[wxqc] wxqc Digest, Vol 23, Issue 18
Gerry Creager N5JXS
gerry.creager at tamu.edu
Sun Sep 24 22:06:46 CDT 2006
Couple of thoughts from someone who went to NASA's classes on soldering.
And then crimping.
Crimp connections, done right, are both mechanically and elctrically
superior to soldered connections. Hex-style crimps properly applied
will crimp through an oxide layer and exclude atmospheric gases.
Insulation-displacing crimped connectors, such as those used in RJ-11,
RJ-15 and RJ-45 connections, when done on solid conductor, have the same
capabilities for electrical connection and getting past an oxide layer.
Although they can provide some strain relief, again, if done
correctly, they do not provide as good a mechanical connection for the
overall connector as a good quality hex crimp.
I've used a bunch of the liquid and gooey moisture barriers over the
years for RF installations. Over the recent past (15 years or more)
I've used one of the Scotch self-vulcanizing tapes with a temporary
overcoat of ScotchKote polymer. I've never had moisture incursion into
a connector so sealed as long as the tape (I use 3 layers) was intact.
I've used the same method of late on meteorological installations,
including one where I recently instrumented a test at Texas A&M's Fire
School for a week of LNG fires and experiments. It saw a lot of
moisture, foam, LNG vapor, but thankfully no flame and was shiney when
removed with no hint of moisture.
Soldering is a great electrical connection, assuming that you have
oxide-free surfaces or have heated and fluxed sufficiently to remove the
oxides. It is a relatively poor mechanical connection because it causes
wires to become more rigid and thus subject to breaking.
I can't speak specifically to the Davis hardware. Don't have any.
However, based on the comments here, I suspect I'd crimp, create
mechanical strain relief with a piece of nylon cord, overwrap the whole
thing with self-vulcanizing tape and paint it with ScotchKote. I'd then
make sure I tied it to the support in a manner that also didn't
potentially add stress to the connections.
Make sure you add a drip loop immediately at the exit to the anemometer
and just before entry into the house...
gerry
dsmweather wrote:
> I use generic telephone cables with the RJ-45's on the ends, but the
> cables are not UV resistant as the cables from Davis. I've not had any
> issues with them (yet) from UV deterioration, but I can tell you this,
> when you introduce a female connector in the line as I had to do with
> the WM-II, moisture IS a problem. The way I solved the moisture problem
> was to paint all the connections with "liquid tape" to keep things dry.
> Even the slightest bit of moisture in the cable connectors gave me quite
> a problem until I painted them with the liquid stuff. Other than that,
> there is no reason why generic telephone cable would not work. You do
> have to use the 6 conductor cables, and not the 4's if your setup is
> similar to the cabled version of the WM-II.
>
> I solder my wires. That seems to be a skill of the past with crimp
> connectors, but soldering and wrapping the connections seem to end the
> moisture factor as well as pulling and strain on the connectors. I have
> used the liquid stuff and recently purchased some self amalgamating tape..
> Supposed to seal itself over time.. Just haven't had the opportunity to test
> it. But liquid tape looks nice as well as does soldering.
>
> Ah.. If you are not familiar with soldering, you need to use the lowest
> wattage you can get so not to fry the board
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: wxqc-bounces at lists.gladstonefamily.net
> [mailto:wxqc-bounces at lists.gladstonefamily.net] On Behalf Of
> wxqc-request at lists.gladstonefamily.net
> Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2006 07:56 PM
> To: wxqc at lists.gladstonefamily.net
> Subject: wxqc Digest, Vol 23, Issue 18
>
> Send wxqc mailing list submissions to
> wxqc at lists.gladstonefamily.net
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> http://server.gladstonefamily.net/mailman/listinfo/wxqc
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> wxqc-request at lists.gladstonefamily.net
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> wxqc-owner at 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. Re: Davis Vantage Pro2 Question (Trevor Hepler)
> 2. Re: Davis Vantage Pro2 Question (Sam Drinkard)
> 3. Re: Rainfall Rate (#8770-55660639-9551) (CUSTOMER SERVICE)
> 4. Re: Rainfall Rate (#8770-55660639-9551) (Gary J. Ferdinand)
> 5. Discussion of weather data quality issues
> (Paul E.R. Packbier - PCR Environmental Inc.)
