47 views

Uploaded by Mogie Talampas

Describe the concepts and developments of estimating evapotranspiration phenomenon

save

- Influence of vegetation on the local climate and hydrology in the tropics: sensitivity to soil parameters
- Final Layout Magazine Beyond Lenses
- james d mcguffin-cawley
- Penman Mothiet
- Changes in the physiological response between leaves and fruits during a moderate water stress in table olive trees.pdf
- Hydraulics 2 Solutions2012
- calc practice problems week 2
- Tutorial 3-Rigid Jointed Frame Analysis
- Solution Tut 11yr12
- Numerical Metods Applied to Global Solar Radiation Modeling - Comparison With Meaured Data
- Framework of the Syllabus
- Dissertation XingyuanChen.final
- VM E4.docx
- Quinteiro2014.pdf
- 1235
- gen3_5
- Eng Oral 2013 (Global Warming)
- Climate Change in Durham
- Official NASA Communication 05-40
- Global Warming
- Solutions Hwt Theory of Solutions
- World Problems Only Getting Worse
- Footing
- Global Warming Refers to an Unequivocal and Contin
- topic 3 and 4 quiz assessment
- IMD Recent (1)
- 1111
- Vibrations-main
- JCE_64_2012_10_2_1045_EN
- Tsunami Relief Disaster Management System
- Final Version Planning 2
- Modeling of Solute Transport in the Unsaturated Zone Using HYDRUS-1D
- Incorporating GIS in Water Resources Modeling
- Identification of Groundwater Potential Zone
- Manual on FC Planning
- Risk Assessment Mapping
- Flood Hazard Mapping Using Aster Image Data
- Hydrology Textbook
- IDF Relationships and Design Storms
- Deforestation Brazil Ndvi
- Hydrologic Soil Groups
- remotesensing-03-00845
- Soil Erosion Risk
- Llano River and Sandy Creek Basins - Fluvial Geomorphic GIS Analyses
- Wind Program_ Advantages and Challenges of Wind Energy
- Rainfall IDF Analysis
- Regionalization of a Conceptual Rainfall-runoff Model

Theory of Evapotranspiration

5.1

Introduction

Evapotranspiration is an important term in the water balance of an irrigated area. Irrigation engineers want to know how much of the irrigation water that has been supplied is consumed by the crops; only then can they calculate, or estimate, the remaining components of the water balance. Agriculturists, on the other hand, want to know the specific water requirements of a crop so that they can obtain a satisfactory yield; they also want to know whether these water requirements are being met under the prevailing irrigation practices. Section 5.3 of this chapter presents the theory of Penman’s open water evaporation. This is followed by the FAO modification of this theory in Section 5.4, and by the recently accepted Penman-Monteith Method in Section 5.5. How this theory is applied in practice will be explained in Sections 5.6, 5.7, and 5.8.

5.2

Concepts and Developments

In the past, many empirical equations have been developed to estimate the potential evapotranspiration (i.e. the evapotranspiration from cropped soils that have an optimum water supply) (Blaney and Criddle 1950; Turc 1954; Jensen and Hake 1963). These empirical correlation methods are often valid only for the local conditions under which they were developed, and as such are hardly transferable to other areas. Nowadays, the focus is therefore on physically-based approaches, which have a wider applicability. For the process of evapotranspiration, three basic physical requirements in the soilplant-atmosphere system must be met: 1 ) A continuous supply of water; 2) Energy to change liquid water into vapour; 3) A vapour gradient to maintain a flux from the evaporating surface to the atmosphere. The various methods of determining evapotranspiration are based on one or more of these requirements. For example, the soil-water-balance approach is based on I), the energy-balance approach is based on 2), and the combination method (energy balance plus heat and mass transfer) is based on parts of 2) and 3). Penman (1948) was the first to introduce the combination method. He estimated the evaporation from an open water surface, and then used that as a reference evaporation. Multiplied by a crop factor, this provided an estimate of the potential evapotranspiration from a cropped surface. Penman’s Method requires meteorological data on air temperature, air humidity, solar radiation, and wind speed. Because even this combination method contains a number of empirical

61

relationships, a host of researchers have proposed numerous modifications to adjust it to local conditions. After analyzing a range of lysimeter data worldwide, Doorenbos and Pruitt (1977) proposed the FAO Modified Penman Method, which has found worldwide application in irrigation and drainage projects. To estimate crop water requirements, CRIWAR uses the same two-step approach as Penman did, but it does not use Penman’s open water evaporation, but the evapotranspiration from a reference crop. Hence, CRIWAR estimates a reference evapotranspiration, reads crop coefficients per crop and per growth stage from crop factor files, and then multiplies the two to find the crop water requirements. For the FAO Modified Penman Method (Doorenbos and Pruitt 1977), the reference crop is defined as:

‘ A n extended surface o f an 0.08 to 0.15 m tall green grass cover of uniform height, actively growing, completely shading the ground, and not short of water. ’

There was evidence, however, that the Modified Penman Method over-predicted the crop water requirements. Hence, using similar physics as Penman did, Monteith (1965) developed an equation that describes the transpiration from a dry, extensive, horizontal, and uniformly vegetated surface, fully covering the ground, that is optimally supplied with water. In international literature, this equation is known as the Penman-Monteith Equation. Recent comparative studies (e.g. Jensen et al. 1990) show the convincing performance of the Penman-Monteith approach under varying climatic conditions, thereby confirming the results of many individual studies reported over the past years. An expert consultation on procedures to revise the prediction of crop water requirements was held in Rome (Smith 1990). There, it was agreed to recommend the Penman-Monteith approach as the currently best-performing combination equation. Through the introduction of canopy and air resistances to water vapour diffusion, estimates of potential and actual evapotranspiration would, in principle, be possible with the Penman-Monteith Equation. Nowadays, this direct, or one-step, approach is increasingly being followed, especially in research environments. Nevertheless, since accepted canopy and air resistances may not yet be known for many crops, the two-step Penman approach (i.e. using crop factors) is still commonly used under field conditions. The reference crop in the Penman-Monteith approach is defined as:

‘A hypothetical crop fully covering the ground, and not short of water, with an assumed crop height of 0.12 m, a f a e d canopy resistance of 70 s/m, and a canopy reflection coefficient of 0.23. ’

5.3

**Evaporation from Open Water : The Penman Method
**

T

**As was mentioned earlier, CRIWAR does not use the ‘classical’ Penman Method
**

62

(1948), but instead uses the FAO Modified Penman Method (default) and the 'modem' Penman-Monteith Method. To give our readers a better understanding of the matter, however, we shall explain the original Penman Method. Penman applied the energy balance of open water at the earth's surface. Equating all incoming and outgoing energy fluxes (Figure 5.1), he obtained

R,-G=H+AE

where R, H energy flux density of net radiation (W/m2) flux density of sensible heat into the air (W/m2) flux density of latent heat into the air (W/m2) = heat flux density into the water body (W/m2)

= = =

(5.1)

ilE

G

The coefficient /z in AE is the latent heat of vaporization of water and E is the vapour flux density (kg/m2s). To convert the above U (W/m2) into an equivalent evapo(transpi)ration in units of mmid, we multiply ; 1 E by a factor 0.0353. This factor equals the number of seconds in a day (86 400), divided by the value of A (2.45 x lo6 J/kg at 20°C), whereby we assume a density of water of 1000 kg/m3. Supposing that R, and G can be measured, we can calculate E if we know the ratio

soil heat G

latent heat M

sensible heat H

. . - . . .

