WRE 2010 AR

7 EVAPORATION

7.1 Introduction
Evaporation is the transfer of water from a liquid to a gaseous state as a result of the difference between
the vapour pressure at the land surface and in the overlying air.

Eo, evaporation from an open water surface, is the direct transfer of water from lakes, reservoirs and rivers
to the atmosphere. This can be relatively easily assessed if the water body has known capacity and does
not leak.

Et is evaporation loss from the transpiration of vegetation. This is sometimes called evapotranspiration,
since loss by direct evaporation of intercepted precipitation and transpired water on plant surfaces is also
included. Thus Et is usually thought of as the total loss by both evaporation and transpiration from a land
surface and its vegetation. The value of the Et varies according to the type of vegetation, its ability to
transpire and the availability of water in the soil. It is much more difficult to quantify Et than Eo since
transpiration rates can vary considerably over an area and the source of water from the ground for the
plants requires careful definition.

Both forms of evaporation, Eo and Et, are influenced by the general climatic conditions. Although the
instrumental measurements are not as simple and straightforward as for rainfall, it is a compensating
factor that evaporation quantities are less variable from one season to another, and therefore more easily
predicted than rainfall amounts. With unlimited supplies of water, evaporation is one of the more
consistent elements in the hydrological cycle. If there is a continuous supply and the rate of evaporation is
unaffected by lack of water, then both Eo and Et are regulated by the meteorological variables, viz
radiation, temperature, vapour pressure and wind speed.

7.2 Factors Affecting Evaporation

The physical process in the change of state from liquid to vapour operates in both Eo and Et and thus the
general physical conditions influencing evaporation rates are common to both.

(a) Solar Radiation

The incoming solar radiation from the Sun is the primary source of heat energy and affects evaporation
amounts over the surface of the Earth according to latitude and season. Since latent heat is required to
change a liquid into its gaseous form and in nature, the more the solar radiation the more latent heat
energy is available. The latent heat of vaporization comes from solar (short-wave) and terrestrial (long-
wave) radiation.

a) Temperature
The evaporation process is dependent upon temperature and is a function of the available energy from the
Sun. If the temperature is more, the saturation vapour pressure increases, the air temperature can hold
more water and evaporation increases. Evaporation amounts tend to be higher in the tropics and lower in
the temperate and polar climates.

b) Saturation Deficit
As mentioned earlier, the saturation deficit of the air is the amount of water vapour that can be taken up
by air before it becomes saturated. A measure of the amount of water vapour in the air is the vapour
pressure. A unique relationship exists between the saturated vapour pressure and the air temperature and
the saturated vapour pressure decreases with increasing temperature. As a consequence, more evaporation
occurs in drier inland areas, than in coastal regions with damp air from the sea.
1
WRE 2010 AR

a) Wind Speed
When air is moving, the amount of evaporation increases since drier air replaces the humid air. As water
evaporates, the air above the evaporating surface gradually becomes more humid until it is saturated and
can hold no more vapour. Thus wind speed at the surface becomes a significant factor. Hence evaporation
tends to be greater in exposed areas that experience plenty of air movement than in sheltered localities,
where air tends to stagnate.

The temperature and wind speed factors may be in conflict in affecting evaporation since windy areas
tend to be cooler and sheltered areas are often warmer. Over a large catchment area, it is the general
characteristics of the prevailing air mass that will have the major effect on evaporation apart from the
direct solar radiation (Shaw, 1992).

The following factors have wider influences on evaporation:

b) Weather Pattern
Low atmospheric pressure usually has associated with it damp unsettled weather in, which the air is
already moist and conditions are not conducive to aid evaporation. The prevailing weather pattern
measured by the atmospheric pressure affects evaporation. The edge of an anticyclone provides ideal
conditions for evaporation, as long as some air movement is operating in conjunction with the high air
pressure.

c) Nature of surface
When wind blows over a smooth, even surface there is little friction and the evaporation is affected
predominantly by the horizontal velocity. Over a rough, irregular surface, however, friction reduces wind
speed but has a tendency to cause turbulence; therefore with an induced vertical component in the wind,
evaporation is enhanced. Thus the nature of the evaporating surface affects evaporation by modifying the
wind pattern. Over an open water surface, strong winds cause waves, which provide an increased surface
for evaporation in addition to causing turbulence.

d) Salinity of the water

Evaporation may also be affected by the salinity of the water or by the presence of pollutants such as oil
films, but these are of relatively minor importance. The presence of dissolved solids in water reduces the
saturated vapour pressure, of water which consequently reduces the rate of evaporation.

Evaporation is necessarily dependent on a supply of water and thus the availability of moisture is a crucial
factor. With all the other factors acting favorably, once the body of water disappears then open water
evaporation Eo ceases. For Et, the availability of water is not so easily observed. Plants draw their supply
from the soil where the moisture is held under tension, and their rate of transpiration is governed by the
stomata in the leaves which act like valves to regulate the passage of water through the pores according to
the incidence of light. The pores are closed in darkness and hence transpiration ceases at night. When
there is a shortage of water in the soil, the stomata regulate the pores and reduce transpiration. Thus Et is
controlled by soil moisture content and the capacity of the plants to transpire, which are conditioned by
the meteorological factors (Shaw, 1992).

7.3 Measurement of Evaporation

7.3.1 Continuity Methods

i) Water Budget

2
WRE 2010 AR

The water-budget method is the simplest of the analytical methods and is also the least reliable. It
involves considering the catchment as watertight and writing the hydrological continuity equation for the
lake or catchment and determining the evaporation from a knowledge or estimation of other variables.
Thus considering the daily average values for a lake, the continuity equation is written as;

+ + = + + + + (7.1)

Where P = daily precipitation, Vis =daily surface inflow into the lake, Vig = daily groundwater inflow, Vos
= daily surface outflow from the lake, Vog = daily seepage outflow, EL = daily lake evaporation, S =
(change) increase in lake storage in a day, TL = daily transpiration loss.
All quantities are in units of volume (m3) or depth (mm) over a reference area. The above equation can
be written as:

= +( − )+ − − − (7.2)

In this the terms P, Vis, Vos and S can be measured. S can be estimated by groundwater level
measurements and soil. However, it is not possible to measure Vig, Vog and TL and therefore these
quantities can only be estimated. Transpiration losses can be considered to be insignificant in some
reservoirs. If the unit of time is kept large, say weeks or months, better accuracy in the estimate of EL is
possible. In view of the various uncertainties in the estimated values and the possibility of errors in
measured variables, the water-budget method cannot be expected to give very accurate results
(Subramanya, 1994).

ii) Field Site

On a small plot scale, it may be feasible to provide sufficient soil moisture instrumentation to determine
∆S in addition to P, R Vis, Vos and hence estimate E. The main difficulty is to account for possible lateral
sub-surface flows and inflows (capillary rise) and outflows at the base of the measured profile. If
tensiometers are used, a ‘zero flux plane may be identified, above which water is lost to evaporation and
below which water passes to percolation and drainage.

iii) Percolation Gauges

These are instruments specially designed for measuring evaporation and transpiration from a vegetated
surface, Et and are comparable with the tanks and pans used for measuring Eo. These are regarded as
research tools rather than standard instruments to be installed at a climatological station. A cylindrical or
rectangular tank about 1 m deep is filled with a representative soil sample is then set in the ground. A
pipe from the bottom of the tank leads surplus percolating water to a collecting container. The surface of
the gauge should be indistinguishable from the surrounding grass or crop covered ground. A rain gauge
is sited nearby and the evaporation plus transpiration is given by the following equation:

Et = Rainfall – Percolation (7.3)

Percolation gauges do not take into account changes in the soil moisture storage. Records are generally
compiled on a monthly basis in climates with rainfall all the year (Shaw, 1992).

iv) Lysimeter (Evapotranspirometer)

By taking into account change in water storage in the ground, lysimeters improve on the Et measurements
of percolation gauges. Compared with the latter, lysimeters are much more complex, more expensive to
construct and maintain, and therefore even more associated with research installation or specially funded
studies. A lysimeter contains a volume of soil (Fig. 7.1) hydrologically isolated from the surrounding soil
and which is planted with representative vegetation. The amount of evaporation is measured by the
3
WRE 2010 AR

difference between the precipitation and the change in soil moisture. It is necessary to ensure that the
thermal, hydrological and mechanical properties of the soil sample are similar to those of the parent
material.

Lysimeters are used to measure rates of evapotranspiration over a surface. More commonly, a volume of
soil is isolated in a lysimeter to provide absolute control of outflows. Rainfall input is measured, drainage
is collected, and soil moisture storage determined either by weighing the lysimeter or using a
measurement technique such as the neutron probe. The siting should be representative of field conditions
(minimizing advection effects) and the soil in the lysimeter should have its natural structure preserved as
closely as is feasible.

The experimental technique required for the direct measurement of evaporation involves complex and
fragile instrumentation. Sophisticated measurement techniques will not be available and even basic
meteorological data may be lacking. There is therefore a requirement for simpler methods which can be
easily used and with a minimum of climatological data (Ayoade, 1988).

