Bob, you might also want to look at what's been done at Unidata ( http://www.unidata.ucar.edu) with the IDV software. Doesn't use PostGIS but that might be an interesting way to get things into it later.
gerry On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 8:49 AM, Basques, Bob (CI-StPaul) < [email protected]> wrote: > Hmm, > > > > I’m working with the Minneapolis International Airport (MSP) on a project, > any chance that data is open/accessible enough to play with? This could > tie directly into a project I’m already working on. > > > > Thanks > > > > Bobb > > > > > > > > *From:* [email protected] [mailto: > [email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Gerry Creager - > NOAA Affiliate > *Sent:* Tuesday, December 10, 2013 2:14 PM > > *To:* PostGIS Users Discussion > *Subject:* Re: [postgis-users] Old question resurfacing > > > > Bob, all: > > > > I agree. I'll have to spend some time with pointcloud but it DOES look > very promising. > > > > Another application? Lidar. Pointed at the sky, not at the ground (we use > 'em to determine cloud layers [ceiling] and sky cover at airports for > aviation data...). > > > > Thanks, all! > > gerry > > > > On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 1:49 PM, Basques, Bob (CI-StPaul) < > [email protected]> wrote: > > Gerry, > > > > Remi’s idea about using a point cloud may be spot on for your use. It > allows you to set a point cloud down to a revolution if need be, which > seems like what you are looking for.. If the data becomes too massive for > insertion into DB at real-time speeds, then you could also separate this > revolution into separate DB’s as well, you could separate a whole number of > ways, by elevation, or quadrant, or . . . > > > > I’m very interested in visualization possibilities with something like > this being available in a database. We’re doing some similar db 3d > visualization stuff on some rather dense point clouds. Your data once > available could use the same visualizer. > > > > Bobb > > > > > > > > *From:* [email protected] [mailto: > [email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Gerry Creager - > NOAA Affiliate > *Sent:* Tuesday, December 10, 2013 1:41 PM > *To:* PostGIS Users Discussion > *Subject:* Re: [postgis-users] Old question resurfacing > > > > Bob > > > > At least preliminarily, I can post-process, so speed of db adds isn't too > troubling. Maintaining accurate representation of the bin-volume data is, > however, important. > > > > Typical rotation is 1-3 RPM, and a complete volume scan takes ~11 min in > clear air (where you best see biologicals if so inclined) or ~5 min in one > of the storm data collection modes. These are for common WSR88D, stationary > radars. SMARTR's and others we have here that are mobile present a whole > host of other options/data eval and speed problems. > > > > Current radar data are nominally considered to have a horizontal > resolution of ~250 m, ignoring distortion or keyholing due to > range.Typically 16 elevations are scanned, once or or twice in storm mode > and a few less elevations in clear air mode. > > > > Now, the interesting thing that's on the horizon is Phased Array Radar. > When that happens, more data, more resolution, and faster updates. > > > > gerry > > > > On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 11:05 AM, Basques, Bob (CI-StPaul) < > [email protected]> wrote: > > Gerry, > > > > Seems like the biggest hangup would be in adding the data to the DB fast > enough. How many points, per revolution, and what is the frequency of a > revolution (stationary Radar, correct, although as I think about it, it > could be mobile if needed, just need to add in the radar location to each > record)? > > > > Bobb > > > > > > > > *From:* [email protected] [mailto: > [email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Gerry Creager - > NOAA Affiliate > *Sent:* Tuesday, December 10, 2013 10:52 AM > *To:* PostGIS Users Discussion > *Subject:* [postgis-users] Old question resurfacing > > > > I asked this years ago, and I think Paul was less than pleased with me > (:-), but: > > > > Has anyone, in the ensuing years looked at encoding radar data into a > postGIS database? We've a little idea that might benefit one project, and > getting the radar data into a good geospatial format would be > beneficial.The data, of coure, would start out as radial-distance and > intensity from the radar site, although we could preprocess it by gridding. > > > > Thanks, Gerry > > -- > > Gerry Creager > > NSSL/CIMMS > > 405.325.6371 > > ++++++++++++++++++++++ > > “Big whorls have little whorls, > > That feed on their velocity; > > And little whorls have lesser whorls, > > And so on to viscosity.” > > Lewis Fry Richardson (1881-1953) > > > _______________________________________________ > postgis-users mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.osgeo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/postgis-users > > > > > > -- > > Gerry Creager > > NSSL/CIMMS > > 405.325.6371 > > ++++++++++++++++++++++ > > “Big whorls have little whorls, > > That feed on their velocity; > > And little whorls have lesser whorls, > > And so on to viscosity.” > > Lewis Fry Richardson (1881-1953) > > > _______________________________________________ > postgis-users mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.osgeo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/postgis-users > > > > > > -- > > Gerry Creager > > NSSL/CIMMS > > 405.325.6371 > > ++++++++++++++++++++++ > > “Big whorls have little whorls, > > That feed on their velocity; > > And little whorls have lesser whorls, > > And so on to viscosity.” > > Lewis Fry Richardson (1881-1953) > > _______________________________________________ > postgis-users mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.osgeo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/postgis-users > -- Gerry Creager NSSL/CIMMS 405.325.6371 ++++++++++++++++++++++ “Big whorls have little whorls, That feed on their velocity; And little whorls have lesser whorls, And so on to viscosity.” Lewis Fry Richardson (1881-1953)
_______________________________________________ postgis-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osgeo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/postgis-users