- . . - .__ _ -.... .-. ..... .. ._ . . . . . .. .. ... .....

. . . r .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Figure 5.1 Illustrating the variables involved in the energy balance of the soil surface (Feddes and Lenselink 1994)

63

1 and described by Equation 5. = temperature at the evaporating (water) surface ("C) Tz = air temperature at a height z above the surface ("C) eJ. measured at the same height as Tz (kPa) Applying the concept of the similarity of the transport of heat and of water vapour yields the Bowen Ratio (5. assumed to be the same for heat and water vapour (sim) = = The other symbols are illustrated in Figure 5.1 shows that radiation energy (R. E is commonly replaced by being the psychrometric -I--+ Tz JpJ Figure 5. H . The situation shown in Figure 5.2: T. We can derive this ratio from the transport equations of heat and water vapour in the air.4) where the ratio cp p J A constant (kPa/"C).2 Illustration of terminology water surface l o 64 .G ) is transformed into sensible heat. aE. and water vapour.H/aE (which is called the Bowen Ratio).2) (5.. = saturated vapour pressure at the evaporating (water) surface (kPa) e . = prevailing vapour pressure in the external air. which are transported to the air in accordance with (5.3) where cp E pa pu ra specific heat of dry air at constant pressure (J/kgK) ratio of molecular masses of water vapour over dry air (-) = atmospheric pressure (kPa) = density of moist air (kg/m3) = aerodynamic diffusion resistance.sa.

T. no heat is added to or removed from the system). as a function of air temperature..3 Saturated water vapour pressure. Note that e.4 yields (5.e. ( e . . in Equation 5.er in Equation 5. e.5 is the saturated vapour pressure at the surface at temperature T.\.The problem with the above equations is that the surface temperature.) . under isothermal conditions (i. we e.\ U ....su.. is not known (not measurable). Penman therefore took three intermediate steps: a) He introduced the proportionality constant (5../ .s.. known as the saturated vapour pressure curve (Figure 5..e: e. versus T.u/ - . Lenselink 1994) (Feddes and 65 ...6 into Equation 5.) This gives p=. Hence Substituting Equation 5.5) The proportionality constant A (kPa/”C) is the first derivative of the function e . .7 with e. . . e..e. - 1 c) He introduced the ‘adiabatic vapour transport’ in such a way that.(er .Y ( I A e.7) b) He replaced the vapour pressure gradient e...t 10 in kPa 0 6 4 2 O O 10 20 30 40 50 60 T~ in O c Figure 5....3).

equals A comparison of this equation with Equation 5... as defined above: E. the original Penman Formula (Equation 5. and writing E. also called the 'aerodynamic term'.. however.g. lakes and flooded rice fields in the very early stages of growth). As was mentioned in Section 5.1 1 ) Substituting the above information into Equation 5. with Equation 5.12) where.12 shows the combination of two processes in one equation.G A+y l. . AEu. The first term is the evaporation equivalent of the net flux of radiant energy to the surface.3. is generally limited to large water bodies (e.A R . The practical value of estimating E. (subscript o denoting open water) for E yields the Penman Formula. especially over longer periods (hence G = O). 66 ./dT. as reference evaporation.10) so that Yl . the heat flux into the water is often ignored.aur = e:. The second term quantifies the corresponding aerodynamic process of water-vapour transport from the evaporating water surface to the surrounding air. (kPa/"C) R. ~ +- y A+y Eu (5.. .12.) P=-( A E U E (5. in mm/d. = net radiation flux density (W/m2) G = heat flux density into the water body (W/m2) i l = latent heat of vaporization (J/kg) y = psychrometric constant (kPa/"C) Eu = isothermal evaporation rate (kg/m2 s) Equation 5.. Note that the resulting E.can assume that es. . also called the 'radiation term'.2.su. But.12. the theoretical adiabatic evaporation..If we introduce this assumption into Equation 5.12) used E.1. CRIWAR does not use Equation 5. (kg/m2s) should be multiplied by 86 400 seconds to give the equivalent evaporation rate E.3 shows that (5. For open water. as was also mentioned earlier. = open water evaporation rate (kg/m2 s) A = proportionality constant de. which is Eo==.

and .. as introduced by Doorenbos and Pruitt (1977). is set equal to zero for daily periods. 2 The Adjustment Factor.4..An adjustment factor to take into account that local climatic conditions deviate from an assumed standard. C reference crop evapotranspiration rate (mm/d) dimensionless adjustment factor (see Section 5. by the appropriate crop coefficient (Section 5. the Modified Penman Equation can be written as (5.~.1..-ez = vapour pressure deficit (kPa) A.5.CRIWAR calculates the values of c by interpolation from Table 5..15 m tall and not short of water. 4 .O. (u~~Ju. . 5 . CRIWAR uses the adjustment factors of Section 5.. The main changes in Penman’s Formula to compute this reference evapotranspiration.0 m above ground surface (m/s) ez.4.13) where ET.The short-wave reflection coefficient (approximately 0. started from the assumption that evapotranspiration from grass largely occurs in response to climatic conditions. whereby the interactions between wind speed. Table 5.f(u) = wind function.4. relative humidity. R. relative humidity.13 differs from 1...05 for water and 0. they suggested that.70. udaJ:.2.08 to 0.1 gives values of c as a function of the day-time wind speed.). the ratio of day over night wind speed. Because short grass is the common surrounding of agro-meteorological stations. 8 6 4 ~ ~ u2 = wind speed measured at 2. y = as defined earlier = = Potential evapotranspiration rate from a cropped surface is subsequently found by multiplying this reference ET. c. 0. can be estimated from comparisons of calculated and measured values of ET.f(u) = 1 + 0 . relate to: . be used. If the heat flux.2) Rn = energy flux density of net incoming radiation (W/m2) .4 5. RH. the evapotranspiration from grass. instead of using evaporation from open water as a reference.1 The FAO Modified Penman Method The Modification The modification of the Penman Method. the adjustment factor in Equation 5. The values of the adjustment factor. and the solar radiation.A more sensitive wind function in the aerodynamic term. and dayhight wind ratio.. 67 . the maximum relative humidity.7).25 for grass).. G. c If the average climatological conditions for which the (Modified) Penman Formula was developed are not met. This adjustment is needed to allow various combinations of radiation. ET. and solar radiation are analyzed...