Fig 7.1 An evapotranspirometer (or drainage lysimeter)

7.3.2 Aerodynamic Methods

a) Diffusion Methods
In this case evaporation can be estimated from the measurements of temperature, the humidity, and the
velocity at two points within the turbulent boundary layer together with the height of the effective datum.

b) Eddy Correlation
This method relies on the analysis of the structure of turbulence to determine transport rates. Although
mean wind velocity will be parallel to the surface, there will be instantaneous perpendicular components.
Similarly, there will be fluctuations in air temperature and humidity about mean values at a given height.
Hence if fluctuations of velocity and e.g. humidity are simultaneously measured, the net flux can be
calculated.

4
WRE 2010 AR

7.3.3 Energy Balance Methods

The energy balance method is an application of the law of conservation of energy. The energy available
for evaporation is determined by considering the incoming energy, outgoing energy and energy stored in
the water body over a known time interval (Subramanya, 1994).

Considering the water body as in Figure 7.2, the energy balance to the evaporating surface in a period of
one day is given by;

= + + + + (7.4)

Where Hn = net heat energy received by the water surface = Hc (1 - r) - Hb in which Hc(1 - r) =
incoming solar radiation into a surface of reflection coefficient (albedo) r, Hb = back radiation (long
wave) from water body, Ha = sensible heat transfer from water surface to air, He = heat energy used up in
evaporation, LEL where = density of water, L = latent heat of evaporation and EL = evaporation in mm,
Hg = heat flux into the ground, Hs = heat stored in water body, Hi = net heat conducted out of the system
by water flow (advected energy)

All the energy terms are in calories per square mm per day. If the time periods are short, the terms Hs and
Hi can be neglected as negligibly small. All the terms except Ha can be readily measured. Ha is estimated
using Bowen's ratio  given by the expression

Ha T  Ta
  6.1x10 4 x a  w
LE L e w  ea (7.5)

where pa = atmospheric pressure in mm of mercury, ew = saturated vapour pressure in mm of mercury,

ea = actual vapour pressure of air in mm of mercury, Tw = temperature of water surface in oC and Ta =
temperature of air in oC. From the above equations EL can be evaluated as

Ha  H g  H s  Hi
EL  (7.6)
L1   

Estimation of evaporation in a lake by the energy balance method has been found to give satisfactory
results, with errors of the order of 5% when applied to periods less than a week.

5
WRE 2010 AR

Black radiation Heat loss to air

Hb Ha

Solar Reflected
radiation H rH c
o
Evaporation
LE L

(1-r)H c
Advection
Heat flux Hi
into the Heat stored
ground Hg

Fig 7.2 Energy balance in a water body

Source: Subramanya, 1994

7.3.4 Combination Methods

A difficulty with the aerodynamic and energy budget methods is that humidity measurements at 2 levels
on a short time-scale are required, and these are difficult measurements to make. A combination
approach can be used in which the aerodynamic method is used to determine H (using temperature
measurements, not humidity) the energy balance is then used to determine  E. This overcomes the need
for humidity measurements, but still includes the other disadvantages of the aerodynamic method.

7.4 Evaporation Estimation

7.4.1 The Penman Combination Equation

Penman (1948) developed a formula for calculating open water evaporation based on fundamental
physical principles, with some empirical concepts incorporated, to enable standard meteorological
observations to be used. This latter facility resulted in the Penman formula being enthusiastically
acclaimed and applied the world over especially by practicing engineers seeking an answer to the
question of water loss.
The physical principles combine the two previous approaches to evaporation calculation, the mass
transfer (or aerodynamic) method and the energy budget method. The basic equations are modified and
rearranged to use meteorological constants and measurements or variables made regularly at
climatologically stations.

In a simplified energy balance equation;

H = Eo + Q (7.7)

Where H is the available heat, Eo is energy for evaporation and Q is energy for heating the air.

6
WRE 2010 AR

The values of Eo and Q can be defined by the aerodynamic equations below;

= ( )( − ) (7.8)

and

= ( )( − ) (7.9)

 is the hygrometric constant (0.27 mm of mercury/oF) to keep units consistent. It is generally assumed
that f(u) = f1 (u). If the aerodynamic equation (Equation 7.8) is based on the air humidity using the air
temperature Ta, then;

= ( )( − ) (7.10)

where ea is the saturated vapour pressure at air temperature Ta, and thus (ea – ed) is the saturation deficit
(ed, the vapour pressure of the air, is the saturated vapour pressure at the dew point, Td). The temperature,
Ta, is easily measured, whence ea is easily obtained, whereas es in equation 7.8 is difficult to evaluate.

If ∆ represents the slope of the curve of saturated vapour pressure plotted against temperature, then;

de e  ed ea  ed
∆=  s  (if gradients are small)
dT Ts  Td Ta  Td

Then from Equation 7.9:

Q =  f(u) T s  T d   T a  Td 

 e s  ed ea  ed 
=  f(u)  
   
E o E a
=  (7.11)
 

Substituting for Q in the energy balance equation (Equation 7.7)

E o E a
Eo = H - 
 

 Eo + Eo = H + Ea

H E a
Eo = 
  
H  E a
Eo=
 
  
Eo= H  Ea /   1 (7.12)
  
7
WRE 2010 AR

This final equation is the basic Penman formula for open water evaporation. It requires values of H and
Ea as well as  for its application.
If net radiation measurements are available, then H, the available heat may be obtained directly. More
often, H is calculated from incoming (RI) and outgoing (Ro) radiation determined from sunshine records,
temperature and humidity, using;

= R (1 − r) − R (7.13)

where r is the albedo and equals 0.05 for water. R1 is a function of Ra, the solar radiation (fixed by latitude
and season) modulated by a function of the ratio, n/N, of measured to maximum possible sunshine
duration. Using r = 0.05 gives;

R (1 − r) = 0.95R f (n⁄N) (7.14)

Penman used fa (n/N) = 0.18 + 0.55n/N in the original work, but later studies have shown that the function
fa(n/N) depends on the clarity of the atmosphere and latitude (MAFF, 1967).

The term Ro in Equation 7.13 is given by;

 
Ro  Ta4 0.56  0.09 ed 0.10  0.90n / N  (7.15)

where Ta4 is the theoretical black body radiation at Ta which is then modified by functions of the
humidity of the air (ed) and the cloudiness (n/N) σ Stefan-Boltzmann Constant (5.67 x 10-8 Wm-2K-4).

Next, Ea in Equation 7.16 is found using the coefficients derived by experiment for open water;

E = 0.35(0.5 + u ⁄100)(e − e ) (7.16)

Finally a value of ∆ is found from the curve of saturated vapour pressure against temperature
corresponding to the air temperature, Ta.

The four measurements required to calculate the open water evaporation are thus;
- Ta, mean air temperature for a week, 10 days or a month, oF or oC
- ed, mean vapour pressure for the same period, mmHg
- n, bright sunshine over the same period, h/day
- u2, mean wind speed at 2m above the surface, miles/day

Ra and N are obtained from standard meteorological Tables 7.6 and7.7 respectively in the Appendix at the
end of this chapter.

With meteorological observations made in various units and the tendency to work now in SI units, care is
needed in converting measurements into the appropriate units for the formula. The evaporation from
open water Eo is finally in mm/day. The values obtained by the Penman equation are comparable to the
pan measurements, since it was derived to approximate evaporation from a pan.

i) The East African Penman Formula

Specific developments of the empirical relations have been proposed for certain regions. For example, in
East Africa (McCulloch, 1965) of the form below is presented;

8
WRE 2010 AR

  n    4 
Eo 
 

 Ra 1  r   0.29Cos  0.52  
 N      

n
N

Ta  0.10  0.90  0.56  0.08 e 

(7.17)
   h  u  
 0.261  1  es  e 
   20000  100  

Where in addition to the previously defined terms,

Ra = maximum radiation on a clear day for a given latitude and time of the year
r = 0.05, for water
= 0.25 for green crops
h = the altitude in m,  = the latitude,
e = vapour pressure in mbar and
u= wind speed in miles/day

A further modification (Callender, Woodhead, 1979) suggests that the Incoming radiation term should be
n
calculated using Ra (0.23+0.53 ) for the same region.
N

In a study (Mangeni, 2007) on the estimation of the evaporation of Lake Victoria, he uses a combination
of the Penman (1948) and the energy balance, yields an energy budget that relies on the radiation balance
and mass transfer terms over the lake, to make more realistic estimates of evaporation over the lake.The
result was an annual evaporation of 1678 mm, which is considered more representative. This value is
greater than the mean annual evaporation of most recent estimates of 1537 mm per year, regarded as an
underestimate.

ii) The Concept of Potential Evaporation

Potential evaporation (PE), the evaporation plus transpiration from a vegetated surface when the water
supply is unlimited, is measured regularly at several climatological stations using an irrigated ‘lysimeter’.
It constitutes the maximum possible loss rate due to the prevailing meteorological conditions. Thus
although Et is the actual evaporation, PE is the maximum value of Et. PE = Et when water supply is
unlimited.

iii) Calculation of Potential Evaporation

A value of the actual evaporation (Et) over a catchment can be obtained by first calculating the potential
evaporation plus transpiration (PE), i.e. assuming an unrestricted availability of water, and then
modifying the answer by accounting for the actual soil moisture content. This method was developed by
Penman and has been recommended for general use. There are several formulae for calculating potential
evaporation and their derivation has been largely due to the need to assess irrigation demands. The
Penman formula in particular, has served more widely to help provide a numerical evaluation of the
moisture content of a catchment and the calculations of Et.

