Hi from Skye...
Posted: Tue 09 Dec 2008 10:35 am
First post, so I though I'd start with a bit of background - though I notice that there are quite a few familiar names already here from 'another place.
I've had a weather station now for almost a year. I'd fancied one for ages. I could see that Davis was top of the range, but I could not justify the cost.
In December 2007 while looking for something else I noticed the OS WMR100 and was interested. I then noticed the WMR200 and decided that it looked like a good compromise. It was only when I started using it (with WD) that I discovered just how "fresh out out of the box" it was...
Now nearly a year later I have the WMR200, a WMR928 with the three basic extra temp/hum and three THC238 'temp probe on a lead' sensors (one as soil, one as temp in a jar/night cloud, the other awaiting resiting as a deeper soil temp), plus Meteohub (software) running on an NSLU2 (the Linux based device that Meteohub runs on) and an RFXCOM receiver. I mainly process and present data using Weather Display, but I also have WSWIN.
The RFXCOM captures the data direct from the OS sensors (which is how I manage to have a total of 6 WMR928 '3 channel' sensors), feeds it to Meteohub, which then feeds it to WD via a http based logging protocol. WD is only seeing data from one of the rain gauges and one of the anemometers - though whe the two anemometers were side by side I used a proxy cgi that I wrote myself to sit between Meteohub and WD to merge the wind data before WD saw it!
Even with WMR200 => WD communication now being basically sound, I'm much happier with the reliability of the Meteohub based "round the houses" approach than with direct WMR200 => WD communications - and as bonuses:
a) I can use more sensors
b) The Meteohub can still publish at least some data 24/7 even if the PC is down for some reason (it's only within the last month of so that I've switched WD to a low energy PC and 24/7 running).
c) I can have the consoles in convenient locations away from the PC.
d) The Meteohub is effectively a logger with massive capacity (years worth of every raw data reading).
The WMR200 logging capacity remains available as a backup facility.
My current kit probably adds up to the price of a Davis (but I'd also need the data logger, and it would certainly cost more to have the number of sensors that I have)!
Horses for courses. For the moment I'm happy with my collection of hardware - though I have recently started to dip a toe into 1-wire...
On the software side I think matters could be improved, hence my interest here...
I've had a weather station now for almost a year. I'd fancied one for ages. I could see that Davis was top of the range, but I could not justify the cost.
In December 2007 while looking for something else I noticed the OS WMR100 and was interested. I then noticed the WMR200 and decided that it looked like a good compromise. It was only when I started using it (with WD) that I discovered just how "fresh out out of the box" it was...
Now nearly a year later I have the WMR200, a WMR928 with the three basic extra temp/hum and three THC238 'temp probe on a lead' sensors (one as soil, one as temp in a jar/night cloud, the other awaiting resiting as a deeper soil temp), plus Meteohub (software) running on an NSLU2 (the Linux based device that Meteohub runs on) and an RFXCOM receiver. I mainly process and present data using Weather Display, but I also have WSWIN.
The RFXCOM captures the data direct from the OS sensors (which is how I manage to have a total of 6 WMR928 '3 channel' sensors), feeds it to Meteohub, which then feeds it to WD via a http based logging protocol. WD is only seeing data from one of the rain gauges and one of the anemometers - though whe the two anemometers were side by side I used a proxy cgi that I wrote myself to sit between Meteohub and WD to merge the wind data before WD saw it!
Even with WMR200 => WD communication now being basically sound, I'm much happier with the reliability of the Meteohub based "round the houses" approach than with direct WMR200 => WD communications - and as bonuses:
a) I can use more sensors
b) The Meteohub can still publish at least some data 24/7 even if the PC is down for some reason (it's only within the last month of so that I've switched WD to a low energy PC and 24/7 running).
c) I can have the consoles in convenient locations away from the PC.
d) The Meteohub is effectively a logger with massive capacity (years worth of every raw data reading).
The WMR200 logging capacity remains available as a backup facility.
My current kit probably adds up to the price of a Davis (but I'd also need the data logger, and it would certainly cost more to have the number of sensors that I have)!
Horses for courses. For the moment I'm happy with my collection of hardware - though I have recently started to dip a toe into 1-wire...
On the software side I think matters could be improved, hence my interest here...