CH ALP Tick eRe, 7

Infiltration

OBJECTIVES
The purpose of this chapter is to:
@ Define infiltration
@ Indicate the role infiltration plays in affecting runoff quantities and in replenish-
ing soil moisture and groundwater storage
@ Review infiltration models and illustrate their use.

Infiltration is that process by which precipitation moves downward through the surface
of the earth and replenishes soil moisture, recharges aquifers, and ultimately supports
streamflows during dry periods. Along with interception, depression storage, and storm
period evaporation, it determines the availability, if any, of the precipitation input for
generating overland flows (Fig. 1.2). Furthermore, infiltration rates influence the tim-
ing of overland flow inputs to channelized systems. Accordingly, infiltration is an
important component of any hydrologic model.
The rate f at which infiltration occurs is influenced by such factors as the type and
extent of vegetal cover, the condition of the surface crust, temperature, rainfall inten-
sity, physical properties of the soil, and water quality.
The rate at which water is transmitted through the surface layer is highly depen-
dent on the condition of the surface. For example, inwash of fine materials may seal the
surface so that infiltration rates are low even when the underlying soils are highly per-
meable. After water crosses the surface interface, its rate of downward movement is
controlled by the transmission characteristics of the underlying soil profile. The vol-
ume of storage available below ground is also a factor affecting infiltration rates.
Considerable research on infiltration has taken place, but considering the infinite
combinations of soil and other factors existing in nature, no perfectly quantified gen-
eral relation exists.

Scanned with CamScanner

 176 Chapter 7 Intitration

7.1 MEASURING INFILTRATION ; are hydrographph analy.

“vy <
dete rmin ing infil trati on capac ity are hydrogra
Com mon ly use d met hod 5 for : assifie d as rainfall simulatoy,
ete
ses and infiltrometer studies. Le art ifietal
cia l ra rainf. aula over a small test plo
In the for mer ,
or flooding devices. Sa ati fr ainfall
ane i and runoff, with considera.
from
and the infiltration calculated Se Flooding infiltrometers are
i:cchedanid'm
and surface :
tion given to depression storage aintained at a cop.
required. =
ade ofo the rate ’ ofrseplenishraicit
prin. reple — .
usually
; rings or tubes
servati made
+] and observations iki: Over
analyses have a
“un a wee of infiltration based on hydrograph conditions of precipitation anq
more directly to prevailing
infiltrometers of relating runoff are
the y are no bet ter tha n the pre cision with which rainfall and
‘eld. However, such studies is the areal variabilitypa ofy rainfal],
LS care d, CR arti
par ticcula
ular r 1
imp o rla nce 1in
measured. Of Reference 1 g 200d
ped and are in use.
Several methods have been develo
description of these methods.

7.2 CALCULATING INFILTRATION

ation of reported average
Infiltration calculations vary in sophistication from the applic
ential equations gov-
rates for specific soil types and vegetal covers to the use of differ
erning the flow of water in unsaturated porous media. For small urban areas that
respond rapidly to storm input, more precise methods are sometimes warranted. On
large watersheds subject to peak flow production from prolonged storms, average or
representative values may be adequate.
The infiltration process is complicated at best. Even under ideal conditions (uni-
ee

form soil properties and known fluid properties), conditions rarely encountered in
practice, the process is difficult to characterize. Accordingly, there has been consider-
able study of the infiltration process. Most of these efforts have related to the develop-
ment of (1) empirical equations based on field observations and (2) the solution of
equations based on the mechanics of saturated flow in porous media [1],[2].
Later in this chapter, several commonly used infiltration models are discussed.
As a preface to that discussion, a brief description of the infiltration process follows. It
reviews the principal factors affecting infiltration and points out some of the problems
encountered by hydrologic modelers.
We begin our discussion with an ideal case, one in
which the soil is homogeneous
throughout the profile and all the pores are directly
interconnected by capillary pas
sages. Furthermore, it is assumed that the rainfall is uniformly
distributed os the area
of ft eli these conditions, the infiltration process may be characterized
a 4S
and the major influencing factors are therefore soil type and moistul¢

The soil type characterizes the size and number of

the passages th h which
the water must flow while the moisture content sets
the capillary a ti land lative
conductivity of the soil. Capillary potential is the
forces. Capillary suction
hydraulic head due er la
is the same as capillary potential but with
ay conductivity is the volume rate of flow c col ig
’ : ; of water Pcie the eum *
gradient of unity (dependent on soil moisture content). Relative conductivity
is the

Scanned with CamScanner

 7.2 Calculating Infiltration 177

F 1.0
600 F-
a

a Relative =
500 conductivity
5 acl we
we a
”ae £
400 _| 3
23 3uv
a &
> 405 §
@ 300+ g
S Capillary | a
Oo suction 7

200 |- 4

5 == =
a — FIGURE 7.1
\| Typical capillary suction-relative
\ \ | conductivity-moisture content relation.
a5 0.1 0.2 03 0.4 of (After Mein and Larson [9])
Moisture content, @ (vol/vol)

capillary conductivity for a specified moisture content divided by the saturated con-
ductivity. Figure 7.1 illustrates the relations among these variables. Note that at low
moisture contents, capillary suction is high while relative conductivity is low. At high
moisture contents the reverse is true.
With this background, an infiltration event can be examined. Consider that rain-
fall is occurring on an initially dry soil. As shown in Fig. 7.1, the relative conductivity is
low at the outset due to the low soil moisture conditions. Thus, for the water to move
downward through the soil, a higher moisture level is needed. As moisture builds up, a
wetting front forms with the moisture content behind the front being high (essentially
saturated) and that ahead of the front being low. At the wetting front, the capillary suc-
tion is high due to the low moisture content ahead of the front.
At the beginning of a rainfall event, the potential gradient that drives soil mois-
ture movement is high because the wetting front is virtually at the soil surface. Initially,
the infiltration capacity is higher than the rainfall rate and thus the infiltration rate
cannot exceed the rainfall rate. As time advances and more water enters the soil, the
wetting zone dimension increases and the potential gradient is reduced. Infiltration
at the
capacity decreases until it equals the rainfall rate. This occurs at the time the soil
land surface becomes saturated. Figures 7.2 and 7.3 illustrate these conditions. Figure
7.2 shows how a moisture profile might develop when a rainstorm of constant intensity
occurs. In the diagram the soil moisture at the surface is shown to range from its initial
value at the top left to its saturated value at the top right. Thus in moving downward on
the left-hand side of the diagram, one can trace the downward progression of the

Scanned with CamScanner

178 Chapter 7 Infiltration
t, 8
Moisture conten

Surface

Depth below surface, z

~<——

FIGURE 7.2
Typical moisture profile development with a constant rainfall rate.

1 2. 3 4
~----- + Rainfall rate

eyoO
g5
5
3 Infiltration Runoff
S
=|

K,-----------e
ee

Time, t
FIGURE 7.3
Infiltration rate versus time
for a given rainfall intensity.
(After Mein and Larson [9]).
:

