Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Heavy Weather for 3610

Expand Messages
  • mervcur
    Hello all, just new to the group I have had a 3610 for a few weeks now and it seems to be working quite well. I have one computer here with XP media Edition
    Message 1 of 18 , Jan 8, 2009
    • 0 Attachment
      Hello all, just new to the group

      I have had a 3610 for a few weeks now and it seems to be working quite
      well. I have one computer here with XP media Edition and several
      others with Linux installed but I have had little experience with
      Windows software over the years. No serial port so I am using a
      Serial to USB adaptor.

      When I first ran Heavy Weather it displayed and matched all the data
      on the touch screen very well. However it didn't store any data in
      the history file because one wasn't created. I guessed I could
      create an empty file with 'notepad' but that didn't help. Next I
      found one could be created by 'Extras - Options - History Data
      Filename but that didn't help either.

      I don't see anything in the recent archives of the List about this so
      I guess I am unique with some new problem. Did I miss anything in
      the Documentation or does anyone have any ideas so I can have a
      history file? Oh yes I did have HW close the history file and open a
      new one but nothing gets written to the new file either.

      I have tried the Weather Display software for Linux and Windows
      versions but there too I have several different problems. At any
      rate I prefer the Heavy Weather screen, it is much less cluttered. I
      looked at he Open 3600 site but that software seems rather old and
      has few users and no doc's.

      I do have constant weather reports on my Linux Desktops for the local
      Airport so this is just to give me data at my end of the city and a
      curiosity history record. I only occasionally use the XP computer,
      getting this working would give it a reason to exist.

      Regards
    • H. Smith
      You can use WUHU with the WS-3610 and Windows: http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/wuhu_software_group/ It will create the history files that you can then view
      Message 2 of 18 , Jan 8, 2009
      • 0 Attachment
        You can use WUHU with the WS-3610 and Windows:

        http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/wuhu_software_group/

        It will create the history files that you can then view in HW Pro.

        Not sure why your HW Pro is not saving a history file.

        Is the History file path in Extra Options set correctly (mine says C:\Program Files\HeavyWeather), yours might be different depending on the install directory.


        --- On Thu, 1/8/09, mervcur <mcurley@...> wrote:
        From: mervcur <mcurley@...>
        Subject: [LacrosseWS] Heavy Weather for 3610
        To: Lacrosse_weather_stations@yahoogroups.com
        Date: Thursday, January 8, 2009, 2:55 PM











        Hello all, just new to the group



        I have had a 3610 for a few weeks now and it seems to be working quite

        well. I have one computer here with XP media Edition and several

        others with Linux installed but I have had little experience with

        Windows software over the years. No serial port so I am using a

        Serial to USB adaptor.



        When I first ran Heavy Weather it displayed and matched all the data

        on the touch screen very well. However it didn't store any data in

        the history file because one wasn't created. I guessed I could

        create an empty file with 'notepad' but that didn't help. Next I

        found one could be created by 'Extras - Options - History Data

        Filename but that didn't help either.



        I don't see anything in the recent archives of the List about this so

        I guess I am unique with some new problem. Did I miss anything in

        the Documentation or does anyone have any ideas so I can have a

        history file? Oh yes I did have HW close the history file and open a

        new one but nothing gets written to the new file either.



        I have tried the Weather Display software for Linux and Windows

        versions but there too I have several different problems. At any

        rate I prefer the Heavy Weather screen, it is much less cluttered. I

        looked at he Open 3600 site but that software seems rather old and

        has few users and no doc's.



        I do have constant weather reports on my Linux Desktops for the local

        Airport so this is just to give me data at my end of the city and a

        curiosity history record. I only occasionally use the XP computer,

        getting this working would give it a reason to exist.



        Regards





























        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • mervcur
        ... C: Program Files HeavyWeather), yours might be different depending on the install directory. ... Thanks for the quite response. I wasn t expecting that
        Message 3 of 18 , Jan 8, 2009
        • 0 Attachment
          --- In Lacrosse_weather_stations@yahoogroups.com, "H. Smith"
          <wuhu_software@...> wrote:
          >
          > You can use WUHU with the WS-3610 and Windows:
          >
          > http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/wuhu_software_group/
          >
          > It will create the history files that you can then view in HW Pro.
          >
          > Not sure why your HW Pro is not saving a history file.
          >
          > Is the History file path in Extra Options set correctly (mine says
          C:\Program Files\HeavyWeather), yours might be different depending on
          the install directory.
          >
          >
          Thanks for the quite response. I wasn't expecting that from the
          amount of activity in the group.

          Thanks for the link. I'll consider installing it when I am a bit more
          sure just what it is going to do.

          heavyWeather is installed in the same path as yours and the location
          in the Options page for the history file is there. I did see a
          reference to currdat.1st which was created and contains data. I don't
          know how to interpret the time section in the file. I would guess it
          is updated with each change in the update of the screen data.
          The display in HW matches the data shown on the 3610.

          As mentioned, I created a history.dat file in the HW directory but
          since it is empty, HW obviously doesn't recognize it. Too bad Lacross
          don't support the software or supply much in the way of documentation
          of the internals.

          Cheerio
        • H. Smith
          I agree with your opinion about La Crosse but they are not the only weather company that seems to completely neglect it s customers. For whatever reason, these
          Message 4 of 18 , Jan 9, 2009
          • 0 Attachment
            I agree with your opinion about La Crosse but they are not the only weather company that seems to completely neglect it's customers.

            For whatever reason, these companies keep their hardware and software details under wraps. In my personal opinion this is a foolish concept and fails to create brand loyalty.

            Why these companies choose to keep their software closed and refuse to support it, I will never understand, I guess when times are good, you can get away with that behavior.

            I have advocated for years that the years community come together and create an "open-source" weather station where the software and hardware design are open to the public. This system could be real-time, more accurate than the consumer brands, and have the ability to upload to the Internet without a PC.

            Anyhow, I have heard others mention this problem with the HW Pro history files although I have not seen a solution yet. If you are running Vista, it can prevent applications from saving data in the program directory. It is possible some patch to XP is following this guideline. You might try changing the history file directory to something like C:\Heavyweather (after creating it). That is the location that the old HW software used to use. If you find a solution let us know.

            The time in the currdat.LST file is an odd beast. It uses a time epoch from December 31, 1899 or something. It is expressed as a double floating point with the fractional part representing the fraction of the current day. Further complicating this value is that it is in terms of GMT local time. I have the routines if you are writing your own code.





            --- On Thu, 1/8/09, mervcur <mcurley@...> wrote:
            From: mervcur <mcurley@...>
            Subject: Re: [LacrosseWS] Heavy Weather for 3610
            To: Lacrosse_weather_stations@yahoogroups.com
            Date: Thursday, January 8, 2009, 11:15 PM











            --- In Lacrosse_weather_ stations@ yahoogroups. com, "H. Smith"

            <wuhu_software@ ...> wrote:

            >

            > You can use WUHU with the WS-3610 and Windows:

            >

            > http://tech. groups.yahoo. com/group/ wuhu_software_ group/

            >

            > It will create the history files that you can then view in HW Pro.

            >

            > Not sure why your HW Pro is not saving a history file.

            >

            > Is the History file path in Extra Options set correctly (mine says

            C:\Program Files\HeavyWeather) , yours might be different depending on

            the install directory.

            >

            >

            Thanks for the quite response. I wasn't expecting that from the

            amount of activity in the group.



            Thanks for the link. I'll consider installing it when I am a bit more

            sure just what it is going to do.



            heavyWeather is installed in the same path as yours and the location

            in the Options page for the history file is there. I did see a

            reference to currdat.1st which was created and contains data. I don't

            know how to interpret the time section in the file. I would guess it

            is updated with each change in the update of the screen data.

            The display in HW matches the data shown on the 3610.



            As mentioned, I created a history.dat file in the HW directory but

            since it is empty, HW obviously doesn't recognize it. Too bad Lacross

            don't support the software or supply much in the way of documentation

            of the internals.



            Cheerio





























            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          • K3JAE
            I use Weather-Display. They do have a Linux version as well. The software is constantly updated to add features and to add more support for all major brand
            Message 5 of 18 , Jan 9, 2009
            • 0 Attachment
              I use Weather-Display. They do have a Linux version as well. The software is
              constantly updated to add features and to add more support for all major
              brand weather stations. To me Heavy Weather looks like cheap software
              compared to Weather Display and I have completely removed Heavy Weather off
              my system. WD just plainly outclasses that junk software packaged with most
              "higher" end LaCrosse stations. It may not be the "prettiest" looking
              interface but its capabilities are too numerous to mention.