10 1.93 .64 .02 .76 .37 .99 .05 1.96 .06 1. and the hind speed ratio.76 .1 1 1. = (RH i 100)/2 where RH is the average relative humidity.32 1.98 . if these data are not available.27 . (Doorenbos and Pruitt 1977) RHniur = 30°6 RHmur = 60% RHntur = 90% 9 1 2 R.53 .62 1.88 1.71 1.05 1..02 1.05 .70 .98 .41 1.15 1.27 O 3 6 9 .88 .22 1.06 1.84 .86 .02 .88 .78 1.00 .14 1.82 .19 1.61 .18 0 3 6 9 86 . incoming shorthabe radiation.60 1.05 1.89 .86 .87 .96 .94 .90 76 .67 ..98 .94 .14 1.79 .83 .10 1.05 1.86 ..92 .0 0 3 6 9 .10 1.70 . However.00 .3).05 .87 . R. a? a function of the maximum relative humidity.94 .65 1.10 1.10 1.81 .48 1.82 .72 1.90 .02 .05 1. How to calculate the incoming short-wave radiation flux density will be explained in Section 5.76 l%rxhr = 4.92 .00 .26 1.85 .81 .59 1..10 1. day-time wind speed.88 1.74 .06 1.05 1.05 1.19 1.65 1.00 .62 SO .05 .92 1.00 .86 .18 1.68 .12 1.10 1.78 .97 .00 .70 1.00 39 .43 .88 1. CRIWAR will use the following default values: and RH.92 .01 .33 1.84 .46 .01 .00 .00 .93 . = 0 3 6 9 . RH.85 .16 1.Table 5 1 Adjustment factor.96 1.96 .75 1.59 .71 .02 .05 1. 68 .56 1.27 1.90 ..61 .10 1.00 .68 .70 . c .68 .10 1.96 .11 1.95 . Day-time wind speed is calculated from data on mean wind speed and a day-night wind ratio. uda.06 .87 1.02 .94 .92 .69 .06 1.06 Ud"1 iu.90 .77 .85 .02 .06 .96 .78 1.81 1..87 1.10 1.[mmd]-+ 3 6 9 12 3 6 9 1 2 3 6 udo\ lmls1 .98 1.90 .6.01 1.55 .96 Data need to be supplied on the day-night ratio of the wind speed and on the maximum relative humidity (see Section 3.79 .72 1.94 34 .10 1.12 1.05 ..99 .80 .95 1.77 .99 .96 .92 .88 .". udu.28 1.Rh.98 .86 .04 1.91 .10 1.72 .82 .79 1.84 1 1.79 .53 .

9.sar ...e. we can treat the dry vegetation layer as if it were one big leaf.A stomatal diffusion resistance is added.. During this diffusion. It is assumed that this lower vapour pressure at leaf temperature...15. As the vapour subsequently moves from the leaf surface to the external air. we can write (5. and the air within these cavities will be at leaf temperature.) through the stomata to the outer ‘leaf surface.1 The Penman-Monteith Approach Crops with Full Soil Cover In analogy with Section 5.13. In this context.15) From Equation 5.5. which differs considerably from that of a grassed surface. where a certain lower vapour pressure reigns.. E. (Figure 5.. Tz. we can write the isothermal evaporation rate. a ‘big leaf‘ stomatal resistance. The actual transpiration process (liquid water changing into vapour) takes place in cavities below the stomata of this ‘big leaf.5 5. Nevertheless. r.4).. and hence an aerodynamic resistance. This results in a different wind function. where actual vapour pressure. y.The hypothetical crop surface has a roughness (dependent on crop height and wind speed). T.) in Equation 5. at air temperature.4.25). for a wet crop as (5. u. it follows that a dry cropped surface can be described by the same equation as a wet cropped surface if the vapour pressure difference (ez. is present. Following the same reasoning that led to Equation 5.5. the evapotranspiration from a wet crop can be described by an equation very similar to Equation 5.The albedo (or reflection coefficient for solar radiation) is different for the hypothetical crop surface (0.14 is replaced by 69 .14) From the discussion by De Bruin (1982) of Monteith’s concept of a dry vegetated surface. When the vapour diffusion rate through the stomata equals the vapour transport rate into the external air.sa. e. T.23) and a grassed surface (0. is encountered. e. resulting to a modification of the psychrometric constant. we have to take into account the differences between a grassed surface and a hypothetical crop surface. . equals the saturated vapour pressure. . these differences are: .. an aerodynamic resistance is encountered. Water vapour escapes saturated (pressure er.

r (kPa/'C) R. = 'big leaf stomatal diffusion resistance (s/m) A = proportionality constant dea. temperatures. then reads where. completely shading the ground.suf/dTa. = net radiation flux density (W/m2) G = heat flux density into the soil ( W h 2 ) 70 . at the same height as Tz is measured (kPa) ra = aerodynamic diffusion resistance.T i M ' T Z ra ' AERODYNAMIC DIFFUSION Figure 5. = prevailing vapour pressure in the external air. as defined earlier ET. assumed to be the same for heat and water vapour (s/m) r. and resistances (Feddes and Lenselink 1994) According to Monteith (1965). = reference evapotranspiration rate from a dry crop surface (kg/m2 s) cp = specific heat of dry air at constant pressure (J/kgK) e. (kPa) e.4 The path of water vapour through a leaf stoma.The equation of Penman-Monteith for a dry vegetation.r.. the same effect is obtained by multiplying y in Penman's Equation by ( 1 + rc/ru).. = saturated vapour pressure at temperature T.su. showing relevant vapour pressures.

r. For arable crops.17 is. however.3 Aerodynamic Resistance The aerodynamic resistance. a rough indication of r. of a dry crop completely covering the ground has a non-zero minimum value if the water supply in the rootzone is optimal (i. this minimum amounts to r. the evaporation from the soil may become dominant.2).as follows r/ecz/ rc = 0. The canopy resistance is a complex function of incoming solar radiation. Owing to the crude description of the vegetation layer. Alternatively. In various published studies. is sometimes related to the single-leaf resistances as measured with a porometer. and soil water content.e.pu i l y = = = density of moist air (kg/m3) latent heat of vaporization (J/kg) psychrometric constant (kPa/"C) The ET. in principle. by the soil-water balance or by a micro-meteorological approach). = 30 s/m. 5.. are not available. This implies that some of these published r. pronounced temperature gradients occur. = 70 s/m (Section 5. and to the leaf area index. has to be known.. It is usually determined experimentally with the Penman-Monteith Equation. r. water vapour deficit. it is very difficult to determine T. is measured independently (e. this quantity is poorly defined. r.19) where z = height at which wind speed is measured (m) 71 .18) If data on Y/eu/ and A . Because.17 should be multiplied by 86400 seconds to give the equivalent reference crop evapotranspiration rate in "/day. precisely. value of Equation 5.. where ET.2 Canopy Resistance Equation 5. directly. and these environmental quantities varies from crop to crop and also depends on the soil type. is determined very crudely.. under conditions of potential evapotranspiration).g. r. in real vegetation. the aerodynamic resistance.. values are inaccurate (de Bruin 1982). The relationship between r. that of a forest is about 150 s/m. It appears that the canopy resistance.. 5. With a partly cropped surface. ra. can be obtained by taking rleUrto be 100 s/m. not able to quantify evapotranspiration from partly cropped surfaces.5 A i (5. CRIWAR uses a fixed value of r.5. With that approach. It is not possible to measure r. Ai.5. can be quantified by (5.

I o I d U+ Figure 5. zo. and zo. For the standard measuring height of z = 2..19 gives r.67h 0. z . increases logarithmically with height..5)... upwards over a displacement height.19 shows that the wind speed. Displacement d depends on the crop height h and is often estimated as d while zom = = 0. Equation 5. zo 72 .0 m.12 m. and the above approximations for d.17 is often used to calculate the reference evapotranspiration. using the above fixed value of r( and the relevant value of r.. and I(. d. equals 0. Equation 5.. illustrating $e displacement thickness.0 m). = 2 0 8 1 ~ ~ . The crop canopy.4 1 wind speed measured at height z (mis) Equation 5.5 The aerodynamic wind profile. u .d : ( > . shifts the horizontal asymptote at height z. however.. and the roughness length. and zo. = In practice.lz.. a hypothetical crop height of 0.123h O. = = = zonl = roughness length for momentum K u: = displacement height because of crop height (m) (m) roughness length for water vapour (m) von Kármán constant (-). ET. d. becomes zero at a height d + zo (Figure 5. It is thus important to know at which height above ground level the wind speed is measured (default height in CRIWAR is 2.

we can find the reference evapotranspiration from Equations 5.6 shows ET. respectively. respectively. 5.6 Comparison of the reference ET for 20 locations. were calculated with Equations 5. computed with the Modified Penman Method (Equation 5.13 and 5.13 and 5. and ET. These Penman-Monteith ETh in mmld 12 10 8 6 4 2 O O 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 modified Penman ETg in mmld Figure 5.17.17) 73 . With monthly average meteorological data from 20 stations.13) and the Penman-Monteith Approach (Equation 5.17.5. ET.6 Computing the Reference Evapotranspiration Accepting the definition of the reference crop as given in Section 5. A plot of the results in Figure 5.2.5.4 Discussion As was mentioned in Section 5. there was evidence that the Modified Penman Method predicted a higher reference ET than the Penman-Monteith Approach.1. = 0.85ETg.