Scanned with CamScanner

 7.2 Calculating Infiltration 179

wetting front for varying levels of soil moisture content at the land surface. Figure 7.3
indicates that until saturation is reached at the surface, the infiltration rate is constant
and equal to the rainfall application rate at the surface. At Point 4, a point that corre-
sponds to the time at which saturation occurs at the surface, the infiltration rate begins
to proceed at its capacity rate, the maximum rate at which the soil can transmit water
across its surface. As time goes on, the infiltration capacity continues to decline until it
becomes equal to the saturated conductivity of the soil, the capillary conductivity when
the soil is saturated. This ultimate infiltration rate is shown by the dashed line to the
right of K, in Fig. 7.3.
Of particular interest is the determination of Point 4 on the curve of Fig. 7.3. This
is the point at which runoff would begin for the conditions specified above. It is also
the point at which the actual infiltration rate f becomes equal to the infiltration capac-
ity rate f, rather than the rainfall intensity rate i. The time of occurrence of this point
depends, for a given soil type, on the initial moisture content and the rainfall rate. The
shape of the infiltration curve after this point in time is also influenced by these factors.
Another factor that must be dealt with in the infiltration process is that of hys-
teresis. In Fig. 7.1 it can be seen that the plot of capillary suction versus soil moisture is
a loop. The curve is not the same for wetting and drying of the soil. The curves shown in
the figure are the boundary wetting and boundary drying curves, curves applicable
under conditions of continuous wetting or drying. Between these curves, an infinite
number of possible paths exist that depend on the wetting and drying history of
the soil. A number of approaches to the hysteresis problem have been reported in the
literature [3].
The illustration of the infiltration process presented was based on an ideal soil.
Unfortunately, such conditions are not replicated in natural systems. Natural soils are
highly variable in composition within regions, and soil cover conditions are also far-
ranging. Because of this, no simple infiltration model can accurately portray all the
conditions encountered in the field. The search has thus been for models that can be
called upon to give acceptable estimates of the rates at which infiltration occurs during
rainfall events.
Mein and Larson have described three general cases of infiltration associated
with rainfall [3]. The first case is one in which the rainfall rate is less than the saturated
conductivity of the soil. Under this condition, shown as (4) in Fig. 7.4, runoff never
occurs since all the rainfall infiltrates the soil surface. Nevertheless, this condition must
be recognized in continuous simulation processes since the level of soil moisture is
affected even though runoff does not occur. The second case is one in which the “sin-
fall rate exceeds the saturated conductivity but is less than the infiltration capacity.
Curves (1), (2), and (3) of Fig. 7.4 illustrate this condition. It should be observed that
the period from the beginning of rainfall to the time of surface saturation varies with
the rainfall intensity. The final case is one in which the rainfall intensity exceeds the
infiltration capacity. This condition is illustrated by the infiltration capacity curve of
Fig. 7.5 and those portions of infiltration curves (1), (2), and (3) of Vig. 7.4 that are in
their declining stages. Only under this condition can runoff occur. All three cases have
Televance to hydrologic modeling, particularly when it is continuous over time.

Scanned with CamScanner

180 Chapter / MTU ao

I
\Q)
|
|
|
I
|

i
x | |
| 1 \(2)
3§ !
§ I; + t

5 | I !
| |
| ! I
| i
K. besos= | te Sl ee ee ee
I, : 1_ | (4)!
| | |
| | |
! ! |
| I |

‘sat ‘Sato ‘saty

Time,t
FIGURE 7.4

Infiltration curves for several rainfall intensities.

(After Mein and Larson [9])

fo fo =fe+ Fo-fJe~*
Infiltration Capacity cur
ve
Hye tograph

Time
FIGURE 7.5
Horton’s infiltration cur
ve and hyetograph.
fame:

Scanned with CamScanner

 7.3 Horton's Infiltration Model
181
7.3 HORTON'S INFILTRATION MODEL
The infiltration process was thorough] y studied
i by Hort : 5
vtl of his work, shown gra phically in
outgrowth Oewas ae ae eenly 1980s [4], Am
Fig. 7.1, the followi i
determining infiltration capacity: ; =e aaen Oe

h*® fet (fo - fe* (7.1)

where ff, = the infiltration capacity (depth/time) at some time 1
kK = a constant representing the rate of decrease in f capacity
eee

f- = a final or equilibrium capacity

Pee

fo = the initial infiltration capacity

Ree

It indicates that if the rainfall supply exceeds the infiltration capacity, infiltration tends
to decrease in an exponential manner. Although simple in form, difficulties in deter-
mining useful values for f and k restrict the use of this equation. The area under the
curve for any time interval represents the depth of water infiltrated during that
interval. The infiltration rate is usually given in inches per hour and the time t in min-
utes, although other time increments are used and the coefficient k is determined
accordingly.
By observing the variation of infiltration with time and developing plots of f ver-
sus t as shown in Fig. 7.5, we can estimate fg and k. Two sets of f and t are selected from
the curve and entered in Eq. 7.1. Two equations having two unknowns are thus
obtained; they can be solved by successive approximations for f and k.
Typical infiltration rates at the end of 1 hr (f;) are shown in Table 7.1. A typical
relation between f; and the infiltration rate throughout a rainfall period is shown
graphically in Fig. 7.6a; Fig.7.6b shows an infiltration capacity curve for normal
antecedent conditions on turf. The data given in Table 7.1 are for a turf area and must
be multiplied by a suitable cover factor for other types of cover complexes. A range of
cover factors is listed in Table 7.2. ;
Total volumes of infiltration and other abstractions from a given recorded rain-
fall are obtainable from a discharge hydrograph (plot of the streamflow rate versus
time) if one is available. Separation of the base flow (dry weather flow) from ae
or
charge hydrograph results in a direct runoff hydrograph (DRH), which .
or
the direct surface runoff, that is, rainfall less abstractions. Direct surface a
a ols oe
precipitation excess in inches uniformly distributed over ug!
calculated by picking values of DRH discharge at equal time increments

TABLE 7.1 Typical f, Values

f (in/hr) fx (ram hy
Soil group
0.50-1.00 a ‘ ; we
High (sandy soils) : re 2)
) 0.10-0.50
Intermediate (loams, clay, silt .25-2.5
0.01-0.10
Low (clays, clay loam)
28.
of Engineering Practice, No.
Source: After ASCE Manual

Scanned with CamScanner

182 Chapter7 Infiltration

Ratio to infiltration capacity at 1 hr

wn
|
»
we

1}-------->= “
|
|
|
0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0
Time (hr)
(a)

3.0
2.8
f = 0.53 + 2.47 e7 9.069%,
2.6
F = 0.00883, = 0.59(1 — e~ 9.06974)
2.4
Capacity (in./hr) and mass (in.)

2.2
2.0
1.8
1.6
1.4
1.2
1.0
0.8
-
Infiltration capacity curve (f)
0.4
0.2

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 120 100
Time (min) from beg 140 160 ~=:180
inning of infiltratio
N Capacity curve, tf

FIGURE 7.6
(b)

antecedent conditions
of turf areas,
pas SSaaSUveg for neer
[After A. L. Tholin and ClintJ. s
Kief
Eng. Div.; 84(SA2), 56 (Mar. 1959),er, “The H di
Ydrology of Urban Runoff” Proc. ASCE J. Sanitary

Scanned with CamScanner

 7.3. Horton's Infiltration Model 183

TABLE 7.2 Cover Factors

Cover Cover factor

Permanent forest and grass Good (1 in. humus) 3.0-7.5

Medium (4~1 in. humus) 2.0-3.0
Poor (<} in. humus) 1.2-1.4
Close-growing crops Good 2.5-3.0
Medium 1.6-2.0
Poor 1.1-1.3
Row crops Good 1.3-1.5
Medium 1.1-1.3
Poor 1.0-1.1

Source: After ASCE Manual of Engineering Practice, No. 28.

hydrograph and applying the formula [5]:

pik (0.03719)(= q;)
Ts,

where P, = precipitation excess (in.)

q; = DRH ordinates at equal time intervals (cfs)
A = drainage area (mi)
nq = number of time intervals in a 24-hr period

For most cases the difference between the original rainfall and the direct runoff
can be considered as infiltrated water. Exceptions may occur in areas of excessive sub-
surface drainage or tracts of intensive interception potential. The calculated value of
infiltration can then be assumed as distributed according to an equation of the form of
Eq. 7.1 or it may be uniformly spread over the storm period. Choice of the method
employed depends on the accuracy requirements and size of the watershed.
To circumvent some of the problems associated with the use of Horton’s infiltra-
tion model, some adjustments can be made [6]. Consider Fig. 7.5. Note that where the
infiltration capacity curve is above the hyetograph, the actual rate of infiltration is
equal to that of the rainfall intensity, adjusted for interception, evaporation, and other
losses. Consequently, the actual infiltration is given by:

f() = min [7,(2), i()] (7.3)

where f(t) is the actual infiltration into the soil and /(#) is the rainfall intensity. Thus the
infiltration rate at any time is equal to the lesser of the infiltration capacity j),{f) or the
rainfall intensity.
Commonly, the typical values of fo and f, are greater than the preva Jing rainio:
intensities during a storm. Thus, when Eq. 7.1 is solved for fp as a function of time
alone, it shows a decrease in infiltration capacity even when rainfall incemsilies are
much less than f,. Accordingly, a reduction in infiltration capacity is mace rovarcdicss
of the amount of water that enters the soil.

