At first glance the Froggitt WH1080 station shown is VERY similar to the ECOWITT WH69 which has a range of consoles (Link to Amazon UK Ecowitt shop (https://www.amazon.co.uk/stores/page/24 ... f_=ast_bln )SamiS wrote: ↑Mon 03 Jun 2024 6:29 pmWell it seems that Froggit (one of rebraded Ecowitt resellers) do have WH1080 on market.
https://www.froggit.de/product_info.php ... mast-.html
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
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
WH1080 Transmitter or New Station ?
- philpugh
- Posts: 428
- Joined: Tue 24 May 2011 8:34 am
- Weather Station: See Signature
- Operating System: Debian 12 (RPi5)
- Location: Antrobus, Cheshire, UK
- Contact:
Re: WH1080 Transmitter or New Station ?
Phil Pugh
GW1100 + WH65/WH57/WH31;GW1100 + WS68/WH40A (also with HP25xx console); GW2001 WittBoy
CumulusMX V4 / CUtils V7
Raspberry Pi 5 64bit
https://goosegate.uk/
GW1100 + WH65/WH57/WH31;GW1100 + WS68/WH40A (also with HP25xx console); GW2001 WittBoy
CumulusMX V4 / CUtils V7
Raspberry Pi 5 64bit
https://goosegate.uk/
-
AllyCat
- Posts: 1132
- Joined: Sat 26 Feb 2011 1:58 pm
- Weather Station: Fine Offset 1080/1 & 3080
- Operating System: Windows XP SP3
- Location: SE London
Re: WH1080 Transmitter or New Station ?
Hi,
An old thread now, but an enormous amount of information appears to have been added (recenty) to the Wiki linked at about post 10 above and directly from the official Ecowitt Shop. I can't claim to have read even 1% of it, but the following quotes seem relevant:
"The WS69 should not be confused with a (n old) WH14 array which is still sold with old stations for the resellers to empty their stock of shelf-warmers. Even though it looks the same from the outside, the array cannot communicate with the modern Ecowitt consoles (or more precisely speaking the consoles do not understand the array transmissions). The WH14 uses a different modulation technique (ASK = amplitude shift keying) for the transmission from the modern consoles (which use FSK = frequency shif keying). It can only be distinguished by the array name on the underside of the housing where WH14 is shown."
"The transmission interval is 16 seconds.
If you want to use a WH65/WS69 combination sensor with an old HP1080/WH1080 console, you have to change the calibration for wind and rain measurement (analogue to the WH24, see there) (as the cups rotate faster and the rain funnel surface is larger than with a WH24, for which the WH1080 console is originally programmed): Wind gain 0.46, Rain gain 0.85 (“gain” stands for calibration factor)."
The second quote appears to contradict the first, but perhaps refers to the really old versions of the "1080", (i.e. about pre 2010-2014 depending on carrier frequency) which did use FSK. I have no definitive information, but wouldn't have expected those very early stations to use the same FSK protocol as Ecowitt uses now. The "Fine Offset" units also used a 48 second transmission period (60 seconds for the optional solar data packet) which is exactly 3 times 16 seconds, that might work because the data format/protocol inherently can tolerate missing/corrupted data packets. However, if the Console did work, its indicated windspeed would be out by a factor of more than 2.
Cheers, Alan.
An old thread now, but an enormous amount of information appears to have been added (recenty) to the Wiki linked at about post 10 above and directly from the official Ecowitt Shop. I can't claim to have read even 1% of it, but the following quotes seem relevant:
"The WS69 should not be confused with a (n old) WH14 array which is still sold with old stations for the resellers to empty their stock of shelf-warmers. Even though it looks the same from the outside, the array cannot communicate with the modern Ecowitt consoles (or more precisely speaking the consoles do not understand the array transmissions). The WH14 uses a different modulation technique (ASK = amplitude shift keying) for the transmission from the modern consoles (which use FSK = frequency shif keying). It can only be distinguished by the array name on the underside of the housing where WH14 is shown."
"The transmission interval is 16 seconds.
If you want to use a WH65/WS69 combination sensor with an old HP1080/WH1080 console, you have to change the calibration for wind and rain measurement (analogue to the WH24, see there) (as the cups rotate faster and the rain funnel surface is larger than with a WH24, for which the WH1080 console is originally programmed): Wind gain 0.46, Rain gain 0.85 (“gain” stands for calibration factor)."
The second quote appears to contradict the first, but perhaps refers to the really old versions of the "1080", (i.e. about pre 2010-2014 depending on carrier frequency) which did use FSK. I have no definitive information, but wouldn't have expected those very early stations to use the same FSK protocol as Ecowitt uses now. The "Fine Offset" units also used a 48 second transmission period (60 seconds for the optional solar data packet) which is exactly 3 times 16 seconds, that might work because the data format/protocol inherently can tolerate missing/corrupted data packets. However, if the Console did work, its indicated windspeed would be out by a factor of more than 2.
Cheers, Alan.