C = (5.16 (5.sat. 5..0. ez. + 237.+ 273.av (Ta. = (Tmm+ Tm.6 J/kgK) ratio of molar masses of water vapour over dry air (0.sar.21) where H Tul.622) Atmospheric Pressure The atmospheric pressure is related to altitude as follows p u = 101.O0659p. Then the ez. the value of is calculated first with the above equation at both Tmin and Tmm.1 CRIWAR Calculations Psychrometric Constant The psychrometric constant is defined as y = -$O.0065H Tu.3 ( Tal. Tu. is calculated in a different way with the Modified Penman Method than with the Penman-Monteith Approach. is quantified by A= 4098 ez.23) With the Penman-Monteith Approach the averaging procedure differs.24) Using data of various meteorological stations.. With the Modified Penman Method. A = deair. and (5.16 . the temperature is averaged first.45 x lo6 J/kg) specific heat of dry air at constant pressure (1004.22) The average value of the saturated vapour pressure. cp E = = atmospheric pressure (kPa) latent heat of vaporization (CRIWAR uses 2.+ 273.. it can be shown that this different Penman-Monteith approach results in about % ! lower reference evapotranspiration.equations contain a number of variables that depend on user-given input information from the CRIWAR General Data and Meteo Data files.rr. 74 .312 = Slope of the Vapour Pressure Curve The slope of the vapour pressure curve.6. the altitude above mean sea level (m) = average air temperature ("C)./dTui.sar.av is calculated by (5..sa.20) where pa = = A.3)2 (5.

622 is used. As stated earlier.RnI. a value of E = 0. the modified Penman Method uses 0. = n N e: = = = TK..1)(0. or canopy reflection coefficient (-). CT = = = net long-wave radiation (W/m2) daily duration of bright sunshine (h) day length (h) actual vapour pressure (kPa) maximum absolute temperature (OK) minimum absolute temperature ( O K ) Stefan-Boltzmann constant (equals 5. where R. net short-wave radiation (W/mz) albedo.26) where R.34-0. the Penman-Monteith Approach uses a different averaging procedure. (5.. This was defined as (Equation 5. = = = = ( 1 .29) For the ratio of the molecular masses of water vapour and dry air. TK.287 (Ta+ 273) (5.30) 75 . + mn. a value of 0. e..6745 x W/m2 K4) Actual Vapour Pressure For the FAO Modified Penman Method. . = RH 50 .23 is used for the Penman-Monteith reference crop. The density of moist air can be expressed as Pa pa = 0.139$) N CT (Ten. Hence e. the actual vapour pressure....14) (5..Net short-wave radiation can be described by R.") 2 (5.. is found from (5.a)R..9+0.27) where RH is the average relative humidity percentage.25) a R. + 50 (5.25 incoming solar radiation (W/m2) The net long-wave radiation is represented by n Rn/=(0.Net Radiation Net radiation consists of two parts: net short-wave radiation and net long-wave radiation: Rn = R..28) Aerodynamic Evaporation Equivalent The Penman-Monteith Approach uses the aerodynamic evaporation equivalent.

and the extra-terrestrial radiation. Hence.31) Solar Radiation Many agro-meterological stations do not have a solarimeter to record the solar radiation..12 m.33) a. for the Modified Penman Method.287 replaces R. (w. the new value is 1367 W/m2. is estimated by CRIWAR from R. southern negative The value 435 is used in the Penman-Monteith Method. The old sun constant was 1353 W/m2. w 76 .287 kJ/kg O K ) . = ( U where R.. CRIWAR uses (1353/1367) x 435 = 430. 6 cp = relative distance between the earth and the sun (-) sunset hour angle (rad) declination of the sun (rad) latitude (rad). The day length. n N = = = = solar radiation (W/m2) fraction of extra-terrestrial radiation on overcast days (-) fraction of extra-terrestrial radiation on clear days (-) extra-terrestrial radiation.21 by substituting the standard measuring height of = 208/u. being the specific gas constant for dry air (0.32) = = a +b R.in which 0.0 m and the reference crop height of 0. sinq sin6 + cosq cos6sin o. northern latitude positive. reasonable estimate values of a and b for average climatic conditions are a = 0.50 (CRIWAR used values).7. and other climates. this value is somewhat lower because a lower value was used for the sun constant. RA.. humid tropical.) where d. In that case. z = 2. Substituting the above values into Equation 5. but they do have a Campbell-Stokes sunshine recorder to record the duration of bright sunshine. U + b -) n N RA (5. which gives r. = = = (5. or Angot value (W/m2) duration of bright sunshine (h) day length (h) Although a distinction can be made between arid.25 and b = 0. and where the ‘officially’ needed value for the virtual temperature has been replaced by the absolute temperature ( Tc. from Equation 5.29 and multiplication with 86400 seconds gives (in “/day) (5.v + 273). R. In the Modified Penman Method. are astronomical values that can be approximated with the following equations RA = 435 d. We can find r. N .

23. 2 Crop development From the end of the initial stage until the attainment of effective full ground cover (between 70 and 80%)..4093 sin ( 2 ~ J + 284 ) 365 (5.033 COS ~ 2zJ 365 (5. during this stage.. but also if used with the Penman-Monteith approach. N . (Modified Penman Method). the soil surface is not.36) The maximum possible sunshine hours. as introduced by Doorenbos and Pruitt (1 977).. is calculated from 6 = 0. covered by the crop canopy (ground cover less than 10%). k. (5. can be found from (5. ET. by means of a crop coefficient.35) The sunset-hour angle is found from o. is found from d. or day of the year ( J = 1 for January 1). or is hardly.4.). or the day length. 77 . 5. For monthly values.The relative distance between the earth and the sun.. d. 6...1).. in combination with ET. i.7 Estimating Potential Evapotranspiration To estimate crop water requirements. The four different stages of crop development which are considered for field and vegetable crops are: 1 Initial growth Germination and early growth of the crop.= arccos(-tanrp tan@ (5. Please note that this does not mean that the crop has reached its mature height. as follows ET.8 Standard Estimates of Crop Coefficients A number of CRIWAR crop files show k.37) 5. of the crop under consideration to an estimated reference evapotranspiration. J can be found as the integer value of 30. CRIWAR relates the potential ET. = k. = 1 + 0. ETre1(either ETg or ET.15.38) Smith (1990) concluded that the practical crop coefficients. where A 4 is the number of the month ( 1 to 12).42 x M .-values as a function of the crop development stage (Section 3. The declination. are not only valid if used in combination with ET.e.34) where J is the Julian day.