He related the potential evaporation from a vegetated land surface to the evaporation from open water
shown;

= . (7.18)

where f is the seasonal conversion factor

He obtained the following values of considered applicability in the climate of Western Europe:
9
WRE 2010 AR

Summer f = 0.8 (May to, August)

Winter f = 0.6 (November to February)
Equinoctial months f = 0.7 (March, April, September, October)

Thus, having calculated Eo for a particular month using Equation 7.12 and its defined components, the
potential evaporation is obtained by applying the appropriate factor, which is locally applicable.
In the Equatorial regions the consistency of daylight hours yields conversion factors that deviate less than
5% throughout the year (Riou, 1984). He further estimates that a constant value of 0.8 in the dry season
and 0.75 in the wet season would not be a major error in estimation. A mean monthly coefficient f is
consistent with pan factors and previous work (START, 2006).

Penman (1948) gave three main reasons why the estimate of potential evapotranspiration cannot be
greater than open water surface evaporation;
a) The albedo of vegetation (10%-18%) is generally greater than that for water (2% to 7%), hence
less energy is absorbed and available for evapotranspiration than for evaporation from the water
surface.
b) At night when the leaf stomata are closed transpiration is virtually nil, whereas evaporation may
still occur from a water surface using the heat stored within.
c) Even when stomata are open during the day they offer resistance to the diffusion of water vapour.

More recently (Finch, 2003) noted that empirical factors applied in the Penman Potential evaporation
equation are likely to significantly overestimate open water evaporation and proposes new empirical
factors that have greater accuracy.

7.4.2 The Penman Monteith Combination Equation

This was a further development of the original Penman equation by (Monteith, 1965) in which he gave an
equation for computing evaporation from vegetated surfaces. It represents the evaporating surface as a
single big leaf, with two parameters; one determined by the crop canopy architecture, while the other
depends on the biological behavior of the crop canopy surface and is related to both crop specific
parameters; light attenuation, leaf stomatal resistances and environmental factors. It has proved effective
if applied correctly with high weather data. The estimates are usually greater than pan evaporation, which
can occur for short periods.
The FAO-56 Penman-Monteith equation has been adopted as the new standard method for estimating
reference crop evapotranspiration and is given as;

900
0.408 Rn  G   U 2 es  ea 
ETo  T  273 (7.19)
   1  0.34U 2 
where:
ETo = reference crop evapotranspiration (mm/day)
Rn = net radiation at the crop surface (MJ/m2/day)
G = soil heat flux density
T = mean daily air temperature at 2m height (0C)
U2 = wind speed at 2m height (m/s)
es = saturation vapour pressure (kPa), given by

10
WRE 2010 AR

e T max  e T min 
es 
2 (7.20)

 17.27T 
eT   0.6108 exp  
 T  237.3  (7.21)

where:
ea = actual vapour pressure
es-ea= saturation vapour pressure deficit (kPa), where;
ea  eTdew 

Tdew = the dewpoint temperature (for well-watered sites, Tdew can be approximated to the
minimum air temperature).
∆ = slope vapour pressure curve (KPa/0C) given by;

  17.27T 
40980.6108 exp 
  T  237.3 
 (7.22)
T  237.32

  Psychometric constant (KPa/0C) given by;

cpP
   0.665 X 10 3 P (7.23)


Where;
P is the atmospheric pressure (KPa/0C), cp is the specific heat at constant pressure = 1.013MJkg-10C-1,  is
the ratio molecular weight of water vapour/dry air = 0.622, and  is the latent heat of vaporization =
2.45MjKg-1

Net longwave radiation (Rnl)

 T , K 4  Tmin , K 4   Rs 
Rnl    max
2
 
 0.34  0.14 e a 1.35
Rso
 0.35  (7.24)
   

Where Rnl net outgoing longwave radiation

In a study (Akinbile, 2007) tested five models on the suitability for determining the reference
evapotranspiration in the region in comparison to the Penman Monteith equation. These were Jensen-
Haise, Blaney-Morin-Nigeria, Thornthwaite, Modified Hargreaves and Penman. The results showed that
after Penman, the Modified Hargreaves gave the best covariabilty. This means that in situations where
there is very limited data, as in many parts of sub-Saharan Africa, the Modified Hargreaves can be used
to obtain reasonable estimates of reference evapotranspiration.

11
WRE 2010 AR

Example 7.1
Given the monthly average climatic data of April of a station at Atumatak in Moroto District, Uganda,
located at 20141N and at an elevation of 1260m, calculate the potential evaporation using the Penman
formula assuming a seasonal conversion factor of 0.7.
A. Data April
1. Mean air temperature 22.50C
2. Mean relative humidity, % 60
3. Mean sunshine hours, n 12
4. Possible sunshine hours (N from Table 7.7) 12
5. Value of the ratio n/N 1
6. Wind speed at 2m height in miles/day (u2) = 172.8
7. Monthly average daily vapour pressure (ea) = 1.02kPa
8. Extra terrestial radiation in mm/day (Ra from App. Table 7.6) 37.13/2.45=15.155mm/day
9. Reflection coefficient (r) 0.05

B. Solving expression RI(1-r)

10. (1-r)=(1-0.05)= 0.95
11. (a+b.n/N)=(0.18+0. 55x1.0)= 0.73
12. RI(1-r) = product of values @ items 8,10 and11= 10.510 mm/day
C. Solving expression  Ta4(0.56-0.092ed1/2)(0.10+0.90n/N)
13. Vapour pressure i) ea(From Table 7.3)= 2.726kPa = 20.447mmHg
ii) ed (recorded)= 1.02kPa = 7.651mmHg
iii) ed1/2 = 2.766
14. σTa4 (= 5.67x 10-8 x (273+22.5)4 =
Ta must be converted to K 432.328 Wm-2
= 432.328 x 2.388 x 10-5 x 1440 mm/day 14.867mm/day
15. (0.56-0.09ed1/2)= (0.56-0.09x2.766)= 0.311
16. (0.10+0.90.n/N)= (0.10+0.90x1.0)= 1.0
17. Ro = p roduct of values @items 14,15 and 16 4.624 mm/day
D. Solving for H = Item No. 12- item No. 17=(10.50-7.29)= 5.886mm/day
E. Solving for Ea=0.35(ea-ed)(0.5+u2/100)
=0.35(20.447-7.651)(0.5+172.8/100)= 9.978 mm/day
From Table 7.4
∆ = 0.165kPa/0C = 1.238mmHg/oC = 1.238/33.8 = 0.037mmHg/0F
∆/  = 0.037/0.27 = 0.137
0 . 137 x 5 .886  9 . 978
Solving for E0 =
F. 1  0 . 137 9.485 mm/day
G. i) PET= Eo x K for April = 9.485x0.7 = 6.640 mm/day

Example 7.2
Using the above data for Moroto, calculate the open water surface evaporation using East African Penman
equation
(1m bar = 0.75mmHg)

12
WRE 2010 AR

Solution

From Example 7.1

∆ = 0.037 mmHg/0F Ra = 15.155mm/day h=1260m
Φ= 20141 σTa4 = 14.867mm/day es = ea = 20.447mmHg
u = 172.8miles/day
1Pa = 0.0075mmHg
1.0kPa = 7.5mmHg 7.5mmHg = 7.5/0.75 = 10mbar
e=1.02kPa = 10.2 mbar
es= 20.447mmHg = 27.263mbar

Upon substitution
  n  0.037


Ra 1  r   0.29cos  0.52  =
 N  0.307
 
x15.155 x 0.95 0.29 cos 20141  0.52 x1 =1.405

  4 
   
n
N 
 
Ta  0.10 0.90  0.56 0.08 e  = 0.037 x14.8670.10  0.90x1 0.56  0.08 10.2 =0.546
 
 0.307
   h  u  0.27  1260  172.8 
0.261  1 es e= x0.261  1  27.26310.2 =11.314
   20000  100  0.307  20000 100 

Eo = 1.405 - 0.546 + 11.314 = 12.173mm/day

Therefore PET = 12.173x0.7 = 8.521mm/day

Example 7.3
Given the monthly average climatic data of April of a station at Atumatak in Moroto district located at
20141N and at an elevation of 1260m, calculate the potential evaporation using FAO Penman-Monteith:
Monthly average daily maximum temperature (Tmax) = 29.80C
Monthly average daily minimum temperature (Tmin) = 13.70C
Monthly average daily vapour pressure (ea) = 1.02kPa
Monthly average daily wind speed (u2) = 3.2 m/s
Monthly average daily sunshine duration (n) = 12hours/day
For April, Mean monthly average temperature (Tmonth, i) = 22.50C
For March, Mean monthly average temperature = (Tmonth, i-1) = 21.00C