Scanned with CamScanner

184 Chapter7 _ Infiltration

To adjust for this deficiency, the integrated form of Horton's equation may 5,
used:

F(t) = | fiir = ftp + i

7
a
- fe
nial
kt,
(14
/,, as shown in Fig. 77. 7 the figure,it 7
where Fis the cumulative infiltration at time previous y noted, this i
assumed that the actual infiltration has been equal to fp. AS
e infiltration must be determined. This
ca,
not usually the case, and the true cumulativ
be done using:

ro= [roa
0
a3
where f(t) is determined using Eq. 7.3.
Equations 7.4 and 7.5 may be used jointly to calculate the time f,, that is, the
equivalent time for the actual infiltrated volume to equal the volume under the infil
tration capacity curve (Fig. 7.7). The actual accumulated infiltration given by Eq.75i
equated to the area under the Horton curve, Eq. 7.4, and the resulting expressioni
solved for t,. This equation:

fo-fe
F =f,tp+ (1 — es) (7.6)
k

cannot be solved explicitly for t,, but an iterative solution can be obtained. It shouldte
understood that the time t, is less than or equal to the actual elapsed time ¢. Thus the
available infiltration capacity as shown in Fig. 7.7 is equal to or exceeds that given by

FIGURE 7.7 0
ny
Cumulative infiltration,
Equivalent time

Scanned with CamScanner

 7.3 Horton's Infiltration Model 185

Eq. 7.1. By making the adjustments described, f, becomes a function of the actual
amount of water infiltrated and not just a variable with time as is assumed in the origi-
nal Horton equation.
In selecting a model for use in infiltration calculations, it is important to know its
limitations. In some cases a model can be adjusted to accommodate shortcomings; in
other cases, if its assumptions are not realistic for the nature of the use proposed, the
model should be discarded in favor of another that better fits the situation.
The first eight chapters of this book deal with the principal components of the
hydrologic cycle. In later chapters, the emphasis is on putting these components
together in various hydrologic modeling processes. When these models are designed
for continuous simulation, the approach is to calculate the appropriate components of
the hydrologic equation, Eq. 1.4, continuously over time. A discussion of how infiltra-
tion could be incorporated into a simulation model follows. It exemplifies the use of
Horton’s equation in a storm water management model (SWMM) [6].
First, an initial value of t, is determined. Then, considering that the value of Je
depends on the actual amount of infiltration that has occurred up to that time, a value
of the average infiltration capacity, f,, available over the next time step is calculated
using:

a1
fb= i :
pine fpat = Fle) — Fl)ae (7.7)

Equation 4.3 is then used to find the average rate of infiltration, f:

o:. [pitioag
f= 2 _ Jp (7.8)
i ifi<f,

where i is the average rainfall intensity over the time step.

Following this, infiltration is incremented using the expression:

F(t + At) = F(t) + AF = F(t) + f At (7.9)

Where AF = fAt is the added cumulative infiltration (Fig. 7.7).
The next step is to find a new value of t,. This is done using Eq. 7.6. If
AF = f, At, tp = tp + At. But if the new ,, is less than tp + At (see Fig. 7.7), Eq. 7.6
Must be solved by iteration for the new value of t p: Lhis can be accomplished
using the
Newton-Raphson procedure [6].
When the value of tp = 16/k, the Horton curve is approximately horizontal and
= f¢. Once this point has been reached, there is no further need for iteration since
fis constant and equal to f, and no longer dependent on F.

Example 7.1 OO
Given an initial infiltration capacity fo of 2.9 in./hr and a time constant
/ of U 28 he).
derive an infiltration capacity versus time curve if the ultimate infiltrations, Capacity is
0.50 in./hr. For the first 8 hours, estimate the total volume of water infiltrat
ed in inches
Over the watershed.

Scanned with CamScanner

186 Chapter 7 Infiltration

Solution: |

1. Using Horton's equation (Eq. 7.1), values of infiltration can be computed fo

various times. The equation Is:
. oe
5

F=f? Qo= foe”

2. Substituting the appropriate values into the equation yields:

f = 0.50 + (2.9 — 0.50)e°28

3. For the times shown in Table 7.3, values of fare computed and entered into the
table. Using a spreadsheet graphics package, the curve of Fig. 7.8 is derived,

TABLE 7.3 Calculations for Example 7.1

Time Infiltration Time Infiltration

(hr) (in./hr) (hr) (in./hr)
0 2.90 5.00 1.09
0.10 2.83 6.00 0.95
0.25 2.74 7.00 0.84
0.50 2.59 8.00 0.76
1.00 2.31 9.00 0.69
2.00 1.87 10.00 0.65
3.00 1.54 15.00 0.54
4.00 1.28 20.00 0.51

2
g 3
2
5ped +-———__
8
e
s
5 1p——P :

FIGURE 7.8 a5
.
Infiltration curve for Example 7.1. 4 8 12 16
3
Time (hr)
4. To find the volume of water
infilt
integrated over the range of 0-8 rated du Ting the first 8 hours, Eq. 7.1 c4# be
:
V = f[050 + (2.9 — 0.50)e~02811
74
V = [0.5t + (2.40 - 0.28)e~0-
28)8
V = 11.84 in.
The volume over the watershed is thus
11.84 in.

Scanned with CamScanner

 7.4 Green-Ampt Model 187

7.4 GREEN-AMPT MODEL

The Green—Ampt infiltration model, originally proposed in 1911, has had a resurgence
of interest [3], [6]-[11]. This approach is based on Darcy’s law (see Chapter 10). In its
original form, it was intended for use where infiltration resulted
from an excess of
water at the ground surface at all times. In 1973, Mein and Larson presented
a method-
ology for applying the Green-Ampt model to a steady rainfall input [9]. They also
developed a procedure for determining the value of the capillary suction parameter
used in the model, In 1978, Chu demonstrated the applicability of the model for use
under conditions of unsteady rainfall [10]. As a result of these and other efforts, the
Green-Ampt model is now employed as an option in such widely used continuous sim-
ulation models as SWMM [6].
The original formulation by Green and Ampt assumed that the soil surface was
covered by ponded water of negligible depth and that the water infiltrated a deep
homogenous soil with a uniform initial water content (see Fig. 7.9). Water is assumed
to enter the soil so as to sharply define a wetting front separating the wetted and
unwetted regions as shown in the figure. If the conductivity in the wetted zone is
defined as K,, application of Darcy’s law yields the equation:

Kile’ B
2g (7.10)
where L is the distance from the ground surface to the wetting front and S is the capil-
lary suction at the wetting front. Referring to Fig. 7.9, it can be seen that the cumulative
infiltration F is equivalent to the product of the depth to the wetting front L and the
initial moisture deficit, 6, — 6; = IMD. Making these substitutions in Eq. 7.10 and

Ponded depth
considered negligible
Water = Ho

Wetsoil

FIGURE 7.9
Definition sketch for Green-Ampt model.