. is recommended for use when the interval between irrigation turns ETr.f in "/day. there are One is based on the assumption that irrigation water two methods of calculating kc. and the average interval between irrigation turns or significant rain. For some crops.. Normally this stage lasts well past the flowering stage of annual crops.8. 5. this stage may last till very near harvest (sugar beet) unless irrigation is ommited at late season and a reduction in ET. by which k...3 Mid-season From the attainment of effective full ground cover to the start of maturing of the crop.1 Initial Growth Stage During the initial growth stage.. and on the frequency with which the soil is wetted by rain or irrigation. some grains). the value of the crop coefficient.. Maturing may be indicated by leaves discoloring (beans) or leaves falling off (cotton). is induced to increase yield and/or quality (sugarcane. Figure 5.-value for the initial crop de3elopment stage as a function of ET. and the frequency of irrigation and significantrainfall (Doorenbos and Pruitt 1977) 78 . Generally. The second method././.e../ values are taken directly from Figure 5. depends largely on the level of ET. 4 Late season From the end of the mid-season stage until full maturity or harvest of the crop.. cotton.7 Average k. O during initial stage Figure 5... k. ET.7.7 shows the relationship between kc. is applied only if soil water content is insufficient to ensure potential transpiration (ideal irrigation regime)...

8 0. advection. 1 I 40days ' . The broken line in Figure 5.8 is assumed to approximate the actual kc-values during the growing season. 13 mid-season 50days late season Y25days: t4 f tl t2 t5 Figure 5. latitude. These local effects may include: size of fields. The above procedure is used by CRIWAR to calculate the k.8 Example of the crop coefficient curve for the CRIWAR pre-programmed crop: Tomato 79 . table 5 4 I mathty 1 haryest I I I O $ I initial 35days f I crop ' development:. a straight line interpolation is assumed to find the kc.. 5.3. they can be schematized as shown in Figure 5. through t5. To be able to select the proper values of kc.:.2 Other Growth Stages As soon as the crop gives effective full soil cover (as at the start of the mid-season growth stage). altitude. irrigation and cultivation practices. CRIWAR uses the second method. As the latter is often true in irrigation practice.-value at any time during the growing season.4r CRIWAR uses user-given meteo data (relative humidity and wind speed). and soil water availability.-value.2.4 planting dyte I abodt 10% 70 to'80% ground cover ground. as shown in Figure kc value 1. CRIWAR will calculate either ET' or ET. Recommended values are given in Table 5..8.. and the k.. The frequency of irrigation and/or significant rainfall has to be given by the user (Section 3. Depending on the choice of the user. One should therefore always be careful in applying crop coefficients from experimental data.-value has been calculated.2 January February March April I May June July 0.3 and kc.(or significant rain) is irregular. Crop coefficients are generally derived from fields with different local conditions and different agricultural practices. When the kc. During the crop development stage.8.. cover I I . Of the dates t . soil evaporation will be negligible.-values are known.2). Values for the crop coefficients k c j (mid-season stage) and kc. climatological variations with time.4 (late season stage) are based on field research.and k.

(planting or sowing date).95 0.60 1.10 0.20 Wheat 1.60 1.5.10 1.o0 1 .60 Soybeans 3 4 1.o0 1.o5 0.25 0.95 0.o5 0.95 0.95 4 3 4 3 4 Y 0.25 0.85 1 .20 0.20 1 .95 1 . the user only needs to give the t .65 1.90 1. the above procedure applies to the pre-programmed field and vegetable crops.20 1 .O5 1.20 0.20 80 .8.o0 Barley Beans (green) Corn (sweet) 3 4 3 4 3 4 1.o5 0.10 0....60 1.65 1.10 0.8.O5 0.25 0.o0 1.O5 0.75 0. CRIWAR calculates the remaining dates.60 1.65 0.20 0.20 0.10 0.45 I .10 0.O5 1.15 0.60 1.10 1.o0 Corn (grain) Cotton 3 4 3 4 3 4 3 4 0.75 0.90 Sugar beet No irrigation during last month 3 4 1. As mentioned in Section 5.45 1. 20 '/o 0-5 5-8 5-8 CROP Artichokes Mid-season Harvest or maturity: 3 4 0. Table 5 2 Crop coefficients k.15 0.95 0..75 1..95 0.25 0.85 1.90 0.70 Potato 3 4 0.o5 0.O5 1 .O5 I .85 I .45 1.10 0.15 0.90 1.o0 0.70 1.15 I .20 1. i and Ac for CRIWAR pre-programmed field and vegetable crops for different stage? of crop growth and prevailing climatic condition5 (Doorenbos and Pruitt 1977) Humidity Wind speed m/s RH.25 0.O5 0.15 1.20 1.15 0.95 1.O5 0.65 Tomato 1.15 0.65 I .55 1 .o0 0.60 1.O5 0.25 0.o0 0.15 1.20 0.70 1.20 0..60 1.10 0.95 1..90 1.95 0.o0 0.75 1.95 1 .55 1.45 0.95 0.o5 0.95 0.80 1. 0-5 STAGE 70% RH.10 1.O5 0.

15 0. this repeated growth cycle has a considerable effect on the irrigation water requirements.55 Clover. In such cases.-values for large mature trees as a function of ground cover and weed control.15 0. Table 5.2 0. Hence.25 0. However. low*) 0. As above. For young orchards.5 1 .o 0. low*) k.-values shown in Table 5. Also here.-values of this group of crops shows the same variation as the above field crops.3 k. Citrus Table 5.1 Light to moderate wind Strong wind 1. the dates should be shifted 6 months.5 gives k.o 1. the k. mean represents the mean value between cuttings.-values for alfalfa. Clover.5 I . just before harvest Bananas The k.1 0.O5 0. For a Mediterranean climate. mean k.1 I . not all fields will be harvested on the same date. The months refer to the northern hemisphere. we recommend increasing the values by 30%. peak k. the growth cycle initial 3 harvest is passed through several times. In a tropical climate.-values after about 10 months relate to the decline in active leaf area.4 as a function of climate. the values related to 20 or 50% ground cover should be used. For individual fields.55 1. planting may be in any month.15 0. 5 *) k.9 1.8 1 . and Pasture The k. Grasses. just after cutting k. the months refer to the northern hemisphere. for deciduous fruit and walnut trees are presented in Table 5. clover. mean k. Values may differ with local farm practices. low.15 0 . and pasture (Doorenbos and Pruitt 1977) Alfalfa Grass for hay 0.6 0. we use the average k.O5 1.3. under wet conditions.O5 0. In a larger irrigated area. low*) k.-values are given for the month after planting. The values listed are for dry soil conditions.3 Other Crops Alfalfa. k. grasses. Table 5.-values for bananas are given in Table 5.o 1 . the lower k. peak.o5 0. peak k.4 assumes planting in March of the first year and the removal of original large leaves in February of the next year. for the southern hemisphere. however.4 1 .85 1 .6 as a 81 . Grasslegumes Pasture Humid Light to moderate wind Dry k.95 1.5.55 1 .O5 0.95 1 .8. since the harvest is repeated several times a year. Deciduous Fruits and Nuts Values of k.3 1 . peak k.55 1 .o5 1.o5 0.55 0. mean k.5 0.