Solution
i. Parameters
T max  T min 29 . 8  13 . 7
Tmean=   21.750C
2 2
Slope of vapour pressure-temperature curve ∆
  17.27T    17.27 x 21.75 
40980.6108 exp  40980.6108 exp 
  T  237.3    21.75  237.3 
 = =0.16
T  237.32 21.75  237.32
Altitude = 1260m

5.26
 293  0.0065H 
Atmospheric pressure P = 101.3 
 293 

13
WRE 2010 AR

5.26
 293  0.0065 x1260 
=101.3  = 87.3kPa
 293 
cpP
Psychometric constant    0.665 X 10 3 P = 0.665x10-3x87.3= 0.058 kPa/0C


ii. Vapour pressure deficit

 17.27T 
e s T   0.6108 exp  
 T  237.3 
 17.27 x 29.8 
es Tmax  29.8  0.6108 exp   = 4.20kPa
 29.8  237.3 

 17.27 x13.7 
es Tmin  13.7   0.6108 exp   = 1.57kPa
13.7  237.3 
Given (ea) = 1.02kPa
es= (4.20+1.57)/2= 2.89kPa
Vapour pressure deficit (es-ea) = 1.87kPa

iii. Radiation
From Table 7.6 J = (for 15 April) 105
or 7.5 Latitude=20141N= (2+14/60)= 2.23 0
N
Ra= 37.13 MJm-2day-1
N (Table 7.7) Day length N= 12.0 hours
n/N=12/12= 1
Incoming Solar radiation Rs=(0.25+0.50n/N)Ra= 27.85 MJm-2day-1
Clear-sky solar radiation Rso =
[0.75+(2x10-5xAltitude)]Ra= 28.78 MJm-2day-1
Rs/Rso=27.85/28.78= 0.97
Net solar radiation Rns= 1  r Rs =0.77x27.85= 21.45
r = 0.23 for the hypothetical grass reference crop
0
From Table 7.8 Tmax= 29.8 C
4
 Tmax , K  41.30 MJm-2day-1
0
From Table 7.8 Tmin= 13.7 C
4
 Tmin , K  33.20 MJm-2day-1
4 4
(  Tmax , K   Tmin , K )/2= 37.25 MJm-2day-1

0.34-0.14 e a = 0.20

1.35Rs/Rso-0.35= 0.96
Rnl = 37.61x0.20x0.96= 7.22 MJm-2day-1
Rn = 21.45-7.22= 14.23 MJm-2day-1
G= 0.14(22.5-21.0)= 0.21 MJm-2day-1
Rn-G = 14.23-0.21= 14.02 MJm-2day-1
0.408(Rn-G)= 5.72 mm/day

14
WRE 2010 AR

900
0.408 Rn  G   U 2 es  ea 
ETo  T  273
   1  0.34U 2 

900
0.16 x5.72  3.2 x1.87 x0.058 x
ETo  22.5  273 =7.02mm/day
0.16  0.0581  0.34 x3.2 
Example 7.4
1. Estimate the daily grass reference evapotranspiration for a location with the following details:
Net radiation (Rn) = 1.9
Soil heat flux (G) = 0
Maximum temperature = -21.50C
Minimum temperature = 12.30C
Dewpoint temperature =12.10C
Altitude (H) = 100 masl
Wind speed at 2m (u2) = 2.08m/s

Solution
Mean temperature Tm = 21.5  12.3  16.9o C
2
Slope of vapour pressure-temperature curve ∆
  17.27T   17.27 x16.9 
40980.6108 exp   40980.6108 exp 
  T  237.3  =   16.9  237.3  =0.12

T  237.32 16.9  237.32

Atmospheric pressure P
5.26 5.26
293  0.0065x100 
= 101.3 293  0.0065H  = 101.3  =100.12kN/m2
 293   293 

cp P
Psychometric constant    0.665 X 10 3 P = 0.665 X 10 3 x101.12 =0.07

SVP at mean temperature eo=e (16.9)=
 17.27 x16.9 
 0.6108 exp    1.93
16.9  237.3 
e21.5  e12.3
Mean SVP es   2.00
2
Actual VP ea= e(12.1)= 1.41

Grass reference evapotranspiration

900
0.408 R n  G   U 2 e s  e a 
ETo  T  273
   1  0.34U 2 
900
0.408x0.121.9  0  0.072.0  1.41x2.08 x
ETo  16.9  273  1.47mm
0.12  0.071  0.34 x2.08

15
WRE 2010 AR

7.4.3 Radiation Methods

A number of similar approaches can be used when radiation data are available as well as air temperature,
but not wind or humidity, which are required by Penman.

i) Priestly and Taylor (1971)

is one of the methods.

ET   Rn (7.25)
 

where α is an empirical constant = (-1.26)

This can be compared with Penman

     f u e s  e 
ET   Rn    
      

 f u es  e
which shows that is represented by   1 Rn

This is some physical justification, but the method can be seriously in error for tall crops (forests).

ii) Doorenbos and Pruitt (1977)

present a similar relationship

ET  c ST (7.26)
 
Ascribed to Makkink (1957).

As for the Penman calculation ST can be estimated from

 n
S T   0.25  0.50  S a
 N

and a family of relations between ET and ST

are presented (determining c) for conditions of varying relative humidity and wind speed.

Example 7.5
Atumatak in Moroto district located at 20141N, altitude 1260m; July, Tmean = 29.8oC. Sunshine
(n) mean = 12 h/day, daytime wind moderate, mean relative humidity = medium
Then Ra = 15.155 mm/day (Ra from App. Table 7.6)
N = 12 h/day (N from Table 7.7)

 n
Solar radiation R s   0.25  0.50  R a = 11.37 mm/day
 N

From Table 7.4 ∆= 0.241 kPa/0C

16
WRE 2010 AR

From Table 7.2  = 0.0.058 kPa/0C

 = 0.806
 

x Rs = 9.165 mm/day

Recall c =1.26

ET  c R s = 11.55 mm/day


7.4.4 Humidity Methods

Modifications of the form:
ET  f 1 u e s  z   e z  have been proposed, where f 1 u  is an empirical wind speed function for a
given locality. However, if humidity and wind-speed data are available, there will generally be sufficient
radiation data to use Penman to give a better estimate. (The humidity equation neglects the radiation
component of the Penman equation).

7.4.5 Temperature methods

A large number of highly simplified methods have been proposed where only climate data available are
those of air temperature.

They include:-

a) Blaney-Criddle method, which uses mean temperature (T), and the percentage (P) of total annual
daylight hours occurring during the period under consideration.

= { (0.46 + 8)} mm/day for monthly data (7.27)

where ET = mean potential evapotranspiration (mm/day! for month considered

T = mean daily temperature (0C) for that month
p = mean daily percentage of total annual daytime hours for a given month and
Latitude
c = adjustment factor (to allow for relative humidity, day-time wind and sunshine hours)

b) Thornthwaite method
Further work was directed towards finding an expression for potential evaporation to serve the needs of
irrigation engineers. Thornthwaite (1948) assumed that an exponential relationship existed between mean
monthly temperature and mean monthly consumptive use. No allowance was made for different crops or
varying land uses. The resulting formula is based mainly on temperature with an adjustment being made
for the number of daylight hours. An estimate of the potential evapotranspiration, PEm, calculated on a
monthly basis, is given by;

a
 10 T m  mm (7.28)
PE m  1 .6 N m  
 I 

17
WRE 2010 AR

Where m is the months 1, 2, 3,….12, Nm is the monthly adjustment factor related to hours of daylight, Tm
is the monthly mean temperature oC, I is the heat index for the year, given by;

1 . 514
T  (7.29)
I   im    m 
 5 

and
a = 6.7 x 10-7I3 – 7.7 x 10-5I2 + 1.8 x 10-2I + 0.49 (to 2 significant figures) (7.30)

The Thornthwaite formula gives a reasonable estimate of PE in the temperate, continental climate of
North America where it was originally derived because there, temperature and radiation are strongly
correlated. In other parts of the world this approach has been less successful. The drawbacks of the
formula are;
a. Temperature alone is not a good indication for the energy available for evapotranspiration,
b. Air temperature of a place lags behind radiation,
c. According to this formula Et will cease when mean temperature is below 0oC. which by no means
is true, although the amount of evaporation will be very small,
d. The formula does not take into account the wind effect which might be an important factor in
some areas, and
e. It under estimates evaporation at high altitudes in the tropics and fails to represent seasonal
variations. This arises from the poor correlation between radiation and temperature near the
equator, where the day length is constant.
f. It also does not consider the effect of warm and cool air on the temperature of a plateau.

An adjustment to the Thornthwaite equation was proposed by Carmargo et al (1999) using an effective
temperature instead of the original mean temperature as given in Equation 7.31.