              This software, in my opinion, is the best out there and support, via forum,
              is excellent. It comes from both the writer of Weather Display as well as
              the entire community on the forum. They are very good. Link if interested:
              http://www.weather-display.com



              73's de K3JAE

              John



              K3JAE Weather Station

              http://www.k3jae.com



              From: Lacrosse_weather_stations@yahoogroups.com
              [mailto:Lacrosse_weather_stations@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of H. Smith
              Sent: Friday, 09 January 2009 06:11
              To: Lacrosse_weather_stations@yahoogroups.com
              Subject: Re: [LacrosseWS] Heavy Weather for 3610




              I agree with your opinion about La Crosse but they are not the only weather
              company that seems to completely neglect it's customers.

              For whatever reason, these companies keep their hardware and software
              details under wraps. In my personal opinion this is a foolish concept and
              fails to create brand loyalty.

              Why these companies choose to keep their software closed and refuse to
              support it, I will never understand, I guess when times are good, you can
              get away with that behavior.

              I have advocated for years that the years community come together and create
              an "open-source" weather station where the software and hardware design are
              open to the public. This system could be real-time, more accurate than the
              consumer brands, and have the ability to upload to the Internet without a
              PC.

              Anyhow, I have heard others mention this problem with the HW Pro history
              files although I have not seen a solution yet. If you are running Vista, it
              can prevent applications from saving data in the program directory. It is
              possible some patch to XP is following this guideline. You might try
              changing the history file directory to something like C:\Heavyweather (after
              creating it). That is the location that the old HW software used to use. If
              you find a solution let us know.

              The time in the currdat.LST file is an odd beast. It uses a time epoch from
              December 31, 1899 or something. It is expressed as a double floating point
              with the fractional part representing the fraction of the current day.
              Further complicating this value is that it is in terms of GMT local time. I
              have the routines if you are writing your own code.

              --- On Thu, 1/8/09, mervcur <mcurley@... <mailto:mcurley%40eol.ca> >
              wrote:
              From: mervcur <mcurley@... <mailto:mcurley%40eol.ca> >
              Subject: Re: [LacrosseWS] Heavy Weather for 3610
              To: Lacrosse_weather_stations@yahoogroups.com
              <mailto:Lacrosse_weather_stations%40yahoogroups.com>
              Date: Thursday, January 8, 2009, 11:15 PM

              --- In Lacrosse_weather_ stations@ yahoogroups. com, "H. Smith"

              <wuhu_software@ ...> wrote:

              >

              > You can use WUHU with the WS-3610 and Windows:

              >

              > http://tech. groups.yahoo. com/group/ wuhu_software_ group/

              >

              > It will create the history files that you can then view in HW Pro.

              >

              > Not sure why your HW Pro is not saving a history file.

              >

              > Is the History file path in Extra Options set correctly (mine says

              C:\Program Files\HeavyWeather) , yours might be different depending on

              the install directory.

              >

              >

              Thanks for the quite response. I wasn't expecting that from the

              amount of activity in the group.

              Thanks for the link. I'll consider installing it when I am a bit more

              sure just what it is going to do.

              heavyWeather is installed in the same path as yours and the location

              in the Options page for the history file is there. I did see a

              reference to currdat.1st which was created and contains data. I don't

              know how to interpret the time section in the file. I would guess it

              is updated with each change in the update of the screen data.

              The display in HW matches the data shown on the 3610.

              As mentioned, I created a history.dat file in the HW directory but

              since it is empty, HW obviously doesn't recognize it. Too bad Lacross

              don't support the software or supply much in the way of documentation

              of the internals.

              Cheerio











              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



              No virus found in this incoming message.
              Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com
              Version: 8.0.176 / Virus Database: 270.10.5/1883 - Release Date: 08 Jan 09
              18:05



              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            • Ken
              I use the free open2300 software with a WS-2305, and my hand edited PHP code based on Kenneth Lavrson s orginal, on a Windows XP PC running WAMP (Apache
              Message 6 of 18 , Jan 9, 2009
              • 0 Attachment
                I use the free open2300 software with a WS-2305, and my hand edited PHP code
                based on Kenneth Lavrson's orginal, on a Windows XP PC running WAMP (Apache
                server). I also think Heavy Weather is crappy. Nice GUI etc, but lousy
                underneath.

                A comment on the "open-source weather station" idea...
                Like those of us who fiddle with the open-source software and can write some
                software to do what we want (or almost), some can handle hardware and some
                can't. I'm sure there are plenty of circuits and designs out there for the
                making. I reckon 'Silicon Chip' did a weather station circuit a while back,
                and either it, or its predecessor, 'Electronics Australia' had a good
                article on making a rain gauge tipping bucket.

                Reality is, it is far easier to buy a cheap weatherstation than to make the
                hardware up from scratch, or even buy the parts separately and cobble them
                together. (And in the US, weatherstations seems to be much cheaper than in
                Australia.) Then you have the job of writing enough software to even
                capture the data, let alone display it somewhere.
                (While I'm capable of putting circuits together and writing software, I'm
                lazy, and I have other areas of interest that call on my time.)

                So don't hold your breath waiting for an open-source hardware solution.
                They are already out there, and too many for any standards. Go with a
                cheap, popular, bought set of hardware then find the open-source software to
                go with it.
                LaCrosse is cheap and it shows. But the cheapness means lots of people have
                it.

                I too don't understand why LaCrosse don't publish the software interface so
                more imaginative programs can spring up which could only help their sales.
                Not using stupid non-standard serial connections would help too.
                The only reason I can think of, is to protect their intellectual property
                somewhat, ie others can't easily copy the hardware or bits of it.
                Considering it is already of cheap Chinese manufacture, you'd think that
                logic is a bit thin.
                The other factor we don't see, is that the same hardware or bits of it, is
                probably sold under various brand names. Publishing interfaces might upset
                some of those brands.
                In the end, we have a Chinese made heap of plastic and wires, with LaCrosse
                branding on it.

                If someone wants to 'push' a cheap hardware solution on this forum, and
                supply open-source software for it, I'd be happy to see it. Meanwhile, lets
                help those using LaCrosse hardware, and point newbies toward the best
                solutions for them.

                And a curse on stupid non-standard serial interfaces.

                My two bobs worth.
                Ken.