45 4 .95 .15 1.1 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 1.9 .5 No weed control I .85 .9 .7 .55 .7 .05 1.4 k.1 1.7 .75 .2 1.95 . 1 5 1 .6 .75 .65 .1 1. 1 5 1 .95 1. **) The kc-values in this part of the table assume infrequent wetting by irrigation or rain (every 2 to 4 weeks). For young orchards with tree ground cover of 20 and 50%.1 .8 1.65 .55 .85 .75 .85 .1 1.95 1.5 .8 .45 .05 1.75 .7 .5 .05 1.45 .7 .15 1.5 .85 .85 Trees providing tree ground = 20% cover Clean cultivated .05 1.75 .5 5 .7 for adjustments). wind Humid.lighttomod.85 .6 .65 .0 1 .6 .55 .6 .85 .85 55 .7 .9 .6 .05 . light to mod.7 . wind Humid.55 .6 .7 . 2 1 .85 8 9 1.65 .85 . 1 5 35 Second season with the removal of original plants in February and 80% ground cover by August: Humid.75 .2 1.95 .1 1.95 .9 .05 1.75 .5 .o 1.95 .45 .65 .5 . April. light to mod. and November.05 Suckering Shooting Harvest Table 5.0 .7 .7 .1 .65 .1 1.8 1.7.0 1.25 1.65 .65 .95 .0 1.85 .05 1.95 1. reduce the mid-season kc-values by 10 to 15% and 5 to lo%.7 7 .75 No weed control .85 .15 1.5 .8 .6 6 .9 1.85 .85 .95 .05 1.75 . for May to October.85 .85 .75 .5 . values for bananas (Doorenbos and Pruitt 1977) Jan Mediterranean climate Feb Mar Apr May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec First-year crop.85 .15 .55 .4 3 .6 .6 .9 .lighttomod.6 .5 k.25 1.9 Trees providing tree ground = 50% cover Clean cultivated No weed control Feb Mar Apr May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec .85 3.95 . In the case of frequent irrigation for March.25 1. For young orchards with tree ground cover of 20 82 .2 1.55 .45 .7 1.55 .1 1.45 .05 .2 I .7 .85 .0 1.5 m by August: Humid. The following notes relate to this table: *) The k.85 .8 .7 .9 . use kc-values of this table ‘with ground cover crop’.2 1. strong wind Dry.-values for citrus.wind Dry. strong wind Tropical climate Months following planting .0 1.75 .45 . strong wind Dry. grown in predominantly dry areas with light to moderate wind (Doorenbos and Pruitt 1977) Jan Large mature trees providing tree ground cover = 70% Clean cultivated .4 2 .1 1.o .95 .0 1.0 1. adjust.65 .-values need to be increased if frequent rain occurs (see Figure 5.6 .05 1.95 1.7 . strong wind - . based on March planting with crop height 3.8 .5 . wind Dry.95 function of farm practices and climate.85 . using Figure 5.5 .7 .Table 5.45 - - .0 1. respectively.55 .

6 .8 . strong wind Dry.7 .8 .85 .85 . light to mod.4 .15 .2 1.9 .05 .85 .85 . cherries.75 .55 . pecans Humid.0 1.15 1. plums Humid. light to mod.45 .25 1.75 .8 .1 1.65 .45 . light to mod.8 .75 .75 .9 .9 -- - - .55 .4 .7 .0 .2 1. 1 1.9 .1 1.15 - - .85 .85 .85 .7 . pears.15 1 .9 . light to mod.4 .05 1.0 1. wind Humid.5 .6 .05 1.6 .1 .85 .05 1.65 .8 .55 .0 1.8 .95 .7 .95 . strong wind Dry. strong wind Dry.85 1. strong wind Peaches.2 1. plums.65 - COLD WINTER WITH LIGHT FROST: NO DORMANCY IN GRASS COVER CROPS Apples.6 .85 1.9 .15 .7 .1 1.4 .6 . cherries Humid.8 .35 1.7 .5 .9 .0 .25 1.35 1. 8 5 .2 1.65 .65 .85 .85 .85 1.25 1.7 .45 .85 .2 1.8 .15 1. light to mod.9 .-values for fully grown deciduous fruit and nut trees (Doorenbos and Pruitt 1977) With ground cover crop*) Mar Apr May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Mar Apr Without ground cover crop**) May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov COLD WINTER WITH KILLING FROST: GROUND COVER STARTING IN APRIL Apples.05 1.9 .45 . light to mod.85 .95 .8 .8 1.2 1.95 .0 .0 .15 1. wind Humid.8 .95 .1 1. wind Humid.7 .85 1.25 1.95 1.65 .75 .75 .25 1. apricots.95 1.8 .8 .85 .8 .95 1.8 .0 .7 .7 .1 1.85 .85 .7 .0 1.5 .75 .8 .15 1. light to mod.9 .9 .0 .7 .5 .0 1.85 . wind Dry. almonds.55 . wind Dry.75 .0 .0 1.2 .85 .8 .2 1.95.1 1.0 1.35 1.9 .2 1. 8 1.5 .8 .5 .15 .9 1.Table 5.8 .95 .9 . strong wind Dry.1 1.35 1.45 .9 1. apricots.75 .9 1.0 1.7 .1 1.7 .95 1.5 .75 .0 .95 1.5 .75 - .9 .85 .45 .15 1.25 1.15 1. strong wind .75 .55 .1 1.74 .45 .8 .5 .2 1.15 1.15 1.05 1.8 .8 .8 .55 .45 .75 .1 .65 .0 .65 .0 1.0 1.85 1.2 1.2 1.75 .55 .1 1. wind Dry.85 .85 .9 .6 k.6 .7 .9 .0 1. pears.05 1.75 .8 .9 1. strong wind Peaches.95 1.6 .05 1.8 .2 .95 .8 .9 . light to mod.05 1.7 . wind Dry.9 .95 1.95 1.55 .35 1.8 .75 . walnuts***) Humid.25 1. wind Humid.- -- .0 1.75 .8 .1 1. strong wind - .95 .8 .0 .

65 . ground cover 40-50% at mid-season Humid.75 .4 . wind Dry.45 .9 .55 .7 .95 .75 . Table 5.7 . ***)For walnuts from March to May. harvest mid-September.65 . initial leaves early April.7 gives k.l .-values by 25 to 35% and 10 to 15%. ground cover 30-35% at mid-season Dry.85 .45 .85 - _ - .45 . wind Humid. Note: For upland rice.6 .8 . wind Humid.5 _ _ - - .5 .35 - Rice To estimate the k. light to mod. 84 . If.25 . The months refer to the northern hemisphere. height and span of trellising) and with cultivation practices. the minimum relative humidity exceeds 70%.7 .6 . light to mod.6 . and to determine the related crop development stages.55 .15 .20%. initial leaves early May.-values are possibly 10 to 20% lower because of slower leaf growth.8 . light tomod. ground cover 30-35% at mid-season Humid.-values for grapes as a function of climate and ground cover.7 .65 .5 .55 . k.9 .9 .-values given for the wet season are used. the k. strong wind - . respectively. No difference is assumed between broadcasthown and transplanted rice.45 . pruning. wind Dry.15 .25 . (This can be done when rice is treated as a user-given crop). harvest late half of July.35 .55 .7 .65 .45 .75 . soil surface dry most of the time (Doorenbos and Pruitt 1977) Jan Feb Mar Apr May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Mature grapes grown in areas with killing frost. strong wind - - .45 . Table 5.7 .l-values be reduced by 15 .75 .7 . reduce the mid-season k.65 .8 . strong wind - _ - - _ - _ - . infrequent irrigation. since the percentage of ground cover during the first month after transplantation differs little from that of broadcast rice.7 .5 .6 .-value for rice.-value for grapes varies considerably with farm practices (row spacing.65 . harvest late August to early September.75 - - Mature grapes in areas with only light frosts.65 Mature grapes grown in hot dry areas.8). the user needs information on the geographical location (Table 5.5 _ .65 .7 .75 .85 .-values for grapes: clean cultivated.6 .65 .and 50%.45 . wind Dry.55 .7 .6 .75 .35 . Only during the initial crop stage should the kc.7 k. the same coefficients as given in Table 5. light to mod.35 - .6 .8 for paddy rice can be used because recommended cultivation practice involves maintaining the top soil close to saturation..75 .4 . initial leaves late February-early March.5 . during the dry season. strong wind Dry. Grapes The k. light to mod. strong wind Dry.65 _ .

