail.com (Keith Miller) Date: Thu May 11 00:46:00 2006 Subject: [wxqc] My Email Post? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <37CD69DD139D4357944D710818E41225@sauron> > -----Original Message----- > From: wxqc-bounces@lists.gladstonefamily.net > [mailto:wxqc-bounces@lists.gladstonefamily.net]On Behalf Of > Bob Johnson > Sent: Thursday, May 11, 2006 12:22 AM > To: Discussion of weather data quality issues > Cc: flcyclone@tampabay.rr.com > Subject: Re: [wxqc] My Email Post? > > > Tom, > > I received your post earlier today as follows, if there > was another then I didn't see it... > Same here: Return-Path: Wed May 10 10:14:07 2006 Received: from c-24-218-180-167.hsd1.ma.comcast.net [24.218.180.167] by mail1.gearhost.com with SMTP; Wed, 10 May 2006 10:14:07 -0600 Received: (qmail 6755 invoked by uid 10008); 10 May 2006 16:12:59 -0000 Received: from localhost (HELO charon.gladstonefamily.net) (127.0.0.1) by charon.gladstonefamily.net (qpsmtpd/0.27-dev) with ESMTP; Wed, 10 May 2006 12:12:59 -0400 Received: (qmail 6728 invoked by uid 10008); 10 May 2006 16:12:55 -0000 Received: from ms-smtp-04.tampabay.rr.com (HELO ms-smtp-04.tampabay.rr.com) (65.32.5.134) by charon.gladstonefamily.net (qpsmtpd/0.27-dev) with ESMTP; Wed, 10 May 2006 12:12:55 -0400 Received: from [192.168.1.100] (6532177hfc198.tampabay.res.rr.com [65.32.177.198]) by ms-smtp-04.tampabay.rr.com (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id k4AGCoxt013953 for ; Wed, 10 May 2006 12:12:50 -0400 (EDT) Received: from 127.0.0.1 (AVG SMTP 7.1.392 [268.5.5/335]); Wed, 10 May 2006 12:12:40 -0400 Delivered-To: mailman-wxqc@lists.gladstonefamily.net Received-SPF: pass (charon.gladstonefamily.net: domain of flcyclone@tampabay.rr.com designates 65.32.5.134 as permitted sender) Message-ID: <000b01c6744c$8fcdbf00$6401a8c0@thomas> From: "Thomas Giella KN4LF" To: References: <20060510160058.34DFF5CC65@willers.employees.org> Date: Wed, 10 May 2006 12:12:40 -0400 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="=======AVGMAIL-446210F875C7=======" X-Virus-Scanned: Symantec AntiVirus Scan Engine Subject: [wxqc] Sling Psychrometer X-BeenThere: wxqc@lists.gladstonefamily.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: Discussion of weather data quality issues List-Id: Discussion of weather data quality issues List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: wxqc-bounces@lists.gladstonefamily.net Errors-To: wxqc-bounces@lists.gladstonefamily.net X-RBL-Warning: SORBS-DUHL: "Dynamic IP Addresses See: http://www.sorbs.net/lookup.shtml?24.218.180.167" X-RBL-Warning: SPAMBAG: 167.180.218.24.blacklist.spambag.org. X-RBL-Warning: DYNHELO: Dynamic HELO found. X-Declude-Sender: wxqc-bounces@lists.gladstonefamily.net [24.218.180.167] X-Declude-Spoolname: 640045385608.eml X-Declude-Note: Scanned by Declude 4.0.9 for spam. Hosting by GearHost www.gearhost.com. X-Declude-Scan: Incoming Score [3] at 10:14:15 on 10 May 2006 X-Declude-Fail: SORBS-DUHL [4], SPAMBAG [2], DYNHELO [5] X-Country-Chain: UNITED STATES->destination X-Rcpt-To: Perhaps you should check any spam filters, or for an issue with you isp that might have delayed or lost it. Keith CW5250 -- From steve_03222 at yahoo.com Thu May 11 07:21:14 2006 From: steve_03222 at yahoo.com (Steve Gunn) Date: Thu May 11 07:21:19 2006 Subject: [wxqc] Dew point & Humidity Message-ID: <20060511112114.98587.qmail@web54202.mail.yahoo.com> Hi, CW5443, I didn't get any takers so I will try again. Could someone look at my QC chart and advise me about my Dew Point vs Humidity readings. Also about the spikes in the analysis. Looking for input as to what they are telling me. I would also appreciate an interpertation of my long range charts. Thanks, Steve __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From philip at gladstonefamily.net Thu May 11 07:43:27 2006 From: philip at gladstonefamily.net (Philip Gladstone) Date: Thu May 11 07:43:39 2006 Subject: [wxqc] My Email Post? In-Reply-To: <005001c674b1$86a8ca40$6401a8c0@thomas> References: <005001c674b1$86a8ca40$6401a8c0@thomas> Message-ID: <4463235F.4020902@gladstonefamily.net> Thomas, I certainly did not censor your post -- but I see what you mean. The archives for the mailing list have a strange version of your email in them. I suspect that the code that generates the archives has extracted the wrong piece of your original email for saving in the archives. I have been planning to upgrade to a more recent version of mailman (the software that runs the list and the archives) for a couple of months now, and this will be the trigger that causes me to do it. If it continues to happen after the upgrade, then I guess that I'll have to dig into the archiving code and try and figure out a way not to archive the 'virus checked' piece of the email, but rather the real content. Sorry Philip Thomas Giella KN4LF wrote: > *Russ,* > *I could be badly mistaken but it appears that the owner of the wxqc > list censored one of my emails posted to the e-list today. If this is > the case then I'm pulling my weather observations out of the > CWOP program and you can totally delete AR692/KN4LF from the system. * > ** > *I'll let you know after I find out. I'm not going to tolerate Marxist > censorship of an email. I've spent 32 years in weather forecasting, 41 > years in weather observing and 3 years in the CWOP. If I post something > it's correct.* > ** > *Take Care, > Thomas F. Giella, KN4LF > Retired Meteorologist & Space Plasma Physicist > Lakeland, FL, USA > flycylone@tampabay.rr.com * > > *NWS Tampa Bay, FL SKYWARN Observer #POL-10A* > > *Lakeland, FL NWS CWOP Weather Station #AR692/KN4LF 3 Second Data: > http://www.kn4lf.com/index1.html > Lakeland, FL NWS CWOP Weather Station #AR692/KN4LF 3 Minute Data: > http://www.kn4lf.com/index.htm > Lakeland, FL Daily Climatological Weather Data Archive Blog: > http://www.kn4lf.com/kn4lf22.htm > Florida Daily Weather Discussion: http://www.kn4lf.com/flwx1.htm > Man Induced Climate Change Refuted: > http://www.kn4lf.com/globalwarminglie.htm * > ** > ----- Original Message ----- > *From:* Thomas Giella KN4LF > *To:* wxqc-owner@lists.gladstonefamily.net > > *Sent:* Thursday, May 11, 2006 12:03 AM > *Subject:* My Email Post? > > *Hello,* > ** > *What happened to the email I posted earlier today?* > ** > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Thomas Giella KN4LF > To: wxqc@lists.gladstonefamily.net > Sent: Wednesday, May 10, 2006 12:12 PM > Subject: Sling Psychrometer > > Jim, > ** > You use it in direct sunlight as the rotation of the thermometers will > counteract any direct insolation error. Shade readings will be just as > inaccurate as placing an instrument shelter under a tree or on the north > side of a building or structure. Shade readings will be lower > temperature wise and higher dewpoint and relative humidity wise. > > If your Stevenson Screen instrument shelter is properly constructed and > exposed, then direct sun readings from a sling psychrometer will be the > same. > > Take Care, > Thomas F. Giella, KN4LF > > > ** > *It was posted to the e-list earlier today but now it looks like this:* > ** > *Thomas Giella KN4LF* flcyclone at tampabay.rr.com > > /Wed May 10 12:12:40 EDT 2006/ > > * Previous message: [wxqc] Sling Psychrometer > > > * Next message: [wxqc] Dew Point Vs Humidity > > > * *Messages sorted by:* [ date ] > > [ thread ] > > [ subject ] > > [ author ] > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Skipped content of type multipart/alternative-------------- next part -------------- > No virus found in this outgoing message. > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > Version: 7.1.392 / Virus Database: 268.5.5/335 - Release Date: 5/9/2006 > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > ** > *Did you censor my post? Please advise.* > ** > *Take Care, > Thomas F. Giella, KN4LF > Retired Meteorologist & Space Plasma Physicist > Lakeland, FL, USA > flycylone@tampabay.rr.com * > > *NWS Tampa Bay, FL SKYWARN Observer #POL-10A* > > *Lakeland, FL NWS CWOP Weather Station #AR692/KN4LF 3 Second Data: > http://www.kn4lf.com/index1.html > Lakeland, FL NWS CWOP Weather Station #AR692/KN4LF 3 Minute Data: > http://www.kn4lf.com/index.htm > Lakeland, FL Daily Climatological Weather Data Archive Blog: > http://www.kn4lf.com/kn4lf22.htm > Florida Daily Weather Discussion: http://www.kn4lf.com/flwx1.htm > Man Induced Climate Change Refuted: > http://www.kn4lf.com/globalwarminglie.htm* > > * * > * > * > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > No virus found in this outgoing message. > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > Version: 7.1.392 / Virus Database: 268.5.5/335 - Release Date: 5/9/2006 > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > wxqc mailing list > wxqc@lists.gladstonefamily.net > http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/mailman/listinfo/wxqc > > The contents of this message are the responsibility of the author. -------------- 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/20060511/cc6014fe/smime.bin From gerry.creager at tamu.edu Thu May 11 08:43:42 2006 From: gerry.creager at tamu.edu (Gerry Creager N5JXS) Date: Thu May 11 08:44:20 2006 Subject: [wxqc] CW5627 In-Reply-To: <4C7058FCA5307C4BBE440C692631B12738676A@pig.uhc.cc> References: <4C7058FCA5307C4BBE440C692631B12738676A@pig.uhc.cc> Message-ID: <4463317E.2000305@tamu.edu> Because you and several of the other stations in the area saw the spike, then dip, I am forming the opinion (in the face of caffeine deficiency this morning) that you had a real event that cause an over pressure spike, and that your site had a transient anomaly that caused the erroneous reading. Lightning is as likely as anything. I should have gone to my archives last night and looked at the storms in your area but I was a bit distracted with honey-do chores. gerry Ken Whelan wrote: > There were some storms coming through around that time. Best guess is a > lightning strike but I wasn't watching close enough to correlate. I > hope it is not an intermittent hardware issue that crops up again. > > I can say for sure that C3927 is nowhere close to the spike mine saw. > Mine went from 1004mb to 1098mb and back down to 1004 in about 30 > minutes. I'm quite certain the actual pressure didn't change that > much. > > Thanks. > kw > > -----Original Message----- > From: wxqc-bounces@lists.gladstonefamily.net > [mailto:wxqc-bounces@lists.gladstonefamily.net] On Behalf Of Gerry > Creager N5JXS > Sent: Wednesday, May 10, 2006 10:08 PM > To: Discussion of weather data quality issues > Subject: Re: [wxqc] CW5627 > > What significant meteorological phenomena occurred there today? Or, did > > someone do some electrical work near your barometer? > > C3927 also saw a spike at about the same time. This was followed by a > decrease in ALT. Suggests something happened in the area and your > sensor just decided to extend the excursion. > > gerry > > Ken Whelan wrote: > >>For some unknown reason, CW5627 sent a few incorrect barometer > > readings > >>today (5/10). The pressure jumped super high and then dropped back >>down to its correct readings. Is there any way to fix this > > information > >>so it doesn't affect my readings in the future? This is the first > > time > >>I have seen this happen. It was definitely the weather station that > > did > >>this. Two different pieces of software picked up the same readings. >> >>Thanks. >> >>_______________________________________________ >>wxqc mailing list >>wxqc@lists.gladstonefamily.net >>http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/mailman/listinfo/wxqc >> >>The contents of this message are the responsibility of the author. > > -- Gerry Creager -- gerry.creager@tamu.edu Texas Mesonet -- AATLT, Texas A&M University Cell: 979.229.5301 Office: 979.458.4020 FAX: 979.862.3983 Office: 1700 Research Parkway Ste 160, TAMU, College Station, TX 77843 From here_tivo at yahoo.com Thu May 11 09:38:59 2006 From: here_tivo at yahoo.com (Steve Schlei) Date: Thu May 11 09:39:05 2006 Subject: [wxqc] Correct anemometer height Message-ID: <20060511133859.83861.qmail@web34209.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Can someone tell me what the proper height of the anemometer should be. Currently mine is at the top of a 4"x4" wooded post about six feet off the ground. I would like to increase that height to get more "official" readings. Steve CW2841 --------------------------------- Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. PC-to-Phone calls for ridiculously low rates. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/pipermail/wxqc/attachments/20060511/3a3de234/attachment.html From gary.oldham at adelphia.net Thu May 11 09:48:38 2006 From: gary.oldham at adelphia.net (gary.oldham@adelphia.net) Date: Thu May 11 09:48:46 2006 Subject: [wxqc] Correct anemometer height Message-ID: <25310384.1147355318206.JavaMail.root@web15> 33 ft./10 meters is the international standard, but also factored in is distance from nearby obstacles. Really the best thing to do is to read the CWOP Instrument Siting Guide which gives good advice about placement of all weather instrumentation. The document can be had at http://mywebpages.comcast.net/dshelms/CWOP_Guide.pdf Gary CW0146 gary.oldham(at)adelphia.net ---- Steve Schlei wrote: ============= Can someone tell me what the proper height of the anemometer should be. Currently mine is at the top of a 4"x4" wooded post about six feet off the ground. I would like to increase that height to get more "official" readings. Steve CW2841 --------------------------------- Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. PC-to-Phone calls for ridiculously low rates. From spamfree at pensom.org Thu May 11 09:51:45 2006 From: spamfree at pensom.org (spamfree) Date: Thu May 11 09:51:53 2006 Subject: [wxqc] Correct anemometer height Message-ID: For a home station, it probably doesn't matter much. A 10' difference in placement accounts for about a 0.011 in hg difference in pressure. However, you can easily adjust for this in your station calibration. The automated airport weather stations (ASOS) record a sensor pressure (the actual reading of the sensor) and a station pressure (the sensor pressure adjusted for the difference in elevation between the sensor location and the official station location such as the runway). This adjustment calculation takes into account temperature as well as elevation, but this is overkill for a home station, as a difference of 30 feet or less is very close to a constant value. My sensor for example, is in the second story of my home, above the official location of my station. But this difference is pretty much irrelevant since it is taken care of in the calibration of the barometer. Steve Can someone tell me what the proper height of the anemometer should be. Currently mine is at the top of a 4"x4" wooded post about six feet off the ground. I would like to increase that height to get more "official" readings. Steve CW2841 Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. PC-to-Phone calls for ridiculously low rates. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/pipermail/wxqc/attachments/20060511/69af81a6/attachment.html From spamfree at pensom.org Thu May 11 09:53:27 2006 From: spamfree at pensom.org (spamfree) Date: Thu May 11 09:53:34 2006 Subject: [wxqc] Correct anemometer height Message-ID: Ignore my previous post. I saw anemometer but my brain read barometer. I shouldn't post before I'm awake. Steve Can someone tell me what the proper height of the anemometer should be. Currently mine is at the top of a 4"x4" wooded post about six feet off the ground. I would like to increase that height to get more "official" readings. Steve CW2841 Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. PC-to-Phone calls for ridiculously low rates. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/pipermail/wxqc/attachments/20060511/e00a1411/attachment.html From gary.oldham at adelphia.net Thu May 11 09:59:33 2006 From: gary.oldham at adelphia.net (gary.oldham@adelphia.net) Date: Thu May 11 09:59:36 2006 Subject: [wxqc] Correct anemometer height Message-ID: <8650795.1147355973528.JavaMail.root@web15> Just to clarify, the original question was about anemometer height, not barometer. Gary CW0146 gary.oldham(at)adelphia.net ---- spamfree wrote: ============= For a home station, it probably doesn't matter much. A 10' difference in placement accounts for about a 0.011 in hg difference in pressure. However, you can easily adjust for this in your station calibration. The automated airport weather stations (ASOS) record a sensor pressure (the actual reading of the sensor) and a station pressure (the sensor pressure adjusted for the difference in elevation between the sensor location and the official station location such as the runway). This adjustment calculation takes into account temperature as well as elevation, but this is overkill for a home station, as a difference of 30 feet or less is very close to a constant value. My sensor for example, is in the second story of my home, above the official location of my station. But this difference is pretty much irrelevant since it is taken care of in the calibration of the barometer. Steve Can someone tell me what the proper height of the anemometer should be. Currently mine is at the top of a 4"x4" wooded post about six feet off the ground. I would like to increase that height to get more "official" readings. Steve CW2841 Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. PC-to-Phone calls for ridiculously low rates. From sam at wa4phy.net Thu May 11 12:30:42 2006 From: sam at wa4phy.net (Sam Drinkard) Date: Thu May 11 12:30:51 2006 Subject: [wxqc] Correct anemometer height In-Reply-To: <25310384.1147355318206.JavaMail.root@web15> References: <25310384.1147355318206.JavaMail.root@web15> Message-ID: <446366B2.3000508@wa4phy.net> gary.oldham@adelphia.net wrote: >33 ft./10 meters is the international standard, but also factored in is distance from nearby obstacles. Really the best thing to do is to read the CWOP Instrument Siting Guide which gives good advice about placement of all weather instrumentation. The document can be had at http://mywebpages.comcast.net/dshelms/CWOP_Guide.pdf > >Gary >CW0146 >gary.oldham(at)adelphia.net > >---- Steve Schlei wrote: > >============= >Can someone tell me what the proper height of the anemometer should be. Currently mine is at the top of a 4"x4" wooded post about six feet off the ground. I would like to increase that height to get more "official" readings. > > Steve > CW2841 > > > Then again, it depends if you want a 2m reading or a 10m reading. Ideally, both would be nice, but since we pretty much base things on the 10m wind, 33' is the number. As