> 6. Re: Discussion of weather data quality issues (Evan Bookbinder)
> 7. Re: Rainfall Rate (Dave Helms)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2006 11:36:46 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
> From: Trevor Hepler <blznqgr at earthlink.net>
> Subject: Re: [wxqc] Davis Vantage Pro2 Question
> To: Discussion of weather data quality issues
> <wxqc at lists.gladstonefamily.net>
> Message-ID:
>
> <32197712.1159112207162.JavaMail.root at elwamui-darkeyed.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL:
> http://server.gladstonefamily.net/pipermail/wxqc/attachments/20060924/8fe5ad
> f0/attachment-0001.html
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2006 13:12:31 -0400
> From: Sam Drinkard <sam at wa4phy.net>
> Subject: Re: [wxqc] Davis Vantage Pro2 Question
> To: Discussion of weather data quality issues
> <wxqc at lists.gladstonefamily.net>
> Message-ID: <4516BC7F.3030403 at wa4phy.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> Thomas,
>
> I use generic telephone cables with the RJ-45's on the ends, but the
> cables are not UV resistant as the cables from Davis. I've not had any
> issues with them (yet) from UV deterioration, but I can tell you this,
> when you introduce a female connector in the line as I had to do with
> the WM-II, moisture IS a problem. The way I solved the moisture problem
> was to paint all the connections with "liquid tape" to keep things dry.
> Even the slightest bit of moisture in the cable connectors gave me quite
> a problem until I painted them with the liquid stuff. Other than that,
> there is no reason why generic telephone cable would not work. You do
> have to use the 6 conductor cables, and not the 4's if your setup is
> similar to the cabled version of the WM-II.
>
> HTH
>
> Sam
>
> Thomas Giella KN4LF wrote:
>
>>*Hello To All,*
>>**
>>*I'm new to the eGroup.*
>>
>>*I just purchased a Davis Vantage Pro2 with the optional fan
>>aspirated temperature/humidty shelter. As all know the Pro2 has the
>>integrated sensor suite (ISS) with wind vane/anemometer attached. You
>>can run the included cable of 40 feet between the ISS and
>>anemometer/wind vane unit and add cable extensions of up to 540 feet. *
>>**
>>*For better wind data accuracy I need to detach the anemometer/wind
>>vane from the ISS and place it at 35 feet up on a mast, further away
>>than the 40 foot included extension cable.*
>>**
>>*I have aquestion. Is the 40 foot extension cable a regular telephone
>>type cable with male connectors on each end? In other words can I buy
>>regular telephone cable extensions at Wal Mart or Home Depot to use
>>between the ISS and anemometer/wind vane? Or do I have to buy the
>>Davis (overpriced in my opinion) cables? *
>>**
>>*Next month I'm buying the model #6332 wireless version of the wind
>>vane/anemometer and the cable thing will not be an issue.*
>>**
>>*Take Care,
>>Thomas F. Giella, KN4LF
>>Retired Meteorologist & Space Plasma Physicist
>>Lakeland, FL, USA
>>flycylone at tampabay.rr.com <mailto:flycylone at tampabay.rr.com>*
>>
>>*NWS Tampa Bay, FL SKYWARN Observer #POL-10A
>>CWOP Station #AR692/KN4LF
>>*
>>*Lakeland, FL Daily Climatological Weather Data Archive:
>>http://www.kn4lf.com/kn4lf22.htm
>>September 2006 Lakeland, FL Daily Climatological Weather Observations
>>http://www.kn4lf.com/kn4lf63.htm
>>Florida/US Raw Weather Forecasting Resource Links:
>>http://www.kn4lf.com/kn4lf13.htm
>>Man Induced Climate Change Refuted:
>>http://www.kn4lf.com/globalwarminglie.htm
>>New Scientific Evidence for the Existence of God:
>>http://www.cosmicfingerprints.com/audio/newevidence.htm
>>*
>>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>No virus found in this outgoing message.
>>Checked by AVG Free Edition.
>>Version: 7.1.405 / Virus Database: 268.12.8/455 - Release Date: 9/22/2006
>>
>>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>wxqc mailing list
>>Post messages to wxqc at lists.gladstonefamily.net
>>To unsubcribe or change delivery options, please go to:
>>http://server.gladstonefamily.net/mailman/listinfo/wxqc
>>
>>The contents of this message are the responsibility of the author.
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2006 11:42:38 -0700 (PDT)
> From: CUSTOMER SERVICE <customerservice at westernunion.com>
> Subject: Re: [wxqc] Rainfall Rate (#8770-55660639-9551)
> To: Discussion of weather data quality issues
> <wxqc at lists.gladstonefamily.net>
> Message-ID:
> <26029186.1159123358166.JavaMail.root at ms1b.instantservice.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
> Hello Steve
>
> Thank you for contacting Western Union. We are writing regarding your
> inquiry.
