>
>
> You already lost that argument.
>
>
Don Quijote is my hero since I was a little kid. I'm used to it. :)
 
 

> WF is moving in the opposite direction of what you want, toward 
> 'increasing' need for continuous internet connectivity to the WF servers, 
> and toward making the UDP messages notionally useless.  There have been 
> many complaints from the original testers in the forums (including me).   
> Some have voted with their feet and gotten rid of all their WF gear 
> (including me).  My opinion is you can't fix bad hardware with software.
>
> My guess - WF is very much in the weather forecasting business, and is 
> focussing their efforts there, more so than somebody like Davis who is in 
> the 'instrumentation' business.
>

It makes sense from a certain point of view, but the two things are not in 
contrast: you can gather all data you want, but users want to receive the 
raw data from the sensors, knowing it is not "enriched" (and that's a plus 
for some). 

>
> Re: sensors and UDP....
>
> The rain data is 'fixed up' via RainCheck before noon the next day local 
> time, available only on their servers via the ReST interface.   How they 
> determine how to (badly, for me) 'fix' your rain data is not released to 
> the consumer.  A lot of people just disable RainCheck for their stations to 
> avoid confusion.  My opinion is the haptic sensor is fatally flawed and 
> they'll come out with a cheap tipping bucket eventually, if EcoWitt doesn't 
> undercut their price to the point where it's not a good idea to even 
> compete there.
>
>
In the thread I replied to on their forum, DSJ explicitly said that he was 
finally convinced of having the same Raincheck enable/disable feature also 
for 
Lightning: 
https://community.weatherflow.com/t/lightning-reports-tempest/6262/133
We'll se if they keep the promise. I replied at the end of that thread.


The lightning data is now totally synthetic and crowd-sourced, presented on 
> their app only via an algorithm that is not released.  Your sensed 
> lightning readings make up 'part' of what they report as lightning for your 
> station, but the UDP info says only what your sensor saw, which frequently 
> is nothing even though you're ducking for cover due to lightning nearby.   
> The lightning sensor is the weakest part of the system, it's very shaky.
>

Vince, I NEVER received a single evt_strike through UDP, not even during a 
big storm that lasted for hours during the night, I was monitoring debug 
log to finally wait for at least 1 event but nothing. Meanwhile I was 
receiving a lot of lightning notifications on the android app. They say I 
should see raw data of the sensors through UDP, but that was not the case, 
I guess I have a faulty station/sensor.

>
> What they include from where in 'fixing' up your sensor readings is not 
> released by WF.  There is no way to opt out of your data being altered 
> short of blocking your Hub from connecting to Internet, but at that point 
> (a) you can't get continuous learning tuning adjustments, (b) you can't get 
> firmware updates, and (c) it is unclear if a previously-tuned WF station 
> would even work without connectivity to the WF servers.
>
>
Well, if all raw data of the sensors is sent via UDP, you don't have 
altered data, but the one coming from the sensors. And that's what I want. 
To compare it with my other stations (ecowitt and davis).

 

> I don't believe it resets the clock on reboot, mine rebooted all the time 
> and I never saw odd data in weewx or in the UDP.
>
> I've always wondered what the Hub does on boot up, other than establishing 
> essentially a MQTT session to the WF servers.  There has to be something 
> related to setting a system clock in there somewhere under the hood, but 
> it's never been documented that I recall.
>
> Definitely worth a test.  Block your hub from all Internet access.  Power 
> it down.  Power it back up.  What does it do ?  Does it block startup if it 
> can't phone home for network time ?  What are the timestamps in the UDP 
> broadcasts ?
>
> You can also tell if your system has rebooted by looking at uptime in the 
> UDP broadcasts.  See the API docs for where.
>

Thanks for the suggestions, if it happens again I'll dig into it.
 