Gary says, the deployment guide is the place for all that good info.. Sam > > > From gerry.creager at tamu.edu Thu May 11 12:36:54 2006 From: gerry.creager at tamu.edu (Gerry Creager) Date: Thu May 11 12:37:21 2006 Subject: [wxqc] Correct anemometer height In-Reply-To: <446366B2.3000508@wa4phy.net> References: <25310384.1147355318206.JavaMail.root@web15> <446366B2.3000508@wa4phy.net> Message-ID: <44636826.3050107@tamu.edu> I'd also like to refer y'all to http://www.wmo.ch/web/www/IMOP/publications/IOM-81/IOM-81-UrbanMetObs.pdf for siting information in urban environments. This paper, by Tim Oke from Canada for the World Meteorological Organization, is really worth considering when placing a weather station in an area with urban canyon, canopy or surface layer areas and where a classical mesoscale observation site is impractical. gerry Sam Drinkard wrote: > gary.oldham@adelphia.net wrote: > >> 33 ft./10 meters is the international standard, but also factored in >> is distance from nearby obstacles. Really the best thing to do is to >> read the CWOP Instrument Siting Guide which gives good advice about >> placement of all weather instrumentation. The document can be had at >> http://mywebpages.comcast.net/dshelms/CWOP_Guide.pdf >> >> Gary >> CW0146 >> gary.oldham(at)adelphia.net >> >> ---- Steve Schlei wrote: >> ============= >> Can someone tell me what the proper height of the anemometer should >> be. Currently mine is at the top of a 4"x4" wooded post about six >> feet off the ground. I would like to increase that height to get more >> "official" readings. >> Steve >> CW2841 >> >> >> > Then again, it depends if you want a 2m reading or a 10m reading. > Ideally, both would be nice, but since we pretty much base things on the > 10m wind, 33' is the number. As Gary says, the deployment guide is the > place for all that good info.. > > Sam > >> >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > wxqc mailing list > wxqc@lists.gladstonefamily.net > http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/mailman/listinfo/wxqc > > The contents of this message are the responsibility of the author. -- Gerry Creager -- gerry.creager@tamu.edu Texas Mesonet -- AATLT, Texas A&M University Cell: 979.229.5301 Office: 979.458.4020 FAX 979.862.3983 MAIL: AATLT, 3139 TAMU Physical: 1700 Research Parkway, Suite 160, College Station, TX 77843-3139 From Russell.B.Chadwick at noaa.gov Thu May 11 13:13:23 2006 From: Russell.B.Chadwick at noaa.gov (Russ Chadwick) Date: Thu May 11 13:11:29 2006 Subject: [wxqc] Correct anemometer height In-Reply-To: <446366B2.3000508@wa4phy.net> Message-ID: <004501c6751e$35729c10$c76e4b89@jedi> FWIW, the US Forest Service wants winds at "eye level" or about 5-6 feet off the ground. CWOP winds are used in some wildfire analysis programs run by the USFS. Russ -----Original Message----- From: wxqc-bounces@lists.gladstonefamily.net [mailto:wxqc-bounces@lists.gladstonefamily.net] On Behalf Of Sam Drinkard Sent: Thursday, May 11, 2006 10:31 AM To: Discussion of weather data quality issues Subject: Re: [wxqc] Correct anemometer height gary.oldham@adelphia.net wrote: >33 ft./10 meters is the international standard, but also factored in is distance from nearby obstacles. Really the best thing to do is to read the CWOP Instrument Siting Guide which gives good advice about placement of all weather instrumentation. The document can be had at http://mywebpages.comcast.net/dshelms/CWOP_Guide.pdf > >Gary >CW0146 >gary.oldham(at)adelphia.net > >---- Steve Schlei wrote: > >============= >Can someone tell me what the proper height of the anemometer should be. Currently mine is at the top of a 4"x4" wooded post about six feet off the ground. I would like to increase that height to get more "official" readings. > > Steve > CW2841 > > > Then again, it depends if you want a 2m reading or a 10m reading. Ideally, both would be nice, but since we pretty much base things on the 10m wind, 33' is the number. As Gary says, the deployment guide is the place for all that good info.. Sam > > > _______________________________________________ wxqc mailing list wxqc@lists.gladstonefamily.net http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/mailman/listinfo/wxqc The contents of this message are the responsibility of the author. From flcyclone at tampabay.rr.com Thu May 11 17:11:42 2006 From: flcyclone at tampabay.rr.com (Thomas Giella KN4LF) Date: Thu May 11 17:12:02 2006 Subject: [wxqc] Correct Anemometer Height Message-ID: <014001c6753f$80a738f0$6401a8c0@thomas> Skipped content of type multipart/alternative-------------- next part -------------- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.392 / Virus Database: 268.5.6/336 - Release Date: 5/10/2006 From hultmane at comcast.net Thu May 11 10:07:08 2006 From: hultmane at comcast.net (hultmane@comcast.net) Date: Thu May 11 22:16:13 2006 Subject: [wxqc] Correct anemometer height Message-ID: <051120061407.7306.4463450C0002718500001C8A22007613940A020E039B049A08@comcast.net> 2. Siting The international standard for anemometer height above ground level is 10 meters (33 feet) with no obstructions at or above this level. CWOP encourages weather station operators to place their anemometers at this level, consistent with safety considerations, if no obstructions are at or immediately below this height. A good link: http://mywebpages.comcast.net/dshelms/CWOP_Guide.pdf -Eric Hultman KC8YPW From philip at gladstonefamily.net Thu May 11 22:31:44 2006 From: philip at gladstonefamily.net (Philip Gladstone) Date: Thu May 11 22:31:50 2006 Subject: [wxqc] Administrivia Message-ID: <4463F390.7020703@gladstonefamily.net> All, I have upgraded the mailing list software to the latest version. Please report any problems to me (off list) and I'll try and get them resolved. I think that plain text emails are now preferred, so please send them in preference to HTML emails. Please bear with me during this time.... Philip -------------- 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/20060511/69397ed1/smime.bin From ken at ubh.com Tue May 16 15:28:00 2006 From: ken at ubh.com (Ken Whelan) Date: Tue May 16 15:28:08 2006 Subject: [wxqc] CW5627 Message-ID: <4C7058FCA5307C4BBE440C692631B127386792@pig.uhc.cc> I had another spike this