Scanned with CamScanner

iss Chapter? Infiltration

rearranging, we obtain:

f= (1 - SNe | (7.11)

Considering that f, = dF/dt, we can state:

cr = (1 +SANE | (7.12)
Integrating and substituting the conditions that F = 0 att = 0, we obtain:

F — (S X IMD) x log, Ce)

= Kg (7.13)
This form of the Green-Am
modeling processes than Eq. 7.10
time at which infiltration began.
The derivation of

Stages [3],[6]. The first Stage

deals with
trates before the surface
be
tion capacity is calculated
usi
Capillary suction, §

FIGURE 7.10
Capillary suction versus moisture content curves.
Moisture content, 9

Scanned with CamScanner

 Green-Ampt Model 189
7.4

made
the options that can be employed to estimate infiltration [6]. Computations are
using the following equations: for F < F,(f = i):

F.==SXIMD iis K, (7.14)

* i/K,-1

and there is no calculation of F, fori = K,,for F = F,(f = fp):

f= (1 >SoM) (7.11)
F

where f = actual infiltration rate (ft/sec)

f, = infiltration capacity (ft/sec)
i = rainfall intensity (ft/sec)
F = cumulative infiltration volume in the event (ft)
F, = cumulative infiltration volume required to cause surface saturation (ft)
S = average capillary suction at the wetting front (ft of water)
IMD = initial moisture deficit for the event (ft/ft)
K, = saturated hydraulic conductivity of soil (ft/sec)

Equation 7.10 shows that the volume of rainfall needed to saturate the surface is
a function of the rainfall intensity. In the modeling process, for each time step for which
i > K,, the value of F, is computed and compared with the volume oi rainfall infil-
i se trated to that time. If F equals or exceeds F,, the surface saturates and calculations for
iS infiltration then proceed using Eq. 7.14. Note that by substituting / for iin Eq. 7.14 ard
rearranging, the equation takes the same form as Eq. 7.11.
For rainfall intensities less than or equal to K,, all the rainfall infiltrates and it:
amount is used only to update the initial moisture deficit, IMD [6]. The cumulative
infiltration volume F, is not altered.
After saturation is achieved at the surface, Eq. 7.11 shows that the infiltration
capacity is a function of the infiltrated volume, and thus of the infiltration rates during
previous time steps. To avoid making numerical errors over long time steps, the inte-
grated form of the Green—Ampt equation (Eq. 7.13) is used. This equation takes the
following form as it is used in SWMM:
K,(t2 — ty) = Fy — Cin(F) + C) - Fy + Cin(F, + C) (7.15)

where C = IMD * S (ft of water)

times (sec)
1 sil
Nis

= subscripts indicating the starting and ending of the time steps.

a
ne

Z Equation 7.15 must be solved iteratively for F>, the cumulative infiltration at the
_ end of the time step. A Newton—Raphson routine is used [6].
Inthe SWMM model, infiltration during time step tf) — t, is equal to (t2 — t,)iif the
ed and is equal to F — F, if saturation has previously occurred and

Scanned with CamScanner

190 Chapter 7 Infiltration

there is a sufficient water supply at the surface. If saturation occurs during an interval, the
infiltrated volumes over each stage of the process within the time steps are computed and
summed. When the rainfall ends or becomes less than the infiltration capacity, any
ponded water is allowed to infiltrate and is added to the cumulative infiltration volume.

5 HUGGINS-MONKE MODEL
Several investigators have circumvented the time dependency problem by introducing
The following equation proposed
soil moisture as the dependent variable [2],[10]-[13].
by Huggins and Monke is an example [2]:

f=f.+ a(® m fy’ 7.16)

Pp

where A and P = coefficients

S =the storage potential of a soil overlying the impeding layer
(T, minus antecedent moisture)
F = the total volume of water that infiltrates
T,, = the total porosity of soil lying over the impeding stratum
Il

The coefficients are determined using data from sprinkling infiltrometer studies. The
variable F must be calculated for cach time increment in the iteration process. At the
beginning of a storm, F = 0 and fis therefore known. In essence the continuity ¢qua-
tion is solved for a block of soil with an inflow rate f (or smaller if the rainfall is less)
and an outflow determined according to Eq. 7.17. Expression (dS /dt)At then gives the
change in storage of the soil. When added to the storage at the beginning of the
time
increment, the total storage is obtained. Equation 7.16 is a modification of one origi-
nated by Holtan and Overton [12],[13] and appears to have merit over the form of Eq.
7.1 if the rate of infiltration supply is less than infiltration capacity.
In order to use this relation when the water supply rate only intermittently
exceeds the infiltration capacity, the rate at which water drains from the “control
zone,” which determines the soil moisture content (S — F), must be
found. It is evalu-
ated as follows [10]:

1, Where the moisture content of the control zone is

less than the field capacity
(amount of water held in the soil after excess gravitationa
l water has drained),
the drainage rate is considered zero.
The drainage rate is assumed equal to the infiltration rate
when the soil is satu-
rated and the infiltration rate becomes constant.
3. If the water content is between the field capacity and saturation, the drainage
rate is computed as:

: P,,\3
Drainage rate = fe(1 — 7)
G (7.17)
where P,, = the unsaturated pore volume

Scanned with CamScanner

 7.6 Holtan Model 191

field
G = maximum gravitational water, that is, the total porosity minus the
capacity

Data from sprinkling infiltrometer studies of various watersheds of interest are

used to estimate the coefficients in Eq. 7.16 [2].

76 HOLTAN MODEL
Another equation for infiltration capacity has been developed by Holtan [14],[15]:

ff =eS + f, (7.18)

where f = the infiltration capacity (in./hr)

a= the infiltration capacity [(in./hr)/in.'*] of the available storage (index of
surface-connected porosity)
Sq = available storage in the surface layer (A-horizon in agricultural soils,
that is, about the first 6 in.) (in. of water equivalent)
f. = the constant rate of infiltration after long wetting (in./hr)

This equation has been modified somewhat for use in the USDAHL-70 water-
shed model [16]:
f = (GI X aS!) + f, (7.19)
where a is a vegetation parameter and GI is a growth index (see Chapter 6).
Information about a is given in Table 7.4.

TABLE 7.4 Tentative Estimates of the Vegetation

Parameter a in the Infiltration Equation
f = GI x aSi4
+ f,
Basal area rating®

Poor Good
Land use or cover condition condition

Fallow? 0.10 0.30

Row crops 0.10 0.20
Small grains 0.20 0.30
Hay (legumes) 0.20 0.40
Hay (sod) 0.40 0.60
Pasture (bunchgrass) 0.20 0.40
Temporary pasture (sod) 0.40 0.60
Permanent pasture (sod) 0.80 1.00
Woods and forests 0.80 1.00
* Adjustments needed for weeds and grazing.
+ For fallow land only, poor condition means after row crop, and
good condition means after sod.
Source: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research
_ Service, 1975.

Scanned with CamScanner

192 Chapter7 Infiltration

In Eq. 7.19, it is assumed that the portion of the available Se eee to

the surface is a function of the density of plant roots. This is given by the vege : ion
parameter a, which has been determined at plant maturity as the percentage of the
ground surface area occupied by plant stems or Toot crowns. In this manner, the frac.
tion of porosity in the agricultural A-horizon that is surface connected by mature plant
roots to form conduits for air or water is represented.

Example 7.2
Using the USDAHL-70 watershed model equation (Eq. 7.19), calcul
ate the infilt ration
capacity in inches per hour if the ultimate infiltration Capaci
ty is 0.5 in./hr, the crop
grown is corn, and the soil is sandy loam. Assume the
basal area rating 1s good, and that
it is 16 weeks into the growing season. It has been
found that the percentage of the
available soil porosity occupied by moisture
is 80%.
Solution.
1, Entering Table 7.4 for row crops, the parame
is estimated to be 0.2. Referring to Fig. 6.6, ter a for the USDAHL-70 equation
the growth index is found to beCULL
(29,
2. Referring to Table 6.5, the value of S, is determined in
The percentage of pore volume the following maz er:
available to water is 0.80 x
In a 6-inch layer of soil, this wou 36.6 = 29.2%,
ld represent 6 X 0.29 = 1.75
3. Now entering the data in Eq. in. of water.
7.19, we get:
f = (GI X asi) + ¢,
f = 0.29 x 0.2(1.75)4 + 9.5
f = 0.63 in./hr

ps, that is,

“e Water ponding. The €quati during peri-
on used in the
I = 0 (hy = Ff
e*alt-t,)
ie a oY Coefficient for
the TecOvery curve (sec™
v4 l)
Dypothetical projected ran
time at which to
= fe c on th €
Tecovery curve

Scanned with CamScanner

 7.7 Recovery of Infiltration Capacity 193

fo fo = fo- (fo- foe katt)

f [
fi < 1
bp f 7
7
/
fi.
re fo

At | At_

0 tre torte fpr ah FIGURE 7.11

Equivalent time Recovery of infiltration capacity.

