13.2.

Soil Conservation Service–Curve Number

Method
In 1954, the United States Soil Conservation Service (SCS, presently known as the Natural Resources Conservation Service,
NRCS) developed a procedure to estimate direct runoff from storm rainfall. It is known as the Soil Conservation Service–Curve
Number (SCS-CN) method. The SCS-CN method is based on the water balance equation and two fundamental hypotheses.
The water balance equation is written as

P = Ia + F + Q

(13.10)

where P is the total rainfall (or maximum potential surface runoff),I a is the initial abstraction, F is the actual infiltration, and Q
is the direct surface runoff. In a storm event, a certain amount of rainfall is initially abstracted as interception, infiltration, and
depression storage before runoff begins. These losses are termed as "initial abstraction." Note that the initial abstraction can't
exceed rainfall, or P ≥I a. The first hypothesis of the SCS-CN method relates the initial abstraction (I a) to S

Ia = λS

(13.11)

where S is the maximum potential retention and λ is the initial abstraction coefficient. The second hypothesis equates the
ratio of actual direct surface runoff and the potential runoff (which is equal to total rainfall less I a) to the ratio of actual
infiltration (F) and the potential infiltration (which is equal to S)

Q F (P − Q − Ia)
= =
P − Ia S S

(13.12)

The values of P, Q, and S are in depth dimensions (e.g., mm), while the initial abstraction coefficient (λ) is dimensionless.
Substituting Eq. (13.11) in Eq. (13.12) and simplifying yields the expression for Q as

(P − Ia)2
Q=
P − Ia + S

(13.13)

Equation (13.13) is the general form of the popular SCS-CN method and is valid for P ≥ I a; Q = 0 otherwise. For λ = 0.2,I a =
0.2S and we get

(P − 0.2S)2
Q=
P + 0.8S

© McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. Any use is subject to the Terms of Use, Privacy Notice and copyright information.
(13.14)

Equation (13.14) is the widely recognized form of the SCS-CN method. The parameter S of the SCS-CN method depends on
soil type, land use, hydrologic condition, and antecedent moisture condition (AMC). Similarly, the initial abstraction coefficient
λ is frequently recognized as a regional parameter which depends on geologic, vegetation, and climatic factors. The SCS-CN
method assumes λ to be equal to 0.2 for practical applications; this has been frequently questioned for its correctness. Since
parameter S can vary in the range of 0 ≤S ≤∞, it is mapped onto a dimensionless curve number CN, varying in a more
appealing range 0 ≤CN ≤100, as

25400
S= − 254
CN

(13.15)

where S is in mm. Note that CN is nondimensional and has no intrinsic meaning; it is only a convenient procedure to transform
S to a 0 to 100 scale. But this is a key parameter of the SCS-CN method which represents the catchment in the model and
gives the model its name. The highest numerical value of CN (i.e., 100) yields S = 0 which is a condition of zero potential
maximum retention, which implies an impermeable watershed. On the other hand, the lowest possible value of CN (which is 0)
indicates a situation of highest potential maximum retention (S = ∞); this refers to a watershed with infinite abstraction. In
practice, S lies in the range (40, 98). All other things remaining the same, higher value ofS (or lower CN) implies lesser runoff
from a watershed.

Table 13.4 gives CN values for typical land uses. USDA (1986) and Mishra and Singh (2003) have described the SCS-CN
method in great details.

Table 13.4 Runoff Curve Numbers for Selected Agricultural, Suburban, and Urban Land Uses (Antecedent Moisture Condition
II, I a = 0.2S)

Hydrologic Soil Group

Land Use Description A B C D

Cultivated land 1 : Without conservation treatment 72 81 88 91

With conservation treatment 62 71 78 81

Pasture or range land: Poor conditions 68 79 86 89

Good condition 39 61 74 80

Meadow: Good condition 30 58 71 78

Wood or forest land: Thin stand, poor cover, no mulch 45 66 77 83

Good cover2 25 55 70 77

Open spaces, lawns, parks, golf courses, cemeteries, etc. 39 61 74 80

Good condition: Grass cover on 75% or more of the area 49 69 79 84

Fair condition: Grass cover on 50%–75% of the area

Commercial and business areas (85% impervious) 89 92 94 95

© McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. Any use is subject to the Terms of Use, Privacy Notice and copyright information.
 Hydrologic Soil Group

Land Use Description A B C D

Industrial districts (72% impervious) 81 88 91 93

Residential 3 : 77 85 90 92

Average lot size     Average % impervious 4 61 75 83 87

1/8 acre (506 m 2 ) or less  65 57 72 81 86

1/4 acre (1012 m 2 )    38 54 70 80 85

1/3 acre (1349 m 2 )    30 51 68 79 84

1/2 acre (2023 m 2 )    25

1 acre (4046 m 2 )     20

Paved parking lots, roofs, driveways, etc. 5 98 98 98 98

Streets and roads: 98 98 98 98

Paved with curbs and storm sewers 5 76 85 89 91

Gravel 72 82 87 89
Dirt

Source: USDA (1986).