                2009/1/10 K3JAE <k3jae@...>

                > I use Weather-Display. They do have a Linux version as well. The software
                > is
                > constantly updated to add features and to add more support for all major
                > brand weather stations. To me Heavy Weather looks like cheap software
                > compared to Weather Display and I have completely removed Heavy Weather off
                > my system. WD just plainly outclasses that junk software packaged with
                > most
                > "higher" end LaCrosse stations. It may not be the "prettiest" looking
                > interface but its capabilities are too numerous to mention.
                >
                >
                >
                > This software, in my opinion, is the best out there and support, via forum,
                > is excellent. It comes from both the writer of Weather Display as well as
                > the entire community on the forum. They are very good. Link if interested:
                > http://www.weather-display.com
                >
                >
                >
                > 73's de K3JAE
                >
                > John
                >
                >
                >
                > K3JAE Weather Station
                >
                > http://www.k3jae.com
                >
                >
                >
                > From: Lacrosse_weather_stations@yahoogroups.com
                > [mailto:Lacrosse_weather_stations@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of H. Smith
                > Sent: Friday, 09 January 2009 06:11
                > To: Lacrosse_weather_stations@yahoogroups.com
                > Subject: Re: [LacrosseWS] Heavy Weather for 3610
                >
                >
                >
                >
                > I agree with your opinion about La Crosse but they are not the only weather
                > company that seems to completely neglect it's customers.
                >
                > For whatever reason, these companies keep their hardware and software
                > details under wraps. In my personal opinion this is a foolish concept and
                > fails to create brand loyalty.
                >
                > Why these companies choose to keep their software closed and refuse to
                > support it, I will never understand, I guess when times are good, you can
                > get away with that behavior.
                >
                > I have advocated for years that the years community come together and
                > create
                > an "open-source" weather station where the software and hardware design are
                > open to the public. This system could be real-time, more accurate than the
                > consumer brands, and have the ability to upload to the Internet without a
                > PC.
                >
                > Anyhow, I have heard others mention this problem with the HW Pro history
                > files although I have not seen a solution yet. If you are running Vista, it
                > can prevent applications from saving data in the program directory. It is
                > possible some patch to XP is following this guideline. You might try
                > changing the history file directory to something like C:\Heavyweather
                > (after
                > creating it). That is the location that the old HW software used to use. If
                > you find a solution let us know.
                >
                > The time in the currdat.LST file is an odd beast. It uses a time epoch from
                > December 31, 1899 or something. It is expressed as a double floating point
                > with the fractional part representing the fraction of the current day.
                > Further complicating this value is that it is in terms of GMT local time. I
                > have the routines if you are writing your own code.
                >
                > --- On Thu, 1/8/09, mervcur <mcurley@... <mailto:mcurley%40eol.ca<mcurley%2540eol.ca>>
                > >
                > wrote:
                > From: mervcur <mcurley@... <mailto:mcurley%40eol.ca<mcurley%2540eol.ca>>
                > >
                > Subject: Re: [LacrosseWS] Heavy Weather for 3610
                > To: Lacrosse_weather_stations@yahoogroups.com
                > <mailto:Lacrosse_weather_stations%40yahoogroups.com<Lacrosse_weather_stations%2540yahoogroups.com>
                > >
                > Date: Thursday, January 8, 2009, 11:15 PM
                >
                > --- In Lacrosse_weather_ stations@ yahoogroups. com, "H. Smith"
                >
                > <wuhu_software@ ...> wrote:
                >
                > >
                >
                > > You can use WUHU with the WS-3610 and Windows:
                >
                > >
                >
                > > http://tech. groups.yahoo. com/group/ wuhu_software_ group/
                >
                > >
                >
                > > It will create the history files that you can then view in HW Pro.
                >
                > >
                >
                > > Not sure why your HW Pro is not saving a history file.
                >
                > >
                >
                > > Is the History file path in Extra Options set correctly (mine says
                >
                > C:\Program Files\HeavyWeather) , yours might be different depending on
                >
                > the install directory.
                >
                > >
                >
                > >
                >
                > Thanks for the quite response. I wasn't expecting that from the
                >
                > amount of activity in the group.
                >
                > Thanks for the link. I'll consider installing it when I am a bit more
                >
                > sure just what it is going to do.
                >
                > heavyWeather is installed in the same path as yours and the location
                >
                > in the Options page for the history file is there. I did see a
                >
                > reference to currdat.1st which was created and contains data. I don't
                >
                > know how to interpret the time section in the file. I would guess it
                >
                > is updated with each change in the update of the screen data.
                >
                > The display in HW matches the data shown on the 3610.
                >
                > As mentioned, I created a history.dat file in the HW directory but
                >
                > since it is empty, HW obviously doesn't recognize it. Too bad Lacross
                >
                > don't support the software or supply much in the way of documentation
                >
                > of the internals.
                >
                > Cheerio
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                >
                >
                >
                > No virus found in this incoming message.
                > Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com
                > Version: 8.0.176 / Virus Database: 270.10.5/1883 - Release Date: 08 Jan 09
                > 18:05
                >
                >
                >
                > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                >
                >
                > ------------------------------------
                >
                > Yahoo! Groups Links
                >
                >
                >
                >


                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
              • Michael Detwiler
                I ve used Heavy Weather (that came with my LaCrosse) and then switched to WUHU. Wuhu is strong, doesn t hog resources, and publishes nicely to several places.
                Message 7 of 18 , Jan 9, 2009
                • 0 Attachment
                  I've used Heavy Weather (that came with my LaCrosse) and then switched to WUHU. Wuhu is strong, doesn't hog resources, and publishes nicely to several places. Is it 'pretty'...NO..but, does it work? YES..bigtime YES..and can you get support...UMMMM...TRIPLE YES! Join the support group and the guy who designed it will answer your questions...works for me and my site quite well.

                  ~Michael D.
                  __________________
                  Michael Detwiler
                  Founder & Owner
                  CookevilleWeatherGuy.com




                  ________________________________
                  From: Ken <ken.wagnitz@...>
                  To: Lacrosse_weather_stations@yahoogroups.com
                  Sent: Friday, January 9, 2009 9:14:24 PM
                  Subject: Re: [LacrosseWS] Heavy Weather for 3610


                  I use the free open2300 software with a WS-2305, and my hand edited PHP code
                  based on Kenneth Lavrson's orginal, on a Windows XP PC running WAMP (Apache
                  server). I also think Heavy Weather is crappy. Nice GUI etc, but lousy
                  underneath.

                  A comment on the "open-source weather station" idea...
                  Like those of us who fiddle with the open-source software and can write some
                  software to do what we want (or almost), some can handle hardware and some
                  can't. I'm sure there are plenty of circuits and designs out there for the
                  making. I reckon 'Silicon Chip' did a weather station circuit a while back,
                  and either it, or its predecessor, 'Electronics Australia' had a good
                  article on making a rain gauge tipping bucket.

                  Reality is, it is far easier to buy a cheap weatherstation than to make the
                  hardware up from scratch, or even buy the parts separately and cobble them
                  together. (And in the US, weatherstations seems to be much cheaper than in
                  Australia.) Then you have the job of writing enough software to even
                  capture the data, let alone display it somewhere.
                  (While I'm capable of putting circuits together and writing software, I'm
                  lazy, and I have other areas of interest that call on my time.)

                  So don't hold your breath waiting for an open-source hardware solution.
                  They are already out there, and too many for any standards. Go with a
                  cheap, popular, bought set of hardware then find the open-source software to
                  go with it.
                  LaCrosse is cheap and it shows. But the cheapness means lots of people have
                  it.

                  I too don't understand why LaCrosse don't publish the software interface so
                  more imaginative programs can spring up which could only help their sales.
                  Not using stupid non-standard serial connections would help too.
                  The only reason I can think of, is to protect their intellectual property
                  somewhat, ie others can't easily copy the hardware or bits of it.
                  Considering it is already of cheap Chinese manufacture, you'd think that
                  logic is a bit thin.
                  The other factor we don't see, is that the same hardware or bits of it, is
                  probably sold under various brand names. Publishing interfaces might upset
                  some of those brands.
                  In the end, we have a Chinese made heap of plastic and wires, with LaCrosse
                  branding on it.

                  If someone wants to 'push' a cheap hardware solution on this forum, and
                  supply open-source software for it, I'd be happy to see it. Meanwhile, lets
                  help those using LaCrosse hardware, and point newbies toward the best
                  solutions for them.

                  And a curse on stupid non-standard serial interfaces.

                  My two bobs worth.
                  Ken.

