Welcome to the Cumulus Support forum.
Latest Cumulus MX V3 release 3.28.6 (build 3283) - 21 March 2024
Cumulus MX V4 beta test release 4.0.0 (build 4019) - 03 April 2024
Legacy Cumulus 1 release 1.9.4 (build 1099) - 28 November 2014
(a patch is available for 1.9.4 build 1099 that extends the date range of drop-down menus to 2030)
Download the Software (Cumulus MX / Cumulus 1 and other related items) from the Wiki
Latest Cumulus MX V3 release 3.28.6 (build 3283) - 21 March 2024
Cumulus MX V4 beta test release 4.0.0 (build 4019) - 03 April 2024
Legacy Cumulus 1 release 1.9.4 (build 1099) - 28 November 2014
(a patch is available for 1.9.4 build 1099 that extends the date range of drop-down menus to 2030)
Download the Software (Cumulus MX / Cumulus 1 and other related items) from the Wiki
Just in case
Moderator: mcrossley
- mcrossley
- Posts: 12756
- Joined: Thu 07 Jan 2010 9:44 pm
- Weather Station: Davis VP2/WLL
- Operating System: Bullseye Lite rPi
- Location: Wilmslow, Cheshire, UK
- Contact:
Re: Just in case
Sorry, yes I found it in the calculation procedure page rather than the net long wave radiation page.
Source code changed for the next build.
Ah, but I was simply dividing the end result Rnl by 24 to get the same result - so as you were!
Source code changed for the next build.
Ah, but I was simply dividing the end result Rnl by 24 to get the same result - so as you were!
-
- Posts: 512
- Joined: Mon 28 Nov 2011 2:13 am
- Weather Station: Davis VP2/ WLL with DFARS
- Operating System: RPi Raspbian (Buster)
- Location: Ferny Grove, Brisbane, Australia
- Contact:
Re: Just in case
No worries Mark.
Thanks for that.
For my tests I based my code on your code and after that compared it the FAO document. And as you say that info is the calculation procedure pages, which is where I notice some things to check as provided.
Thanks for that.
For my tests I based my code on your code and after that compared it the FAO document. And as you say that info is the calculation procedure pages, which is where I notice some things to check as provided.
- HansR
- Posts: 5963
- Joined: Sat 20 Oct 2012 6:53 am
- Weather Station: GW1100 (WS80/WH40)
- Operating System: Raspberry OS/Bookworm
- Location: Wagenborgen (NL)
- Contact:
Re: Just in case
Yes there is in Chapter 4, search for Boltzman (roughly halfway you find devide by 24).mcrossley wrote: ↑Tue 12 Oct 2021 3:07 pm Interesting, thanks.
I had coded the Stefan-Boltzman constant to be 4.903e-09, but as you point out that is a per day value. Since we are calculating by the hour it makes sense to divide that by 24.
However I cannot see a reference to doing that in the FAO document?
Interesting discussion. Though I don't see EVT be more than some kind of reference. Not something like a measurement, not even a derivative.
Interesting nonetheless!
Hans
https://meteo-wagenborgen.nl
CMX build 4017+ ● RPi 3B+ ● Raspbian Linux 6.1.21-v7+ armv7l ● dotnet 8.0.3
https://meteo-wagenborgen.nl
CMX build 4017+ ● RPi 3B+ ● Raspbian Linux 6.1.21-v7+ armv7l ● dotnet 8.0.3
- HansR
- Posts: 5963
- Joined: Sat 20 Oct 2012 6:53 am
- Weather Station: GW1100 (WS80/WH40)
- Operating System: Raspberry OS/Bookworm
- Location: Wagenborgen (NL)
- Contact:
Re: Just in case
Ah.... too late.
Nice read anyway
Nice read anyway
Hans
https://meteo-wagenborgen.nl
CMX build 4017+ ● RPi 3B+ ● Raspbian Linux 6.1.21-v7+ armv7l ● dotnet 8.0.3
https://meteo-wagenborgen.nl
CMX build 4017+ ● RPi 3B+ ● Raspbian Linux 6.1.21-v7+ armv7l ● dotnet 8.0.3
- mcrossley
- Posts: 12756
- Joined: Thu 07 Jan 2010 9:44 pm
- Weather Station: Davis VP2/WLL
- Operating System: Bullseye Lite rPi
- Location: Wilmslow, Cheshire, UK
- Contact:
Re: Just in case
Mainly for agriculturists, gives some idea of when watering may be required if you compare the cumulative figure against rainfall. The ET CMX and Davis calculates is just for the standard grass crop, for anything else it has to be corrected.
-
- Posts: 512
- Joined: Mon 28 Nov 2011 2:13 am
- Weather Station: Davis VP2/ WLL with DFARS
- Operating System: RPi Raspbian (Buster)
- Location: Ferny Grove, Brisbane, Australia
- Contact:
Re: Just in case
After the tweaks to the ET calculation in build 3152, I re did my comparisons for the year so far and is similar to the previous totals of when this was first included in CMX.
