Welcome to the Cumulus Support forum.

Latest Cumulus MX V4 release 4.4.2 (build 4085) - 12 March 2025

Latest Cumulus MX V3 release 3.28.6 (build 3283) - 21 March 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

If you are posting a new Topic about an error or if you need help PLEASE read this first viewtopic.php?p=164080#p164080

wind average webtag

From build 3044 the development baton passed to Mark Crossley. Mark has been responsible for all the Builds since. He has made the code available on GitHub. It is Mark's hope that others will join in this development, but at the very least he welcomes your ideas for future developments (see Cumulus MX Development suggestions).

Moderator: mcrossley

Post Reply
Mapantz
Posts: 1992
Joined: Sat 17 Dec 2011 11:55 am
Weather Station: Davis Vantage Pro2
Operating System: Windows 11 x64
Location: Dorset - UK
Contact:

wind average webtag

Post by Mapantz »

At midnight, my php tags file was processed, I spotted an unusually high wind average.. :lol:

Code: Select all

$windAvg="<#windAvg dp=1>";

Code: Select all

$windAvg="698.1";
It was bang on 00:00:00

So, I'd guess that being the webtag gives a rolling average, it didn't have much time to accumulate any data, hence the wild number.. :lol:
Image
User avatar
mcrossley
Posts: 14388
Joined: Thu 07 Jan 2010 9:44 pm
Weather Station: Davis VP2/WLL
Operating System: Bullseye Lite rPi
Location: Wilmslow, Cheshire, UK
Contact:

Re: wind average webtag

Post by mcrossley »

That's an interesting one.

Because the calculation uses values for "today" just after rollover the numbers will be tiny and the resulting figure could be a "bit whacky".

Really it is one of those figures that should be used retrospectively to previous days when a full days data is available, the value for today is a bit of indicator.

I'll put in a check for "tiny" times and return zero in that case - that is better than some wildly large value.
Post Reply