>
>
> Your email does not appear to be addressed to Western Union. We apologize
> for any confusion.
>
>
> If you have any additional comments or questions, please do not hesitate
> to contact us at customerservice at westernunion.com.
>
> Sincerely,
> Steven
> Customer Service Representative
> www.westernunion.com
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Steve Dimse (steve at dimse.com)
> Sent: Sep 24, 2006 7:00:09 AM
> Subject: Re: [wxqc] Rainfall Rate
>
>
> On Sep 24, 2006, at 3:09 AM, Victor Engel wrote:
>
>
>>This is more impressive. It also more accurately reflects how hard
>>it was raining at the time. Are either or both of these calculation
>>methods standards? Which is preferred?
>>
>
> If you are asking about the data as sent to the APRS Internet System,
> it is based on amounts, not rates. There are three values that may be
> reported, last hour, last 24 hours, and since midnight local time.
> The 1 hour and 24 hour totals are forward through MADIS.
>
> Steve K4HG
> _______________________________________________
> wxqc mailing list
> Post messages to wxqc at lists.gladstonefamily.net
> To unsubcribe or change delivery options, please go to:
> http://server.gladstonefamily.net/mailman/listinfo/wxqc
>
> The contents of this message are the responsibility of the author.
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2006 17:15:57 -0400
> From: "Gary J. Ferdinand" <alaparos at taconic.net>
> Subject: Re: [wxqc] Rainfall Rate (#8770-55660639-9551)
> To: "Discussion of weather data quality issues"
> <wxqc at lists.gladstonefamily.net>
> Message-ID: <NFEFIBAAOABBAHFOICFCAEGIFJAA.alaparos at taconic.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
>
> Steve, I bet you have some heads being scratch over at WU!!
>
>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: wxqc-bounces at lists.gladstonefamily.net
>>[mailto:wxqc-bounces at lists.gladstonefamily.net]On Behalf Of CUSTOMER
>>SERVICE
>>Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2006 2:43 PM
>>To: Discussion of weather data quality issues
>>Subject: Re: [wxqc] Rainfall Rate (#8770-55660639-9551)
>>
>>
>>Hello Steve
>>
>>Thank you for contacting Western Union. We are writing regarding your
>>inquiry.
>>
>>
>>Your email does not appear to be addressed to Western Union. We
>>apologize for any confusion.
>>
>>
>>If you have any additional comments or questions, please do not hesitate
>>to contact us at customerservice at westernunion.com.
>>
>>Sincerely,
>>Steven
>>Customer Service Representative
>>www.westernunion.com
>>
>>
>>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Steve Dimse (steve at dimse.com)
>>Sent: Sep 24, 2006 7:00:09 AM
>>Subject: Re: [wxqc] Rainfall Rate
>>
>>
>>On Sep 24, 2006, at 3:09 AM, Victor Engel wrote:
>>
>>
>>>This is more impressive. It also more accurately reflects how hard
>>>it was raining at the time. Are either or both of these calculation
>>>methods standards? Which is preferred?
>>>
>>
>>If you are asking about the data as sent to the APRS Internet System,
>>it is based on amounts, not rates. There are three values that may be
>>reported, last hour, last 24 hours, and since midnight local time.
>>The 1 hour and 24 hour totals are forward through MADIS.
>>
>>Steve K4HG
>>_______________________________________________
>>wxqc mailing list
>>Post messages to wxqc at lists.gladstonefamily.net
>>To unsubcribe or change delivery options, please go to:
>>http://server.gladstonefamily.net/mailman/listinfo/wxqc
>>
>>The contents of this message are the responsibility of the author.
>>
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>wxqc mailing list
>>Post messages to wxqc at lists.gladstonefamily.net
>>To unsubcribe or change delivery options, please go to:
>>http://server.gladstonefamily.net/mailman/listinfo/wxqc
>>
>>The contents of this message are the responsibility of the author.
>>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 5
> Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2006 08:47:38 +1000
> From: "Paul E.R. Packbier - PCR Environmental Inc." <paul at pcrguam.com>
> Subject: [wxqc] Discussion of weather data quality issues
> To: wxqc at lists.gladstonefamily.net
> Message-ID: <DE69260B-3DBE-4070-ADEF-95521E7E8F36 at pcrguam.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=WINDOWS-1252; delsp=yes;
> format=flowed
>
> Evan:
>
> Any idea what causes the 140 mbar "pops" every six hours at the Guam
> NWS/NOAA weather station <http://weather.gladstonefamily.net/site/PGUM>?