                  2009/1/10 K3JAE <k3jae@w3pie. org>

                  > I use Weather-Display. They do have a Linux version as well. The software
                  > is
                  > constantly updated to add features and to add more support for all major
                  > brand weather stations. To me Heavy Weather looks like cheap software
                  > compared to Weather Display and I have completely removed Heavy Weather off
                  > my system. WD just plainly outclasses that junk software packaged with
                  > most
                  > "higher" end LaCrosse stations. It may not be the "prettiest" looking
                  > interface but its capabilities are too numerous to mention.
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  > This software, in my opinion, is the best out there and support, via forum,
                  > is excellent. It comes from both the writer of Weather Display as well as
                  > the entire community on the forum. They are very good. Link if interested:
                  > http://www.weather- display.com
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  > 73's de K3JAE
                  >
                  > John
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  > K3JAE Weather Station
                  >
                  > http://www.k3jae. com
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  > From: Lacrosse_weather_ stations@ yahoogroups. com
                  > [mailto:Lacrosse_weather_ stations@ yahoogroups. com] On Behalf Of H. Smith
                  > Sent: Friday, 09 January 2009 06:11
                  > To: Lacrosse_weather_ stations@ yahoogroups. com
                  > Subject: Re: [LacrosseWS] Heavy Weather for 3610
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  > I agree with your opinion about La Crosse but they are not the only weather
                  > company that seems to completely neglect it's customers.
                  >
                  > For whatever reason, these companies keep their hardware and software
                  > details under wraps. In my personal opinion this is a foolish concept and
                  > fails to create brand loyalty.
                  >
                  > Why these companies choose to keep their software closed and refuse to
                  > support it, I will never understand, I guess when times are good, you can
                  > get away with that behavior.
                  >
                  > I have advocated for years that the years community come together and
                  > create
                  > an "open-source" weather station where the software and hardware design are
                  > open to the public. This system could be real-time, more accurate than the
                  > consumer brands, and have the ability to upload to the Internet without a
                  > PC.
                  >
                  > Anyhow, I have heard others mention this problem with the HW Pro history
                  > files although I have not seen a solution yet. If you are running Vista, it
                  > can prevent applications from saving data in the program directory. It is
                  > possible some patch to XP is following this guideline. You might try
                  > changing the history file directory to something like C:\Heavyweather
                  > (after
                  > creating it). That is the location that the old HW software used to use. If
                  > you find a solution let us know.
                  >
                  > The time in the currdat.LST file is an odd beast. It uses a time epoch from
                  > December 31, 1899 or something. It is expressed as a double floating point
                  > with the fractional part representing the fraction of the current day.
                  > Further complicating this value is that it is in terms of GMT local time. I
                  > have the routines if you are writing your own code.
                  >
                  > --- On Thu, 1/8/09, mervcur <mcurley@eol. ca <mailto:mcurley% 40eol.ca< mcurley%2540eol. ca>>
                  > >
                  > wrote:
                  > From: mervcur <mcurley@eol. ca <mailto:mcurley% 40eol.ca< mcurley%2540eol. ca>>
                  > >
                  > Subject: Re: [LacrosseWS] Heavy Weather for 3610
                  > To: Lacrosse_weather_ stations@ yahoogroups. com
                  > <mailto:Lacrosse_ weather_stations %40yahoogroups. com<Lacrosse_ weather_stations %2540yahoogroups .com>
                  > >
                  > Date: Thursday, January 8, 2009, 11:15 PM
                  >
                  > --- In Lacrosse_weather_ stations@ yahoogroups. com, "H. Smith"
                  >
                  > <wuhu_software@ ...> wrote:
                  >
                  > >
                  >
                  > > You can use WUHU with the WS-3610 and Windows:
                  >
                  > >
                  >
                  > > http://tech. groups.yahoo. com/group/ wuhu_software_ group/
                  >
                  > >
                  >
                  > > It will create the history files that you can then view in HW Pro.
                  >
                  > >
                  >
                  > > Not sure why your HW Pro is not saving a history file.
                  >
                  > >
                  >
                  > > Is the History file path in Extra Options set correctly (mine says
                  >
                  > C:\Program Files\HeavyWeather) , yours might be different depending on
                  >
                  > the install directory.
                  >
                  > >
                  >
                  > >
                  >
                  > Thanks for the quite response. I wasn't expecting that from the
                  >
                  > amount of activity in the group.
                  >
                  > Thanks for the link. I'll consider installing it when I am a bit more
                  >
                  > sure just what it is going to do.
                  >
                  > heavyWeather is installed in the same path as yours and the location
                  >
                  > in the Options page for the history file is there. I did see a
                  >
                  > reference to currdat.1st which was created and contains data. I don't
                  >
                  > know how to interpret the time section in the file. I would guess it
                  >
                  > is updated with each change in the update of the screen data.
                  >
                  > The display in HW matches the data shown on the 3610.
                  >
                  > As mentioned, I created a history.dat file in the HW directory but
                  >
                  > since it is empty, HW obviously doesn't recognize it. Too bad Lacross
                  >
                  > don't support the software or supply much in the way of documentation
                  >
                  > of the internals.
                  >
                  > Cheerio
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  > No virus found in this incoming message.
                  > Checked by AVG - http://www.avg. com
                  > Version: 8.0.176 / Virus Database: 270.10.5/1883 - Release Date: 08 Jan 09
                  > 18:05
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                  >
                  >
                  > ------------ --------- --------- ------
                  >
                  > Yahoo! Groups Links
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >

                  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]






                  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                • mervcur
                  ... software is ... Weather off ... with most ... forum, ... well as ... Thanks for your comments John. I have installed the WD trial and it runs out very
                  Message 8 of 18 , Jan 9, 2009
                  • 0 Attachment
                    --- In Lacrosse_weather_stations@yahoogroups.com, "K3JAE" <k3jae@...>
                    wrote:
                    >
                    > I use Weather-Display. They do have a Linux version as well. The
                    software is
                    > constantly updated to add features and to add more support for all major
                    > brand weather stations. To me Heavy Weather looks like cheap software
                    > compared to Weather Display and I have completely removed Heavy
                    Weather off
                    > my system. WD just plainly outclasses that junk software packaged
                    with most
                    > "higher" end LaCrosse stations. It may not be the "prettiest" looking
                    > interface but its capabilities are too numerous to mention.
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    > This software, in my opinion, is the best out there and support, via
                    forum,
                    > is excellent. It comes from both the writer of Weather Display as
                    well as
                    > the entire community on the forum. They are very good. Link if
                    interested:
                    > http://www.weather-display.com
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    > 73's de K3JAE
                    >
                    > John
                    >
                    >
                    Thanks for your comments John. I have installed the WD trial and it
                    runs out very shortly. Recording the data is not worth the approx
                    $100 it would cost me for WD.

                    I don't recall just what wasn't right when I tried it previously, but
                    I just had it running for 30 mins, it said it was receiving packets
                    but there was no data displayed except the barometer and it was wrong.
                    I looked at the data log file and it displayed a temp of 29 deg C.
                    That is also wrong for the inside temp. I think previously there was
                    wind, barom. and inside temps displayed but the memory banks don't
                    work so good anymore.

                    I moved to this Linux computer, and here I have a serial port so the
                    uncertainty of a Serial-USB adaptor is gone. WD-Linux is running and
                    receiving data, but outside temp of 13 C is displayed in red [minus?]
                    and the display shows -11. Barom is 1013 and the display is 1023 and
                    the inside temp is 0 C when I am toasty at 22.6 C.

                    So I don't know if it is worthwhile trying to learn what is wrong. The
                    LED? beside data quality is green, beside Data received is red,
                    perhaps that indicates something. I think in Windows the latter was
                    always yellowish.

                    I carry this black cloud around and software bugs happen to me and no
                    one else, I am used to it now.

                    Regards

                    Merv VE3DAC
                  • mervcur
                    ... Vista, it ... It is ... C: Heavyweather (after ... use. If ... I created the directory under C:/ and copied my history.dat file there and then started HW.
                    Message 9 of 18 , Jan 9, 2009
                    • 0 Attachment
                      >
                      > Anyhow, I have heard others mention this problem with the HW Pro history
                      > files although I have not seen a solution yet. If you are running
                      Vista, it
                      > can prevent applications from saving data in the program directory.
                      It is
                      > possible some patch to XP is following this guideline. You might try
                      > changing the history file directory to something like
                      C:\Heavyweather (after
                      > creating it). That is the location that the old HW software used to
                      use. If
                      > you find a solution let us know.
                      >

                      I created the directory under C:/ and copied my history.dat file there
                      and then started HW. Guess what, it couldn't find the unit. The
                      display manager said it was COM 5, but no go. So moved the USB cable
                      to another front port, COM 6, changed the config, still couldn't
                      find it. Started Weather Display, and it seemed to find the unit and
                      report receiving packets. Since it never displayed any readings I
                      dunno how successful it was. Both pieces of software worked a couple
                      of days ago. I'll advise about the history file when I next get a
                      connection. I don't love Windows.

                      > The time in the currdat.LST file is an odd beast. It uses a time
                      epoch from
                      > December 31, 1899 or something. It is expressed as a double floating
                      point
                      > with the fractional part representing the fraction of the current day.
                      > Further complicating this value is that it is in terms of GMT local
                      time. I
                      > have the routines if you are writing your own code.
                      >

                      I'm way past writing code, but thanks for the info about the time.
                      Seems reminiscent of Unix time, but I forget the details of figuring
                      that out.

                      Perhaps I'll look at the php script in the files area using the
                      current.lst file and play around setting up a local web page. The
                      authors web page is not as complete as the one by K3JAE, but is a bit
                      of a project.

                      Will be in touch

                      Regards

                      Merv
                    • H. Smith
                      Ken, Thanks for the reply. As far as these home weather stations go, there is no real technology worth giving away so far as communications protocols and the
                      Message 10 of 18 , Jan 10, 2009
                      • 0 Attachment
                        Ken,

                        Thanks for the reply.

                        As far as these home weather stations go, there is no real technology worth giving away so far as communications protocols and the embedded systems go. As you say, most of this stuff is junk cobbled together for the least expense.

                        With the exception of Davis and Peet Bros,  that are actually still made in America, most of the other stations are produced with the least amount of material and the cheapest components they can find (let alone the cheapest workers they can find).

                        As you mention, the WS-3610 console is a good example. They were so cheap that they did not want to pay one U.S. dollar for a real UART (about the price of a pack of gum these days) to provide for a real serial interface. One of my favorite comedians once said, and rightfully so, "You can't fix stupid".

                        In order for an open-source system to exist, it would require a bit of work for a handful of people to come up with the hardware and software specs. The software is the easy part.

                        The embedded system would probably be fairly easy to choose. Sparkfun has several cheap embedded systems (with schematics). The only complexity I can see there would be a Wifi connection (or Ethernet) and a TCP/IP stack. Of course the hardware would need to provide for several different I/O (digital in/out, analog in/out, serial ports, etc) so that it could be expanded later.