morning in my data and there were no storms in the area. It appears that the 11/28/05 firmware release for the Vantage Pro 2 console introduced this bug. If you have installed this on your console. You can now update directly from your PC. Here is a link to the 4/10/2006 REV B firmware update for the wireless model of the Vantage Pro 2. http://www.davisnet.com/support/weather/software.asp#vantagepro2firmware direct1 Can I please get my data fixed one more time for about 3:00 am central. Hopefully this problem is resolved. Thanks kw -----Original Message----- From: wxqc-bounces@lists.gladstonefamily.net [mailto:wxqc-bounces@lists.gladstonefamily.net] On Behalf Of Ken Whelan Sent: Wednesday, May 10, 2006 11:03 PM To: Discussion of weather data quality issues Subject: RE: [wxqc] CW5627 There were some storms coming through around that time. Best guess is a lightning strike but I wasn't watching close enough to correlate. I hope it is not an intermittent hardware issue that crops up again. I can say for sure that C3927 is nowhere close to the spike mine saw. Mine went from 1004mb to 1098mb and back down to 1004 in about 30 minutes. I'm quite certain the actual pressure didn't change that much. Thanks. kw -----Original Message----- From: wxqc-bounces@lists.gladstonefamily.net [mailto:wxqc-bounces@lists.gladstonefamily.net] On Behalf Of Gerry Creager N5JXS Sent: Wednesday, May 10, 2006 10:08 PM To: Discussion of weather data quality issues Subject: Re: [wxqc] CW5627 What significant meteorological phenomena occurred there today? Or, did someone do some electrical work near your barometer? C3927 also saw a spike at about the same time. This was followed by a decrease in ALT. Suggests something happened in the area and your sensor just decided to extend the excursion. gerry Ken Whelan wrote: > For some unknown reason, CW5627 sent a few incorrect barometer readings > today (5/10). The pressure jumped super high and then dropped back > down to its correct readings. Is there any way to fix this information > so it doesn't affect my readings in the future? This is the first time > I have seen this happen. It was definitely the weather station that did > this. Two different pieces of software picked up the same readings. > > Thanks. > > _______________________________________________ > wxqc mailing list > wxqc@lists.gladstonefamily.net > http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/mailman/listinfo/wxqc > > The contents of this message are the responsibility of the author. -- Gerry Creager -- gerry.creager@tamu.edu Texas Mesonet -- AATLT, Texas A&M University Cell: 979.229.5301 Office: 979.458.4020 FAX: 979.862.3983 Office: 1700 Research Parkway Ste 160, TAMU, College Station, TX 77843 _______________________________________________ wxqc mailing list wxqc@lists.gladstonefamily.net http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/mailman/listinfo/wxqc The contents of this message are the responsibility of the author. _______________________________________________ wxqc mailing list wxqc@lists.gladstonefamily.net http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/mailman/listinfo/wxqc The contents of this message are the responsibility of the author. From n0exp at charter.net Tue May 16 15:44:21 2006 From: n0exp at charter.net (n0exp@charter.net) Date: Tue May 16 15:44:40 2006 Subject: [wxqc] CW5627 Message-ID: <1019719106.1147808661304.JavaMail.root@fepweb06> I get spikes if I operate my Ham Radio station on 20 meters using my 4 and dipole. any operation shuts down the com port and I have to unplug USB re insert it and restart the software. The Both my programs VWeather and the one that came with the Vantage Pro 2 wireless cause an S4 noise on the radio. ;-) My Mother sadi it wouldn't be easy aka N0EXP Jim Christensen www.christensenwildlifephotos.com ---- Ken Whelan wrote: > > I had another spike this morning in my data and there were no storms in > the area. It appears that the 11/28/05 firmware release for the > Vantage Pro 2 console introduced this bug. If you have installed this > on your console. You can now update directly from your PC. Here is a > link to the 4/10/2006 REV B firmware update for the wireless model of > the Vantage Pro 2. > > http://www.davisnet.com/support/weather/software.asp#vantagepro2firmware > direct1 > > Can I please get my data fixed one more time for about 3:00 am central. > Hopefully this problem is resolved. > > Thanks > kw > > -----Original Message----- > From: wxqc-bounces@lists.gladstonefamily.net > [mailto:wxqc-bounces@lists.gladstonefamily.net] On Behalf Of Ken Whelan > Sent: Wednesday, May 10, 2006 11:03 PM > To: Discussion of weather data quality issues > Subject: RE: [wxqc] CW5627 > > There were some storms coming through around that time. Best guess is a > lightning strike but I wasn't watching close enough to correlate. I > hope it is not an intermittent hardware issue that crops up again. > > I can say for sure that C3927 is nowhere close to the spike mine saw. > Mine went from 1004mb to 1098mb and back down to 1004 in about 30 > minutes. I'm quite certain the actual pressure didn't change that > much. > > Thanks. > kw > > -----Original Message----- > From: wxqc-bounces@lists.gladstonefamily.net > [mailto:wxqc-bounces@lists.gladstonefamily.net] On Behalf Of Gerry > Creager N5JXS > Sent: Wednesday, May 10, 2006 10:08 PM > To: Discussion of weather data quality issues > Subject: Re: [wxqc] CW5627 > > What significant meteorological phenomena occurred there today? Or, did > > someone do some electrical work near your barometer? > > C3927 also saw a spike at about the same time. This was followed by a > decrease in ALT. Suggests something happened in the area and your > sensor just decided to extend the excursion. > > gerry > > Ken Whelan wrote: > > For some unknown reason, CW5627 sent a few incorrect barometer > readings > > today (5/10). The pressure jumped super high and then dropped back > > down to its correct readings. Is there any way to fix this > information > > so it doesn't affect my readings in the future? This is the first > time > > I have seen this happen. It was definitely the weather station that > did > > this. Two different pieces of software picked up the same