1 For a more detailed description, please refer to USDA (1986).

2 Good cover is protected from grazing and liter and brush cover soil.

3 Curve numbers are computed assuming the runoff from the house and driveway is directed toward the street with a minimum of
roof water directed to lawns where additional infiltration could occur.

4 The remaining previous areas (lawn) are considered to be in good pasture condition for these curve numbers.

5 In some warmer climates of the country a curve number of 95 may be used.

13.2.1. Curve Number Estimation

The basic inputs to estimate CN are land cover complex classification, soil group classification, and AMC.

13.2.2. SCS Land Cover Complex Classification

The SCS land cover complex classification consists of three factors: land use, treatment or practice, and hydrologic condition.
About 15 different land uses have been identified for estimating curve numbers. Agricultural land uses are often subdivided,
based on treatment or practice, for example, contoured or straight row. This separation reflects the differences in runoff
potential associated with the variation in land treatment. The hydrologic condition indicates the differences in the level of land
management. It has been classified by SCS into three different classes: poor, fair, and good. Not all land uses have been
classified in this manner.

© McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. Any use is subject to the Terms of Use, Privacy Notice and copyright information.
Land cover refers to the vegetation in the watershed, agriculture practices or fallow, water bodies, and impervious surfaces
(such as roads, buildings, etc.). CN depends on these and also on how agriculture is practiced—row crops, fallow land,
terraced fields, and so on. Runoff produced by grassland depends on the hydrologic condition of nature pasture. A good
hydrologic condition implies 75% areal coverage by native pasture and light grazing, fair hydrologic condition is for 50%–75%
areal coverage and medium grazing, and poor hydrologic condition is less than 50% areal coverage and heavy grazing.

13.2.3. SCS Soil Group Classification

SCS has developed a soil classification system that consists of four groups, identified by the letters A, B, C, and D. Soil
characteristics that are associated with each group are as follows:

Group Sand, loamy sand, or sandy loam types of soils. These have low runoff potential and high infiltration rates, even when thoroughly
A: wetted. They chiefly consist of deep, well to excessively drained sands or gravels and have a high rate of water transmission.

Group Silt loam or loam, having moderate infiltration rate when thoroughly wetted. These consist of moderately deep to deep, moderately
B: well to well drained soils with moderately fine to moderately coarse textures.

Group Soils are sandy clay loam. They have low infiltration rates when thoroughly wetted and consist chiefly of soils with a layer that
C: impedes downward movement of water and soils with moderately fine to fine structure.

Group Soils are clay loam, silty clay loam, sandy clay, silty clay, or clay. This group has the highest runoff potential. They have very low
D: infiltration rates when thoroughly wetted and consist chiefly of clay soils with a high swelling potential.

13.2.4. Antecedent Soil Moisture Condition

The AMC represents the moisture content of the soil at the beginning of a rainfall event. AMC has a significant effect on rate
and volume of runoff produced. Recognizing that it is a significant factor, SCS identified three antecedent soil moisture
conditions, which were labelled I, II, and III. The soil conditions for each group are as follows:

I: Soils are dry but not to the wilting point; satisfactory cultivation has taken place.

II: Average condition.

III: Heavy rainfall, or light rainfall and low temperature have occurred within the last 5 days; saturated soil.

The seasonal rainfall limits for each AMC (I, II, III) are described in Table 13.5.

Table 13.5 Seasonal Rainfall Limits for the Three AMCs

Total 5-day Antecedent Rainfall (cm)

AMC Dormant Season Growing Season

I Less than 1.3 Less than 3.6

II 1.3–2.8 3.6–5.3

III Over 2.8 Over 5.3

The soil moisture contents in a catchment just before a storm occurs are of utmost importance in determining a hydrograph.
According to Hawkins (1975), the errors in CN may have more impact on runoff estimation than the errors of similar

© McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. Any use is subject to the Terms of Use, Privacy Notice and copyright information.
magnitude in the estimation of storm rainfall P. Major watershed characteristics, such as soil type, land use/treatment
classes, hydrologic soil group, hydrologic conditions, and AMC, play a key role in the accurate estimation of CN. AMC is one of
the most important watershed characteristics when determining CN. However, AMC is relatively less important in extremely
wet or dry conditions. AMC mainly depends on catchment conditions. AMC depends on soil hydraulic properties, land cover,
land treatment, and runoff generating processes. In hydrologic design, AMC may also be a policy decision rather than a
statement of actual soil condition at the site.

The SCS method uses the 5-day antecedent rainfall as antecedent precipitation index (API) for three AMCs: AMC I through
AMC III. Hjelmfelt et al. (1982) statistically related the AMC I, AMC II, and AMC III levels to 90%, 10%, and 50% cumulative
probability of the exceedance of runoff depth for a given rainfall, respectively.

Despite the widespread use of SCS-CN methodology, the correct estimation of the curve number for the given situation has
been a topic of continued discussion among hydrologists and the water resources community.

Conversion of CN from AMC II to AMC I and AMC III Hawkins et al. (2009, p. 106) have reported various formulae for
converting CN from one AMC to another AMC. Following Hawkins et al. (1985),

S(I) = 2.281 S(II ) and S(III) = 0.427 S(II )

(13.16)

where S(I), S(II), and S(III) refer to S corresponding to AMC I, AMC II, and AMC III, respectively.

