poster - International Conference of Agricultural Engineering

poster - International Conference of Agricultural Engineering poster - International Conference of Agricultural Engineering

cigr.ageng2012.org
from cigr.ageng2012.org More from this publisher
10.11.2014 Views

location of the study, López-Urrea et al. (2006) indicated that FAO56 P-M equation is the most accurate method to estimate ETo in semiarids conditions. For these reasons, this equation has been chosen to calibrate the Hargreaves equation. This paper aims to calibrate the Hargreaves equation for estimating ETo, comparing it with daily average estimations obtained through the FAO56 P-M equation in a zone of the Southeast of Spain. 2. Materials and Methods Weather data sets were obtained from agrometeorological stations in the provinces of Murcia and Albacete (Spain). These stations are integrated in the irrigation advisory service in the Spanish autonomous regions of Murcia and Castilla-La Mancha. Data were daily registered during period 2005-2009. From these climatic data, and by using the Penman-Monteith FAO56 equation, ETo was calculated (Allen et al., 1998). The used Penman Monteith equation is the next: ET 0 900 0,408· ∆(Rn − G) + γ u2(e = T + 273 ∆ + γ(1+ 0.34·u ) Where: ET o = reference evapotranspiration (mm·day -1 ) Rn = crop surface net radiation (MJ·m -2 day -1 ) Ra = extraterrestrial radiation (mm·day -1 ) G = soil heat flux (MJ·m -2 día -1 ) T = average air temperature at 2 m height (ºC) u2 = wind speed at 2 m height (m·s -1 ) e s = saturated vapor pressure (kPa) e a = real vapor pressure (kPa) e s - e a = vapor pressure deficit (kPa) ∆ = slope of the vapor pressure curve (kPa·ºC -1 ) γ = psicrometric constant (kPa·ºC -1 ). 2 s − e a ) Moreover, and by using the same climatic data, estimations of ETo values by means of Hargreaves equation were obtained (Hargreaves and Samani, 1985). ET 0.5 0 = 0.0135·(t ave + 17.78)·R 0·KT·(t max − tmin) ET o = referente evapotranspiration (mm·day -1 ) t ave = daily average temperature (ºC) R o = extraterrestrial radiation (MJ·m -2 day -1 ) KT = coefficient (0.162 for inner regions and 0.19 for coastal regions) In order to transform MJ·m -2 day -1 to mm·day -1 , the value has to be multiplied by 0.408. Several comparisons were obtained through the simple linear regression analysis technique and a set of statistics. These statistics are: Root mean square error (RMSE): ⎡ ⎢ RMSE = ⎢ ⎢ ⎢⎣ n ∑ i= 1 2 ⎤ (yi − xi) ⎥ ⎥ n0 ⎥ ⎥⎦ 0,5

Relative error (RE): Index of agreement (IA): IA = 1− n RMSE RE = ·100 y ∑ i= 1 ∑ i= 1 i n (x − y ) ((x − x) + (y Where: x i = ET o Hargreaves (ET o H) value for the i day. y i = ET o Penman Monteith (ET o PM) value for the i day. n = number of data. x = average ET o H value. y = average ET o PM value. i i i 2 − y)) Relation between ET o PM and ET o H values for the studied period has been graphically represented, and regression lines for every station have been calculated. 3. Results In this study, data from two specific agrometeorological stations were analysed, concretely from the 2.5 (Villena, Alicante) and 3.4 (Yecla, Murcia) stations. In Fig. 1 a linear regression between the ETo values estimated by Hargreaves and the values calculated by using FAO56 P-M equation is presented for every station. In 3.4 station (Fig. 1, left), the daily values obtained by Hargreaves neither overestimate nor underestimate the values calculated by FAO56 P-M equation, with a RMSE of 0.67 mm day-1, a RE near 20 % and a IA value of 0.97. Otherwise, in 2.5 station (Fig. 1, right), Hargreaves has a good fit with values between 0.5 and 4.5 mm day-1, but over these values the ETo calculated by FAO56 P-M equation is lightly underestimated (6%). 2 ETo Hargreaves (1985) (mm day -1 ) 12 10 8 y = 0.99x + 0.03 R 2 = 0.90 6 4 2 0 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 ETo Hargreaves (1985) (mm day -1 ) 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 y = 0.86x + 0.31 R 2 = 0.91 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 ET o Penman-Monteith FAO56 (mm day -1 ) ETo Penman.Monteith FAO56 (mm day -1 ) ETo PM 1:1 Regression ETo PM 1:1 Regression FIGURE 1. Daily ETo comparison between FAO56 P-M and Hargreaves equations during the studied period (2005-2009) in two stations: 3.4 (Yecla) station (left) and 2.5 (Villena) station (right). TABLE 1. Evaluation of Hargreaves equation to estimate daily ETo comparing with FAO56 Penman- Monteith equation for two different locations. N Xi yi yi/xi A B R 2 RMSE ER IA Station (mm day -1 ) (mm day -1 ) (%) (mm day -1 ) (mm day -1 ) (%) ET o (Har.)=A+B*ET o (P-M FAO56) Yecla (Murcia) 1816 3,41 3,40 100 0,03 0,99 0,90 0,67 19,61 0,97 Villena (Alicante) 1825 3,67 3,46 94 0,31 0,86 0,91 0,70 18,96 0,97 Results indicate that Hargreaves equation is precise for daily estimations in this zone. It is not necessary to previously calibrate data. The rest of stations present a similar performance with some exceptions.

