资源科学 ›› 2019, Vol. 41 ›› Issue (10): 1780-1790.doi: 10.18402/resci.2019.10.02

• 水资源 • 上一篇    下一篇

不同潜在蒸散发估算方法在辽宁省的适用性分析

曹永强,刘明阳,李元菲,肖春柳   

  1. 辽宁师范大学地理科学学院,大连 116029
  • 收稿日期:2019-03-15 修回日期:2019-07-16 出版日期:2019-10-25 发布日期:2019-10-25
  • 作者简介:曹永强,男,内蒙古乌盟丰镇市人,教授,主要从事水文水资源研究。E-mail: caoyongqiang@lnnu.edu.cn
  • 基金资助:
    国家自然科学基金项目(51579126,51779114);辽宁省百千万人才工程项目;大连市科技创新基金项目(2018J13SN116)

Applicability of six potential evapotranspiration estimation methods in Liaoning Province

CAO Yongqiang,LIU Mingyang,LI Yuanfei,XIAO Chunliu   

  1. School of Geographical Sciences, Liaoning Normal University, Dalian 116029, China
  • Received:2019-03-15 Revised:2019-07-16 Online:2019-10-25 Published:2019-10-25

摘要:

准确估算潜在蒸散发(PET)是研究区域水文循环和农业灌溉管理必不可少的理论依据。本文利用辽宁省及周边27个气象站点1968—2017年的历史气象数据,选用6种估算方法(Penman-Monteith(PM)法、Rohwer(Roh)法、Hamon(Ham)法、Hargreaves(Har)法、Makkink(Mak)法和Priestley-Taylor(PT)法)计算PET。并以PM法月值作为标准,对5种估算方法的经验系数进行修正,再从年、月两个时间尺度和空间尺度分析修正经验系数前后5种估算方法在辽宁省的适用情况。结果表明:①修正前,年尺度上,Mak法、PT法和PM法的结果较为接近,相对误差均在25%以内。月尺度上,PT法相对误差最小为13.96%,其次是Mak法。空间尺度上,5种估算方法在辽东北地区估算精度较低,整体空间差异明显,相对来说PT法估算适用性更好。②修正后,5种估算方法适用性和相关性都有明显的提高,在年尺度上各估算方法与PM法计算结果年际变化大致相同,其中Mak法和PT法最为合适,相对误差均在10%以内,月尺度和空间尺度上,PT法都优于其他方法。因此,在计算辽宁省PET时,本文推荐使用修正经验系数后的PT法,其次是Mak法。

关键词: 潜在蒸散发, 估算方法, 适用性, 经验系数, PM法, Mak法, 辽宁省

Abstract:

Accurate estimation of potential evapotranspiration (PET) is a basis for studying regional hydrological cycles and agricultural irrigation management. In this study, six estimation methods Penman-Monteith (PM) method, Rohwer (Roh) method, Hamon (Ham) method, Hargreaves (Har) method, Makkink (Mak) method, and Priestley-Taylor (PT) method were tested based on historical meteorological data of 27 meteorological stations in Liaoning Province and surrounding areas from 1968 to 2017. Potential evapotranspiration was calculated by the Makkink (Mak) method and the Priestley-Taylor (PT) method. The PM method was used as the standard to correct the empirical coefficients of the five estimation methods. Then, the application of the five estimation methods for annual and monthly PET in Liaoning Province before and after the correction of the empirical coefficients was analyzed. The results show that: (1) Before the correction, the results of the Mak, PT, and PM methods are relatively close, and the relative errors are all within 25%. On the monthly scale, the relative error of the PT method is the lowest (13.96%), followed by the Mak method. Spatially, the five estimation methods have lower estimation accuracy in the northeastern part of the province, and the overall spatial difference is obvious. Comparatively, the PT method is more applicable. (2) After the amendment, the applicability and correlation of the five estimation methods are clearly improved. On the annual scale, the estimation results are almost the same as the inter-annual changes of the PM method. The Mak and PT methods are most suitable, and their relative errors are all within 10%. On the monthly scale and with regard to the spatial pattern, the PT method is superior to other methods. Therefore, when calculating PET in Liaoning Province, we recommend using the PT method after the correction of the empirical coefficients, followed by the Mak method.

Key words: potential evapotranspiration, estimation method, applicability, empirical coefficient, PM method, Mak method, Liaoning Province