and up to 14 months in Hawaii. 16 months in Mauritius.15 Sugarcane The crop coefficients for sugarcane vary considerably with climate and cane variety.o Oct March 1. Wet summer (south) Light to mod.o 1.-values for an average 12-month ratoon crop and a 24-month virgin crop.O5 early Oct 1.15 1. Ratoon growing periods are shorter: 9 months in Iran. 85 .-values for rice as used in CRIWAR.S.3 .95 1 .35 1 .15 I .o 1.1 1. wind Strong wind Europe (Spain. wet season k.-values are used (Doorenbos and Pruit 1974). wind Strong wind Dry summer (Calif.8 k.O5 1.35 . When RH. wind Strong wind South Australia Dry summer Light to mod..o May early May Sept-Oct 1.95 Dec-Jan mid May 1.1 1.95 1 . wind Strong wind U.O5 1.1 .O5 Dec-Jan Apr-May 1.9 gives k. wind Strong wind June-July Nov-Dec 1. For virgin plantings.15 I .1 1.25 1.2 1. and up to 24 months in Hawaii.1 1. wind Strong wind Dry season Light to mod..95 1 .) Light to mod. Planting Harvest First & second Mid-season month Last 4 weeks Humid Asia Wet season (monsoon) Light to mod.95 1 .15 1. The application of irrigation water usually stops between 4 to 6 weeks before harvest.1 1.A.15 1.15 1 . France and Italy) Dry season Light to mod. S.25 1.1 1.o .1 1.1 1.o I .O5 1. this length may be 13 to 14 months in hot Iran. The total length of the growing season depends on the climate and on the start of the growth period and whether we consider a virgin crop or a ratoon crop.15 1.1 .1 1.O5 Nov-Dec Apr-May 1. America Wet season Light to mod.25 1.o 1 .Table 5. wind Strong wind North Australia Wet season Light to mod.15 1.35 I . wind Strong wind Humid S.o May-June Sept-Oct 1. Table 5. 12 months in Mauritius. > 70%.1 1.

15 .4. wind Strong wind Strong wind ..5 2.4 Procedure to Determine Crop Coefficients per Month If the calculation period for CRIWAR is a month (or 10-day period). the duration of the growth stages with corresponding crop coefficients.75 (crop-development stage) and 15 days with k.-values for sugarcane (Doorenbos and Pruitt 1977) Crop age 12 month 24 month RH. the k.75 (crop-development stage).5 2. = 0. Thus k.65 .1 O Published k.45 .4 4 -10 IO -11 11 -12 1 o O .h .10.60 86 . Table 5.45 + (25/30) x 0. = 0.75 .. a tomato crop is cultivated with planting date 1 February and harvest date 30 June.5 .75 1..85 .values must be available per month (or IO-day period).5 Jun 6Jun -30Jun k..6 6 -17 17 -22 22 -24 Planting to 0.45.5 .2.5 .1 .90.O5 = 0.25 .In April.8 . = 0..-values of an example tomato crop Growth stage of crop Initial stage Crop-development stage Mid-season stage Late-season stage Duration Period 1 Feb 5 Mar 6 Mar .February is entirely within the initial stage. < 20% Light to mod..4 . = (5/30) x 0.3 1.-values. k. Because the user-selected calculation period for ETp is a month. of each growth stage has to be transferred to a crop coefficient per calender month.In March.75 = 0...8 1..25 full canopy 0. there are 15 days with k. 35 days 40 days 50 days 25 days - 0. of this tomato crop are shown in Table 5.45 0. The CRIWAR procedure is as follows: .7 .5 full canopy 0.5-0.95 . and 25 days with k.8 . there are 5 days with k. k.75 + (15/30) x 1.75 full canopy 0. From local experiments (or literature). wind .45 (initial stage). .75 5.6 1. Thus kc. k.apr = (15/30) x 0.2 2 . Growth stage Light to mod.. .2.I .9 10% RH.O5 . CRIWAR calculates average k.15 Apr 16Apr . Table 5. In the following example.10 shows that the months and the growth stages do not correspond. = 0.o 1 ..05 .Table 5.. Because the crop growing period does not usually coincide with the calendar months.75 to full canopy Peak use Early senescence Ripening 1 .1 1..2 1. = 1 .0 I ..3.O5 0. Thus.25-0.95 1.9 k.8.85 ..5 .55 .95 1.5 3.5 4.O5 (mid-season stage).70 (All months are assumed to have 30 days.).

. Fogg (Ed. Thesis.E. 1204.05. pp.) Cambridge University Press. Monteith. Penman. L.E. Turc.45 Mar 0. Hence. M. pp. In: Drainage Principles and Applications. 1948. 6 . pp. Ritzema (ed). 87 .L. Food and Agricultural Organization. mal = 1.05 + (25/30)x 0. J.O. Feddes 1991. Le bilan d’eau des sols. Preliminary Review of Revised FAO Radiation and Temperature Methods. Agron. 45 pp. Royal Sociev. G. SCS-TP 96.90 May 1. 1954.O5 Jun 0. Washington. Evapotranspiration. Rome. Verhoef. Feddes. 5-131. Burman. J.In June.C. Natural Evaporation from Open Water. and R. Irrigation and Drainage Paper 24. Model for Predicting Evaporation from a Row Crop with Incomplete Cover. M. D. Evaporation and the Environment. Thus. The Energy Balance qf the Earth’s Surface : A Practical Approach. 1 16 p. New York. H. 205-234. Lenselink 1994. Guidelinesfor Predicting Crop Water Requirements. H.L. ASCE Manuals and Reports on Engineering Practice 70.G. frrig.1 1 are thus used for the crop ‘tomato’: - = Table 5. and W. and H.D. there are 5 days with k. 1990. 44 p.60 = 0. H. 120-146. and K. Pruitt 1977. 1982. de Bruin. Rome. 193. l’évaporation et l’écoulement. Jensen. J. Wageningen. Haise 1963. Determining Water Requirements in frrigated Areas from Climatological and Irrigation Data. FAO. 1972. Ritchie. ASCE.E.2nd Ed. pp.T. London.A. A. In: The State and Movement of Water in Living Organisms. Serv. FAO. and Grass. kCJUn = (5130) x 1.05 (mid-season stage) and 25 days with k. 1125 p.70 Apr 0. Wageningen. Criddle 1950. and Drain. Estimating Evapotranspiration from Solar Radiation.-value calculated by CRIWAR 0.-values for the ‘tomato’ example crop Feb li.A. Smith. pp.J. = 1. USDA Soil Cons.A..F. M. Jensen. Agricultural University. 156 p.68 (rounded off).R. Bare Soil.R. ILRI. H. Di\. Draft Report on the Expert Consultation on Revision of FAO Methodologies for Crop Water Requirements. ASCE 96. Evapotranspiration and frrigation Water Requirements.12 13. 0. J. Relations entre les précipitations. Water Resources Research 8 . Proceedings. Doorenbos. and W. k.68 References Blaney. Ann. 332 p. Rome. The k. for June.1 1 Monthly k.P. Allen 1990.. . 1965. R.D.60 (late-season stage). 25-28. and R.May is completely within the mid-season stage. R.-values of Table 5. Land and Water Development Division.

