Gast ::
| Hauptseite > Publikationsdatenbank > Potential evaporation dynamics over saturated bare soil and an open water surface |
| Hauptseite > Publikationsdatenbank > Potential evaporation dynamics over saturated bare soil and an open water surface |
| Journal Article | FZJ-2021-00686 |
; ; ; ; ; ;
2020
Elsevier
Amsterdam [u.a.]
This record in other databases: 
Please use a persistent id in citations: http://hdl.handle.net/2128/27003 doi:10.1016/j.jhydrol.2020.125140
Abstract: Actual evaporation (Ea) can be calculated as a fraction of potential evaporation (PE), which refers to the evaporation rate if supply water is unlimited. Potential evaporation depends on the available energy and the underlying material, and different approaches to estimate potential evaporation exist nowadays. This study provides a detailed analysis of the evaporation dynamics over fully saturated, sandy soil (PEs) and an open water surface (PEw). Moreover, the performance of commonly used methods to estimate PE is assessed. At the basis of these analyses is a lysimeter experiment in the Guanzhong Basin, China, which allowed a precise measurement of PE with a very high temporal resolution. Temperature profiles in lysimeters and meteorological data were also measured during the experiment. A comparison of PEs and PEw was carried out for seven consecutive days (August 11th to 17th, 2016). Results show that PEw is smaller than PEs on a daily scale, with PEw rates being bigger than PEs at night but smaller during daytime. Furthermore, the temporal dynamics of PEw lags 4–5 h behind PEs. In accordance with the energy balance equation, PE dynamics are mainly governed by “available energy”. The PE rates calculated by Penman-Monteith (PM) and Priestly-Taylor (PT) based on these measurements were also evaluated. The measured PE is relatively well reproduced by PM and PT equations. Finally, the effect of using different approaches to estimate PE on calculating Ea was tested by an integrated hydrological model that calculates water flow in the unsaturated zone by solving the Richards equation. The relative differences were up to 17.5%.
; 
; 
; BIOSIS Previews ; Biological Abstracts ; Clarivate Analytics Master Journal List ; Current Contents - Agriculture, Biology and Environmental Sciences ; Current Contents - Engineering, Computing and Technology ; Ebsco Academic Search ; Essential Science Indicators ; IF < 5 ; JCR ; Nationallizenz
; SCOPUS ; Science Citation Index Expanded ; Web of Science Core Collection
|
The record appears in these collections: |
PDF
Fulltext by OpenAccess repository