                        A larger and more expensive issue is sensors from rain buckets to wind sensors. Attempting to manufacture these parts at home would be prohibitive. Luckily you can buy many of these peices from exisiting manufacturers. For example, the 1-wire stations often use the La Crosse rain bucket ($20 or so). You could opt for the cheap unit or if you really want to blow $200-300, you could buy a quality heated rain bucket.

                        As far as the wind sensors go, Inspeed now has both a wind speed and direction sensor (new). This is probably one of the biggest hurdles as far as sensors go. Ideally the embedded system could supprt 1-wire, therefore supporting the inexpensive 1-wire wind sensor as well.

                        The barometer, temperature, and humidity sensors are also available from various source. The idea there would be to support various A/D standards (0-5v, 0-10v, 5-20ma, etc). This would allow the end user to configure their system however they wanted to. The idea there is to allow the end user to spend as much money as they want to pursue accuracy (or not).

                        In the end, I suppose that it depends whether or not you are happy with what is out there. If a station that costs < $100, is accurate enough your for needs, then I say go for it.

                        If you are interested in real-time weather systems, and better than your average sensor suite, you are pretty much SOL unless you want to dig deep in to your pocket.

                        When considering higher-end stations, the sky is the limit. A home system can cost upward of $600 or more (depending on the sensors). Even then, you are subject to the limitations of the provider (sensor accuracy, proprietary protocols, etc). The high end stuff is incredibly expensive where a single sensor can cost you $1500 or more (who is buying that stuff anyhow?).

                        In the end, all of these high end systems will suffer from closed protocols and software limitations. There is very little impetus for enhancing or improving unless they are harassed by a larger community of users.

                        As an example, I wrote Davis technical support requests that went completely un-answered after several attempts. These companies could give a rats-behind about your average user. This is not to suggest that Davis is alone in the lack of support, all of the companies involved (with the exception of Peet Bros) are in the same boat. I have never had such rude experiences in my life. I bet the company that made my toilet would be more responsive to a customers support questions.

                        The nice thing about the open-source concept (if done correctly), it would allow users to come in to the community for not much more than they pay for an average station (like say an Oregon Scientific), and have something a bit better than even a high-end home station. It would also allow for professional systems (for farming, etc) to be implemented for a fraction of the off the shelf systems.

                        My guess is that once the hardware and software implementation was completely, the price would come in less than a higher-end home station.

                        Well that is my two cents on the subject (hey, I could have bought a UART for that!).

                        Thanks.


                        --- On Fri, 1/9/09, Ken <ken.wagnitz@...> wrote:
                        From: Ken <ken.wagnitz@...>
                        Subject: Re: [LacrosseWS] Heavy Weather for 3610
                        To: Lacrosse_weather_stations@yahoogroups.com
                        Date: Friday, January 9, 2009, 10:14 PM











                        I use the free open2300 software with a WS-2305, and my hand edited PHP code

                        based on Kenneth Lavrson's orginal, on a Windows XP PC running WAMP (Apache

                        server). I also think Heavy Weather is crappy. Nice GUI etc, but lousy

                        underneath.



                        A comment on the "open-source weather station" idea...

                        Like those of us who fiddle with the open-source software and can write some

                        software to do what we want (or almost), some can handle hardware and some

                        can't. I'm sure there are plenty of circuits and designs out there for the

                        making. I reckon 'Silicon Chip' did a weather station circuit a while back,

                        and either it, or its predecessor, 'Electronics Australia' had a good

                        article on making a rain gauge tipping bucket.



                        Reality is, it is far easier to buy a cheap weatherstation than to make the

                        hardware up from scratch, or even buy the parts separately and cobble them

                        together. (And in the US, weatherstations seems to be much cheaper than in

                        Australia.) Then you have the job of writing enough software to even

                        capture the data, let alone display it somewhere.

                        (While I'm capable of putting circuits together and writing software, I'm

                        lazy, and I have other areas of interest that call on my time.)



                        So don't hold your breath waiting for an open-source hardware solution.

                        They are already out there, and too many for any standards. Go with a

                        cheap, popular, bought set of hardware then find the open-source software to

                        go with it.

                        LaCrosse is cheap and it shows. But the cheapness means lots of people have

                        it.



                        I too don't understand why LaCrosse don't publish the software interface so

                        more imaginative programs can spring up which could only help their sales.

                        Not using stupid non-standard serial connections would help too.

                        The only reason I can think of, is to protect their intellectual property

                        somewhat, ie others can't easily copy the hardware or bits of it.

                        Considering it is already of cheap Chinese manufacture, you'd think that

                        logic is a bit thin.

                        The other factor we don't see, is that the same hardware or bits of it, is

                        probably sold under various brand names. Publishing interfaces might upset

                        some of those brands.

                        In the end, we have a Chinese made heap of plastic and wires, with LaCrosse

                        branding on it.



                        If someone wants to 'push' a cheap hardware solution on this forum, and

                        supply open-source software for it, I'd be happy to see it. Meanwhile, lets

                        help those using LaCrosse hardware, and point newbies toward the best

                        solutions for them.



                        And a curse on stupid non-standard serial interfaces.



                        My two bobs worth.

                        Ken.



                        2009/1/10 K3JAE <k3jae@w3pie. org>



                        > I use Weather-Display. They do have a Linux version as well. The software

                        > is

                        > constantly updated to add features and to add more support for all major

                        > brand weather stations. To me Heavy Weather looks like cheap software

                        > compared to Weather Display and I have completely removed Heavy Weather off

                        > my system. WD just plainly outclasses that junk software packaged with

                        > most

                        > "higher" end LaCrosse stations. It may not be the "prettiest" looking

                        > interface but its capabilities are too numerous to mention.

                        >

                        >

                        >

                        > This software, in my opinion, is the best out there and support, via forum,

                        > is excellent. It comes from both the writer of Weather Display as well as

                        > the entire community on the forum. They are very good. Link if interested:

                        > http://www.weather- display.com

                        >

                        >

                        >

                        > 73's de K3JAE

                        >

                        > John

                        >

                        >

                        >

                        > K3JAE Weather Station

                        >

                        > http://www.k3jae. com

                        >

                        >

                        >

                        > From: Lacrosse_weather_ stations@ yahoogroups. com

                        > [mailto:Lacrosse_weather_ stations@ yahoogroups. com] On Behalf Of H. Smith

                        > Sent: Friday, 09 January 2009 06:11

                        > To: Lacrosse_weather_ stations@ yahoogroups. com

                        > Subject: Re: [LacrosseWS] Heavy Weather for 3610

                        >

                        >

                        >

                        >

                        > I agree with your opinion about La Crosse but they are not the only weather

                        > company that seems to completely neglect it's customers.

                        >

                        > For whatever reason, these companies keep their hardware and software

                        > details under wraps. In my personal opinion this is a foolish concept and

                        > fails to create brand loyalty.

                        >

                        > Why these companies choose to keep their software closed and refuse to

                        > support it, I will never understand, I guess when times are good, you can

                        > get away with that behavior.

                        >

                        > I have advocated for years that the years community come together and

                        > create

                        > an "open-source" weather station where the software and hardware design are

                        > open to the public. This system could be real-time, more accurate than the

                        > consumer brands, and have the ability to upload to the Internet without a

                        > PC.

                        >

                        > Anyhow, I have heard others mention this problem with the HW Pro history

                        > files although I have not seen a solution yet. If you are running Vista, it

                        > can prevent applications from saving data in the program directory. It is

                        > possible some patch to XP is following this guideline. You might try

                        > changing the history file directory to something like C:\Heavyweather

                        > (after

                        > creating it). That is the location that the old HW software used to use. If

                        > you find a solution let us know.

                        >

                        > The time in the currdat.LST file is an odd beast. It uses a time epoch from

                        > December 31, 1899 or something. It is expressed as a double floating point

                        > with the fractional part representing the fraction of the current day.

                        > Further complicating this value is that it is in terms of GMT local time. I

                        > have the routines if you are writing your own code.

