On 4/29/2014 9:59 PM, Jim Lux wrote:
On 4/29/14, 5:08 PM, Al Kozakiewicz wrote:
I'm not going to belabor the point. Wind speed is derived by
measuring the change in rotational position divided by time. The
shorter the sampling interval (time), the lower the measurement
accuracy. There is no reason for this to controversial.
Just count the pulses, and divide by time. Plastic anometers have very
little rotational mass.
With out getting fancy you can easily get better than 1 mph accuracy.
To me, more than every three seconds is wasted energy/effort/money/time
as is all the effort expended to measure errors that are meaningless
unless you want lab accuracy for a study. Then calibration becomes a
major portion of the effort. Then you need standards traceable to the
NBS and someone certified to do it. Been there and done that, but not
with anemometers.
73
Roger (K8RI)
_______________________________________________
_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
|