Tef =1/2k(3Tmax – Tmin) (7.31)

where k =0.69 provides the best estimates for ETo

The adjusted Thornthwaite equation had a performance identical to the more robust and highly
recommended Penman Monteith FAO formula (Pereira et al, 2004).
Improvement of PET estimates using Thornthwaite by weighting the temperature towards maximum
rather than minimum or mean temperatures was also suggested by Riou 1984 who proposed an
evapotranspiration equation based on mean maximum temperature Equation 7.32.

PET(mm/day) = 0.30 * mean Max T -5.9 (7.32)

In his study (Tindimugaya, 2000) showed that pan derived estimates of PET are on average, 35% greater
than those estimated using Thornthwaite method. The use of a simple weighting factor to maximum daily
temperatures to estimate Tef (Equation 7.33) was able to closely match (<5% difference) pan derived
estimates of monthly PET and the Thornthwaite approach (START, 2006).

Tef = (2Tmax – Tmin)/3 (7.33)

18
WRE 2010 AR

Example 7.6
Calculate the potential evapotransipration for Moroto (20141N) by using Thornthwaite formula
Month Mean monthly Monthly heat index PET cm
1.514
Temperature (0C)(t) i  Tm / 5 e=1.6(10t/I)a

1 2 3 4
January 22.3 9.62 8.94
February 22.7 9.88 9.34
March 23.2 10.21 9.85
April 22.5 9.75 9.14
May 20.9 8.72 7.62
June 20.6 8.53 7.35
July 20.4 8.41 7.18
August 20.8 8.66 7.53
September 21.1 8.85 7.80
October 22.3 9.62 8.94
November 21.8 9.29 8.45
December 21.8 9.29 8.45
I=110.8 100.58cm

a = 6.75x10-7(110.8)3 – 7.71 x10-5 (110.8)2 + 1.8 x10-2 (110.8) + 0.49239

a = 2.46
Ta = mean air temperature in oK = 273+0C
n n
Rn = net radiation (mm of water) = Ra (1-r)(0.18+0.55 ) – σTa4(0.55-0.092 e d )(0.10+ 0.90 )
N N
r = reflection coefficient of evaporating surface, 0.06 for open water surface
Ra = Angot’s value of mean monthly extra-terrestrial radiation, mm of water/day
n
= ratio between actual and possible hours of bright sunshine
N
σ = Stefan-Boltzman constant
RH mean
E= saturation vapour pressure of the atmosphere, in mmHg, at dew point temperature= xea in
100
which RH is the mean relative humidity

7.4.6 Direct Estimation

Currently, an indirect measurement of evaporation from open water is made by taking the difference in
storage of a body of water measured at two known times, which gives a measure of the evaporated water
over the time interval. If rain has fallen during the time period then the rainfall quantity must be taken
into account. In practice, this water budget method is used on two widely differing spatial scales, by
measurements at reservoirs and by measurements with specially designed instruments maintained at
meteorological stations.

i) Tanks and Pans

These are basically called evaporimeters. The advantage being that they can easily be transferred and
installed. The most widely used instrument nowadays is the American Class A Pan (Fig. 7.5). This is
circular with a diameter of 1.21 m and is 255 mm deep. It is set with the base 150 mm above the ground
19
WRE 2010 AR

surface on an open wooden frame so that the air circulates freely round and under the pan. The water
level in the pan is kept to about 50 mm below the rim. The level is measured daily with a hook gauge and
the difference between two readings gives a daily value of evaporation. Alternatively, evaporation can be
obtained by bringing the water level in the pan back to a fixed level with a measured amount of water.
Pans provide an integrated measurement of the effects of radiation, wind, temperature and humidity.

Another instrument that has been accepted by many countries is the Russian tank. The USSR GGI-3000
tank has a smaller surface area (0.3 m2, 0.618 m diameter) than the other instruments, but has the depth of
the British tank (0.60-0.685 m). It is cylindrical with a conical base and is made of galvanized iron.

Pan Coefficient Cp
Evaporation pans are not exact models of large reservoirs and have the following principle drawbacks:
1. They differ in the heat-storing capacity and heat transfer from the sides and bottom. The sunken
pan and floating pan aim to reduce this deficiency. As a result of this factor the evaporation from
a pan depends to a certain extent on its size. While a pan of 3m diameter is known to give a value
which is about the same as from a neighbouring large lake, a pan of size 1.0 m diameter indicates
about 20% excess evaporation that that of the 3m diameter pan.

2. The height of the rim in an evaporation pan affects the wind action over the surface. Also, it casts
a shadow of variable magnitude over the water surface.

3. The heat transfer characteristics of the pan material are different from that of the reservoir.

In view of the above, the evaporation from a pan has to be corrected to get the evaporation from a lake
under similar climatic and exposure conditions. Thus a coefficient Cp is introduced in Equation 7.34 as:

Lake evaporation = Cp x pan evaporation (7.34)

In which CP = pan coefficient. The values of Cp in use range from 0.6 to 0.8 depending on the wind speed
and relative humidity at the pan site as well as on the type of pan.

Evaporation Stations
Evaporation plays an important role in long term studies of the water regime of the lakes and reservoirs
and for water management. It is usual to install evaporation pans in such locations where other
meteorological data are also simultaneously collected. In such cases the number of evaporation stations is
determined according to the area and configuration of the lakes and the climatic region or regions
involved. The WMO 1994 recommends the minimum network of evaporation stations within areas of
uniform physiography as given in Table 7.1:

Table 7.1 Minimum density of evaporation stations

Physiographic Unit Minimum density per station

area in km2 per station
Coastal 50,000
Mountainous 50,000
Interior plains 50,000
Hilly/undulating 50,000
Small islands 50,000
Polar/arid 100,000

Source: WMO 1994

20
WRE 2010 AR

100m m
G round
0.61m level

1.83m

a) UK British Standard Tank

1.21m

255 mm

150 mm wooden support

Ground
level

b) US Class A Pan

0.618m
75 mm
Ground
level

0.6 m
0.68 m

USSR GG1- 3000 Tank

Fig 7.3 Evaporimeters

ii) Atmometers
These are devices that can give direct measurement of evaporation. A water supply is connected to a
porous surface and the amount of evaporation over a designated time period is given by a measurement of
the change in water stored. Thus Eo = S

7.5 Potential Evaporation and Rainfall

The estimation of the deficit between rainfall and potential evaporation provides an initial input to water
balance studies carried out using continuity methods explained in Section 7.3.1. Recent studies carried out
in Uganda (Majugu, 2003) show the monthly variation of the rainfall and potential evaporation for 4
selected representative climatological regions illustrated in Fig 7.4.
21
WRE 2010 AR

The moisture deficit between the mean monthly potential evaporation rates and the mean monthly rainfall is
most pronounced over the central northern and the northeastern region of Karamoja in particular especially
during the dry season of October to March. Over the central northern the moisture deficit goes up to 200
mm (Zone H) and over the Karamoja region the deficit goes up to 250mm (not shown). Even during the
peak of the rainy season, July to September, the deficit is about zero over the central northern and about
50mm over the Karamoja region. Over the northwestern region the moisture deficit is not so pronounced,
during the peak rainfall period of July to October there is a net moisture balance of up to about 50mm,
while during the dry season of December to March the deficit is only up to around 150mm (Zone J).
Over the south-western region the moisture deficit during the dry seasons of December to February and
June to August goes up to about 100mm while during the peak of the rain seasons of March to May and
September to November there is an almost net balance between the potential evaporation and the mean
rainfall (Zone CW). Over the Lake Victoria basin, Central areas and the South-eastern areas as represented
by zone D there is a net balance of up to about 50mm during the main rainy season of March to May while
the deficit during the dry seasons of December to February and June to September is up to about 100mm
(Zone D). Over the mountainous central parts of the eastern region zone F (not shown) the period of net
moisture is more extended, from April up to August while the deficit during the dry season of December up
to February goes up to around 100mm.
It should be noted that the potential evaporation rates were based on calculations using an open evaporation
pan. This method usually leads to an overestimates.

22
WRE 2010 AR

Zone J: Northwestern region Zone H: Eastern - Central Northern region

300 300

250 Annual mean rainfall 1370 mm 250 Annual mean rainfall 1195 mm

200 200

150 150

100 100

50 50

0 0

Jan Apr Jul Oct Jan Apr Jul Oct

mean Average Evaporation
mean Average Evaporation

Zone CW: Southern parts -SW region

Zone D: Southern parts- Eastern region

300
300
Annual mean rainfall 1120 mm
Annual mean rainfall 1315 mm
250
250
200
200
150
150
100
100
50
50
0
0
Jan Apr Jul Oct Jan Apr Jul Oct
mean Average Evaporation
mean Average Evaporation

Fig 7.4 Mean monthly rainfall and potential evaporation amounts for four representative regions
Source: Majugu 2003
23
WRE 2010 AR

Mean (Rainfall - Evaporation) Seasonal Patterns

24
WRE 2010 AR

3-monthly seasonal (rainfall - evaporation) maps in Fig7.5 indicate wide spatial and seasonal variations,
which are broadly in line with the degree of spatial and seasonal wetness of the country. The season
December to February which is the driest season especially over the northern and most parts of the central
regions indicate very high rainfall deficits especially over the northern region. The season March to May
which is the main rainy season of the country, indicates net rainfall amounts extending from the central
areas to the southeastern areas of the country. Elsewhere there are moderate rainfall deficits. On the other
hand the season June to August (not shown) indicates net rainfall amounts especially over the Lake Kyoga
basin and the northwestern areas of the country. Rainfall deficits are rather high over the central and
Southern parts of the country. Finally the season September to December (not shown) indicates net rainfall
amounts centred over the high grounds of the central parts of the western region. During this season the
northeastern region exhibits considerably high rainfall deficits.