In the SWMM model, kg is assumed to be a constant fraction or multiple of k:

ka = Rk (7.21)
where R is a constant ratio, considered to be much less than 1.6. This implies a longer
drying curve than a wetting curve [6].
For
Following the sequence shown in Fig. 7.11, new values of r, are generated.
example, along the recovery curve:

fi = fpltm) = fo- Go - foe *fa (7.22)

where Ty4 = tw1 7 fw:

Ty2 = two — by

T,,:
Then, solving Eq. 7-22 for the initial time difference,
1 fo= f)
tor = ty = = | 7.23
lI

Tr
ka (4 = In ( )

(7.24)
Ty1 = T wr + At

where t,, =the value of r, at the beginning of recovery (sec)

f, =the corresponding value of fy (ft/sec)
The value of f; (see Fig. 7.11) is found using Eq. 7.22. Then t,1 is obtained by the appli-
cation of Eq. 7.1:
i fo - fe
fi = 7 (224) (7.25)

Scanned with CamScanner

 194 Chapter7 Infiltration

7.8 TEMPORAL AND SPATIAL VARIABILITY OF INFILTRATION CAPACITY

The infiltration capacity generally varies both in space ane. nae wen a =
drainage basin [17]-[19]. Spatial variations occur because of di erences in : ypes
and vegetation. The usual procedure used to accommodate this type of varia 100 Is to
subdivide the total region into components having approximately uniform soil and
erties. ; a
arr infiltration capacity at a given location in a watershed varies with time as
shown in Fig. 7.5. The initial infiltration capacity is a function of antecedent conditions
and can be estimated from a knowledge of the area’s soil moisture or from an
antecedent precipitation index. If precipitation occurs at a rate less than the f capacity
rate, the change in f capacity with time will not be that given by the f capacity curve;
during periods of no precipitation, the infiltration capacity will recover. Example 7,3
illustrates these concepts.

Example 7.3
Given the rainfall pattern of Fig. 7.12 and the
infil
determine the overland flow supply rate o. Assu tration capacity curve of Fiz. 7.13,
curve of Fig. 5.3 governs. Neglect intercep
me a turf cover and that the OGEE
tion losses.
Solution. In order to solve the problem, it is
necessary to determine P F i,a
nd 7
1. Construct a curve of mass infiltration
F versus f capacity. This is done by cal-
culating the areas under the curve
in Fig. 7.13a at given times and plotting
them versus f capacity as sho
wn in Fig. 7.13b. Calculations to determine
cumulative infiltration are
shown in Table 7.5. Note that the F values are
plotted versus f capacity at the
end of the corresponding tim
example, the first value, e interval. For
0,33, is plotted vers
end of the 5-min interval. = i S
P ed Seek aan
Rainfall intensity i or infiltration

“/
capacity f (in./hr)

ala
a

Storm infiltration curve

w
I
7

| Original f capacity curve

See ae
tN
i]

FIGURE 7.12
ee ee ee
— Storm infiltration capacit y curve co
nstructed from
original
f capacity curve, 0
30 40 50 60 70 80
Time (min)

Scanned with CamScanner

 7.8 Temporal and Spatial Variability of Infiltration Capacity 195

= e
3= 5
4
= 5
B ae Average height of ordinate during
5 4 first
5 min = 4 in./hr g 4
& 3 EB3 3
8
§ 2 a 2
£1 21
5 Peoyeo| | | ft = | ! ! J
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 “0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0
Time (min) Mass infiltration, F’(in.)
(a) (b)
FIGURE 7.13
(a) Infiltration capacity curve and (b) mass infiltration versus f curve for Example 7.3.

2. Determine the storm period infiltration. The storm pattern and original f
capacity curve are plotted as shown in Fig. 7.12.
a. In the first 20 min f > /; therefore, all the rainfall is infiltrated:
F = (0.1 x4) + (08 x 4) = 0.15 in.
F b. From the F versus f curve (Fig. 7.13b), for F = 0.15, f = 4.25 in./hr.
. t c. Use this as the initial value of fat t = 20 min and shift the original f capac-
ity curve to the right to obtain the storm infiltration curve (Fig. 7.12). Note

TABLE 7.5 Determination of Infiltration

Time increment Average height of ordinate Cumulative infiltration,

(min) (in/hr) F (in.)
0-5 4.00 4 x 5/60 = 0.33
5-15 2.50 2.5 X 10/60 + 0.33 = 0.75
15-30 1.50 1.5 X 15/60 + 0.75 = 1.13
30-60 1.15 1.15 x 30/60 + 1.13 = 1.7

i(in./hr) Cumulative precipitation, P(in.) f (in-/hr) Cumulative infiltration, F (in.)

0.10 0.10 x 10/60 = 0.02 0.10 0.10 x 10/60 = 0.02

0.80 x 10/60 + 0.02 = 0.15 0.80 08 x 10/60 + 0.02 = 0.15
0.80
5.00 5 x 10/60 + 0.15 = 0.98 2.90 2.9 xX 10/60 + 0.15 = 0.63
3.7 x 10/60 + 0.98 = 1.60 1.80 18 x 10/60 + 0.63 = 0.93
3.70
2.00 2 x 10/60 + 1.60 = 1.93 1.40 14 x 10/60 + 0.93 = 1.17
11 x 10/60 + 1.93 = 2.12 1.10 1.1 x 10/60 + 1.17 = 1.35
61.100" 0.50 0.5 x 10/60 + 1.35 = 1.43

Scanned with CamScanner

196 Chapter7 _ Infiltration

TABLE 7.7 Determination of the Overland Flow Supply Rate

Time P F P-F i ni ii as aa as
(min) (in.) (in.) (in.) (in./hr) (in./hr) (in.

10 0.02 0.02 0 0.1 0.1 _— ; :

20 0.15 0.15 0 0.8 0.8 _— — -
30 0.98 0.63 0.35 5.0 2.9 21 or 13
40 1.60 0.93 0.67 3c} 1.8 1.9 _ 3
50 1.93 1.17 0.76 2.0 1.4 0.6 7 a
60 2412 1.35 0.77 1.1 11 _ :
70 2.20 1.43 0.77 0.5 0.5 _— 1.0 0
“From Fig. 5.3.

that this would not have been done if all rainfall intensities
the original f capacity curve ordinates. Since at the had excceded

a
end of 20 min, some f

AB i
capacity remained unfilled, the curve shift is carri
ed out to accommodate

aol
this.

see id a aa mm
3. Having plots for the storm period infiltra
tion and the rainfall versi- time,
values of P. F i, and f can
be determined. Calculations for P
in Table 7.6. Note that the curve of F and F are listed
original f capacity
vers us f (Fig. 7.13b) relates zo the
curve and is used to aid in constructing
while the values of F calculated abov the storm / curve,
e are related to actual storm cond
Rainfall intensities (7) are taken itions. 4
from the hyetograph of Fig. 7.12.
Having determined F Bi, and
lated P — F values and determine f, it is now pos sible to enter Fig. 5.3 using2 calcu-
this ratit o and the calculate
the ratio of overland flow supply
2 d values of i — f permit o toi — f. Using
operations are tabulated in s the determination of oc.
Table 7,7. These

7.9 SCS RUNOFF CURVE

NUMBER PROCEDURE
The Soil Conservation
Service (SCS) has de
cedure for estimating veloped a wide] y use
runoff [20]- d curve number pro-
infiltration, are embo
died in it.
Th
of small agricultural
watersheds, While the
infiltration directly, §
tion estimate.
The SCS procedure con
sists of selectin a
by the use of . curves founde
d on field stud 6 8 stt orm an Omputing the direct runoff
numerous soil cove ies of the amoud c
r combinations, A nt of measured runoff
Table 7.8. Selection Tunoff curve num from
of
the Tunoff curve nu ber (CN) is extracted from
and the types of cover. mber is depend Ent on
Soils are classified A,B an te cedent conditions
criteria: C ,»or D acc
ord ing
™ to the following

Scanned with CamScanner

 7.9 SCS Runoff Curve Number Procedure 197

P-Ly |
o- a with P= IS =, + Fi
8+ Rainfall (P) a and F=P-I1,-Q
Runoff (Q)
at Curves on this sheet are for the |
Rate case 1, = 0.25, so that
_ (P— 0.25)?
~ Om P+ ORs Y
& {Initial Infiltration &
Q é abstraction (I,) |
curve 3 |
3a |
|
E 4 FP PN
2
|
A
3 sh Menem cin g lille