                        >

                        > --- On Thu, 1/8/09, mervcur <mcurley@eol. ca <mailto:mcurley% 40eol.ca< mcurley%2540eol. ca>>

                        > >

                        > wrote:

                        > From: mervcur <mcurley@eol. ca <mailto:mcurley% 40eol.ca< mcurley%2540eol. ca>>

                        > >

                        > Subject: Re: [LacrosseWS] Heavy Weather for 3610

                        > To: Lacrosse_weather_ stations@ yahoogroups. com

                        > <mailto:Lacrosse_ weather_stations %40yahoogroups. com<Lacrosse_ weather_stations %2540yahoogroups .com>

                        > >

                        > Date: Thursday, January 8, 2009, 11:15 PM

                        >

                        > --- In Lacrosse_weather_ stations@ yahoogroups. com, "H. Smith"

                        >

                        > <wuhu_software@ ...> wrote:

                        >

                        > >

                        >

                        > > You can use WUHU with the WS-3610 and Windows:

                        >

                        > >

                        >

                        > > http://tech. groups.yahoo. com/group/ wuhu_software_ group/

                        >

                        > >

                        >

                        > > It will create the history files that you can then view in HW Pro.

                        >

                        > >

                        >

                        > > Not sure why your HW Pro is not saving a history file.

                        >

                        > >

                        >

                        > > Is the History file path in Extra Options set correctly (mine says

                        >

                        > C:\Program Files\HeavyWeather) , yours might be different depending on

                        >

                        > the install directory.

                        >

                        > >

                        >

                        > >

                        >

                        > Thanks for the quite response. I wasn't expecting that from the

                        >

                        > amount of activity in the group.

                        >

                        > Thanks for the link. I'll consider installing it when I am a bit more

                        >

                        > sure just what it is going to do.

                        >

                        > heavyWeather is installed in the same path as yours and the location

                        >

                        > in the Options page for the history file is there. I did see a

                        >

                        > reference to currdat.1st which was created and contains data. I don't

                        >

                        > know how to interpret the time section in the file. I would guess it

                        >

                        > is updated with each change in the update of the screen data.

                        >

                        > The display in HW matches the data shown on the 3610.

                        >

                        > As mentioned, I created a history.dat file in the HW directory but

                        >

                        > since it is empty, HW obviously doesn't recognize it. Too bad Lacross

                        >

                        > don't support the software or supply much in the way of documentation

                        >

                        > of the internals.

                        >

                        > Cheerio

                        >

                        >

                        >

                        >

                        >

                        >

                        >

                        >

                        >

                        >

                        >

                        > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

                        >

                        >

                        >

                        > No virus found in this incoming message.

                        > Checked by AVG - http://www.avg. com

                        > Version: 8.0.176 / Virus Database: 270.10.5/1883 - Release Date: 08 Jan 09

                        > 18:05

                        >

                        >

                        >

                        > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

                        >

                        >

                        > ------------ --------- --------- ------

                        >

                        > Yahoo! Groups Links

                        >

                        >

                        >

                        >



                        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





























                        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                      • Rich Allen
                        I would love to be involved in an open source weather station project. But here s the hitch; I don t want this thing to be stand alone. I want mine to rely on
                        Message 11 of 18 , Jan 10, 2009
                        • 0 Attachment
                          I would love to be involved in an open source weather station project.
                          But here's the hitch; I don't want this thing to be stand alone. I want
                          mine to rely on a PC. :) The ideal setup for me would be a unit
                          somewhat similar to the LaCrosse units, where a central outside temp and
                          humidity sensor also receives data from wind and rain sensors, then
                          sends the data to a PC directly (no console in the middle) via hard wire.

                          I suppose that if a cheap TCP/IP module were available, maybe one that
                          utilized DHCP to connect to an existing subnet, then Cat5 could be used
                          for that sensor to PC connection (or rather, sensor to router).
                          Otherwise, some kind of box with the connector from the sensor on one
                          end and a USB out on the other would have to be designed.

                          My point is, I don't want the weather station to upload data to the
                          internet on it's own, I want to have control over that on the PC side of
                          things. This allows me to write my own software much more easily than
                          trying to write something to fit into an eeprom or something similar.
                          It also means I can do history and real-time graphs locally without
                          having to download the data from where ever the station is uploading to.

                          I have a great deal of programming experience, and moderate or higher
                          experience in electronic assembly and embedded programming, but that's
                          limited to AtMega/Arduino family of chips.

                          Rich Allen
                        • Ken
                          You don t need a UART to provide a standard serial interface. One bit-bashed by a micro can fine. I m talking more about the electrical interface, for
                          Message 12 of 18 , Jan 10, 2009
                          • 0 Attachment
                            You don't need a UART to provide a 'standard' serial interface. One
                            bit-bashed by a micro can fine. I'm talking more about the electrical
                            interface, for example using a real ground, and not using the control
                            pins for the I/O. I've used PicAxe micros, which provide serial in &
                            out in as small as an 8 pin PIC chip.

                            A simple serial interace is the least expensive to provide, followed
                            by USB, then TCP/IP. Alternatively wireless, on 433MHz, but that
                            still has to have a receiver at the PC, which is connected via one of
                            those. One problem with wireless, is that not all countries have the
                            same 'free' frequency bands. Does the US also use 433MHz as an
                            unlicensed low-power band?

                            Last time I looked at 1-wire weather sensors, they were relatively
                            expensive, and not very high resolution.

                            An open-source solution would want to be complete enough, hardware and
                            software wise, that a relative beginner could put it together and get
                            it working. This means a complete software solution, for a Windows
                            and Linux and MAC computer, with no further programming needed for a
                            working system. And a user manual. (Open-source is usually pretty
                            crappy with the latter.)

                            The hardware could be catered for by someone doing a design and
                            sourcing sensor parts well enough for a magazine like Silicon Chip to
                            take it on as an article. Then a store would provide a kit. Then
                            maybe that store or some other company would sell the finished article
                            already assembled and tested.

                            Rich,
                            the advantage of the weather station micro at least collecting
                            readings and storing some data, is that the attached PC doesn't have
                            to be on 24/7 to not miss readings. I use a laptop, but even that has
                            to come down occasionally. (Windows updates forcing reboots is a
                            major cause.)
                            I agree, the final product should not be blindly sending data to the
                            net, but should interface to a PC. The LCD-dispay console could be
                            dispensed with. That would save money.

                            Using a PC-only solution (no independent micro) could be done, with
                            all sensors wired to it. Not my preferred aproach, but it would be
                            the cheapest solution, and the most flexible for software hackers.
                            But like RS232, the ubiquitous bi-directional printer port has
                            disappeared from modern PCs. :( -Though you can get USB to parallel
                            convertors.

                            Ken.



                            2009/1/10 H. Smith <wuhu_software@...>:
                            > Ken,
                            >
                            > Thanks for the reply.
                            >
                            > As far as these home weather stations go, there is no real technology worth giving away so far as communications protocols and the embedded systems go. As you say, most of this stuff is junk cobbled together for the least expense.
                            >
                            > With the exception of Davis and Peet Bros, that are actually still made in America, most of the other stations are produced with the least amount of material and the cheapest components they can find (let alone the cheapest workers they can find).
                            >
                            > As you mention, the WS-3610 console is a good example. They were so cheap that they did not want to pay one U.S. dollar for a real UART (about the price of a pack of gum these days) to provide for a real serial interface. One of my favorite comedians once said, and rightfully so, "You can't fix stupid".
                            >
                            > In order for an open-source system to exist, it would require a bit of work for a handful of people to come up with the hardware and software specs. The software is the easy part.
                            >
                            > The embedded system would probably be fairly easy to choose. Sparkfun has several cheap embedded systems (with schematics). The only complexity I can see there would be a Wifi connection (or Ethernet) and a TCP/IP stack. Of course the hardware would need to provide for several different I/O (digital in/out, analog in/out, serial ports, etc) so that it could be expanded later.
                            >
                            > A larger and more expensive issue is sensors from rain buckets to wind sensors. Attempting to manufacture these parts at home would be prohibitive. Luckily you can buy many of these peices from exisiting manufacturers. For example, the 1-wire stations often use the La Crosse rain bucket ($20 or so). You could opt for the cheap unit or if you really want to blow $200-300, you could buy a quality heated rain bucket.
                            >
                            > As far as the wind sensors go, Inspeed now has both a wind speed and direction sensor (new). This is probably one of the biggest hurdles as far as sensors go. Ideally the embedded system could supprt 1-wire, therefore supporting the inexpensive 1-wire wind sensor as well.
                            >
                            > The barometer, temperature, and humidity sensors are also available from various source. The idea there would be to support various A/D standards (0-5v, 0-10v, 5-20ma, etc). This would allow the end user to configure their system however they wanted to. The idea there is to allow the end user to spend as much money as they want to pursue accuracy (or not).
                            >
                            > In the end, I suppose that it depends whether or not you are happy with what is out there. If a station that costs < $100, is accurate enough your for needs, then I say go for it.
                            >
                            > If you are interested in real-time weather systems, and better than your average sensor suite, you are pretty much SOL unless you want to dig deep in to your pocket.
                            >
                            > When considering higher-end stations, the sky is the limit. A home system can cost upward of $600 or more (depending on the sensors). Even then, you are subject to the limitations of the provider (sensor accuracy, proprietary protocols, etc). The high end stuff is incredibly expensive where a single sensor can cost you $1500 or more (who is buying that stuff anyhow?).
                            >
                            > In the end, all of these high end systems will suffer from closed protocols and software limitations. There is very little impetus for enhancing or improving unless they are harassed by a larger community of users.
                            >
                            > As an example, I wrote Davis technical support requests that went completely un-answered after several attempts. These companies could give a rats-behind about your average user. This is not to suggest that Davis is alone in the lack of support, all of the companies involved (with the exception of Peet Bros) are in the same boat. I have never had such rude experiences in my life. I bet the company that made my toilet would be more responsive to a customers support questions.
                            >
                            > The nice thing about the open-source concept (if done correctly), it would allow users to come in to the community for not much more than they pay for an average station (like say an Oregon Scientific), and have something a bit better than even a high-end home station. It would also allow for professional systems (for farming, etc) to be implemented for a fraction of the off the shelf systems.
                            >
                            > My guess is that once the hardware and software implementation was completely, the price would come in less than a higher-end home station.
                            >
                            > Well that is my two cents on the subject (hey, I could have bought a UART for that!).
                            >
                            > Thanks.
                            >
                            >
                            > --- On Fri, 1/9/09, Ken <ken.wagnitz@...> wrote:
                            > From: Ken <ken.wagnitz@...>
                            > Subject: Re: [LacrosseWS] Heavy Weather for 3610
                            > To: Lacrosse_weather_stations@yahoogroups.com
                            > Date: Friday, January 9, 2009, 10:14 PM
                            >
                            >
                            >
                            <SNIP>
                          • Rich Allen
                            Well, I m sure I m in the minority here, but I run two web sites out of my home (I have a 50mb up/down fiber connection to the internet) using a Windows Server
                            Message 13 of 18 , Jan 10, 2009
                            • 0 Attachment
                              Well, I'm sure I'm in the minority here, but I run two web sites out of
                              my home (I have a 50mb up/down fiber connection to the internet) using a
                              Windows Server OS. My server is on 24/7 and the last time I had to
                              re-boot was last June, and it was only down for a few minutes, maybe 4
                              minutes tops. I can live with that. :)