RAINFALL – EVAPORATION (mm)

Rainfall - Evaporation for the season December to February Rain - Evaporation for the season March to May
5
4
4

4
4

3
3

3
3

2
2

2
2

1 1

1 1

0 0

-1 -1

-1 -1

-2
30 31 32 33 34 35 30 31 31 32 32 33 33 34 34 35 35

Fig 7.5 (Rainfall – Evaporation) for the seasons December to February and March to May
Source: (Majugu, 2003)

The Evaporation Ratio is the ratio of the annual evapotranspiration to precipitation and the Aridity Index or
Dryness Index is the ratio of the potential evapotranspiration to precipitation (Budyoko, 1974). The aridity
index can also be used to obtain an analytic equation, which can be used to estimate change in runoff given
annual changes in precipitation and available energy (often expressed in terms of potential
evapotranspiration), due to climate change, with a correlation of about 0.95 (Arora, 2002). Regions where
the aridity index is greater than unity are broadly classified as dry. Furthermore, regions where aridity index
is less than unity are classified as wet. The aridity index may also be related to the climatic regions in the
25
WRE 2010 AR

broad sense; 12 > Φ ≥ 5 as arid; 5 > Φ ≥ 2 as semi-arid; 2 > Φ ≥ 0.75 as sub-humid and 0.75 > Φ ≥
0.375 as humid ( Ponce et al., 2000). Fig 7.6 shows the map of the aridity index for the climatic regions in
Uganda and gives an average of 1.5. In the north east it is semi-arid and in the rest of the country it can be
considered as sub- humid. This map can be compared to Fig 5.6 on climatological regions and Figs 6.8 and
6.9 on drought intensity and severity respectively.

Fig 7.6 A Map of Uganda showing the Aridity Index in the different Climatological Zones
Source: (WRM,2005)

26
WRE 2010 AR

7.6 Plant – Water Relationships

Water makes up a large percentage of plant tissues and is very useful for growth. It is transferred through
roots to the vessels of the plant to the sub-stomatal cavity from where evaporation can actually take place.
The movement of water through the stomata is by molecular diffusion of water vapour.
Factors affecting plant-water relationships include soil, plant, weather factors as well as factors such as
soil volume, plant spacing, soil fertility and crop and soil management.
The growth of a plant depends on the metabolic activity of cells which is dependent on water content.
Metabolic activities in the plant cells include cell division and enlargement. Continual reduction in
amount of water available for cell activities leads to conditions for example cell turgor, wilting, ceasation
of cell enlargement, reduction in photosynthesis. Water acts as a solvent for gases, minerals to move
within cells and tissues. Since cell walls are permeable to water, a continuous liquid phase extending
through the plant is created and it is through this phase that translocation of solutes takes place. Water is
essential for cell growth, maintenance and position of leaves and new shoots. Water is lost from plants
through transpiration and must be replaced immediately for survival of the plant. Sometimes a deficit of
moisture may exist due to the fact that rate of moisture loss exceeds that of absorption through the roots
of the plant bringing about water stress. This could retard the growth and development of the plant cells
and eventually the plant.
Water movement starts from the water available to the plant roots, it then moves into the root and then
through the conducting elements and then to the leaves. The rate of movement of the water is driven by
the potential difference of the water in the soil-atmosphere system (Micheal, 2003).

i) Drought Tolerance of Plants

Plants may survive periods of water stress by various means; some crops being more drought resistant
than others. Plants exhibit drought tolerance due to either factors affecting the water intake rate or loss or
because plants are able to survive tissue desiccation. Plants with deeper wide spread roots have a more
sustained resistance to drought effects as compared to plants with shallow roots.

ii) Movement of Water and Nutrients in Plants

Water and nutrients move within the plant from cell to cell and tissue to tissue. The forces that drive this
movement include; diffusion and mass flow and active transport depending on the expenditure of
metabolic energy. Movement by mass flow occurs when some molecules come into contact with other
molecules that are moving. Movement by diffusion is by virtue of the kinetic energy possessed by the
molecules.

7.7 Crop Water Requirements

In designing irrigation schemes and assessing the quantity of water to be supplied, the engineer must
make estimates of crop water requirements. The Crop water requirement may be defined as the quantity
of water, regardless of its source, required by a crop or diversified pattern of crops in a given period of
time, for its normal growth under field conditions at a place. Water requirement includes the losses due to
Et or consumptive use (Cw) plus the losses during the application of irrigation water (unavoidable losses)
and the quantity of water required for special operations such as land preparation, transplanting and
leaching. It may be formulated as follows;

WR = Et or Cw + Application losses + Special needs (7.35)

Water requirement is, therefore, a ‘demand’ and the ‘supply’ would consist of contributions from any of
the sources of water, the major source being the irrigation water (IR), effective rainfall (ER) and soil
profile contributions (S) including that from shallow water tables that is;

WR = IR + ER + S (7.36)
27
WRE 2010 AR

The field irrigation requirement of a crop, therefore, refers to the water requirement of crops, exclusive of
effective rainfall and contribution from soil profile and it may be given as;

IR = WR – (ER + S) (7.37)

The farm irrigation requirement depends on the irrigation needs of individual crops, their area and the
losses in the farm water distribution systems, mainly by way of seepage.
The needs vary for different crops and during the periods of growth. The several computational methods
use a reference crop evapotranspiration, which is the rate of evapotranspiration from an extensive
uniformly covered grass surface which is never short of water. This is the potential evaporation (PE) of
the Penman formula. Two other methods to derive the reference crop evapotranspiration have been
widely used namely i) the Blaney-Criddle formula developed and applied successfully by American
irrigation engineers, and ii) the measurements of Eo from evaporation pans (Doorenbos and Pruitt, 1977).

There are two main components in the calculations:

(1) There is need to determine the reference crop evapotranspiration (ETo = PE) as in the FAO-56
Penman Monteith equation

(a) Results of the Penman calculations in using monthly mean data provide ETo in mm d-1
but these are subject to an adjustment factor which depends on relative humidity,
incoming radiation and the ratio of daytime to night-time mean wind speeds.

(b) The Blaney – Criddle formula requires only mean daily temperatures (ToC) over each
month.

ETo = P(0.46T + 8)mm d-1 (7.38)

With P the mean daily percentage (for the month) of total annual daytime hours.

An adjustment factor is applied similarly for relative humidity, sunshine hours and
daytime wind speed estimates.

(c) From evaporation pan measurements.

ETo = kp E mm d-1 (mean daily value) (7.39)

Pan coefficients (kp) are available for the US Class A pan according to different ground cover
round the pan, mean relative humidity and the daily run of wind.

(2) The second stage in estimating crop water requirements is the selection of the crop coefficient (kc)
according to the cropping pattern during a production season and the growth characteristics of the
crop.

Then ETcrop = kc ETo calculated for each of the 30 or 10 day periods through the growing season,
depending on the chosen budgeting period for the application of water to supplement any rainfall.

Irrigation is of prime importance in hot climates and especially as there is need to improve on food
security and with the challenges of global warming. In evaluating the total water requirements for an
irrigation scheme many more factors need consideration. The ETcrop is variable over time and area and can

28
WRE 2010 AR

be affected by changing local conditions. The quality of the soil and method of application together with
agricultural practices, all have to be assessed in calculating the total water needs.

i) Crop Coefficient
The crop coefficient is dependent upon the development stage of a crop as shown in Fig. 7.7 as follows:

The four stages of crop development are described (Allen et al, 1998) herein as:

i) Initial stage: germination and early growth when the soil surface is hardly covered
by the crop (groundcover <10%)

ii) Crop development stage : from end of initial stage to attainment of effective full ground
cover (ground cover  70 - 80%). Start of mid-season stage can
be recognized in the field when crop has attained 70 to 80%
ground cover which, however, does not mean that the crop has
reached its mature height. Effective full groundcover refers to
cover when kc is approaching a maximum.

iii) Mid - season stage: from attainment of effective full groundcover to time of start
of maturing as indicated by discoloring of leaves (beans) or
leaves falling off (cotton). For some crops this may extend to
near harvest (sugar beet) unless irrigation is not applied at late
season and reduction in ET crop is induced to increase yield
and/or quality (sugar cane, cotton, some grains); normally well
past the flowering stage of annual crops.

iv) Late season stage: from end of mid-season stage until full maturity or harvest

K c mid
1.20
Kc
1.00

0.80
Kc end
0.60

0.40 K c ini

0.20 Crop mid- late

Initial development season season
0.00
time of season (days)

Fig 7.7 Crop Coefficient Curve

Source: Allen et al 1998

Factors affecting ETcrop

Actual ET crop will depend on local factors which are not covered in the methods mentioned. These
factors include:
i) Climate will vary from year to year and for each period within the year. This brings about the
time variation aspect. In selecting ET crop for project planning, knowledge should be obtained on
29
WRE 2010 AR

level and frequency at which high demands for water can be expected, particularly in the months
of peak water use.
ii) Climatic data are sometimes used from stations located some distance away from the area under
study. This is only permissible in areas where the same weather extends for long distances.
iii) Altitude also affects the ET crop – as radiation at high altitudes may be different to that in low
lying areas due to temperature, humidity and wind at the different altitudes.
iv) Soil Water is an important factor that includes level of available soil water, the ground water and
the salinity.
v) Methods of irrigation - techniques of irrigation if properly designed and administered can affect
the amount of evapotranspiration because different methods use different methods of application
of water.
vi) Cultural practices of the area in which the irrigation is being applied. For example the fertiliser
used is greatly dependent on method and frequency of irrigation, plant population as obviously
the more the plant cover the more the evapotranspiration, mulching practices, use of artificial
wind breakers and use of anti-transpirants in plant foliage properties to reduce evapotranspiration.

A study (Rugumayo et al, 2003) was carried out to determine the reliability of rainfall in relation to crop
water requirements, for different crops in selected climatic regions in Uganda. Available rainfall data
from these regions were examined for consistency using the double mass curve and infilled using Markov
generation methods. The data was then subjected to statistical tests to determine the probability
distributions that best fit them. Probability distributions were selected from among the Log-Normal,
Pearson Type III, Log-Pearson Type III and the Gumbel Extreme Value Type I distributions. Two
methods were applied in determining the most suitable distribution, namely, the Chi-square goodness of
fit test and regression analysis of the probability plots. Representative crops from the districts were then
selected and their crop water requirements determined using the FAO Penman Monteith equation. These
were compared to the rainfall to determine the effectiveness of the rainfall in meeting crop water
requirements. The crop water requirements were adjusted with respect to the effective rainfall to find a
planting date that minimizes the additional water requirement. Crops that required additional water were
identified and the yield reduction due to moisture stresses determined. Irrigation schedules were then
developed for the crops that required additional water.

In the identification of the best fit meteorological model for evaporation estimation in a particular agro-
ecological zone, actual evaporation was measured using three mini lysimeters and then validated by the
use of six models. The results showed that measured actual evaporation was greater in the afternoon than
in the mornings and varied significantly over days. After linear regression the ranking of the best fit for
models was Priestley and Taylor, Makkink, Abtew, Hargreaves, Romanenko, Penaman, Turc CROPWAT
and Penman Monteith (Wasige et al, 2002).

7.8 Effective Rainfall

It can generally be defined as useful or utilizable rainfall. It is usually interpreted differently by specialists
in different fields. From the point of view of water requirements for crops, annual or seasonal effective
rainfall can be defined as that part of the total annual or seasonal rainfall which is useful directly or
indirectly for crop production on a site where it falls. It excludes water lost by surface run off, deep
percolation, moisture remaining in the soil after crops have been harvested. This concept is used for
planning and operation of irrigation projects. Measurement of effective rainfall is done by measuring
rainfall, irrigation, losses by surface runoff, percolation beyond the root zone and soil moisture uptake by
the crop for evapotranspiration. This is further discussed in Chapter 13.

Factors that affect effective rainfall

a. Rainfall characteristics
30
WRE 2010 AR

b. Land slope
c. Soil characteristics
d. Ground water characteristics
e. Management practices
f. Crop characteristics
g. Carry-over soil moisture
h. Ground water contribution
i. Surface and subsurface in-flows and out-flows
j. Deep percolation
k. Measurement of effective rainfall
l. Irrigation requirements

7.9 Interception
Part of the storm precipitation that occurs is intercepted by vegetation and other forms of cover on the
drainage area. Interception can be defined as that segment of the gross precipitation input which wets and
adheres to above ground objects until it is returned to the atmosphere through evaporation or as the
storage of precipitation on the vegetation canopy and stems.
Precipitation striking vegetation may be retained on leaves or blades of grass, flow down the stems of
plants and become stemflow, or fall off the leaves to become part of the throughfall as shown in Fig. 7.8.
The modifying effect that a forest canopy can have on rainfall intensity at the ground (the throughfall) can
be put to practical use in watershed management schemes.

The amount of water intercepted is a function of i) the storm character, ii) the species, age, and density of
prevailing plants and trees, and iii) the season of the year. Usually about 10 – 20 percent of the
precipitation that falls during the growing season is intercepted and returned to the hydrologic cycle by
evaporation. Water losses by interception are especially pronounced under dense closed forest – as much
as 25 percent of the total annual precipitation. Interception storage is satisfied early in a storm and, when
the stores are full, water either i) drips through gaps in the canopy to the ground below (throughfall) or ii)
runs down the stem of the plant to the ground (stemflow). When there is a strong wind, interception
storage capacity is reduced, although higher wind speeds encourage evaporation and therefore wind may
actually increase overall losses for longer storms. This can be written as:

Net precipitation = Stemflow + Throughfall

Gross precipitation – Net precipitation = Interception loss

Potential storm interception losses can be estimated (Chow, 1964) by using

Li = S + KEt (7.36)

Where Li = the volume of water intercepted (mm)

S = the interception storage that will be retained on the foliage against the forces of wind and
gravity (usually varies between 0.25 and 1.3 mm.)
K = the ratio of surface area of intercepting leaves to horizontal projection of this area
E = the amount of water evaporated per hour during the precipitation period (mm)
t = time (hr)

The above equation is based on the assumption that rainfall is sufficient to fully satisfy the storage term S.
The following equation was designed (Gray, 1973) to account for the rainfall amount;

31
WRE 2010 AR

Li = S (1 – e-P/S) + KEt (7.37)

Where P = rainfall and e is the base of natural logarithms.

Note that the storm time duration t is given in hours, while Li, S, and E are commonly measured in inches
or mm.

Evaporation
Evaporation Through
flow

Canopy Stem
storage storage

Net rainfall

Fig 7.8 A Simplified model of Interception

7.10 Depression Storage
Surface or depression storage is closely allied to interception and is another aspect of water loss. It
comprises water retained in hollows and depressions on the ground surface during and after precipitation.
This water is eventually evaporated into the atmosphere or infiltrates into the soil to replenish soil
moisture storage or be used by vegetation. Surface or depression storage must also be distinguished from
surface detention where precipitation is temporarily stored on the ground surface before the beginning of
overland flow and surface runoff during a rainstorm.
The amount of depression storage varies widely, depending on the surface micro-topography, slope and
permeability, as well as the antecedent rainfall conditions. Depression storage deductions occur early in a
storm sequence and they are a function of topography, ground cover, and extent and type of land
development.

The volume of water stored by surface depressions at any given time can be approximated (Linsley et al,
1949) using;

V  S d (1  e  k Pe ) (7.38)

Where V = the volume actually in storage at some time of interest

Sd = the maximum storage capacity of the depressions
Pe = the rainfall excess (gross rainfall minus evaporation, interception, and infiltration)
32
WRE 2010 AR

K = a constant equivalent to l / Sd

The value of the constant can be determined by considering that if Pe ≈ 0, essentially all the water will fill
depressions and dV/ dPe will equal one. This requires that k = 1 / Sd. Estimates of Sd may be secured by
making sample field measurements of the area under study.

One assumption regarding dV / dt is that all depressions must be full before overland flow supply begins.
Actually, this would not agree with reality unless the locations of depressions were graded with the
largest ones occurring downstream.

Depression storage d (mm) can be represented (Kidd and Lowring, 1979) as;

k1
d k1 (7.39)
s
Where:
k1 coefficient depending on surface type (0.07) for impervious surface and 0.28s ground slope(-)

Typical values of depression storage vary from less than 2 mm for paved areas, 3-7 mm for flat roofs and
up to 10 mm for gardens.

Summary
Evaporation is one of the major processes of the hydrological cycle. It is the process by which water
moves from water bodies, the soil surface and vegetation to the atmosphere. This chapter gives the
factors that affect Evaporation and the different methods of its measurement. This component is
important for crop development for which the soil water quantity greatly affects crop yield. Also
included herein are components of interception, effective rainfall and depression storage. These aspects
determine the amount of evaporation that an area experiences and hence their determination is important
in estimation of evapotranspiration.

Appendix
1. The following tables are reproduced from Crop Evapotranspiration, Guidelines for Computing
Crop Water Requirements, FAO Irrigation and Drainage Paper 56, 1998, Rome, Italy.