>
> Re: the UDP monitor program, if you run my UDP listener with the --raw 
> --decoded options you will see a reasonably nicely formatted output of what 
> the Hub is emitting.   You 'can' run this on the same box as weewx and the 
> weatherflow UDP driver, but be sure to set 'shared_socket = true' in 
> weewx.conf so that the driver coexists with other things also listening for 
> udp/50222 on the same box.
>
> My listener is at https://github.com/vinceskahan/weatherflow-udp-listener
>
> Feel free to email offline if you need help with my listener...
>

I had already bookmarked your listener, in case I needed to debug things. 
Thank you very much for the support, I'll contact you if needed. :)

Alessandro

 

>  
>

On Thursday, October 29, 2020 at 2:17:16 AM UTC+1, vince wrote:
>
> On Wednesday, October 28, 2020 at 4:11:45 PM UTC-7, Alessandro Del Prete 
> wrote:
>>
>> I'll read the exchange, thanks. I'm very interested in this problem, I 
>> have an ongoing conversation with support because the lightning sensor is 
>> not sending data via UDP, I just receive events on the app, but via UDP I 
>> received no evt_strike events. I know there's a specific discussion about 
>> this lightining issue and the UDP raw data vs enriched API data, and I hope 
>> they understand that locally, via UDP, we want to see ALL sensors' data, 
>> it's not acceptable that they decide what I can read from the system and 
>> what not.
>>
>>
> You already lost that argument.
>
> [...disclaimer - past WF user for 24 months including being a field tester 
> of Sky, Solar panel, and Tempest...]
>
>
> WF is moving in the opposite direction of what you want, toward 
> 'increasing' need for continuous internet connectivity to the WF servers, 
> and toward making the UDP messages notionally useless.  There have been 
> many complaints from the original testers in the forums (including me).   
> Some have voted with their feet and gotten rid of all their WF gear 
> (including me).  My opinion is you can't fix bad hardware with software.
>
> My guess - WF is very much in the weather forecasting business, and is 
> focussing their efforts there, more so than somebody like Davis who is in 
> the 'instrumentation' business.
>
> Re: sensors and UDP....
>
> The rain data is 'fixed up' via RainCheck before noon the next day local 
> time, available only on their servers via the ReST interface.   How they 
> determine how to (badly, for me) 'fix' your rain data is not released to 
> the consumer.  A lot of people just disable RainCheck for their stations to 
> avoid confusion.  My opinion is the haptic sensor is fatally flawed and 
> they'll come out with a cheap tipping bucket eventually, if EcoWitt doesn't 
> undercut their price to the point where it's not a good idea to even 
> compete there.
>
> The lightning data is now totally synthetic and crowd-sourced, presented 
> on their app only via an algorithm that is not released.  Your sensed 
> lightning readings make up 'part' of what they report as lightning for your 
> station, but the UDP info says only what your sensor saw, which frequently 
> is nothing even though you're ducking for cover due to lightning nearby.   
> The lightning sensor is the weakest part of the system, it's very shaky.
>
> What they include from where in 'fixing' up your sensor readings is not 
> released by WF.  There is no way to opt out of your data being altered 
> short of blocking your Hub from connecting to Internet, but at that point 
> (a) you can't get continuous learning tuning adjustments, (b) you can't get 
> firmware updates, and (c) it is unclear if a previously-tuned WF station 
> would even work without connectivity to the WF servers.
>
>  
>
>> PS: I asked WF support also about the timestamp issue, if there's a 
>> possibility that the Tempest sends epoch time zero on reboot or in any 
>> other case.
>>
>>
> I don't believe it resets the clock on reboot, mine rebooted all the time 
> and I never saw odd data in weewx or in the UDP.
>
> I've always wondered what the Hub does on boot up, other than establishing 
> essentially a MQTT session to the WF servers.  There has to be something 
> related to setting a system clock in there somewhere under the hood, but 
> it's never been documented that I recall.
>
> Definitely worth a test.  Block your hub from all Internet access.  Power 
> it down.  Power it back up.  What does it do ?  Does it block startup if it 
> can't phone home for network time ?  What are the timestamps in the UDP 
> broadcasts ?
>
> You can also tell if your system has rebooted by looking at uptime in the 
> UDP broadcasts.  See the API docs for where.
>
> Re: the UDP monitor program, if you run my UDP listener with the --raw 
> --decoded options you will see a reasonably nicely formatted output of what 
> the Hub is emitting.   You 'can' run this on the same box as weewx and the 
> weatherflow UDP driver, but be sure to set 'shared_socket = true' in 
> weewx.conf so that the driver coexists with other things also listening for 
> udp/50222 on the same box.
>
> My listener is at https://github.com/vinceskahan/weatherflow-udp-listener
>
> Feel free to email offline if you need help with my listener... 
>

 

-- 
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/8b0733cc-59bc-46db-a5af-fd47e8f99d1do%40googlegroups.com.

Reply via email to