2
ae } aa
< | ' |

nD i
1 JZ A a te OU
| ome | |

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 ip 8 9 10 11 12
Rainfall,P (in.)
FIGURE 7.14
Solution of direct runoff equation. § = S’ + I,, where S is watershed storage
in inches, J, is
initial abstraction, and S’ is potential maximum retention exclusive of / i

A. (Low runoff potential) Soils having high infiltration rates even if thoroughly wet-
ted and consisting chiefly of deep well to excessively drained sands or er
avels.
They have a high rate of water transmission.
B. Soils having moderate infiltration rates if thoroughly wetted and consist
ing
chiefly of moderately deep to deep, moderately well to well-drained soils
with
moderately fine to moderately coarse textures. They have a moderate rate of
water transmission.
C. Soils having slow infiltration rates if thoroughly wetted and consisting
chiefly of
soils with a layer that impedes the downward movement of water,
or soils with
moderately fine to fine texture. They have a slow rate of water transm
ission.
D. (High runoff potential) Soils having very slow infiltration rates
if thoroughly wet-
ted and consisting chiefly of clay soils with a high swelling potent
ial, soils with a
permanent high water table, soils with a claypan or clay layer
at or near the sur-
face, and shallow soils over nearly impervious material. They have a very slow
rate of water transmission.
A composite curve number (CN) for a watershed having more
than one land use,
ent, or soil type can be found by weighting each
curve number according to its
for example, 80 percent of a watershed has a CN of 75 and the rema
ining

Scanned with CamScanner

 198 Chapter7 Infiltration
a
TABLE 7.8 Runoff Curve Numbers for Hydrologic Soil-Cover Complexes
Hydrologic soil group
es
Laval nekercaves Treatment or practice Hydrologic condition A B Cc D
Fallow Straight row == 77 86 91 94
Row crops Straight row Poor 72 88 91
Straight row Good 67 85 89
Contoured Poor 70 79 84 88
Contoured Good 65 75 82 86
Contoured and terraced Poor 66 74 80 82
Contoured and terraced Good 62 71 78 81
Small grain Straight row Poor 65 76 84 88
Good 63 75 83 87
Contoured Poor 63 74 82 85
Good 61 73 8i $4
Contoured and terraced Poor 61 72 79 82
Good 59 70 78 81
Close-seeded legumes? Straight row Poor 66 77 £5 89
or rotation meadow Straight row Good 58 72 él
: 85
ee Poor 64 75 £5 85
ntoure Good
Contoured and terraced
55 69 78 3
Poor 63 73
Contoured and terraced & .
Good 51 67 "6 80
Pasture or range
Poor 68 79 86 89
Pair 49 69 79 8
Contoured ° a a2 61 74 =
Contoured Fai r 47 67 $1 88
Contoured = . d =
Meadow
59 75 8
= 6 35 70 79
Woods Good 30 58 71 78
HOG 45 6 77 8
Farmsteads
ear 36 6 723 7
Good 25 55 70 71
Roads (dirt)¢ — 59 74 82 86
(hard surface)?
— 7, 82 8789
* Antecedent moisty diti ai = 74
* Close-drilled or ei, Hand fe = 025, 84 90 2
“Including Tight-of-way, —
Source: After “H ‘ydrology,”
» Sy SUpDI.
A to Sec. 4, Engi
» Engineer in 8 Handbook,
US, Department of Agricu
lty Soil
re, Soil Conservation Service, 968.
190°.

20 percent is im Pervio
us (CN = 10
100 = 80. 0), then the
Weighted CN
The curve numbers = 0.80 x 75 + 0.20 X
in
Table 7.8 are
conditions. Other anteced appli
ent moisture co
n dition. a {0 a
MCs) vearreageas faonltlecedent moisture
owe:

Scanned with CamScanner

 7.9 SCS Runoff Curve Number Procedure 199

AMCI. A condition of watershed soils where the soils are dry but not to the
wilting point, and when satisfactory plowing or cultivation takes place.
(This condition is not considered applicable to the design flood com-
putation methods presented in this text.)
AMCII. The average case for annual floods, that is, an average of the condi-
tions that have preceded the occurrence of the maximum annual flood
on numerous watersheds.
AMC Ill. If heavy rainfall or light rainfall and low temperatures have occurred
during the 5 days previous to the given storm and the soil is nearly
saturated.
The corresponding curve numbers for Condition I and Condition HI can be
obtained from Table 7.9 if the CN for AMC IJ is known.
The SCS has developed two synthetic 24-hr rainfall distributions from Weather
Service rainfall frequency data. The Type I distribution is representative of the mar-

TABLE 7.9 Curve Numbers (CNs) for Wet (AMC III) and
Dry (AMC I) Antecedent Moisture Conditions
Corresponding to an Average Antecedent
Moisture Condition

Corresponding CNs

e CN for AMCII AMCI AMCIII

; 100 100 100

95 87 98
90 78 96
85 70 94
be 80 63 91
E 715 57 88
70 51 85
65 45 82
60 40 78
55 35 74
50 31 70
45 26 65
40 22 60
35 18 55
30 15 50
25 12 43
20 9 37
15 6 30
10 4 22
5 2 13
AMC L Lowest runoff potential. Soils in the watershed are dry
enough for satisfactory plowing or cultivation.
AMC II: The average condition.
AMC IIE Highest runoff potential. Soils in the watershed are
practi oe Saturated from antecedent rains.
‘After “Hydrology,” Suppl. A to Sec. 4, Engineering Handbook,
ent of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service, 1968.

Scanned with CamScanner

200 Chapter 7 Infiltration
——$—__

TABLE 7.10 Runoff Curve Numbers for Urban Areas

Curve numbers for
hydrologic soil group*
Cover description a
on

Average percent
impervious area? A B C
Cover type and hydrologic condition
a
Fully developed urban areas (vegetation established)

Open space (lawns, parks, golf courses, cemeteries, etc.)°

a .
Poor condition (grass cover <50%) 68 79 86 89
Fair condition (grass cover 50-75%) 69 79
49 &
Good condition (grass cover >75%)
39 61 74 80
Impervious areas
Paved parking lots, roofs, driveways, etc.
(excluding right-of-way)
98 98 38 %8
Streets and roads
Paved; curbs and storm sewers
(excluding right-of-way)
Paved; open ditches (including tight-of-way) 98 98 98 98
Gravel (includin g right-of-way) 83 89 92 93
16 85 RY 9]
Dirt (including right-of-way)
Western desert urban areas 72 82 87 89
Natural desert landscaping (pervious
areas only)?
Artificial desert landscaping (impervious 63 77 85 88
weed
barrier, desert shrub with 1-2-in. sand
or
gravel mulch and basin borders)
Urban districts 5
Commercial and business 96 96 96 a
Industrial
= 89 92 94
Residential districts by average lot size 95
81 88 91 8
k acre or less (town houses)
1 acre 65
77 85 90 9
acre “a 61 7
1 acre
3s
30 57 72 81 86
1 acre 25
2, acres
20 5451 7068 so
79 $4
flee 12 46 82
65 71
Newly graded areas (pervious areas only, no €velopin
; g urban ar eas
Idle lands (CNs are determined using Kay Vegetation)
64
to those in Table 7.8), “t YPes similar o 86 a1
° Average runoff condition, and I, = 0.25
° The avetage percent
impervious area shown
areas are directly connected to the was used
drainage System to deve lop the Composite
to open space in good hy
drologic condition, CNs , impervio us are:as CNs, Oth €r ass
for other ania umptioi a
“ CNs shown are equivalent to 4 CN of 98, and Pervi rvi ous
“Composite CNs for natural deser
those of pastur
¢. Composite CNs Ns of Condit
ions ous are
areaas are
re 38 follows: impe
consid ered equivale? '
t landscapi ng should may be ¢
(CN = 98) and the pervious area
CN. Th © pervious area C
bec ay ec ‘0 ™m
omputed usin Puted for other co MbiSmbuteion
nat d s using Fig, 15.9 or 15.10.
* Composite CNs to use for the Fig. 15.9 of 15.1 of open space cover tyP®
design of t emporary m Ns are assum 0
Yivalent to dese ased on the impervious area percenta
ede
Fig. 15.9 or 15.10 based on the degree of development ce ;
ene’
during 8tadin
ee
¥®
Source: U.S. Soil Conservation Servi
(impervious ar
ea : “onstructi *t shrub in Poor hydrologic condition"
ce, “Urban H ydrol gy for Sm on should be computed
alt Watersheds using
on oe the CNs for the Newly graded pervious 2 reas
* “ech. Rele
a8€ 55 (2nd ef.) tin- vnce

