Laserfiche WebLink
<br />ntt?Q"1 ''J <br />..)... .)~ oj <br /> <br />75 <br /> <br />...... <br />'* 50 <br />.... <br />Z <br />0 <br />C/) <br />C/) <br />W <br />Q: <br />Cl. <br />Cl. 25 <br />=> <br />C/) <br /> <br />o <br /> <br /> <br />2 <br /> <br />4 <br /> <br />6 <br /> <br />10 <br /> <br />8 <br /> <br />CHANGE IN TEMPERATURE <br /> <br />(OC) <br /> <br />Figure 10. ComparlsoD of modelBDd empirical equaUOIUI. <br /> <br />r <br />I <br /> <br />evaporation sites. However, on a daily basis, <br />particularly during daylight hours, the water <br />temperature will lag behind air temperature. <br /> <br />This temperature lag will affect the suppres- <br />sion value for daily calculations. A comparison of <br />daily values between air and water temperatures <br />measured at the evaporation station revealed that <br />water temperatures were consistently below air <br />temperatures. Analysis of the relationship between <br />air temperature and saturation pressure along with <br />the substitution of esw for esa shows that daily <br /> <br />suppression values calculated from the model <br />equation are conservative. <br /> <br />CoDclusloD' The model proposed is definitely <br />conservative for small reservoirs. as indicated by <br />Figure 10, and probably also for large reservoirs as <br />indicated by Figure S. <br /> <br />The model accuracy for small reservoirs could <br />be improved by substracting an estimate of esa <br />from both the numerator and demoninator of the <br />model ratio (see Figure 5 discussion) but this may <br />reduce the accuracy on large reservoirs. <br /> <br />:n <br />