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

    Evaluation of the Vapor Pressure Models in the Estimation of Actual Vapor Pressure and Evapotranspiration

    Source: Journal of Irrigation and Drainage Engineering:;2018:;Volume ( 144 ):;issue: 011
    Author:
    Upreti Hitesh;Ojha C. S. P.
    DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)IR.1943-4774.0001346
    Publisher: American Society of Civil Engineers
    Abstract: The quantification of evapotranspiration (ET) is highly important in water resources planning. The most reliable method for determining ET is to measure it in the field using lysimeters. However, the use of lysimeters for measurement of crop ET (ETc) is both expensive and time consuming, thus necessitating a cheaper yet reliable alternative method. One such method is to determine ET using the Penman-Monteith equation, which requires daily meteorological data as inputs. Three vapor pressure models (Models 1–3) are mentioned in Irrigation and Drainage Paper-56 of the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO-56) for the estimation of actual vapor pressure (ea) that is used in the estimation of reference ET (ET) by the FAO Penman-Monteith equation. Model 1, which uses daily maximum and minimum temperature and relative humidity (RH) data, is the preferred method to estimate ea; other models are used in data-constrained situations. Another vapor pressure model (Model 5) is proposed in this study. The performance of the vapor pressure models along with two other models (Models 4 and 6) existing in the literature is compared with that of Model 1 in estimating daily ea and ET values. The ea values were underestimated by Model 2, whereas Models 3, 4, and 5 overestimated ea. Results show that Models 4 and 5 (proposed model) performed better than FAO-56 Models 2 and 3 for estimating daily ea values for Roorkee station, India. However, Model 4, which uses only daily mean temperature and RH data, has lower accuracy in ET estimation when compared to Model 5. This is because Model 4 underestimated the daily saturation vapor pressure values. This suggests that daily mean temperature is not enough for the accurate estimation of daily ET values. The overall performance of Model 5, which uses the Lawrence dewpoint temperature-RH relationship, was more consistent and closest to Model 1 when compared to the other vapor pressure models for the study region in data-constrained situations. Furthermore, the effect of wind speed ranges on the performance of the vapor pressure models in ET estimation is also assessed. The effect of vapor pressure models in ET estimation is not considerable for light winds but becomes substantial for higher wind speeds.
    • Download: (1.844Mb)
    • Show Full MetaData Hide Full MetaData
    • Get RIS
    • Item Order
    • Go To Publisher
    • Statistics

      Evaluation of the Vapor Pressure Models in the Estimation of Actual Vapor Pressure and Evapotranspiration

    URI
    https://yetl.yabesh.ir/yetl1/handle/yetl/4249639
    Collections
    • Journal of Irrigation and Drainage Engineering

    Show full item record

    contributor authorUpreti Hitesh;Ojha C. S. P.
    date accessioned2019-02-26T07:49:21Z
    date available2019-02-26T07:49:21Z
    date issued2018
    identifier other%28ASCE%29IR.1943-4774.0001346.pdf
    identifier urihttp://yetl.yabesh.ir/yetl1/handle/yetl/4249639
    description abstractThe quantification of evapotranspiration (ET) is highly important in water resources planning. The most reliable method for determining ET is to measure it in the field using lysimeters. However, the use of lysimeters for measurement of crop ET (ETc) is both expensive and time consuming, thus necessitating a cheaper yet reliable alternative method. One such method is to determine ET using the Penman-Monteith equation, which requires daily meteorological data as inputs. Three vapor pressure models (Models 1–3) are mentioned in Irrigation and Drainage Paper-56 of the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO-56) for the estimation of actual vapor pressure (ea) that is used in the estimation of reference ET (ET) by the FAO Penman-Monteith equation. Model 1, which uses daily maximum and minimum temperature and relative humidity (RH) data, is the preferred method to estimate ea; other models are used in data-constrained situations. Another vapor pressure model (Model 5) is proposed in this study. The performance of the vapor pressure models along with two other models (Models 4 and 6) existing in the literature is compared with that of Model 1 in estimating daily ea and ET values. The ea values were underestimated by Model 2, whereas Models 3, 4, and 5 overestimated ea. Results show that Models 4 and 5 (proposed model) performed better than FAO-56 Models 2 and 3 for estimating daily ea values for Roorkee station, India. However, Model 4, which uses only daily mean temperature and RH data, has lower accuracy in ET estimation when compared to Model 5. This is because Model 4 underestimated the daily saturation vapor pressure values. This suggests that daily mean temperature is not enough for the accurate estimation of daily ET values. The overall performance of Model 5, which uses the Lawrence dewpoint temperature-RH relationship, was more consistent and closest to Model 1 when compared to the other vapor pressure models for the study region in data-constrained situations. Furthermore, the effect of wind speed ranges on the performance of the vapor pressure models in ET estimation is also assessed. The effect of vapor pressure models in ET estimation is not considerable for light winds but becomes substantial for higher wind speeds.
    publisherAmerican Society of Civil Engineers
    titleEvaluation of the Vapor Pressure Models in the Estimation of Actual Vapor Pressure and Evapotranspiration
    typeJournal Paper
    journal volume144
    journal issue11
    journal titleJournal of Irrigation and Drainage Engineering
    identifier doi10.1061/(ASCE)IR.1943-4774.0001346
    page5018007
    treeJournal of Irrigation and Drainage Engineering:;2018:;Volume ( 144 ):;issue: 011
    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