readings. > > > > Thanks. > > > > _______________________________________________ > > wxqc mailing list > > wxqc@lists.gladstonefamily.net > > http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/mailman/listinfo/wxqc > > > > The contents of this message are the responsibility of the author. > > -- > Gerry Creager -- gerry.creager@tamu.edu > Texas Mesonet -- AATLT, Texas A&M University > Cell: 979.229.5301 Office: 979.458.4020 FAX: 979.862.3983 > Office: 1700 Research Parkway Ste 160, TAMU, College Station, TX 77843 > _______________________________________________ > wxqc mailing list > wxqc@lists.gladstonefamily.net > http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/mailman/listinfo/wxqc > > The contents of this message are the responsibility of the author. > > _______________________________________________ > wxqc mailing list > wxqc@lists.gladstonefamily.net > http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/mailman/listinfo/wxqc > > The contents of this message are the responsibility of the author. > > _______________________________________________ > wxqc mailing list > wxqc@lists.gladstonefamily.net > http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/mailman/listinfo/wxqc > > The contents of this message are the responsibility of the author. From steve_03222 at yahoo.com Wed May 17 18:21:07 2006 From: steve_03222 at yahoo.com (Steve Gunn) Date: Wed May 17 18:21:14 2006 Subject: [wxqc] Re: wxqc Digest, Vol 19, Issue 18 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060517222107.27418.qmail@web54208.mail.yahoo.com> Just wondering if I subscribed to the correct list. I have asked repeatly for assistance in understanding the quality reports. I had one response from Phillip and that was it. I thought I signed up for the list that is mentioned in the Quality Reports that stated something like. If you need assistance troubleshooting a reading that shows an error, then join this list. If I have joined the wrong list would someone be so kind as to point me to the correct list that can help with quality issues and reading and understanding the quality reports. Steve __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From philip at gladstonefamily.net Wed May 17 18:49:13 2006 From: philip at gladstonefamily.net (Philip Gladstone) Date: Wed May 17 18:49:19 2006 Subject: [wxqc] Dew point & Humidity In-Reply-To: <20060511112114.98587.qmail@web54202.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20060511112114.98587.qmail@web54202.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <446BA869.3030902@gladstonefamily.net> Steve, The spikes in the analysis are commonly called 'jaggies'. They are an artifact of the analysis caused by a neighboring station that is reporting once per hour that has an incorrect temperature. The only way of locating this station (as it doesn't seem to be a CWOP or METAR station) is to go to http://www-frd.fsl.noaa.gov/mesonet/ and zoom in on your location. Take a look at your neighboring stations and there should be one with a temperature that is out of line. Let me know what you find out -- we can sometimes get those readings marked as bad and excluded from future analysis. Philip Steve Gunn wrote: > Hi, CW5443, > I didn't get any takers so I will try again. > Could someone look at my QC chart and advise me about > my Dew Point vs Humidity readings. Also about the > spikes in the analysis. Looking for input as to what > they are telling me. > I would also appreciate an interpertation of my long > range charts. > > Thanks, > Steve > > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around > http://mail.yahoo.com > _______________________________________________ > wxqc mailing list > wxqc@lists.gladstonefamily.net > http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/mailman/listinfo/wxqc > > The contents of this message are the responsibility of the author. > > -------------- 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/20060517/fda21dd6/smime.bin From philip at gladstonefamily.net Wed May 17 21:14:52 2006 From: philip at gladstonefamily.net (Philip Gladstone) Date: Wed May 17 21:14:59 2006 Subject: [wxqc] CW5627 In-Reply-To: <4C7058FCA5307C4BBE440C692631B127386792@pig.uhc.cc> References: <4C7058FCA5307C4BBE440C692631B127386792@pig.uhc.cc> Message-ID: <446BCA8C.8070303@gladstonefamily.net> Taken care of. I have deleted the entries for that day so that it will not affect your green check mark. Philip Ken Whelan wrote: > I had another spike this morning in my data and there were no storms in > the area. It appears that the 11/28/05 firmware release for the > Vantage Pro 2 console introduced this bug. If you have installed this > on your console. You can now update directly from your PC. Here is a > link to the 4/10/2006 REV B firmware update for the wireless model of > the Vantage Pro 2. > > http://www.davisnet.com/support/weather/software.asp#vantagepro2firmware > direct1 > > Can I please get my data fixed one more time for about 3:00 am central. > Hopefully this problem is resolved. > > Thanks > kw > > -----Original Message----- > From: wxqc-bounces@lists.gladstonefamily.net > [mailto:wxqc-bounces@lists.gladstonefamily.net] On Behalf Of Ken Whelan > Sent: Wednesday, May 10, 2006 11:03 PM > To: Discussion of weather data quality issues > Subject: RE: [wxqc] CW5627 > > There were some storms coming through around that time. Best guess is a > lightning strike but I wasn't watching close enough to correlate. I > hope it is not an intermittent hardware issue that crops up again. > > I can say for sure that C3927 is nowhere close to the spike mine saw. > Mine went from 1004mb to 1098mb and back down to 1004 in about 30 > minutes. I'm quite certain the actual pressure didn't change that > much. > > Thanks. > kw > > -----Original Message----- > From: wxqc-bounces@lists.gladstonefamily.net > [mailto:wxqc-bounces@lists.gladstonefamily.net] On Behalf Of Gerry > Creager N5JXS > Sent: Wednesday, May 10, 2006 10:08 PM > To: Discussion of weather data quality issues > Subject: Re: [wxqc] CW5627 > > What significant meteorological phenomena occurred there today? Or, did > > someone do some electrical work near your barometer? > > C3927 also saw a spike at about the same time. This was followed by a > decrease in ALT. Suggests something happened in the area and your > sensor just decided to extend the excursion. > > gerry > > Ken Whelan wrote: >> For some unknown reason, CW5627 sent a few incorrect barometer > readings >> today (5/10). The pressure jumped super high and then dropped back >> down to its correct readings. Is there any way to fix this > information >> so it doesn't affect my readings in the future? This is the first > time >> I have seen this happen. It was definitely the weather station that > did >> this. Two different pieces of software picked up the same readings. >> >> Thanks. >> >> _______________________________________________ >> wxqc mailing list >> wxqc@lists.gladstonefamily.net >> http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/mailman/listinfo/wxqc >> >> The contents of this message are the responsibility of the author. > > -- > Gerry Creager -- gerry.creager@tamu.edu > Texas Mesonet -- AATLT, Texas A&M University > Cell: 979.229.5301 Office: 979.458.4020 FAX: 979.862.3983 > Office: 1700 Research Parkway Ste 160, TAMU, College Station, TX 77843 > _______________________________________________ > wxqc mailing list > wxqc@lists.gladstonefamily.net > http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/mailman/listinfo/wxqc > > The contents of this message are the responsibility of the author. > > _______________________________________________ > wxqc mailing list > wxqc@lists.gladstonefamily.net > http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/mailman/listinfo/wxqc > > The contents of this message are the responsibility of the author. > > _______________________________________________ > wxqc mailing list > wxqc@lists.gladstonefamily.net > http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/mailman/listinfo/wxqc > > The contents of this message are the responsibility of the author. > > -------------- 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/20060517/71261cdf/smime.bin From sam at wa4phy.net Thu May 18 21:51:33 2006 From: sam at wa4phy.net (Sam Drinkard) Date: Thu May 18 21:51:45 2006 Subject: [wxqc] VWS and Advanced parameter settings Message-ID: <1148003493.5990.12.camel@thunder.wa4phy.net> I guess I'm losing it :-) I'm looking at the VWS advanced parameter settings, and I see a few options in how the wind gust is calculated. It is currently set to Max windspeed in sample period, which is 10 minutes. Is that where I should be, or should I be set to max windspeed in database update period, and is the 10 minutes filtered average correct? FWIW, we had a small shower move thru here a little while ago, and I got a 2mb pressure rise. I see the madis QC did not flag it as bad, but Philip's checking did. How come ? Is there a threshold that is set for things like pressures above and below the "average" that triggers this? Thanks.. Sam -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/pipermail/wxqc/attachments/20060518/e845d6a7/attachment.html From steve_03222 at yahoo.com Fri May 19 17:42:51 2006 From: steve_03222 at yahoo.com (Steve Gunn) Date: Fri May 19 17:42:55 2006 Subject: [wxqc] Quality Checks In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060519214251.6054.qmail@web54209.mail.yahoo.com> You mentioned Madis vs phillips quality checks. Where is the madis QC check located? Steve CW5443 __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From sam at wa4phy.net Fri May 19 17:53:07 2006 From: sam at wa4phy.net (Sam Drinkard) Date: Fri May 19 17:53:13 2006 Subject: [wxqc] Quality Checks In-Reply-To: <20060519214251.6054.qmail@web54209.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20060519214251.6054.qmail@web54209.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <446E3E43.2090708@wa4phy.net> You didn't state where you are, so here is the link for the GA stations. Substitute your state in the URL for GA and then click on the NOAA mesonet header, which will take you to the madis display page. Once you find your own station, if you click on it, the madis QC info will appear for the past several hours. Sam Steve Gunn wrote: >You mentioned Madis vs phillips quality checks. Where >is the madis QC check located? > >Steve CW5443 > > > > > From deadeye916 at gmail.com Fri May 19 20:28:13 2006 From: deadeye916 at gmail.com (Dan Crooks) Date: Fri May 19 20:28:22 2006 Subject: [wxqc] Quality Checks In-Reply-To: <446E3E43.2090708@wa4phy.net> References: <20060519214251.6054.qmail@web54209.mail.yahoo.com> <446E3E43.2090708@wa4phy.net> Message-ID: I didn't see a link it the other response...Here's the link I use for my area by lat/long. http://www-frd.fsl.noaa.gov/mesonet/?center_lat=39.28833¢er_lon=-121.33617&scale=300 Dan CW1789 On 5/19/06, Sam Drinkard wrote: > > You didn't state where you are, so here is the link for the GA > stations. Substitute your state in the URL for GA and then click on the > NOAA mesonet header, which will take you to the madis display page. > Once you find your own station, if you click on it, the madis QC info > will appear for the past several hours. > > Sam > > Steve Gunn wrote: > > >You mentioned Madis vs phillips quality checks. Where > >is the madis QC check located? > > > >Steve CW5443 > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/pipermail/wxqc/attachments/20060519/f270edf2/attachment.html From gerry.creager at tamu.edu Sat May 20 01:58:59 2006 From: gerry.creager at tamu.edu (Gerry Creager) Date: Sat May 20 01:59:20 2006 Subject: [wxqc] Quality Checks In-Reply-To: <20060519214251.6054.qmail@web54209.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20060519214251.6054.qmail@web54209.