Scanned with CamScanner

 cedure 201
7.9 SCS Runoff Curve Number Pro

itime climate, including Hawaii, Alaska, and the coastal side of the Sierra Nevada and
Cascade mountains in California, Oregon, and Washington. The Type II distribution
represents the remainder of the United States, where high runoff rates are generated
distri-
from summer thunderstorms, The procedure used in developing the SCS rainfall
butions is given in Ref. 21.
Once a rainfall amount has been determined, the direct runoff resulting from this
precipitation can be estimated using an appropriate curve number and Figs. 7.14 and
7.15. These figures are applicable for areas up to 2000 acres. In Fig. 7.14, Sis aretention
index reflecting the potential storage of the watershed in inches [20].

Estimation of CN Values for Urban Land Uses

Table 7.10 includes CN values for various land use types. For these, the CN is based on a
specific percentage of imperviousness. The CN values for commercial land use are, for
example, based on an imperviousness of 85%. For urban land uses for which the per-
centages of imperviousness given in Table 7.10 are not valid, the CN can be estimated

40
38
36
34
32
30
28
26
24
Direct runoff, Q (in.)

22
20
18
16
14
12
10
®
nFHn

0
5
0 246 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40
Rainfall, P (in.)
FIGURE 7.15
Solution of direct runoff equation.
(After Ref 20)
mats

Scanned with CamScanner

 is
pert cme te ne II
202 Chapter7 = Infiltration
il: oup A, ac urve number for the impervious
using a weighted curve number. For sou gr le 7.10). Using thes e
s, it would be 39 (see Tab
would bes = Sem be oe CN estimate for any
ee to provide a weighted
portian
values, the following equati sp
e imperviousness and open
land use having a given percentag
CNy = CNp(1 - f) + £08) (7.26)
|
i ness, CNy is is t the weighted curve
i of impervious number, and CN,
i tion
a tat ie ietetll area. If for soil group A, an area 1s 85% oe and
obtained as follows:
15% open space, a CN estimate using Eq. 7.26 would be
CNy = 39(1 — 0.85) + 0.85(98) = 89
Limitations to the CN Method
The SCS method has restrictions that must be complied with if estimates of discharge
using the procedure are to be valid. The method should generally be used on water
sheds that are homogeneous in CN. If a watershed has several areas with different
curve numbers, the weighted curve number can be used. But where the differences in
CN are greater than 5, it is better to subdivide the watershed into subareas, analyze
them individually, and weight their runoff values rather than the curve ninmbers,
The CN method should only be used when the CN exceeds 50, and the time of concen-
tration is greater than 0.1 hr and less than 10 hr. Furthermore, the computed
value of
I,/P should fall within the range of 0.1 to 0.5, where
J, is the initial abstraction (see
Fig. 7.14).
Using CN to Estimate Runoff
The SCS method is widel y used
to; estimate runoff (see Fi g. 7.14). If a depth of rainfall
P is given in inches, th € resulting runoff Q
may be es timated using the following
equation:

Q = (P — 0.28)°/(P + 0.85) for

P = 0.25 (7.27)
where § _ the potential
: maxim
: um retent tos
ion, is determined using the
following equation:
5 = [(1000)/(CN)] — 10

Example 7.4
A watershed ha mn
s a l group
800d condition. For soi
a 24. C, with row CTOps on cont
the SCS CN approa ch, age year Precipitation of Sin in
using Fig, 7.14. ee and teruased Ee
's Using Egs. 7.27 4
nd 7.28,8, and
al La also make ne
an estima t?
Solution
1. From Table 7.8,
CN CN isj found
to be 78. Then
using Eq. - 7,7.28
28, we find that
:

Scanned with CamScanner

 7.10 Philndex 203

= [(1000)/(78)] — 10 = 2.82
2, Equation 7.27 is then used to estimate
Q:
Q = [8 — (0.2 x 2.82))7/[8 + (0.8 x 2.82)] = 5.40 inches of runoff
Using Fig. 7.14 and interpolating between curve numbers, we get Q
= about
5.4 inches of runoff, the same result.

7.10 PHIINDEX
Infiltration indexes generally assume that infiltration occurs at some constant or aver-
age rate throughout a storm. Consequently, initial rates are underestimated and final
rates are overstated if an entire storm sequence with little antecedent moisture is con-
sidered. The best application is to large storms on wet soils or storms where infiltration
rates may be assumed to be relatively uniform [1].
The most common index is termed the phi () index for which the total volume
of the storm period loss is estimated and distributed uniformly across the storm pat-
tern. Then the volume of precipitation above the index line is equivalent to the runoff
(Fig. 7.16). A variation is the W index, which excludes surface storage and retention.
Initial abstractions are often deducted from the early storm period to exclude initial
depression storage and wetting.

4.0
Rainfall intensity (in./hr)

é index

} !
2.0 3.0 4.0 FIGURE 7.16
Time (hr) Representation of a ¢ index.

Scanned with CamScanner

204 Chapter7 Infiltration
of observed Tunoffjy
, the amount this
To determine the index for a giv‘ven storm,
: quantity anq th
difference between a Q
deter
etermmined from the hydrograph a
then , calc The
‘i volume of loss (including the effects
SSI ’
i
in Fig. 7.16. y ‘
meUse
er of the "}
¢ index
in fee antes the amount of direct runoff from a give,
re. Un
storm pa ern 15 esse i

i 1s Corre

SUMMARY
Infiltration is a significant component of hydrologic processes. Soils have varying
capacities to infiltrate water. Influencing factors include soil type, degree of saturation,
and nature of ground cover. Activities that change the soil surface
or altcr its proper. _
ties alsohave a modifying effect.
When the rainfall intensity is less than the
infiltration capacity, all of the water |
reaching the ground can infiltrat e. But
if the rainfall intensity exceeds the infilt
capacity, infiltration will occu ration
r

» the initial infiltration cap

ues, and as the soil beco acity of a dr
mes saturated, i
(ultimate capacity).
Infiltration rates ha
ve been determined
conditions, A numb for a
er of equations
ha ve variety of soils and ground cover
inf iltration process, Th been dev eloped to serve
ey are exemplifie as models for the |
d by Eqs. 7.
1,7.11, and 7.16,

PROBLEMS

71

7.2. Gr OSs rain intensities al volume of water infiltrated in inches

dur;
» and 2 in /hr, este a hour Of a 5-hr storm over g 1000
, termine the basin Sind . 25,4):
kz Th wa direct Surface runof, “acre basin were 9,
f from the basin was 375 acrevlt
4 Small area y
T g "
; of Water infiltrate dag onentially to Vas obsery ed to be 4.5 in./h
;
r
gt th ’
7.4 Rework Proble onf = Ting a 10-hr ; ward an equilibrium of 0.5 inJ/ht.:
™m 7.2 if h a eee T interval. Determine the value of *
7
7.5 Weree22, Pr
10,3, 8nd 5 CnVee/hr;Storm
oblem 733 ; e ii
Occurred
an ee _- OV
eeat SuEr
rfacae barusinoff ws inl the rain: fall intens
? 12 envhr, and a tot : itlitie® s
al of 33 AUiltratj
7.6 Tecipitation falls Na 50 pacity Was |
0-acre draj Water infilt 9,000 m?
rated dutine het the , itv
anage fSi,.: n ac ultimate capac!”
cordTdjing to & the 10-hr interval.
the followin
g schedule
:

