YaBeSH Engineering and Technology Library

    • Journals
    • PaperQuest
    • YSE Standards
    • YaBeSH
    • Login
    View Item 
    •   YE&T Library
    • ASCE
    • Journal of Irrigation and Drainage Engineering
    • View Item
    •   YE&T Library
    • ASCE
    • Journal of Irrigation and Drainage Engineering
    • View Item
    • All Fields
    • Source Title
    • Year
    • Publisher
    • Title
    • Subject
    • Author
    • DOI
    • ISBN
    Advanced Search
    JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

    Archive

    Predictive Evapotranspiration Equations in Rain Gardens

    Source: Journal of Irrigation and Drainage Engineering:;2019:;Volume ( 145 ):;issue: 007
    Author:
    Amanda Hess
    ,
    Bridget Wadzuk
    ,
    Andrea Welker
    DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)IR.1943-4774.0001389
    Publisher: American Society of Civil Engineers
    Abstract: Current stormwater control measure (SCM) design often does not include the dynamic process of evapotranspiration (ET) for vegetated systems. This study compared two reference ET equations with a three-year data set from rain garden weighing lysimeters. The outcome was a tool to incorporate ET into SCM design. The weighing lysimeters at Villanova University, located in southeastern Pennsylvania, were used to measure water budget parameters for three scenarios: sandy loam with UO, sand with an unconstricted outflow (UO), and sand with internal water storage (IWS). The two ET models explored were the ASCE Penman-Monteith equation (a robust model) and the Hargreaves equation (a simple model). Estimated ET values from these two equations, both with and without modifications for water availability and crop presence, were compared and calibrated (if modified) with observed data. Comparisons and calibrations were performed on a daily and storm basis to explore the applicability of the two ET models for continuous and storm approaches. The observed ET was 28%–52% of inflow over the continuous three-year period and 16–30 mm on a storm scale, making ET a significant part of the lysimeters’ water budget. Due to the experimental nature of the lysimeters, 12 of the 36 study months had additional simulated runoff, such that a smaller ET as a percentage of inflow was expected in the rain garden SCM’s water balance. The Hargreaves and ASCE Penman-Monteith equations without modification provided an adequate estimate for rain garden ET for all systems at the storm scale. Modifications to ET estimations produced by both equations through crop coefficients and a soil moisture extraction function provided a good model for storm-scale ET by reducing errors and increasing efficiencies for all weighing lysimeter types. Evapotranspiration estimates from both unmodified equations provided, at best, a marginally better estimate than the average observed rate for continuous daily rain garden ET. The application of crop coefficients and a soil moisture extraction function to both equations reduced errors in ET estimates and increased the equations’ predictive power (Nash-Sutcliffe efficiency) for all weighing lysimeter types. Both equations with modifications on a daily scale produced good ET estimates for the IWS system. For both equations, crop coefficients were found in an expected range for UO systems (0.3–1.5) but were high in the IWS system (1.6–2.0). Soil moisture extraction functions were not needed to calibrate the IWS equations on the storm scale. Both the Hargreaves equation and the ASCE Penman-Monteith equation provided an adequate model (especially with modifications) to incorporate ET into a design-storm approach to SCM design. Use of both predictive models on a daily scale has potential use in continuous simulation, as in most cases the ET estimations predicted by the equations provided a better estimate than the average of the observed daily ET rates.
    • Download: (1.505Mb)
    • Show Full MetaData Hide Full MetaData
    • Get RIS
    • Item Order
    • Go To Publisher
    • Price: 5000 Rial
    • Statistics

      Predictive Evapotranspiration Equations in Rain Gardens

    URI
    http://yetl.yabesh.ir/yetl1/handle/yetl/4260581
    Collections
    • Journal of Irrigation and Drainage Engineering

    Show full item record

    contributor authorAmanda Hess
    contributor authorBridget Wadzuk
    contributor authorAndrea Welker
    date accessioned2019-09-18T10:42:43Z
    date available2019-09-18T10:42:43Z
    date issued2019
    identifier other%28ASCE%29IR.1943-4774.0001389.pdf
    identifier urihttp://yetl.yabesh.ir/yetl1/handle/yetl/4260581
    description abstractCurrent stormwater control measure (SCM) design often does not include the dynamic process of evapotranspiration (ET) for vegetated systems. This study compared two reference ET equations with a three-year data set from rain garden weighing lysimeters. The outcome was a tool to incorporate ET into SCM design. The weighing lysimeters at Villanova University, located in southeastern Pennsylvania, were used to measure water budget parameters for three scenarios: sandy loam with UO, sand with an unconstricted outflow (UO), and sand with internal water storage (IWS). The two ET models explored were the ASCE Penman-Monteith equation (a robust model) and the Hargreaves equation (a simple model). Estimated ET values from these two equations, both with and without modifications for water availability and crop presence, were compared and calibrated (if modified) with observed data. Comparisons and calibrations were performed on a daily and storm basis to explore the applicability of the two ET models for continuous and storm approaches. The observed ET was 28%–52% of inflow over the continuous three-year period and 16–30 mm on a storm scale, making ET a significant part of the lysimeters’ water budget. Due to the experimental nature of the lysimeters, 12 of the 36 study months had additional simulated runoff, such that a smaller ET as a percentage of inflow was expected in the rain garden SCM’s water balance. The Hargreaves and ASCE Penman-Monteith equations without modification provided an adequate estimate for rain garden ET for all systems at the storm scale. Modifications to ET estimations produced by both equations through crop coefficients and a soil moisture extraction function provided a good model for storm-scale ET by reducing errors and increasing efficiencies for all weighing lysimeter types. Evapotranspiration estimates from both unmodified equations provided, at best, a marginally better estimate than the average observed rate for continuous daily rain garden ET. The application of crop coefficients and a soil moisture extraction function to both equations reduced errors in ET estimates and increased the equations’ predictive power (Nash-Sutcliffe efficiency) for all weighing lysimeter types. Both equations with modifications on a daily scale produced good ET estimates for the IWS system. For both equations, crop coefficients were found in an expected range for UO systems (0.3–1.5) but were high in the IWS system (1.6–2.0). Soil moisture extraction functions were not needed to calibrate the IWS equations on the storm scale. Both the Hargreaves equation and the ASCE Penman-Monteith equation provided an adequate model (especially with modifications) to incorporate ET into a design-storm approach to SCM design. Use of both predictive models on a daily scale has potential use in continuous simulation, as in most cases the ET estimations predicted by the equations provided a better estimate than the average of the observed daily ET rates.
    publisherAmerican Society of Civil Engineers
    titlePredictive Evapotranspiration Equations in Rain Gardens
    typeJournal Paper
    journal volume145
    journal issue7
    journal titleJournal of Irrigation and Drainage Engineering
    identifier doi10.1061/(ASCE)IR.1943-4774.0001389
    page04019010
    treeJournal of Irrigation and Drainage Engineering:;2019:;Volume ( 145 ):;issue: 007
    contenttypeFulltext
    DSpace software copyright © 2002-2015  DuraSpace
    نرم افزار کتابخانه دیجیتال "دی اسپیس" فارسی شده توسط یابش برای کتابخانه های ایرانی | تماس با یابش
    yabeshDSpacePersian
     
    DSpace software copyright © 2002-2015  DuraSpace
    نرم افزار کتابخانه دیجیتال "دی اسپیس" فارسی شده توسط یابش برای کتابخانه های ایرانی | تماس با یابش
    yabeshDSpacePersian