>
> Paul
>
> On Sep 25, 2006, at 12:38 AM, wxqc-request at lists.gladstonefamily.net
> wrote:
>
>
>>Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2006 19:00:11 -0500
>>From: Evan Bookbinder <Evan.Bookbinder at noaa.gov>
>>Subject: Re: [wxqc] my rain collector vs. the birds
>>To: Discussion of weather data quality issues
>> <wxqc at lists.gladstonefamily.net>
>>Message-ID: <00e501c6dea3$3dabc2a0$6701a8c0 at stormalerthp>
>>Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=iso-8859-1;
>> reply-type=original
>>
>>A fake cat also works. In all seriousness, birds became a HUGE
>>problem with
>>the new NWS Ultrasonic wind sensors -- hawks in fact. The 3 pronged
>>sensor
>>made a perfect perch for the birds, causing erroneous wind gusts
>>(in some
>>cases near hurricane force) to be observed when the bird was active
>>on his
>>perch.
>>
>>Several attempts to remove the birds by providing alternate landing
>>areas
>>were unsuccessful -- they prefer the 10m perch to scout out their
>>prey. The
>>solution that works ended up being a auto-motion sensor attached to
>>a strobe
>>light and a blaring siren. Two days of that and the sites have not
>>had any
>>bird problems :)
>>
>>Evan
>
>
> _____________________________________________
> PCR Environmental, Inc. - SBA Section 8(a) & HUBZone Certified WOSB SDB
> 266 Father San Vitores Street
> Tamuning, Guam 96913-3622 USA
> (671) 646-3560; Fax (671) 646-3563
>
> http://www.pcrguam.com
>
> ? integrity ? competence ? professionalism ?
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 6
> Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2006 18:30:59 -0500
> From: Evan Bookbinder <Evan.Bookbinder at noaa.gov>
> Subject: Re: [wxqc] Discussion of weather data quality issues
> To: Discussion of weather data quality issues
> <wxqc at lists.gladstonefamily.net>
> Message-ID: <45171533.5020500 at noaa.gov>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
>
> You'd have to ask Phillip on this one. Apparently the decoder bombs on
> the 00, 06 and 12Z observations on the 23rd. However looking at the raw
> METARs, there's nothing wrong with them.
>
> METAR PGUM 230554Z 10007KT 10SM FEW018 SCT040 SCT120 27/25 A2981
> METAR PGUM 231154Z 08003KT 10SM FEW015 26/24 A2989
>
> Given the times of occurrence, I'm wondering if a synoptic observation
> from an alternate source is entering his system and being mis-decoded.
> Again, the actual observations from the site are fine...
> http://www.uswx.com/us/stn/?code=c&n=60&stn=PGUM
>
> Evan
>
>
> Paul E.R. Packbier - PCR Environmental Inc. wrote:
>
>>Evan:
>>
>>Any idea what causes the 140 mbar "pops" every six hours at the Guam
>>NWS/NOAA weather station <http://weather.gladstonefamily.net/site/PGUM>?
>>
>>Paul
>>
>>On Sep 25, 2006, at 12:38 AM, wxqc-request at lists.gladstonefamily.net
>>wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2006 19:00:11 -0500
>>>From: Evan Bookbinder <Evan.Bookbinder at noaa.gov>
>>>Subject: Re: [wxqc] my rain collector vs. the birds
>>>To: Discussion of weather data quality issues
>>> <wxqc at lists.gladstonefamily.net>
>>>Message-ID: <00e501c6dea3$3dabc2a0$6701a8c0 at stormalerthp>
>>>Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=iso-8859-1;
>>> reply-type=original
>>>
>>>A fake cat also works. In all seriousness, birds became a HUGE
>>>problem with
>>>the new NWS Ultrasonic wind sensors -- hawks in fact. The 3 pronged
>>>sensor
>>>made a perfect perch for the birds, causing erroneous wind gusts
>>>(in some
>>>cases near hurricane force) to be observed when the bird was active
>>>on his
>>>perch.
>>>
>>>Several attempts to remove the birds by providing alternate landing
>>>areas
>>>were unsuccessful -- they prefer the 10m perch to scout out their
>>>prey. The
>>>solution that works ended up being a auto-motion sensor attached to
>>>a strobe
>>>light and a blaring siren. Two days of that and the sites have not
>>>had any
>>>bird problems :)
>>>
>>>Evan
>>>
>>
>>_____________________________________________
>>PCR Environmental, Inc. - SBA Section 8(a) & HUBZone Certified WOSB SDB
>>266 Father San Vitores Street
>>Tamuning, Guam 96913-3622 USA
>>(671) 646-3560; Fax (671) 646-3563
>>
>>http://www.pcrguam.com
>>
>>? integrity ? competence ? professionalism ?
>>
>>
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>wxqc mailing list
>>Post messages to wxqc at lists.gladstonefamily.net
>>To unsubcribe or change delivery options, please go to:
>>http://server.gladstonefamily.net/mailman/listinfo/wxqc
>>
>>The contents of this message are the responsibility of the author.
>>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 7
> Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2006 20:56:16 -0400
> From: Dave Helms <dshelms at comcast.net>
> Subject: Re: [wxqc] Rainfall Rate
> To: Discussion of weather data quality issues
> <wxqc at lists.gladstonefamily.net>
> Message-ID: <45172930.9000608 at comcast.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> Victor,
>
> I think the WD values you show are meant to be an a 1 hour rainfall
> forecast based on the most recent rate of fall measurement which is
> sampled over a very short period of time (10 seconds?).
>
> Dave
> CW0351
>
> Evan Bookbinder wrote:
>
>
>>Sounds like a bug in Weather Display??? The Davis VP reports a
>>separate rainfall rate which would have numbers that you calculated in
>>the second listing. The second is the standard for rainfall rate,
>>which as you surmised, is different from hourly rainfall accumulation.
>>
>>Evan
>>
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> *From:* Victor Engel <mailto:brillig at gmail.com>
>> *To:* Discussion of weather data quality issues
>> <mailto:wxqc at lists.gladstonefamily.net>
>> *Sent:* Sunday, September 24, 2006 2:09 AM
>> *Subject:* [wxqc] Rainfall Rate
>>
>> Today, my weather station had its first real storm. It measured
>> 1.66 inches in 40 minutes. The rainfall amounts during the storm
>> went like this:
>>
>> 17:16 0
>> 17:21 0.16
>> 17:26 0.43
>> 17:30 0.79
>> 17:35 1
>> 17:41 1.29
>> 17:46 1.53
>> 17:50 1.64
>> 17:56 1.66
>>
>>
>> where the second column shows the daily total.
>>
>> Weather Display reported a rainfall rate matching these numbers. I
>> suppose that is accurate if the rainfall rate is meant to be an
>> average rate over the past hour. But obviously, if what we really
>> want to know is how hard it was raining while it was coming down,
>> then the rate should be the new accumulation divided by the
>> elapsed time. That gives the following chart:
>>
>> 17:16
>> 17:21 1.92
>> 17:26 3.24
>> 17:30 5.4
>> 17:35 2.52
>> 17:41 2.9
>> 17:46 2.88
>> 17:50 1.65
>> 17:56 0.2
>>
>>
>> This is more impressive. It also more accurately reflects how hard
>> it was raining at the time. Are either or both of these
>> calculation methods standards? Which is preferred?
>>
>> Victor
>>
>> P.S. The rest of town received anywhere from 0 to 1.44 inches,
>> with common amounts being under 0.1 inch. I didn't realize the
>> whole town wasn't unundated until the storm had passed and
>> internet access was restored so I could check around.
>>
>>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>> _______________________________________________
>> wxqc mailing list
>> Post messages to wxqc at lists.gladstonefamily.net
>> To unsubcribe or change delivery options, please go to:
>> http://server.gladstonefamily.net/mailman/listinfo/wxqc
>>
>> The contents of this message are the responsibility of the author.
>>
>>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>wxqc mailing list
>>Post messages to wxqc at lists.gladstonefamily.net
>>To unsubcribe or change delivery options, please go to:
>>http://server.gladstonefamily.net/mailman/listinfo/wxqc
>>
>>The contents of this message are the responsibility of the author.
>>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> wxqc mailing list
> Send messages to wxqc at lists.gladstonefamily.net
> To unsubscribe or change options, please go to:
> http://server.gladstonefamily.net/mailman/listinfo/wxqc
>
> The contents of these messages are the responsibility of the author(s).
>
>
> End of wxqc Digest, Vol 23, Issue 18
> ************************************
>
> _______________________________________________
> wxqc mailing list
> Post messages to wxqc at lists.gladstonefamily.net
> To unsubcribe or change delivery options, please go to:
> http://server.gladstonefamily.net/mailman/listinfo/wxqc
>
> The contents of this message are the responsibility of the author.
--
Gerry Creager -- gerry.creager at 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
More information about the wxqc
mailing list