Hawkins et al. (1985) suggested

CN (I) = CN (II )/[2.81 − 0.01381CN (II )];

CN (III) = CN (II )/[0.427 + 0.00573 CN (II )]

(13.17)

Similarly, Chow et al. (1988) proposed

CN (I) = 4.2 CN /[10 − 0.058 CN (II )]; CN (III) = 23 CN (II )/[10 + 0.13 CN (II )]

(13.18)

Sobhani (1975) proposed

CN (I) = CN (II )/[2.334 − 0.01334 CN (II )];

CN (III) = CN (II )/[0.4036 − 0.0059 CN (II )]

(13.19)

Example

Example 13.3

A watershed received 47 mm of rain on a given day. It has pasture with heavy grazing and Group B soil. Previous to this
event, watershed had received 64 mm rainfall in the past 5 days. Compute the direct runoff by using the SCS method.

© McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. Any use is subject to the Terms of Use, Privacy Notice and copyright information.
 Solution

From Table 13.4, for pasture with poor hydrological condition and Group B soil, CN = 79.

For 5-day antecedent rainfall of 61 mm, AMC III condition is considered.

For AMC II CN = 79, AMC III CN = 91

From Eq. (13.15)

25, 400 25, 400
S= − 254 = − 254 = 25.12
CN 91
Hence
(47 − 0.2 × 25.12)2 1761.94
Q= = = 33.87mm
(47 + 0.8 × 25.12) 52.02

Example

Example 13.4

The previous example had only one land use. A real-life catchment will have multiple land uses. Consider that a catchment
has the following land uses:

40% cultivated land with conservation treatment

20% open spaces, grass cover on 50%–75% area

20% residential area that is about 38% impervious

10% residential area that is about 65% impervious

10% paved roads with storm sewers

This watershed has Group B soils and received 38 mm rainfall on a given day; the total rainfall in the 5 previous days was
40 mm. Compute runoff by using the SCS method.

Solution

We first compute the weighted CN:

© McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. Any use is subject to the Terms of Use, Privacy Notice and copyright information.
 Land use % CN Weighted CN

Cultivated land with cons treatment 40 71 2840

Open space 20 69 1380

Residential area, 38% impervious 20 75 1500

Residential area, 65% impervious 10 85 850

Paved roads with storm sewers 10 98 980

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----

Total 100 7550

Hence weighted CN for the catchment = 7550/100 = 76

For 5-day antecedent rainfall of 40 mm, the AMC II condition is appropriate. Hence CN = 76.

From Eq. (13.15),

25, 400 25, 400
S= − 254 = − 254 = 80.21
CN 76
Hence
(38 − 0.2 × 80.21)2 482.154
S= = = 4.72 mm
(38 + 0.8 × 80.21) 102.168

13.2.5. Major Strengths and Weaknesses of SCS-CN

Methodology
Although the SCS-CN methodology is versatile conceptually and has been widely applied almost all over the world, its success
critically depends on how correctly the two major parameters CN and I a are estimated. These two are indeed sensitive and
varying parameters but typically these are assumed constant over space and time. Research has established that even for the
same location, the values of these two change with time due to changes in land uses, crop cover, crop growth, and land
treatment.

Although the method is attractive for many practicing hydrologists due to its simplicity, it contains some unknowns and
inconsistencies. SCS-CN method has been critically reviewed by various researchers who have highlighted its structural
inconsistencies (Michel et al., 2005) and uses and limitations (Ponce and Hawkins, 1996; Garen and Moore, 2005). Following
Singh et al. (2010), the major strengths and weaknesses of SCS-CN methodology are listed here.

Major Strengths

1. It is a simple, robust, and lumped conceptual model which relies on only one parameter (CN) and it is well suited for
ungauged situations.

2. It is responsive to four readily available catchment properties: soil type, land use/treatment, surface condition, and AMC.

© McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. Any use is subject to the Terms of Use, Privacy Notice and copyright information.
3. To estimate direct surface runoff, the method requires only a few basic descriptive inputs that can be easily converted to
numerical values (CN).

4. The method works well for agricultural watersheds for which it was originally intended but has been successfully applied
for urban or forest watersheds.

5. It is compatible with remote sensing (RS) and geographical information system (GIS) tools in hydrological applications.

Major Weaknesses

1. SCS-CN does not have any explicit expression of time and the impact of spatial and temporal distribution of rainfall on
runoff generation is not accounted for.

2. There is a lack of clear guidance on how to accommodate varied AMCs.

3. Fixed initial abstraction coefficient λ = 0.2 irrespective of variation in catchment properties is a weakness of the technique.

4. The relationship between CN and AMC classes is not continuous and thus the changes in CN are not smooth. Further, the
method does not consider effects of spatial scales on CN.

5. Antecedent moisture condition plays important role in runoff generation but the method lacks expression for its
assessment.

© McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. Any use is subject to the Terms of Use, Privacy Notice and copyright information.