| 引用本文: | 郑 健,鲍婷婷,杨 赟,等.参考作物蒸发蒸腾量计算方法在甘肃省不同区域的适用性分析[J].灌溉排水学报,2022,41(10):1-9. |
| ZHENG Jian,BAO Tingting,YANG Yun,et al.参考作物蒸发蒸腾量计算方法在甘肃省不同区域的适用性分析[J].灌溉排水学报,2022,41(10):1-9. |
|
| 摘要: |
| 【目的】分析参考作物蒸发蒸腾量计算方法在甘肃省不同区域的适用性。【方法】把甘肃省划分为4个区域（I区，河西干旱区；Ⅱ区，陇中北部半干旱区；Ⅲ区，陇中南部半湿润区；Ⅳ区，陇南-甘南湿润区），在此基础上，采用甘肃省26个国家气象站点1980—2019的气象资料，并以FAO-56 Penman Monteith（P-M）法作为计算ET0的标准方法，同时选用Hargreaves-Samani（Har）法、FAO-24 Penman（24PM）法、FAO 1948 Penman（48PM）法、Makkink（Mak）法、Priestley-Taylor（PT）法5种简化方法计算甘肃省各个站点的ET0，对5种简化方法在4个分区的适用性进行分析。【结果】5种简化方法在甘肃省不同分区的计算精度存在明显差异，Har法和Mak法分别与P-M法的相关系数更接近1，拟合曲线的拟合程度更好，表现出了较高的计算精度，适用性较好，但Har法在高海拔地区计算精度明显下降；48PM法和24PM法比P-M法计算结果偏大，计算精度居中；PT法计算精度整体较低。不同计算方法在各区的适用性顺序为，I区：Mak法>Har法>48PM法>24PM法>PT法；Ⅱ区、Ⅲ区、Ⅳ区：Har法>Mak法>48PM法>24PM法>PT法。【结论】当气象资料出现缺失时，推荐在I区选用Mak法，在Ⅱ区、Ⅲ区和Ⅳ区选用Har法。 |
| 关键词: 参考作物蒸发蒸腾量（ET0）；简化计算方法；适用性分析；甘肃省 |
| DOI：10.13522/j.cnki.ggps.2022183 |
| 分类号: |
| 基金项目: |
|
| Reference Evapotranspiration in Gansu Province Calculated Using Different Methods |
|
ZHENG Jian, BAO Tingting, YANG Yun, CHEN Ya
|
|
1. College of Energy and Power Engineering, Lanzhou University of Technology, Lanzhou 730050, China; 2. Key Laboratory of the System of Biomass Energy and Solar Energy Complementary Energy Supply System in Gansu, Lanzhou 730050, China;
3. Collaborative Innovation Center of Key Technology for Northwest Low Carbon Urbanization, Lanzhou 730050, China;
4. Water Conservancy Research Institute of Linxia Hui Autonomous Prefecture, Linxia 731100, China
|
| Abstract: |
| 【Objective】Reference evapotranspiration (ET0) measures the potential water loss from soils in terrestrial systems. It varies with a multitude of factors and can be calculated by different methods. In this paper, we compared ET0 calculated by five methods for regions with incomplete meteorological data across Gansu province in northwestern China. 【Method】We divided the province into four regions: arid area in Hexi (Region I), semi-arid area in northern Longzhong (Region II), semi-humid area in southern Longzhong (Region III), and humid area in Longnan and Gannan (Region IV). The reference evapotranspiration in each region was calculated using the Hargreaves-Samani (Har), the FAO-24 Penman (24PM), the FAO 1948 Penman (48PM), the Makkink (Mak), and the Priestley Taylor (PT) methods, respectively. For each method, we calculated the daily ET0 based on data measured from 1980 to 2019 from 26 meteorological stations across the province. The accuracy and robustness of each method for each region was tested against that estimated using the FAO-56 penman Monteith (P-M) method. 【Result】ET0 calculated from different methods varied, though the variation depended on region. The results calculated from the Har and Mak methods were correlated with that from the P-M method with the correlation coefficients close to unity, despite that the Har method was less accurate for high altitude regions. The results estimated by the 48PM and 24PM methods were both greater than the ET0 calculated by P-M method. The accuracy of the five simplified methods for estimating ET0 was ranked in the order of Mak > Har >48PM > 24PM > PT for Region I, and Har >Mak> 48PM > 24PM >PT for other three regions.【Conclusion】For regions that are lack of meteorological data, the Mak method was the best alternative for estimating ET0 in Region I, while the Har method worked better for other regions in Gansu province. |
| Key words: reference crop evapotranspiration (ET0); calculation methods; applicability analysis; Gansu Province |
