4.3 Article

FAO-56 dual crop coefficient method for estimating evaporation from soil and application extensions

Journal

JOURNAL OF IRRIGATION AND DRAINAGE ENGINEERING
Volume 131, Issue 1, Pages 2-13

Publisher

ASCE-AMER SOC CIVIL ENGINEERS
DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9437(2005)131:1(2)

Keywords

evapotranspiration; evaporation; crops; crop moisture index; soil water

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Crop coefficient curves provide simple, reproducible means to estimate crop evapotranspiration (ET) from weather-based reference ET values. The dual crop coefficient (K,) method of the Food and Agricultural Organization of the United States (FAO) Irrigation and Drainage Paper No. 56 (FAO-56) is intended to improve daily simulation of crop ET by considering separately the contribution of evaporation from soil. The dual method utilizes basal crop coefficients representing ET from crops having a dry soil surface and separately predicts evaporation from bare soil based on a water balance of the soil surface layer. Three extensions to the evaporation calculation procedure are described here that are intended to improve accuracy when applications warrant the extra complexity. The first extension uses parallel water balances representing the portion of the soil surface wetted by irrigation and precipitation together and the portion wetted by precipitation alone. The second extension uses three stages for surface drying and provides for application to deep cracking soils. The third extension predicts the extraction of the transpiration component from the soil surface layer. Sensitivity and analyses and illustrations indicate moderate sensitivity of daily calculated ET to application of the extensions. The dual K, procedure, although relatively simple computationally and structurally, estimates daily ET as measured by lysimeter relatively well for periods of bare soil and partial and full vegetation cover.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available