ET_Bom1: As a comparison to a nearby BoM Station - Archerfield Airport that get fairly similar weather but is more exposed.
ET_Bom2: As a comparison to a nearby BoM Station - Brisbane that generally doesn't get as hot (closer to the coast) but not as exposed as Archerfield.
From what I can see, I pretty happy with the ET figures, and fits in roughly what I would expect.
I find the ET figures interesting to follow as a guide in relation to weather at the time and compared with rainfall. I will be looking to adding this data to my website.
Code: Select all
ET CMX ET CMX v2 ET bom1 ET bom2
------------------------------------------------------------------
Jan 123.45 123.77 164.5 156.8
Feb 101.62 101.9 149.3 129.9
Mar 89.51 89.76 122.6 106.9
Apr 84.34 84.5 105.4 87.4
May 75.79 75.98 86 70
Jun 63 63.2 72.4 53.4
Jul 71.6 71.97 81.2 66.5
Aug 92.82 93.05 106.2 68.9
Sep 112.58 112.94 135.3 88.9
Oct 110.65 110.96 143.9 115.9
------------------------------------------------------------------
Total 925.36 928.03 1166.8 944.6
ET_Bom2: As a comparison to a nearby BoM Station - Brisbane that generally doesn't get as hot (closer to the coast) but not as exposed as Archerfield.
From what I can see, I pretty happy with the ET figures, and fits in roughly what I would expect.
I find the ET figures interesting to follow as a guide in relation to weather at the time and compared with rainfall. I will be looking to adding this data to my website.
- mcrossley
- Posts: 12756
- Joined: Thu 07 Jan 2010 9:44 pm
- Weather Station: Davis VP2/WLL
- Operating System: Bullseye Lite rPi
- Location: Wilmslow, Cheshire, UK
- Contact:
Re: Just in case
Thanks for continuing to look at this. I'm getting low daily ET values as we head into winter - 1 mm or less - so it makes evaluation a little tricky.
From my quick scan of the results and comparing with my VP2 console...
The value derived from wind is better (I'm wondering if Davis have omitted the anemometer height compensation altogether - there is no input for it on the console).
The solar contribution appears to be lower. I may dump the current MX method, and just implement the FAO method - though I think their value is an approximation of what MX is using.
From my quick scan of the results and comparing with my VP2 console...
The value derived from wind is better (I'm wondering if Davis have omitted the anemometer height compensation altogether - there is no input for it on the console).
The solar contribution appears to be lower. I may dump the current MX method, and just implement the FAO method - though I think their value is an approximation of what MX is using.
-
- Posts: 512
- Joined: Mon 28 Nov 2011 2:13 am
- Weather Station: Davis VP2/ WLL with DFARS
- Operating System: RPi Raspbian (Buster)
- Location: Ferny Grove, Brisbane, Australia
- Contact:
Re: Just in case
No worries. I would be happy to assist with this if you need any thing further - we get plenty of ET here. I already had some calculations worked out because I wanted to use the ET values because of the WLL not calculating the data from separate sensors.
Interesting comparisons there - can't compared with the console here (It's wasn't until I moved to the WLL that I could measure solar). I don't think Davis worried about the height of the anemometer as you say, unless that is undocumented but it would not know anyway. Davis however don't specifically explain how they calculate the net radiation, as in their specs document they say they use a modified calculation. I suspect that Davis approximated the calculations to some degree.
Interesting comparisons there - can't compared with the console here (It's wasn't until I moved to the WLL that I could measure solar). I don't think Davis worried about the height of the anemometer as you say, unless that is undocumented but it would not know anyway. Davis however don't specifically explain how they calculate the net radiation, as in their specs document they say they use a modified calculation. I suspect that Davis approximated the calculations to some degree.
- mcrossley
- Posts: 12756
- Joined: Thu 07 Jan 2010 9:44 pm
- Weather Station: Davis VP2/WLL
- Operating System: Bullseye Lite rPi
- Location: Wilmslow, Cheshire, UK
- Contact:
Re: Just in case
With the limited CPU power in the console, they seem to have used lookup tables and interpolation for other values, I wouldn't be surprised if they did the same with some ET calculations.
-
- Posts: 139
- Joined: Sun 03 Jan 2010 10:57 am
- Weather Station: Davis Pro2
- Operating System: Windows 2012R2
- Location: London
Re: Just in case
Is there a way to (re)calculate missing Evapotranspiration?
I used to get the figure but "lost" it when I moved my solar sensor to a separate transmitter (and got a WLL) a few years back. I noticed the CumulusMX "Calculate evapotranspiration" option at the beginning of the year, and turned it on, and I have the evapotranspiration since, but I have almost 2 years where it's missing.
Anything I can do?
I used to get the figure but "lost" it when I moved my solar sensor to a separate transmitter (and got a WLL) a few years back. I noticed the CumulusMX "Calculate evapotranspiration" option at the beginning of the year, and turned it on, and I have the evapotranspiration since, but I have almost 2 years where it's missing.
Anything I can do?