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <446EB023.3020105@tamu.edu> Philip pulls in the MADIS data and utilizes it in his graphics and analysis. MADIS data are available if you go looking around http://www.fsl.noaa.gov. Poke around for 'data' and MADIS. Each individual measurement is QC'd so it's not the whole thing, but, like Philip's graphics, each parameter and not the bundled various measurements. There's good documentation on the way MADIS QC is done, too. If this isn't specific enough, please ask again tomorrow after I've gotten some sleep... :-) gerry Steve Gunn wrote: > You mentioned Madis vs phillips quality checks. Where > is the madis QC check located? > > Steve CW5443 > > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around > http://mail.yahoo.com > _______________________________________________ > wxqc mailing list > wxqc@lists.gladstonefamily.net > http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/mailman/listinfo/wxqc > > The contents of this message are the responsibility of the author. -- Gerry Creager -- gerry.creager@tamu.edu Texas Mesonet -- AATLT, Texas A&M University Cell: 979.229.5301 Office: 979.458.4020 FAX 979.862.3983 MAIL: AATLT, 3139 TAMU Physical: 1700 Research Parkway, Suite 160, College Station, TX 77843-3139 From steve_03222 at yahoo.com Sat May 20 12:16:31 2006 From: steve_03222 at yahoo.com (Steve Gunn) Date: Sat May 20 12:16:46 2006 Subject: [wxqc] Madis QC checks In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060520161631.89772.qmail@web54205.mail.yahoo.com> OK, I found the map, clicked on my site and this is waht I got. Not sure how it shows quality checks. This is just a few entries, not the whole page. Steve C5443 (APRSWXNET) CW5443 Bristol NH US time slp t / td dir / spd / gst/pcp presWx & skyCover (UTC) (mb) (F) (mph) (in.) 1545 999.3(S) 58.0(S)/48.60(S) 281?(C)/002(S)/005/0.00" 1530 999.3(V) 57.0(V)/48.80(V) 225?(V)/002(V)/004/0.00" 1515 999.7(V) 57.0(V)/49.50(V) 270?(V)/003(V)/003/0.00" 1500 999.7(V) 56.0(V)/48.50(V) 2?(V)/001(V)/001/0.00" 1450 999.7(V) 56.0(V)/47.80(V) 289?(V)/001(V)/003/0.00" 1434 999.7(V) 56.0(V)/47.80(V) 279?(V)/002(V)/005/0.00" 1419 999.3(V) 56.0(V)/48.50(V) 238?(V)/002(V)/005/0.00" 1404 999.3(V) 56.0(V)/49.20(V) 67?(V)/000(V)/003/0.00" 1349 999.3(V) 56.0(V)/48.90(V) 299?(V)/002(V)/004/0.00" 1333 999.3(V) 56.0(V)/49.20(V) 157?(V)/001(V)/002/0.00" 1318 999.3(V) 56.0(V)/49.60(V) 192?(V)/001(V)/005/0.00" 1303 999.0(V) 56.0(V)/50.20(V) 202?(V)/002(V)/009/ __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From sam at wa4phy.net Sat May 20 17:01:54 2006 From: sam at wa4phy.net (Sam Drinkard) Date: Sat May 20 17:02:08 2006 Subject: [wxqc] Madis QC checks In-Reply-To: <20060520161631.89772.qmail@web54205.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20060520161631.89772.qmail@web54205.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <446F83C2.7050409@wa4phy.net> Steve, at the bottom of the page, there is a list of the QC letter designators used. They tell what action has been taken, but a "V" is a reading that is OK. Here they are. Z = "No QC applied" C = "Passed QC stage 1" S = "Passed QC stages 1 and 2" V = "Passed QC stages 1, 2 and 3" X = "Failed QC stage 1" Q = "Passed QC stage 1, but failed stages 2 or 3 " G = "Included in accept list" B = "Included in reject list" I suggest a little reading on the subject of QC from the various places, one of which is on the CWOP main page, and of course, the link from that page http://www-sdd.fsl.noaa.gov/MADIS/madis_sfc_qc.html which shows all the goodies and how they fit together. Sam Steve Gunn wrote: >OK, I found the map, clicked on my site and this is >waht I got. Not sure how it shows quality checks. This >is just a few entries, not the whole page. > >Steve > >C5443 (APRSWXNET) CW5443 Bristol NH US >time slp t / td dir / spd / >gst/pcp presWx & skyCover >(UTC) (mb) (F) (mph) >(in.) >1545 999.3(S) 58.0(S)/48.60(S) >281?(C)/002(S)/005/0.00" >1530 999.3(V) 57.0(V)/48.80(V) >225?(V)/002(V)/004/0.00" >1515 999.7(V) 57.0(V)/49.50(V) >270?(V)/003(V)/003/0.00" >1500 999.7(V) 56.0(V)/48.50(V) >2?(V)/001(V)/001/0.00" >1450 999.7(V) 56.0(V)/47.80(V) >289?(V)/001(V)/003/0.00" >1434 999.7(V) 56.0(V)/47.80(V) >279?(V)/002(V)/005/0.00" >1419 999.3(V) 56.0(V)/48.50(V) >238?(V)/002(V)/005/0.00" >1404 999.3(V) 56.0(V)/49.20(V) >67?(V)/000(V)/003/0.00" >1349 999.3(V) 56.0(V)/48.90(V) >299?(V)/002(V)/004/0.00" >1333 999.3(V) 56.0(V)/49.20(V) >157?(V)/001(V)/002/0.00" >1318 999.3(V) 56.0(V)/49.60(V) >192?(V)/001(V)/005/0.00" >1303 999.0(V) 56.0(V)/50.20(V) 202?(V)/002(V)/009/ > > > > > From sam at wa4phy.net Mon May 22 12:12:44 2006 From: sam at wa4phy.net (Sam Drinkard) Date: Mon May 22 12:12:55 2006 Subject: [wxqc] Sensor drift Message-ID: <4471E2FC.8010909@wa4phy.net> I am experiencing what I believe to be sensor drift on the barometric pressure sensor. I've been following the diffs between my station and KDNL / KAGS now for about two weeks, and altho a good portion of the time, we are within 0.2mb of each other, last night, I was showing about 1.5mb or better between the two, with my reading being the higher. The only fly in the ointment is the fact that KHQU, Thomson GA, ASOS was showing yet a higher reading than I was, by another 0.20 mb. I know I should not try to match most readings based on graphs, but baro pressure I'd think should be very close, given our very similar altitudes. In short, does anyone have any first hand knowledge or even theory that the Davis baro sensor will, in fact, drift with change of temperature, or time? Regards, Sam From spamfree at pensom.org Mon May 22 12:25:27 2006 From: spamfree at pensom.org (spamfree) Date: Mon May 22 12:25:36 2006 Subject: [wxqc] Sensor drift Message-ID: Hi, It will. The Vantage Pro console measures the actual pressure (sensor pressure) internally, but calculates a sea level reduced pressure value which is what is displayed on the console, and passed on to connected weather programs. Their algorithm uses elevation as well as temperature and humidity in their calculation. The problem is that CWOP only wants altimeter for the pressure which is calculated from the sensor pressure and elevation only. The result is that if you are above around 500 ft elevation, your CWOP submitted pressure will appear to drift when compared to other non-vantage pro stations as the average temperature and humidity change. This is especially noticable after passage of a front and as the seasons change. I wrote a freeware tool to address this called VPLive http://www.pensom.org/weather/vptools/vplive.html . VPLive reverses the VP barometer calculation to get the sensor pressure, and then calculates the altimeter from that and sends that to APRS/CWOP. You can also play around with the whole pressure calculation issue with this other freeware tool http://www.pensom.org/weather/vptools/vppressurecalc.html Steve =======