The aim of this study was to present and validate an alternative evapotranspiration calculation procedure that includes specific expression for the aerodynamic resistance. Calculated daily potential evapotranspiration totals were compared to the results of FAO56 procedure application and to the results of measurements taken with a precision weighing lysimeter permanently grown with irrigated, short grass. For the examination period from March 17 through October 31, 2011, it was found that daily potential evapotranspiration estimates obtained by both calculation procedures fitted well to the lysimeter measurements. Potential evapotranspiration daily totals calculated with the use of the proposed aerodynamic resistance calculation procedure gave better results for days with higher evapotranspiration, compared to the FAO56 method. The most important is that the approach based on the proposed alternative aerodynamic resistance could be effectively used even for a wide variety of crops, because it is not limited to any particular crop.