ACOMPARISON OF AUTOMATICALLY AND MANUALLY COLLECTED PAN EVAPORATION DATA
暂无分享,去创建一个
Pan evaporation is an important weather variable that has numerous applications related to decision making
in agriculture, forestry, ecology, hydrology, and other fields. The automation of pan evaporation measurements through
the use of electronic sensors has the potential to increase the availability and resolution of measurements, while reducing
the overall cost of data collection. Information is needed with respect to the field performance of these devices. The
objective of this study was to compare automated and manual pan evaporation measurements. Daily pan evaporation
measurements calculated from 15-min averages of water height in Class A evaporation pans of the Georgia Automated
Environmental Monitoring Network (AEMN) were compared to daily pan evaporation data collected at National Weather
Service (NWS) cooperative stations. Collocated weather stations in Griffin and Watkinsville, Georgia were selected for
the comparison. Data from 1991 to 1996 at the Griffin location and data from 1993 to 1997 data at the Watkinsville
location were used. Data sets consisted of 733 and 808 daily evaporation totals from Griffin and Watkinsville,
respectively. An estimate of potential evapotranspiration was also calculated for each daily record using the Priestley-
Taylor equation. Daily pan evaporation amounts from the automated observations were generally less than the
evaporation measurements from the manual observations. Average total annual pan evaporation from the manual
observations was 537 mm for Griffin and 1051 mm for Watkinsville. The average total annual pan evaporation from the
automated observations was, respectively, 414 mm and 676 mm for the same locations. The Priestley-Taylor
approximation of pan evaporation was generally closer to the manual observations than the automated observations.
Average total annual evapotranspiration estimated by the Priestley-Taylor equation was 491 mm at Griffin and 842 mm at
Watkinsville. The daily automated pan evaporation data included many low values for days in which considerable pan
evaporation should normally occur. Records of water height from the automated observations showed that mechanical
problems with the sensor used in the automated pan evaporation system were responsible for much of the difference seen
between the automated and manual observations. Improved maintenance of the automated observations is recommended
to justify replacement of the manual observations. A change in the design of the float mechanism might also be considered
by the manufacturer.