By the way Davis just announced an air quality sensor called AirLink. It does PM 1, 2.5, and 10. https://www.weatherstations.co.uk/airlink.htm
On Monday, August 24, 2020 at 3:12:33 PM UTC-4, galfert wrote: > > 1. The Ultrasonic is better a picking up low wind and may be a bit more > precise. But on the top end the ultrasonic stops at 89 mph. The spinning > anemometer stops at 99 mph. Longevity is anyone's bet. no moving parts on > ultrasonic...but electronics can break just as much as something with > moving parts. > 2. The GW1000 is worth every penny. You can't get data from an Ambient > console without it that includes all sensors. The ObserverIP is junk...I > don't even consider that an option. > 3. The GW1000 has a bit better range to sensors than the display consoles. > Advertised is 300 ft but 100 ft is typical. Some say even 200 ft is > possible with the latest version of the GW1000. > 4. No, there is no logger on the GW1000. The WS-2000 / HP2551 display does > have an SD card storage option but that data would be a pain to get out > manually via .csv files. I suppose if you keep it powered up via UPS you > can have data there. You can always have more than one system getting data > from the GW1000. So that if one is down maybe the other stays up. > 5. I've not seen that you can yet publish PM2.5 data into any of the > public online services. WU upload takes PM2.5 but if you upload to them > they don't yet do anything with this data. Other places will probably soon > take PM2.5. There are several reasons to consider Ambient or Ecowitt ...one > versus the other. If you go Ambient then you can only ever buy sensors that > they sell...because Ecowitt sensors will not work with their display > consoles. The GW1000 being that it is Ecowitt will pick up all the > sensors....but you won't see them on the WS-2000 display if they aren't > Ambient branded. The HP2551 is available for purchase but you can't buy the > HP2553. If you are in the US then Ecowitt will not sell you the HP2553. > Your only option is to buy the WS-5000. But you could buy the GW1002 with > spinning anemometer and then later buy just the WS80 ultransonic from > Ambient when it becomes available. Yes more costly because you would be > getting a WS68 that you wouldn't need...but it is the only way if you live > in the US. That said I'm sort of partial and I like the WS68 just fine. The > WH80 needs a heater if you live in colder climate...that is an extra cost > and an extra thing to need to wire up for power...and you'll need to devise > a way to turn it on/off because that is not built in and it can't have the > heater on if it it above a certain temperature. The WH80 to me looks like a > bird perch. The WS68 seems more bird proof to me. Ambient does not sell the > WS68 and they never will. > > On Monday, August 24, 2020 at 2:48:27 PM UTC-4, loonsailor wrote: >> >> I need a replacement for my 25-year-old Vantage Pro (original, not +) and >> am considering either the Ecowitt 2551 or the 2553 or the Ambient >> equivalents. I'll also add a WH41 and a WH43 (or ambient equivalents) ar >> quality sensors. I've got a 25 year database of weather (started on wView) >> and I'm eager to keep it going. A couple of questions: >> >> >> 1. How does the ultrasonic anemometer compare to the one in the >> mechanical ones in accuracy, reliability, and expected longevity? >> 2. Of course, I will want to connect the new station to weeWx. I see >> that there is a new pull driver for the GW1000. Is it worth getting the >> GW1000 for that purpose, or can I use the new driver with the console >> included with the stations? >> 3. Is the maximum range from station to console the same for GW1000 >> and the included console? >> 4. One of the things I like about my ancient Vantage Pro is that >> there is a 2-week memory in the station console. If my linux server goes >> down for any reason, upon startup weeWX will recapture the data that it >> missed and populate the DB accordingly. Very nice! Is there any >> equivalent with the stations / consoles that I’m considering? >> 5. Getting the air quality sensors set up is a stage-2 sort of >> project for me, and I understand that it’s not completely >> straightforward, >> because there is no dedicated PM2.5 field in the standard DB. Still, >> though I’ll worry about that implementation a bit later, I’d like to plan >> for it. With that in mind, is there any reason to prefer the Ambient or >> the Ecowitt? If I’m picking up the data with weeWx, how does it get into >> one of the public air quality maps? Or, should I consider getting a >> PurpleAir instead? I know it’s pricier, but if there’s a good reason to >> go >> that way I’m open to it. >> >> Any advice will be eagerly, gratefully accepted. Thanks, in advance. >> >> >> -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "weewx-user" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/weewx-user/589c553c-20c9-428d-af38-a46c1660feefo%40googlegroups.com.