location <strong>of</strong> the study, López-Urrea et al. (2006) indicated that FAO56 P-M equation is the<br />

most accurate method to estimate ETo in semiarids conditions. For these reasons, this<br />

equation has been chosen to calibrate the Hargreaves equation.<br />

This paper aims to calibrate the Hargreaves equation for estimating ETo, comparing it with<br />

daily average estimations obtained through the FAO56 P-M equation in a zone <strong>of</strong> the<br />

Southeast <strong>of</strong> Spain.<br />

2. Materials and Methods<br />

Weather data sets were obtained from agrometeorological stations in the provinces <strong>of</strong> Murcia<br />

and Albacete (Spain). These stations are integrated in the irrigation advisory service in the<br />

Spanish autonomous regions <strong>of</strong> Murcia and Castilla-La Mancha. Data were daily registered<br />

during period 2005-2009.<br />

From these climatic data, and by using the Penman-Monteith FAO56 equation, ETo was<br />

calculated (Allen et al., 1998). The used Penman Monteith equation is the next:<br />

ET<br />

0<br />

900<br />

0,408· ∆(Rn<br />

− G) + γ u2(e<br />

=<br />

T + 273<br />

∆ + γ(1+<br />

0.34·u )<br />

Where:<br />

ET o = reference evapotranspiration (mm·day -1 )<br />

Rn = crop surface net radiation (MJ·m -2 day -1 )<br />

Ra = extraterrestrial radiation (mm·day -1 )<br />

G = soil heat flux (MJ·m -2 día -1 )<br />

T = average air temperature at 2 m height (ºC)<br />

u2 = wind speed at 2 m height (m·s -1 )<br />

e s = saturated vapor pressure (kPa)<br />

e a = real vapor pressure (kPa)<br />

e s - e a = vapor pressure deficit (kPa)<br />

∆ = slope <strong>of</strong> the vapor pressure curve (kPa·ºC -1 )<br />

γ = psicrometric constant (kPa·ºC -1 ).<br />

2<br />

s<br />

− e<br />

a<br />

)<br />

Moreover, and by using the same climatic data, estimations <strong>of</strong> ETo values by means <strong>of</strong><br />

Hargreaves equation were obtained (Hargreaves and Samani, 1985).<br />

ET<br />

0.5<br />

0<br />

= 0.0135·(t<br />

ave<br />

+ 17.78)·R<br />

0·KT·(t<br />

max<br />

− tmin)<br />

ET o = referente evapotranspiration (mm·day -1 )<br />

t ave = daily average temperature (ºC)<br />

R o = extraterrestrial radiation (MJ·m -2 day -1 )<br />

KT = coefficient (0.162 for inner regions and 0.19 for coastal regions)<br />

In order to transform MJ·m -2 day -1 to mm·day -1 , the value has to be multiplied by 0.408.<br />

Several comparisons were obtained through the simple linear regression analysis technique<br />

and a set <strong>of</strong> statistics. These statistics are:<br />

Root mean square error (RMSE):<br />

⎡<br />

⎢<br />

RMSE = ⎢<br />

⎢<br />

⎢⎣<br />

n<br />

∑<br />

i=<br />

1<br />

2 ⎤<br />

(yi<br />

− xi)<br />

⎥<br />

⎥<br />

n0<br />

⎥<br />

⎥⎦<br />

0,5

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!