                              I'd just like to see a project that's flexible enough to cover a range
                              of uses and needs. But if the USB box is a necessary component, and it
                              also had some memory available for a short history (say 256 readings at
                              a configurable interval) then even better!

                              Rich Allen


                              Ken wrote:
                              > Rich,
                              > the advantage of the weather station micro at least collecting
                              > readings and storing some data, is that the attached PC doesn't have
                              > to be on 24/7 to not miss readings. I use a laptop, but even that has
                              > to come down occasionally. (Windows updates forcing reboots is a
                              > major cause.)
                            • H. Smith
                              The embedded system could easily accommodate an SD card, holding several gigs of weather history unlike the current consumer systems. Given a serial or USB
                              Message 14 of 18 , Jan 10, 2009
                              • 0 Attachment
                                The embedded system could easily accommodate an SD card, holding several gigs of weather history unlike the current consumer systems.

                                Given a serial or USB interface, that history could be read by PC software.

                                The idea of having the embedded system upload directly to the net is so that people do not waste electricity powering a full-blown PC simply to upload weather data, which many of us do.

                                Again, with the appropriate embedded software and PC software, you can do just about any arrangement you want.

                                As far as UARTs and the like go, there is no sense bit-banging on a UART when it could be doing other useful things. If you use interrupts, your threads do not need to hang up sending simple serial data.

                                For that matter, the embedded system could easily run a micro OS.



                                --- On Sat, 1/10/09, Rich Allen <rico@...> wrote:
                                From: Rich Allen <rico@...>
                                Subject: Re: [LacrosseWS] Heavy Weather for 3610
                                To: Lacrosse_weather_stations@yahoogroups.com
                                Date: Saturday, January 10, 2009, 5:08 PM











                                Well, I'm sure I'm in the minority here, but I run two web sites out of

                                my home (I have a 50mb up/down fiber connection to the internet) using a

                                Windows Server OS. My server is on 24/7 and the last time I had to

                                re-boot was last June, and it was only down for a few minutes, maybe 4

                                minutes tops. I can live with that. :)



                                I'd just like to see a project that's flexible enough to cover a range

                                of uses and needs. But if the USB box is a necessary component, and it

                                also had some memory available for a short history (say 256 readings at

                                a configurable interval) then even better!



                                Rich Allen



                                Ken wrote:

                                > Rich,

                                > the advantage of the weather station micro at least collecting

                                > readings and storing some data, is that the attached PC doesn't have

                                > to be on 24/7 to not miss readings. I use a laptop, but even that has

                                > to come down occasionally. (Windows updates forcing reboots is a

                                > major cause.)





























                                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                              • H. Smith
                                Correction, I did not mean bit-banging on a UART, I meant bit banging on a GPIO (General Purpose I/O) line. ... From: H. Smith
                                Message 15 of 18 , Jan 10, 2009
                                • 0 Attachment
                                  Correction, I did not mean bit-banging on a UART, I meant bit banging on a GPIO (General Purpose I/O) line.


                                  --- On Sat, 1/10/09, H. Smith <wuhu_software@...> wrote:
                                  From: H. Smith <wuhu_software@...>
                                  Subject: Re: [LacrosseWS] Heavy Weather for 3610
                                  To: Lacrosse_weather_stations@yahoogroups.com
                                  Date: Saturday, January 10, 2009, 6:00 PM













                                  The embedded system could easily accommodate an SD card, holding several gigs of weather history unlike the current consumer systems.



                                  Given a serial or USB interface, that history could be read by PC software.



                                  The idea of having the embedded system upload directly to the net is so that people do not waste electricity powering a full-blown PC simply to upload weather data, which many of us do.



                                  Again, with the appropriate embedded software and PC software, you can do just about any arrangement you want.



                                  As far as UARTs and the like go, there is no sense bit-banging on a UART when it could be doing other useful things. If you use interrupts, your threads do not need to hang up sending simple serial data.



                                  For that matter, the embedded system could easily run a micro OS.



                                  --- On Sat, 1/10/09, Rich Allen <rico@ricosweb. net> wrote:

                                  From: Rich Allen <rico@ricosweb. net>

                                  Subject: Re: [LacrosseWS] Heavy Weather for 3610

                                  To: Lacrosse_weather_ stations@ yahoogroups. com

                                  Date: Saturday, January 10, 2009, 5:08 PM



                                  Well, I'm sure I'm in the minority here, but I run two web sites out of



                                  my home (I have a 50mb up/down fiber connection to the internet) using a



                                  Windows Server OS. My server is on 24/7 and the last time I had to



                                  re-boot was last June, and it was only down for a few minutes, maybe 4



                                  minutes tops. I can live with that. :)



                                  I'd just like to see a project that's flexible enough to cover a range



                                  of uses and needs. But if the USB box is a necessary component, and it



                                  also had some memory available for a short history (say 256 readings at



                                  a configurable interval) then even better!



                                  Rich Allen



                                  Ken wrote:



                                  > Rich,



                                  > the advantage of the weather station micro at least collecting



                                  > readings and storing some data, is that the attached PC doesn't have



                                  > to be on 24/7 to not miss readings. I use a laptop, but even that has



                                  > to come down occasionally. (Windows updates forcing reboots is a



                                  > major cause.)























                                  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





























                                  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                                • jotwg
                                  Rich, did you see this thread: http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/Lacrosse_weather_stations/message/2855 Might be not exactly what you are looking for, but may
                                  Message 16 of 18 , Jan 13, 2009
                                  • 0 Attachment
                                    Rich,

                                    did you see this thread:
                                    http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/Lacrosse_weather_stations/message/2855

                                    Might be not exactly what you are looking for, but may be...

                                    Would be nice to get some help on the Atmel stuff.

