Penman-Monteith公式与Penman修正式在计算ET_0中的比较研究  

Comparison of ET_0 Estimated by Penman-Monteith and Modified Penman Methods

作　　者：张文毅[1] 党进谦[1] 赵璐[1] 

机构地区：[1]西北农林科技大学水利与建筑工程学院,陕西杨凌712100

出　　处：《节水灌溉》2010年第12期54-59,共6页Water Saving Irrigation

摘　　要：利用1961-2001年关中中部地区3个气象站的月气象资料,分别用Penman-Monteith公式和Penman修正式计算3站的ET0,并对计算的结果进行了比较。结果表明,Penman-Monteith公式计算的ET0年值大于Penman修正式计算的ET0的年值,且两种方法逐年的计算结果比较稳定。绝对误差ΔET0的变化为-138～44 mm;相对误差变化为0.17%～13.90%。ET0多年月均值在全年各月变化较大,绝对误差ΔET0在4-7月大于0,其他月份都小于0;相对误差1、10、11和12月相对较大,而在其他月份相对较小。导致差异的原因在于两种公式采用了不同的辐射项和空气动力项计算公式和参数,其中春、夏两季空气动力学项的不同是引起结果差异的主要原因,而在秋、冬两季辐射项不同是引起结果差异的主要原因。两种公式计算的ET0具有显著的线性相关性。Based on the monthly meteorological data from 1961-2001 of three stations in the middle Guanzhong area,the ET0 was calculated by the Penman-Monteith and Modified Penman methods respectively and the results are compared.The results showed that the annual ET0 calculated by Penman-Monteith method was higher than that obtained by modified Penman method and the results calculated by the two methods was stable in every year.The absolute deviation of yearly ET0 between the two methods was-138～44 mm,the yearly relative deviation was 0.17%～13.90%.The difference of monthly ET0 was bigger in one year.The absolute deviation of monthly ET0 between the two methods was above zero in April,May,June and July,while below zero in other months.The relative deviation of monthly ET0 was bigger in January,February,November and December,was smaller in other months.The main cause of the deviation of ET0 was that different equations and parameters were used to calculate the radiation term and aerodynamic term in the equations.The main reason of the differences in spring and summer is the aerodynamic term,and in autumn and winter is the radiation term.The correlation between ET0 calculated by the two methods had linear relationship.

关 键 词：PENMAN-MONTEITH公式 Penman修正式 ET0 

分 类 号：S119[农业科学—农业基础科学]