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

Strange Humidity Calibration Results

Discussion and questions about Cumulus weather station software version 1. This section is the main place to get help with Cumulus 1 software developed by Steve Loft that ceased development in November 2014.
Post Reply
Ken22
Posts: 31
Joined: Tue 14 Jan 2014 3:08 pm
Weather Station: Oregon Scientific WMR968
Operating System: Windows 7 Pro 64 bit
Location: Massachusetts, USA
Contact:

Strange Humidity Calibration Results

Post by Ken22 »

My humidity readings are very far off from reality. Replacing the sensor with a new one didn't help much. I am now told that these Oregon sensors have a long history of inaccuracy.

I'm fixing this the best I can with a combination of calibration adjustments.

I have a Multiplier of 0.776 and an offset of 22. I also have the parameter of change 98% humidity to 100% checked.

With the WMR-968 showing 98% humidity, I should get (98 * .776) + 22 which equals 98.048 and should show as 100% in Cumulus. However, Cumulus is showing 99%.

If I change the multiplier to .775 and turn off the 98->100 flag, the result should be 97.95% and show in Cumulus as 98%, but it shows as 97%.

Am I misunderstanding something, or is this a program error?

Ken
===
User avatar
steve
Cumulus Author
Posts: 26701
Joined: Mon 02 Jun 2008 6:49 pm
Weather Station: None
Operating System: None
Location: Vienne, France
Contact:

Re: Strange Humidity Calibration Results

Post by steve »

Cumulus truncates the result of applying the multiplier and the offset. You could argue that it should round, and I would have some sympathy with that, but it doesn't, and I don't propose to change that, in Cumulus 1 at least. It's possible that there was a reason for doing it this way.

The 98->100 setting affects the value before the multiplier and offset are applied. It is intended to cater for the deficiency in the station where the raw figure from the station can never be more than 98.
Steve
Ken22
Posts: 31
Joined: Tue 14 Jan 2014 3:08 pm
Weather Station: Oregon Scientific WMR968
Operating System: Windows 7 Pro 64 bit
Location: Massachusetts, USA
Contact:

Re: Strange Humidity Calibration Results

Post by Ken22 »

steve wrote:The 98->100 setting affects the value before the multiplier and offset are applied. It is intended to cater for the deficiency in the station where the raw figure from the station can never be more than 98.
First, let me say that I don't really care a lot about this, so I not suggesting you spend any time fixing anything. However, the statement quoted does not appear to be correct. In my case, the value before corrections was 98 and it displayed 99 with the 98>100 setting in effect.

Ken
===
User avatar
steve
Cumulus Author
Posts: 26701
Joined: Mon 02 Jun 2008 6:49 pm
Weather Station: None
Operating System: None
Location: Vienne, France
Contact:

Re: Strange Humidity Calibration Results

Post by steve »

Ken22 wrote:However, the statement quoted does not appear to be correct. In my case, the value before corrections was 98 and it displayed 99 with the 98>100 setting in effect.
A reading of 98 with the 98->100 setting in effect is first converted to 100. A multiplier of 0.776 and an offset of 22 applied to that = (100*0.776) + 22 = 77.6+22 = 99.6. Truncating gives 99.
Steve
Ken22
Posts: 31
Joined: Tue 14 Jan 2014 3:08 pm
Weather Station: Oregon Scientific WMR968
Operating System: Windows 7 Pro 64 bit
Location: Massachusetts, USA
Contact:

Re: Strange Humidity Calibration Results

Post by Ken22 »

steve wrote:A reading of 98 with the 98->100 setting in effect is first converted to 100. A multiplier of 0.776 and an offset of 22 applied to that = (100*0.776) + 22 = 77.6+22 = 99.6. Truncating gives 99.
Got it!

Ken
===
Post Reply