                                    cheers
                                    Jörg

                                    --- In Lacrosse_weather_stations@yahoogroups.com, Rich Allen
                                    <rico@...> wrote:
                                    >
                                    > I would love to be involved in an open source weather station project.
                                    > But here's the hitch; I don't want this thing to be stand alone. I
                                    want
                                    > mine to rely on a PC. :) The ideal setup for me would be a unit
                                    > somewhat similar to the LaCrosse units, where a central outside temp
                                    and
                                    > humidity sensor also receives data from wind and rain sensors, then
                                    > sends the data to a PC directly (no console in the middle) via hard
                                    wire.
                                    >
                                    > I suppose that if a cheap TCP/IP module were available, maybe one that
                                    > utilized DHCP to connect to an existing subnet, then Cat5 could be used
                                    > for that sensor to PC connection (or rather, sensor to router).
                                    > Otherwise, some kind of box with the connector from the sensor on one
                                    > end and a USB out on the other would have to be designed.
                                    >
                                    > My point is, I don't want the weather station to upload data to the
                                    > internet on it's own, I want to have control over that on the PC
                                    side of
                                    > things. This allows me to write my own software much more easily than
                                    > trying to write something to fit into an eeprom or something similar.
                                    > It also means I can do history and real-time graphs locally without
                                    > having to download the data from where ever the station is uploading to.
                                    >
                                    > I have a great deal of programming experience, and moderate or higher
                                    > experience in electronic assembly and embedded programming, but that's
                                    > limited to AtMega/Arduino family of chips.
                                    >
                                    > Rich Allen
                                    >
                                  • stevech11
                                    I have a WS36xx - for several years. As you know, the serial interface on these is very odd- they bit-bang clock and data, bi-directionally, using RS232
                                    Message 17 of 18 , Jan 13, 2009
                                    • 0 Attachment
                                      I have a WS36xx - for several years.
                                      As you know, the serial interface on these is very odd- they bit-bang
                                      clock and data, bi-directionally, using RS232 control signals and they
                                      don't even use the transmit and receive serial data lines.

                                      My home web server runs "Open3600" software, a 1st cousin of Open2300.
                                      I have my home automation software (Homeseer) run an Open3600 real
                                      time weather data grab every 15 minutes. I store that into a microsoft
                                      MDB database (compatible with MS Access or any ODBC). And once an hour
                                      I upload the live data to WUHU's server using a HTTP connection.
                                      Written in VBScript. So I don't need the bloated WeatherUnderground
                                      nor any of the overkill commercial software. My own web server formats
                                      live and history weather data and serves it to web browsers. The web
                                      server HTML formatter is written in VB6.

                                      I've run this 24/7 for almost 2 years now. It just runs, doesn't
                                      crash, etc.

                                      I would contribute to an Open Weather Station hardware. Dallas
                                      Semiconductor did this some years ago using 1-wire sensors. Parts of
                                      that are sold even now by http://www.aagelectronica.com/ but I suspect
                                      they are having trouble with demand.



                                      --- In Lacrosse_weather_stations@yahoogroups.com, "jotwg" <jotwg@...>
                                      wrote:
                                      >
                                      > Rich,
                                      >
                                      > did you see this thread:
                                      >
                                      http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/Lacrosse_weather_stations/message/2855
                                      >
                                      > Might be not exactly what you are looking for, but may be...
                                      >
                                      > Would be nice to get some help on the Atmel stuff.
                                      >
                                      > cheers
                                      > Jörg
                                      >
                                      > --- In Lacrosse_weather_stations@yahoogroups.com, Rich Allen
                                      > <rico@> wrote:
                                      > >
                                      > > I would love to be involved in an open source weather station
                                      project.
                                      > > But here's the hitch; I don't want this thing to be stand alone. I
                                      > want
                                      > > mine to rely on a PC. :) The ideal setup for me would be a unit
                                      > > somewhat similar to the LaCrosse units, where a central outside temp
                                      > and
                                      > > humidity sensor also receives data from wind and rain sensors, then
                                      > > sends the data to a PC directly (no console in the middle) via hard
                                      > wire.
                                      > >
                                      > > I suppose that if a cheap TCP/IP module were available, maybe one
                                      that
                                      > > utilized DHCP to connect to an existing subnet, then Cat5 could be
                                      used
                                      > > for that sensor to PC connection (or rather, sensor to router).
                                      > > Otherwise, some kind of box with the connector from the sensor on one
                                      > > end and a USB out on the other would have to be designed.
                                      > >
                                      > > My point is, I don't want the weather station to upload data to the
                                      > > internet on it's own, I want to have control over that on the PC
                                      > side of
                                      > > things. This allows me to write my own software much more easily
                                      than
                                      > > trying to write something to fit into an eeprom or something similar.
                                      > > It also means I can do history and real-time graphs locally without
                                      > > having to download the data from where ever the station is
                                      uploading to.
                                      > >
                                      > > I have a great deal of programming experience, and moderate or higher
                                      > > experience in electronic assembly and embedded programming, but
                                      that's
                                      > > limited to AtMega/Arduino family of chips.
                                      > >
                                      > > Rich Allen
                                      > >
                                      >
                                    • stevech11
                                      Correction to the below: I said bloated WeatherUnderground but I meant to say HeavyWeather ... ...
                                      Message 18 of 18 , Jan 13, 2009
                                      • 0 Attachment
                                        Correction to the below: I said "bloated WeatherUnderground" but I
                                        meant to say "HeavyWeather"...

                                        --- In Lacrosse_weather_stations@yahoogroups.com, "stevech11"
                                        <stevech@...> wrote:
                                        >
                                        > I have a WS36xx - for several years.
                                        > As you know, the serial interface on these is very odd- they bit-bang
                                        > clock and data, bi-directionally, using RS232 control signals and they
                                        > don't even use the transmit and receive serial data lines.
                                        >
                                        > My home web server runs "Open3600" software, a 1st cousin of Open2300.
                                        > I have my home automation software (Homeseer) run an Open3600 real
                                        > time weather data grab every 15 minutes. I store that into a microsoft
                                        > MDB database (compatible with MS Access or any ODBC). And once an hour
                                        > I upload the live data to WUHU's server using a HTTP connection.
                                        > Written in VBScript. So I don't need the bloated WeatherUnderground
                                        > nor any of the overkill commercial software. My own web server formats
                                        > live and history weather data and serves it to web browsers. The web
                                        > server HTML formatter is written in VB6.
                                        >
                                        > I've run this 24/7 for almost 2 years now. It just runs, doesn't
                                        > crash, etc.
                                        >
                                        > I would contribute to an Open Weather Station hardware. Dallas
                                        > Semiconductor did this some years ago using 1-wire sensors. Parts of
                                        > that are sold even now by http://www.aagelectronica.com/ but I suspect
                                        > they are having trouble with demand.
                                        >
                                        >
                                        >
                                        > --- In Lacrosse_weather_stations@yahoogroups.com, "jotwg" <jotwg@>
                                        > wrote:
                                        > >
                                        > > Rich,
                                        > >
                                        > > did you see this thread:
                                        > >
                                        >
                                        http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/Lacrosse_weather_stations/message/2855
                                        > >
                                        > > Might be not exactly what you are looking for, but may be...
                                        > >
                                        > > Would be nice to get some help on the Atmel stuff.
                                        > >
                                        > > cheers
                                        > > Jörg
                                        > >
                                        > > --- In Lacrosse_weather_stations@yahoogroups.com, Rich Allen
                                        > > <rico@> wrote:
                                        > > >
                                        > > > I would love to be involved in an open source weather station
                                        > project.
                                        > > > But here's the hitch; I don't want this thing to be stand alone. I
                                        > > want
                                        > > > mine to rely on a PC. :) The ideal setup for me would be a unit
                                        > > > somewhat similar to the LaCrosse units, where a central outside temp
                                        > > and
                                        > > > humidity sensor also receives data from wind and rain sensors, then
                                        > > > sends the data to a PC directly (no console in the middle) via hard
                                        > > wire.
                                        > > >
                                        > > > I suppose that if a cheap TCP/IP module were available, maybe one
                                        > that
                                        > > > utilized DHCP to connect to an existing subnet, then Cat5 could be
                                        > used
                                        > > > for that sensor to PC connection (or rather, sensor to router).
                                        > > > Otherwise, some kind of box with the connector from the sensor
                                        on one
                                        > > > end and a USB out on the other would have to be designed.
                                        > > >
                                        > > > My point is, I don't want the weather station to upload data to the
                                        > > > internet on it's own, I want to have control over that on the PC
                                        > > side of
                                        > > > things. This allows me to write my own software much more easily
                                        > than
                                        > > > trying to write something to fit into an eeprom or something
                                        similar.
                                        > > > It also means I can do history and real-time graphs locally without
                                        > > > having to download the data from where ever the station is
                                        > uploading to.
                                        > > >
                                        > > > I have a great deal of programming experience, and moderate or
                                        higher
                                        > > > experience in electronic assembly and embedded programming, but
                                        > that's
                                        > > > limited to AtMega/Arduino family of chips.
                                        > > >
                                        > > > Rich Allen
                                        > > >
                                        > >
                                        >
                                      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.