Again, of all the wifi based controllers I have seen on the internet, only the Water Sage has a very sophisticated built-in ET model. to know what is the optimal amount of water for their plants? The wifi-based controller makers themselves are supposed to offer the suggestions to the gardener using built-in ET prediction models. What makes them think a typical gardener knows enough about soil water absorption rate, soil moisture retention rate, soil water holding capacity, plant water usage, etc. With the exception of the Water Sage’s sophisticated ET model, most, if not all of the other wifi based controllers require the user to determine what is the maximum amount of water it needs on the hottest summer day. Error in forecast temperature can cause errors in the evapo-transpiration prediction. Just like all wifi-based controllers, the Water Sage still uses weather station data to forecast rainfall, but doesn’t reconcile difference between forecast and actual rainfall or temperature. But even the Water Sage is not as good as the Rainbird because it doesn’t measure LOCAL temp and rainfall. ![]() I wonder if the Water Sage may be made by former Rainbird engineers. The Water Sage has almost the same sophistication of ET model as the Rainbird ESP-SMTe. ![]() The one that is the most sophisticated is the Water Sage made by OnPoint. Only a few have a sophisticated evapo-transpiration model built in that asks sufficient detailed input questions such as soil type, slope, amount of shade, plant type, root depth, plant density, water loving vs. A weather station located just a half mile away can have totally different rainfall from your own location.Īs a group they lack sophistication in modelling the evapo-transpiration based on soil type, plant type, plant density, root depth, water application rate, drip vs. NOAA or weather station rainfall is NOT rainfall at your own location. Hydrawise is one of the few exceptions that takes actual rainfall into account, but you’d have to pay a $5/month fee to have it incorporate rainfall amount into its scheduling routines. They suspend watering when rain is forecast, but don’t adjust watering frequency and duration to take into account the actual amount of rainfall. is vastly different from 1/8" in 24 hrs., but these wifi-based controllers can’t tell the difference. Nor do they as a group have the ability to know the actual amount of rainfall. They all rely on weather forecasts using either local weather stations forecasts or NOAA forecasts to suspend watering, but as a group (there may be one or two exceptions), they lack the ability to reconcile difference between forecast and actual rainfall or difference between forecast and actual temperature. What’s the likelihood a high-tech startup will survive more than a couple years? How many of them will survive in the near future? Will the user still be able to re-program your wifi-based controller, if the company goes out of business? All of them are made by startup companies. Most of them rely on the user’s ability to link the controller to a proprietary server or website in order to program it. BUT, they come with some severe drawbacks: ![]() They have unmatched convenience, I grant that too. They have very fancy graphics, I grant that. My critique with the wifi based controllers is that they are not as smart as they want you to believe.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |