The test with the 206 ml is for cylinder gauge with a diameter of 4in or 10.16 cm Both Stratus and Tropo have a diameter of 3.976in or 10.09cm The cylinder volume formula is V=h*π*r2... so h=v/πr2 I measured carefully the diameter in both guages and are exactly 10.1cm or 3.976in According to the formula , 200 ml of water in a 10.1cm diameter cylinder measures the equivelant of 24.963 mm of water Using a professional pharmasist glassy volume tube 100ml with +/- 1ml error at 20c , 200 ml in the stratus gauge measures exactly 25.2mm of water and the Tropo 24.6 mm.
Given that you used a scale approved by CoCoRaHS that has merely a 1 gram resolution, there was really little reason to worry about the density of water. Typically my rain water here in NH is between 0°F and 70°F. From the table you found, the density of 70°F water is 0.99802, so 206 ml of water will have a mass of 205.588, which should still display 206 on your scale. So, for your experiment, you could get away with rounding 0.99802 to 0.998 and even just 1.00, i.e. don't worry about it, especially since you used "cold tap water." Secondly, the video says you were measuring mass. No! Scales like what you used measure the force, i.e. weight of an object, with a strain gauge. It just reports the weight converted to grams at the 9.8 m/s^2 acceleration of gravity. To measure mass, you should used something like a double pan device or something with sliding weights like old doctor's scales. Those will measure the same mass on the moon as they would on Earth. Strain gauges are more accurate than old spring based scales, so they work fine on Earth. If you're nuts (like me), there are inexpensive scales with a 0.01g resolution. I used one in my analysis, which essentially confirmed your 2nd and 3rd experiments. See wermenh.com/tropo/ Personally, I think we should move from reading volumetric scales and measure rainfall by weight. Simpler, more accurate, less lossage, less expensive too, especially if you're using the scale in the kitchen for recipes. When I get a chance, I'm going to take an old funnel and attach tubes to fill an old soda bottle and let out displaced air. Easy to change, even in a rain storm, low evaporation, a fine hack.
Yes, the 1 gram resolution is not ideal, but we wanted to use a "CoCoRaHS approved scale" to limit any complaints about an "unverified" piece of equipment. Again, yes, the density calculation was rather superfluous, but it has been a point of contention among those who criticize the measurement of water by weight, so we wanted to include it to show that the density of our water was being considered. We appreciate your clarification regarding the difference between what a scale "measures" and what it "reports", we just didn't want anyone thinking that grams were a unit of weight. Thanks for your input!
Thank you for watching! We used a text-to-speech AI called Coqui-TTS. The AI was trained on the VCTK dataset, which includes speech data from 109 English speakers. We specifically used voice p318 (86).
You can't have it both ways. You actually left a gauge out of your experiments. A NWS gauge that has a diameter of 8". Whichever gauge has the same results as the NWS gauge, is the gauge that everyone should be using.
@RMartin631 If that's the case, get ready to buy a TROPO! When compared with the 8" NWS Standard Rain Gauge (SRG), the Stratus overmeasures by 3%. Given that the TROPO measures 3% less than the Stratus, it likely measures within 1% of the SRG. Long-term measurement comparisons between the Stratus, TROPO and 8" NWS gauge are being conducted by observers at the CSU weather station.
I've had a Tropo guage for a few months now and its great, good job guys. Also I am now your 50th subscriber!
As a CoCoRaHS observer, I will buy a Tropo this summer
Thank you for watching!
@@climalytic I ordered a tropo rain gauge last night. Thank you
@@williamallencrowder361 Thank you for your purchase William! We are shipping that out today!
The test with the 206 ml is for cylinder gauge with a diameter of 4in or 10.16 cm
Both Stratus and Tropo have a diameter of 3.976in or 10.09cm
The cylinder volume formula is V=h*π*r2... so h=v/πr2
I measured carefully the diameter in both guages and are exactly 10.1cm or 3.976in
According to the formula , 200 ml of water in a 10.1cm diameter cylinder measures the equivelant of 24.963 mm of water
Using a professional pharmasist glassy volume tube 100ml with +/- 1ml error at 20c , 200 ml in the stratus gauge measures exactly 25.2mm of water and the Tropo 24.6 mm.
Given that you used a scale approved by CoCoRaHS that has merely a 1 gram resolution, there was really little reason to worry about the density of water. Typically my rain water here in NH is between 0°F and 70°F. From the table you found, the density of 70°F water is 0.99802, so 206 ml of water will have a mass of 205.588, which should still display 206 on your scale.
So, for your experiment, you could get away with rounding 0.99802 to 0.998 and even just 1.00, i.e. don't worry about it, especially since you used "cold tap water."
Secondly, the video says you were measuring mass. No! Scales like what you used measure the force, i.e. weight of an object, with a strain gauge. It just reports the weight converted to grams at the 9.8 m/s^2 acceleration of gravity. To measure mass, you should used something like a double pan device or something with sliding weights like old doctor's scales. Those will measure the same mass on the moon as they would on Earth.
Strain gauges are more accurate than old spring based scales, so they work fine on Earth.
If you're nuts (like me), there are inexpensive scales with a 0.01g resolution. I used one in my analysis, which essentially confirmed your 2nd and 3rd experiments. See wermenh.com/tropo/
Personally, I think we should move from reading volumetric scales and measure rainfall by weight. Simpler, more accurate, less lossage, less expensive too, especially if you're using the scale in the kitchen for recipes. When I get a chance, I'm going to take an old funnel and attach tubes to fill an old soda bottle and let out displaced air. Easy to change, even in a rain storm, low evaporation, a fine hack.
Yes, the 1 gram resolution is not ideal, but we wanted to use a "CoCoRaHS approved scale" to limit any complaints about an "unverified" piece of equipment. Again, yes, the density calculation was rather superfluous, but it has been a point of contention among those who criticize the measurement of water by weight, so we wanted to include it to show that the density of our water was being considered. We appreciate your clarification regarding the difference between what a scale "measures" and what it "reports", we just didn't want anyone thinking that grams were a unit of weight. Thanks for your input!
Interesting accent. Is the speaker AI or Irish, or???
Thank you for watching! We used a text-to-speech AI called Coqui-TTS. The AI was trained on the VCTK dataset, which includes speech data from 109 English speakers. We specifically used voice p318 (86).
@@climalytic Cool, what a great name for an AI speech program. I love Coqui frogs, and I miss hearing them.....
You can't have it both ways. You actually left a gauge out of your experiments. A NWS gauge that has a diameter of 8". Whichever gauge has the same results as the NWS gauge, is the gauge that everyone should be using.
Do you have the money to buy a NWS gauge? They are NOT INEXPENSIVE
@@williamallencrowder361, I did not suggest that everyone use a NWS gauge. Go back and reread what I wrote.
@RMartin631 If that's the case, get ready to buy a TROPO! When compared with the 8" NWS Standard Rain Gauge (SRG), the Stratus overmeasures by 3%. Given that the TROPO measures 3% less than the Stratus, it likely measures within 1% of the SRG. Long-term measurement comparisons between the Stratus, TROPO and 8" NWS gauge are being conducted by observers at the CSU weather station.