If it does cause any issues then i will just remove it again, its was stuck down with
hot glue so thinners will easily dissolve the glue, dont care about the addons if they
melt a little i can just sand them down
I will certainly let you know how it goes, theres a manual weather station in Lidl later this week
could be now actually, i cant remember and i will get that to compare with
I thought davis was 0.1mm? oh well lol but i did read on here somewhere that someone did modify
to 0.1mm and it was running ok, just cant remember where i read it now…
I dont think its gonna be quite 0.1mm anyway as i cut it down too much #-o
Thanks lol, you aint seen the image yet, attached below :oops:
A test pour never works out, i always end up doing too fast
But i will report the findings thats for sure…
Please dont laff, at least the top looks pretty :lol:
Looking at it i can see it getting blown off either Friday or Sunday :? :roll:
You need a known start point. And that is the original Oregon resolution. A tip based on a 10 cm diameter area (78.53 cm2) is 1 mm. Use these data as your “old” data with the second Niko’s calculator. The first one is not valid.
In going from a 100mm diameter to a 200mm diameter you doubled the diameter.
If you multiply the diameter by 2 you change the collecting area by 2 x 2 = 4. So with 4 times the area each tip will be caused by 1/4 = 0.25 as much rain as with no modification.
If you increase the original 100mm to 310mm, you have increased the collecting area by 3.1 x 3.1 = 9.61. With 9.61 times the area each tip will be caused by 1/9.61 = 0.104 as much rain as with no modification.
That’s what that figure it sounds like to me.
Maybe you could do a rough check by holding a ruler against your gauge?
Not precise, but it should at least indicate which figure is more likely.