33
WRE 2010 AR

Table 7.2 Atmospheric pressure (P) for different altitudes (z)

34
WRE 2010 AR

Table 7.3 Psychrometric constant (γ) for different altitudes (z)

35
WRE 2010 AR

Table 7.4 Saturation vapour pressure (eo(T)) for different temperatures (T)

36
WRE 2010 AR

Table 7.5 Slope of vapour pressure curve (Δ) for different temperatures (T)

37
WRE 2010 AR

Table 7.6 Number of the day in the year (J)

Table 7.6

38
WRE 2010 AR

Table 7.6 (continued)

39
WRE 2010 AR

Table 7.7 Daily extraterrestrial radiation (Ra) for different latitudes for the 15th day of themonth

Daily extraterrestrial radiation (Ra) for different latitudes for the 15th day of the month1
24(60)
Ra  Gsc d r  s sin  sin    cos sin  s 

(values in MJM-2day-1)2

40
WRE 2010 AR

Table 7.8 Mean daylight hours (N) for different latitudes for the 15th of the month

Mean daylight hours (N) for different latitudes for the 15th of the month1
24
N  s


41
WRE 2010 AR

Table 7.8 (continued)

Mean daylight hours (N) for different latitudes for the 15th of the month1
24
N  s


42
WRE 2010 AR

Table 7.9: σTK4 (Stefan- Boltzmann law) at different temperatures (T)

43
WRE 2010 AR

References
1. Akinbile, C.O., Reliability Estimation of Evapotranspiration Equations under Inaccurate Data
conditions in Sub- Saharan Africa, Proceedings Conference on Collaborative Technical Research,
2007 Kampala, Uganda.
2. Allen, R.G., Pereira, L.S., Raes, Smith, M., Crop Evapotranspiration, Guidelines for Computing
Crop Water Requirements, FAO Irrigation and Drainage Paper 56, 1998, Rome, Italy
3. Arora, V.K., The use of Aridity Index to assess the Climate Change effect on Annual Runoff, Journal
of Hydrology, 2002, Vol 265,pp 164-177.
4. Ayoade, J.O., Tropical Hydrology and Water Resources, Macmillan, 1998, London, UK.
5. Blaney H.F., Criddle W.O., Determining Water requirements in Irrigated areas from Climatological
and Irrigation Data, USDA-(SCS) 1950, Technical Paper 96.
6. Budyoko, M.I., Climate and Life, Academic Press, 1974, Orlando, Florida, USA.
7. Butler, D, Davies, J.W., Urban Drainage, E&FN Spon, 2000, London, UK.
8. Callender B.A., Woodhead, T. Eddy Correlation measurement of convective heat flux and estimation
of evaporative heat flux over growing tea. East African Agriculture and Forestry Journal, 1979, Vol
43, pp85- 101.
9. Carmargo A., Marin, F.R., Sentelhas, P.C., Picini, A.G. Adjustment of the Thornthwaite method to
estimate the potential evapotranspiration for arid and superhumid climates based on daily
temperature altitude, Rev. Bras. Agrometeorology, 1999,7, 2, 252-257. In Portuguese with an
English Summary.
10. Chow, V.T., (ed) Handbook of Applied Hydrology, McGraw Hill, 1964, New York, USA.
11. Doorenbos, J.Pruit, W.O., Crop Water Requirements, FAO Irrigation and Drainage Paper 24, FAO
1977, Rome, Italy.
12. Finch, J.W., Empirical Factors for Estimating Open Water Evaporation from Potential Evaporation;
Water and Environmental Journal Vol. 17 No. 2003, London, UK.
13. Gray. D.M., (ed) Handbook on the Principles of Hydrology, National, Research Council, Canada,
1973, Port Washington, Water Information Centre Inc, Canada.
14. Kidd, C.H.R., Lowring, M.J., The Wallingford Urban Sub-catchment Model, Institute of Hydrology,
1979, Wallingford, UK.
15. Linsley, R.K., Jr, Kohler, M.A., Paulus, J.L.H., Applied Hydrology, McGraw Hill,1949, New York,
USA.
16. Majugu, A.W., The Generation and Application of Climate Information Products and Services for
Disaster Preparedness, WMO Drought Monitoring Centre, 2003, Nairobi, Kenya.
17. Mangeni, B., Katashaya, G.N., Estimation of Lake Victoria Evaporation, Proceedings Conference on
Collaborative Technical Research, 2007 Kampala, Uganda.
18. McCulloch,J.S.G., Tables for the Rapid Computation of the Penman Estimate of Evaporation, East
African Agriculture and Forestry Journal No. 30, 286-95,1965, London, UK .
19. Michael, A.M., Irrigation Theory and Practice, Vikas Publishing House PVT Ltd, 2003, New Delhi,
India.
20. Monteith, J.L., Evaporation and Environment. 19th Symposia Society for Experimental Biology,
1965, 19 pp 205-234 University Press, Cambridge, UK.
21. Penman, H.L., Evaporation: an Introductory Survey, Netherlands Journal of Agricultural Science,
Vol 4pp 9-29, 1956, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
22. Penman, H.L., Natural Evaporation from Open Water, Bare Soil and Grass, Proc.Roy.Soc.193, 1948,
London, UK.
23. Pereira, A.R, Pruitt, W.O. Adoption of the Thornthwaite scheme for estimating daily reference
evapotranspiration, Agricultural Water Management 2004, 66, 251-257.
24. Ponce, V.M., Pandey, R.P., Ercan, S., Characterisation of Drought across the Spectrum, Journal of
Hydrological Engineering, American Society of Civil Engineers, 2000, Vol 5(2),pp 222-224.

44
WRE 2010 AR

25. Riou C. Experimental Study of Potential Evapotranspiration in Central Africa, Journal of Hydrology
1984, 72, 275-288.
26. Rugumayo, A.I, Kiiza, N.,Shiima, J., Rainfall Reliability for Crop Production, A case study in
Uganda, Proceedings of the Diffuse Pollution Conference,2003 Dublin, Republic of Ireland.
27. Shaw, E.M., Hydrology in Practice, Chapman and Hall, 1994, London, UK.
28. START, Climate Hydrology Uganda, Assessing the Impacts of Climate Change and Variability on
Water Resources in Uganda: Developing an Integrated Approach at the Sub-Regional Scale. Final
Report, University College, London, 2006, UK.
29. Subramanya, K., Engineering Hydrology, Second Edition, Tata McGraw- Hill, New Dehli, India.
30. Thornthwaite, C.W., An Approach Towards a Rapid Classification of Climate, The Geographical
Review Vol. 38No. pp. 55-94.
31. Tindimugaya. C., An Assessment of Groundwater Potential for Wobulenzi Town, Uganda, M.Sc
Dissertation, Institute of Hydraulic Engineering, Delft 2000, the Netherlands.
32. Viessman, Jr.W., Lewis,G.L., Introduction to Hydrology, Fourth Edition, Harper Collins College
Publishers, 1996, Florida USA.
33. Wasige, E.J., Tenywa, M.M., Byalebeka, J.B., Majaliwa, J.G., Lufafa, A., Evaporation Measurement
and the Validation of Meteorological Models, MUARIK, 2002, Bulletin, pp88-91
34. Wilson, E.M., Engineering Hydrology, Fourth Edition, Macmillan 1990, London, UK.
35. World Meteorological Organisation: Guide to Hydrological Practice, Fifth Edition, 1994, Geneva,
Switzerland.

Questions
1. a) Distinguish between the two forms of evaporation Eo and Et. What is meant by Potential
Evaporation?

b) Explain the assumptions and derive the Penman's Formula for the evaporation from an open
water surface.

2. Below is information about an area in North Africa at latitude 32o N for the period 3 –
12th August 1995.
 Mean air temperature was 17.4 о C.
 Mean relative humidity was 82.4%.
 Mean number of sunshine hours, n = 2.87.
 Wind speed (u) at 2m height was 93 miles/day.
 Reflection coefficient, r = 0.05.
 Recorded vapor pressure at dew point, ed = 11.2 mmHg.

a) Use Penman’s formula to determine the potential evapotranspiration from an open water surface
in the area. (1m bar = 0.75mmHg,  = 0.49 mmHg / о C)

b) Use Penman’s formula to determine the evaporation for part of the area with vegetal cover during
that period. (where seasonal conversion factor f = 0.8 for August)

3. Describe the plant-water relationship as far as movement of water and its use by the plants is
concerned.

4. a) What is effective rainfall and how does it apply to crop requirements in irrigation?
b) Discuss the factors that affect the effective rainfall

45
WRE 2010 AR

5. Discuss the different methods used to determine the effect of climate on crop water requirements.
What factors affect evapotranspiration?

6. Given the monthly average climatic data of November of a station in central Uganda, located at
10010011N and at an elevation of 1650m. Assume a seasonal conversion factor of 0.6.
Calculate the potential evaporation using:
a) Penman formula
b) Penman Monteith

7. Evaporation is affected by several factors, discuss them. State the four methods of measuring
evaporation.

8. Describe the direct estimation method of evaporation (Include an illustration). What are the merits and
demerits of the method.

9. Give reasons as to why the pan coefficient is included in the equation for determining the lake
evaporation.

10. Draw and explain the crop coefficient curve indicating the four stages of crop development.

11. Discuss the terms i) Interception, ii) Depression Storage, iii) Drought tolerance in crops

12.Define the terms i) Evaporation Ratio, ii) Aridty index and explain their significance.

13. What is potential evaporation?

14. Discuss various methods of estimating evaporation along with their limitations.

46