Scanned with CamScanner

 Problems 205

30-min period A 2 3
Intensity (in/hr) 4.0 2.0 60 : 0
a. Determine the total storm rainfall (in inches)
1 - an the ¢ index for the basin if the net storm rain is 3.0 in
5 e direct s ace runoff volume from a 4.40-mi? drainage basin is “hoe determined by planimeter
from the a
‘tid dhe oe Sa aph to be 10,080 cfs-hr. The hydrograph was produced by a
a duration of 5 hr. Determine (a) the net rain and (b) the # index.
7.8 The followingving table lists the stor m rainfall
i data and i i i
storm beginning at midnight on April 14 of the iat fad ———_o_
a. Plota the rainfa ll hyetograph and the f capacity
i curve on rectangular coordinate paper.
. Determine the total storm precipitation in inches.
‘ :
c. By counting squares or b y plani: meter, determine the net storm rain by the f capacity
aetlod:

Rainfall Data for a Hypothetical Storm on April 15 of the Current Year

(Beginning at midnight on April 14)

Rainfall —_— Infiltration capacity Hourly deduction for

intensity at beginning of hour depression storage
Hour (in./hr) (in./hr) (in./hr)

1 0.41 0.200 0.20

2 0.49 0.160 0.14
0.32 0.125 0.04
3
4 0.31 0.100 0,02
5 0.22 0.085 0.00
6 0.08 0.070 0.00
7 0.07 0.065
8 0.09 0.057
9 0.08 0.052
0.06 0.047
0.11 0.044
0.12 0.040
0.15 0.037
0.23 0.036
0.28 0.035
0.26 0.034
0.21 0.033
0.09 0.033
0.07 0.033
0.06 0.032
0.03 0.032
0.02 0.032
0.01 0.031
0.01 0.031

Scanned with CamScanner

 206 Chapter7 Infiltration
ios i f
7.9 Tabulated below ar e totatal rainfall intensities during each hour of a frontal storm Oe,
drainage basin.
a. Plot the rainfall hyetograph : i sus time).
Secarmituinasent in
b. Determinei tal storm precipitati inches.
;
the 7 is 2.00 in., determine
c I the ni cota the exact ¢ index (in/hr)
the hyetograph above for the Craings,
definition the area under
asin. (No the inde jy
must be 2.00 in.)
d. Determine the area of the drainage basin (acres) the net rain is 2.00 in.
sured volume of direct surface runoff is 2,015 cfs-hr. and the me,
e. Using the ¢ index calculated in part c, dete
rmine the volume of direct Surface rungy
(acre-ft) that would result from the followin
g:

Hour 1 2 3 4
Intensity (in/hr) 0.40 0,05 0.30 0.20

pHour Rainfall intensity (in/hr

g ) | Hour Ra
1 Siin
tfaa ll inintetensnsit
ity (in/hr)
y (in ty
0.41
2 13
0.49 0.15
3 14
| 0.22
it
0.23
/ . 0.31 0.28
i ; 0.22 16 0.26
| 0.08 17 0.21
| 7 0.0 7 18 0.09
8 0.09 19
9 ; 0.07-
0.08 20
10 4 0.06
i
0.06
,
O11 22
0.03

12 019 0.02
23 0.01
7.10 The Sica : 24
assumption that theMbercy Method of ¢ : oe
0.01
descri:be the factors that are Stimating Tai nfall ex
7 HA Ora C€ss (net (net rain
Tomi 4, © considereg rainin) ) ) isi base d on the
drainage
exactly how my basin has hen ted depends on several f
ch rain ea
SOmposite Curve curve Humber is determined. factors. Name °
712 Determine mone: ny
Posite Must
$Cg fal] befor irect TR b LN
° of 50, According
aa Percent nayThe lan Tunoff Commences? i to the sa
SE Is 4g e “Urve ont
numb
7.13 Which scg 2 fora 600-acre
a at
S0i basin that is with!
&

TOlogic ¢ ae "OPS totally “i

72

7.14 Rework Problem

in poor hydrologic con
.

7 11 if thea
a e
answers jn centimeter
s cat Ve the higi est On dition.
ing j
715 R
na ge 5
ework Problem 7 38
the
Utrat; In is 12 42
jon rate: : A, B, C,
unde
r poor Conditio so; wt or D? ? «you!
7.16 For the co
ns an 3 son S
oup js and
he Cis sees yacten. che}
mposite CUrVe th
the direct Tainfa ny * Meadow Under
ll is 29 * Mb © land use 1S‘ 50% str
De ey foung in “Onditions,
aight-row , fo
©m 5 if
“> Stimate the amount off
of ru?

Scanned with CamScanner

 References 207

REFERENCES
{1] Ven Te Chow (ed.), Handbook of Applied Hydrology, New York: McGraw-Hill, 1964.
(2] L. F Huggins and E. J. Monke, “The Mathematical Simulation of the Hydrology of Small
Watersheds,” Tech Rept. 1, Purdue University Water Resources Center, Lafayette, IN,
Aug. 1966.
[3] R. G. Mein and C. L. Larson, “Modeling the Infiltration Component of the Rainfall-
Runoff Process,” Bull. 43, Water Resources Research Center, University of Minnesot
a,
Minneapolis, MN, Sept. 1971.
[4] R. E. Horton, Surface Runoff Phenomena: Part I, Analysis of the Hydrograph, Horton
Hydrol. Lab. Pub. 101, Ann Arbor, MI: Edwards Bros., 1935.
[5] W. D. Mitchell, “Unit Hydrographs in Illinois,” Illinois Waterways Division, 1968.
[6] W. C. Huber, J. P. Heaney, S. J. Nix, R. E. Dickinson, and D. J. Polmann, “Storm Water
Management User’s Manual, Version III,” Department of Environmental Engineering
Sciences, University of Florida, Gainesville, Nov. 1981.
[7] H.T. Haan, H. P. Johnson, and D. L. Brakensiek (eds.), Hydrologic Modeling of Small
Watersheds, ASAE Monograph No. 5, St. Joseph, MI: American Society of Agricultural
Engineers, 1982.
[8] W. H. Green and G. A. Ampt, “Studies on Soil Physics, 1. The Flow of Air and Water
Through Soils,” J. Agric. Sci. 4, 11-24(1911).
[9] R. G. Mein and C. L. Larson, “Modeling Infiltration During a Steady Rain.” Water
Resources Res. 9(2), 384-394(Apr. 1973).
[10] S. T. Chu, “Infiltration During an Unsteady Rain,” Water Resources Res. 14(3),
461-466(June 1978).
[11] B. J. Knapp, “Infiltration and Storage of Soil Water,” in Hillslope Hydrology, M. J. Kirby
(ed.), New York: John Wiley, 1978.
[12] H. N. Holtan, “A Concept for Infiltration Estimates in Watershed Engineering,” US.
Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service, 1961, pp. 41-51.
[13] D. C. Overton, “Mathematical Refinement of an Infiltration Equation for Watershed
Engineering,” ARS 41-99, US. Department of Agriculture, Washington, D.C., 1964.
[14] H. N. Holtan, “A Concept for Infiltration Estimates in Watershed Engineering,” ARS
41-51. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service, Washington, D.C.,
= 1961.
. [15] H.N. Holtan, “A Model for Computing Watershed Retention from Soil Parameters,” J
Soil Water Conserv. 20(3), 91-94(1965).
[16] H.N. Holtan, G. J. Stiltner, W. H. Henson, and N. C. Lopez, “USDAHL-74 Revised Model
of Watershed Hydrology,” ARS Tech. Bull. No. 1518, U.S. Department of Agriculture,
Washington, D.C., 1975.
[17] N. H. Crawford and R. K. Linsley, Jr., “Digital Simulation in Hydrology: Stanford
Watershed Model IV,” Tech. Rept. 39, Department of Civil Engineering, Stanford
University, July 1966.
[18] Staff, Hydrologic Research Laboratory, “National Weather Service—River Forecast
System Forecast Procedures,” NWS HYDRO 14, U.S. Department of Commerce,
Washington, D.C., Dec. 1972.
| A.M. Lumb et al.,“GTWS: Georgia Tech Watershed Simulation Model,” School of Civil
Engineering, ERC-0175, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA, 1975.

Scanned with CamScanner