A platform for research: civil engineering, architecture and urbanism
A platform for research: civil engineering, architecture and urbanism
Forcing the Penman-Montheith Formulation with Humidity, Radiation, and Wind Speed Taken from Reanalyses, for Hydrologic Modeling
The Penman-Monteith reference evapotranspiration (ET0) formulation was forced with humidity, radiation, and wind speed (HRW) fields simulated by four reanalyses in order to simulate hydrologic processes over six mid-sized nivo-pluvial watersheds in southern Quebec, Canada. The resulting simulated hydrologic response is comparable to an empirical ET0 formulation based exclusively on air temperature. However, Penman-Montheith provides a sounder representation of the existing relations between evapotranspiration fluctuations and climate drivers. Correcting HRW fields significantly improves the hydrologic bias over the pluvial period (June to November). The latter did not translate into an increase of the hydrologic performance according to the Kling-Gupta Efficiency (KGE) metric. The suggested approach allows for the implementation of physically-based ET0 formulations where HRW observations are insufficient for the calibration and validation of hydrologic models and a potential reinforcement of the confidence affecting the projection of low flow regimes and water availability.
Forcing the Penman-Montheith Formulation with Humidity, Radiation, and Wind Speed Taken from Reanalyses, for Hydrologic Modeling
The Penman-Monteith reference evapotranspiration (ET0) formulation was forced with humidity, radiation, and wind speed (HRW) fields simulated by four reanalyses in order to simulate hydrologic processes over six mid-sized nivo-pluvial watersheds in southern Quebec, Canada. The resulting simulated hydrologic response is comparable to an empirical ET0 formulation based exclusively on air temperature. However, Penman-Montheith provides a sounder representation of the existing relations between evapotranspiration fluctuations and climate drivers. Correcting HRW fields significantly improves the hydrologic bias over the pluvial period (June to November). The latter did not translate into an increase of the hydrologic performance according to the Kling-Gupta Efficiency (KGE) metric. The suggested approach allows for the implementation of physically-based ET0 formulations where HRW observations are insufficient for the calibration and validation of hydrologic models and a potential reinforcement of the confidence affecting the projection of low flow regimes and water availability.
Forcing the Penman-Montheith Formulation with Humidity, Radiation, and Wind Speed Taken from Reanalyses, for Hydrologic Modeling
Simon Ricard (author) / François Anctil (author)
2019
Article (Journal)
Electronic Resource
Unknown
Metadata by DOAJ is licensed under CC BY-SA 1.0
| Online Contents | 2008
Online Contents | 2008
Comparing Net Radiation Estimation Methods: CIMIS versus Penman-Monteith
| British Library Online Contents | 2007
Comparison of wind power estimates from the ECMWF reanalyses with direct turbine measurements
| American Institute of Physics | 2009
Wave modeling performance in the Gulf of Mexico and Western Caribbean: Wind reanalyses assessment
| Online Contents | 2013