.

To follow this path. which often discourages research on the effectiveness of precipitation.d. 90 . 6. which is decided upon from an agricultural or operational viewpoint. but is not included in the definition of effective precipitation. Its value depends on a wide range of local conditions. 1988. The phrase ‘during a specific time period’ may mean the entire period or any sub-period between sowing or planting and harvesting. Kabat. soil data. which are show4 as yesho-exit blocks. Water required for leaching serves a significant purpose. To appreciate the difference between the actual effective precipitation and the CRIWAR-quantified effective precipitation. which will be discussed below.‘Effective precipitation is that part of the total precipitation on the cropped area. which shows the path of measurable precipitation on an irrigated field. one needs to have some basic knowledge of the major factors influencing this effectiveness.2 Major Factors Mecting Effective Precipitation Various attempts have been made to establish a relationship between total precipitation and effective precipitation. ICID proposed this definition so that data on effective precipitation. These salts may be leached by the rains during either a fallow period or the crop season. Although these physically based dynamic models can provide very reliable information about the upper limit of the effective precipitation. Unfortunately. either from individual storms or on a seasonal basis. Some methods use data on (cumulative) precipitation and evapotranspiration. Precipitation on fallow fields can range from very harmful to a future crop. or the period between harvests. ’ This definition limits itself to the ‘cropped area’. The above definition limits the effective precipitation to that part ‘which is available to meet evapotranspiration in the cropped area’. upon infiltration. that the user of CRIWAR does not have such detailed measured data. We assume. during a specific time period. which is available to meet potential evapotranspiration in the cropped area. could be compared without the errors due to the local interpretation of the variable concept of ‘leaching water requirement’. to highly beneficial to it. they also need highly skilled users. Precipitation which. 1984).2 (Kopec et al. we have to make a number of decisions. v. The most sophisticated approaches are based on a dynamic simulation of a complete soil water balance on a day-to-day basis (Feddes et al. Their application is therefore usually confined to sites where an extensive set of input data can be collected. passes through the crop’s rootzone may leach harmful salts from the soil. and the related field application ratio for different irrigated areas. and crop parameters to estimate the portion of the total precipitation that can be effective. These factors are grouped in the flow chart in Figure 6. a universal formula relating the ‘effective’ to the total precipitation is not feasible because the ratio is affected by many independent factors. however. Broek and Feddes 1992). or by non-consumed irrigation water.

measurable precipitation on BrBa .intensity .duration -!requency fall directly on irrigated field (through- precipitation irrlgaled crop divide total precipitation Into pan intercepted by crop and pari nol intercepted by crop precipitation evapdetermine' .depth to watenable water was tem.inillai moisture uptake by mots durlng a &ori period precipltation can be used snsctively by dce this pan 01 prscipi- Y dmormine vmerholding capacny 01the snsctive root zone o1 irrigmd crop determine evaporation lmm pondsd water over panodneeded Y this pert of pmclpitmion reduces Is inaHectlvetor lortolai inflltntion n root zone n d dstsrmlns -cspllary nse chamclerlstks Of Doli . can be uaed irrigated crop upon pumping.tnlinrmion rate content 01 soil . 1984) 91 .2 Precipitation flow chart (Kopec et al. water (stond sttecllvo this water was (tmporanly) stored m groundwater bash WPlerbecomB6 *llectlva tor crop growth this valer IS heflectlve: u n d by crops Figure 6.

- Influence of vegetation on the local climate and hydrology in the tropics: sensitivity to soil parametersUploaded byFiza A. Saman
- Final Layout Magazine Beyond LensesUploaded byabsurdfixation752
- james d mcguffin-cawleyUploaded byapi-256305402
- Penman MothietUploaded bymechmohsin4745
- Changes in the physiological response between leaves and fruits during a moderate water stress in table olive trees.pdfUploaded bytibamm
- Hydraulics 2 Solutions2012Uploaded by0123456789ra
- calc practice problems week 2Uploaded byapi-213116779
- Tutorial 3-Rigid Jointed Frame AnalysisUploaded bysagar
- Solution Tut 11yr12Uploaded byJiaming Liu
- Numerical Metods Applied to Global Solar Radiation Modeling - Comparison With Meaured DataUploaded byJ Armando Gastelo Roque
- Framework of the SyllabusUploaded byGoanengineer
- Dissertation XingyuanChen.finalUploaded bysita_adhi
- VM E4.docxUploaded byAnonymous WChcyfT
- Quinteiro2014.pdfUploaded byTeresa Mata
- 1235Uploaded byanon-522272
- gen3_5Uploaded byHavva Sahın
- Eng Oral 2013 (Global Warming)Uploaded byMun Shin
- Climate Change in DurhamUploaded byvalstan
- Official NASA Communication 05-40Uploaded byNASAdocuments
- Global WarmingUploaded byRidho' Garangkang
- Solutions Hwt Theory of SolutionsUploaded byShubhamKhanna
- World Problems Only Getting WorseUploaded byMavyllos
- FootingUploaded byJaycee Pagador
- Global Warming Refers to an Unequivocal and ContinUploaded byAshikin Shikin
- topic 3 and 4 quiz assessmentUploaded byapi-401642975
- IMD Recent (1)Uploaded bysrinivasan9
- 1111Uploaded byamir11601
- Vibrations-mainUploaded byVinayak Rao
- JCE_64_2012_10_2_1045_ENUploaded bywambossi
- Tsunami Relief Disaster Management SystemUploaded byapi-3823785

- Final Version Planning 2Uploaded byMogie Talampas
- Modeling of Solute Transport in the Unsaturated Zone Using HYDRUS-1DUploaded byMogie Talampas
- Incorporating GIS in Water Resources ModelingUploaded byMogie Talampas
- Identification of Groundwater Potential ZoneUploaded byMogie Talampas
- Manual on FC PlanningUploaded byMogie Talampas
- Risk Assessment MappingUploaded byMogie Talampas
- Flood Hazard Mapping Using Aster Image DataUploaded byMogie Talampas
- Hydrology TextbookUploaded byMogie Talampas
- IDF Relationships and Design StormsUploaded byMogie Talampas
- Deforestation Brazil NdviUploaded byMogie Talampas
- Hydrologic Soil GroupsUploaded byMogie Talampas
- remotesensing-03-00845Uploaded byMogie Talampas
- Soil Erosion RiskUploaded byMogie Talampas
- Llano River and Sandy Creek Basins - Fluvial Geomorphic GIS AnalysesUploaded byMogie Talampas
- Wind Program_ Advantages and Challenges of Wind EnergyUploaded byMogie Talampas
- Rainfall IDF AnalysisUploaded byMogie Talampas
- Regionalization of a Conceptual Rainfall-runoff ModelUploaded byMogie Talampas