See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/271701124

Rainfall-Runoff Analysis Using the Soil Conservation Service Curve

Number Method

Conference Paper · June 2014

CITATIONS READS

0 3,023

1 author:

Reynold J. Stone
University of the West Indies, St. Augustine
52 PUBLICATIONS   1,021 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Climate Variability and Change in Trinidad and Tobago View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Reynold J. Stone on 02 February 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Rainfall-Runoff Analysis Using the Soil
Conservation Service Curve Number Method

Reynold J. Stone

Caribbean Workshop on Soil Physical Management

Soil Management Issues Related to Food Production and Environmental Quality
as a Consequence of Climate Change and Variability
June 30th-July 4th, 2014
UWI, St. Augustine, Trinidad & Tobago, W.I.
 Introduction

“Direct runoff from rainfall is one of the more fundamental concepts

in hydrology serving as a point of departure for flood peak and
structure design. As a hydrologic event, rainfall-runoff is a common
occurrence, and much public and professional awareness of
hydrology is built on experience with it. In addition, via the role of
land use and condition, it is also a fundamental problem of environ-
mental impact and water quality modeling.”

ASCE/EWRI Curve Number Hydrology Task Committee

(2009) . Curve Number Hydrology: State of the Practice,
ASCE, Reston, Virginia.
The Rainfall-Runoff Process

 Rainfall
 Interception
 Throughflow
 Stemflow
 Surface ponding
 Infiltration
 Runoff
Factors Affecting Runoff

 Rainfall (amount, intensity and duration)

 Soil type and topography

 Antecedent soil moisture condition

 Land use/cover and condition

Brief History of the SCS CN Method

“ The CN method arose in the mid-1950s to meet the

planning and design needs of the SCS in imple-
menting Public Law 566. This nation-wide effort
required consistent and objective methodologies, a
basis in agriculture and soils, responses attributable
to land management, and realism with respect to
the limited data situations at that time. Because
there was limited technology available, it was
necessary to create a new method on short notice
for such purpose.”

ASCE/EWRI Curve Number Hydrology Task Committee

(2009). Curve Number Hydrology: State of the Practice,
ASCE, Reston, Virginia.
The SCS-CN Method
(a) The Water Balance Equation

P = Ia + F + Q

P = total rainfall
Ia= initial abstraction
F = infiltration amount
Q = actual direct runoff
The SCS-CN Method (cont’d)

(b) The Proportionality Equality Hypothesis

Q/(P – Ia) = F/S

S = potential maximum retention

The SCS-CN Method (cont’d)

(c) The Ia-S Hypothesis

Ia = λ S

λ = initial abstraction ratio

The SCS-CN Method (cont’d)

Combining the water balance equation, the

proportionality equality and the Ia-S
hypotheses yields the following:

Q = (P – λS)2/[P + (1-λ)S]
The SCS-CN Method (cont’d)

S = 1000/CN – 10

CN=Curve Number (0 to 100),

which depends on:

 Soil Group

 Land use/cover type

 Antecedent rainfall condition

The SCS-CN Method (cont’d)

Q = (P – λS)2/[P + (1-λ)S]

S = 25400/CN – 254

λ = 0.2

Q = (P – 0.2S)2/(P + 0.8S)
Table 1. The USDA-NRCS Hydrologic Soil Group Classification

Soil Description Final

Group Infiltration
Rate
(mm/h)
A Lowest Runoff Potential. Includes deep sands with 8 - 12
very little silt and clay, also deep, rapidly permeable
loess.
B Moderately Low Runoff Potential. Mostly sandy soils 4-8
less deep than A, loess less deep or less aggregated
than A, but the group as a whole has above-average
infiltration after thorough wetting.
C Moderately High Runoff Potential. Comprises shallow 1-4
soils and soils containing considerable clay and
colloids, though less than those of group D. The group
has below-average infiltration after pre-saturation.
D Highest Runoff Potential. Includes mostly clays of 0-1
high swelling percent, but the group also includes some
shallow soils with nearly impermeable sub-horizons
near the surface.
Table 2. Antecedent Moisture Conditions

Antecedent Moisture 5-day Antecedent Rainfall

Condition

I <36 mm

II 36 - 53 mm

III >53 mm
Table 3. Runoff Curve Numbers for Hydrologic Soil-Cover
Complexes for Antecedent Moisture Condition II.

Cover type Hydrologic A B C D

Condition

Woods Poor 45 66 77 83

Fair 36 60 73 79

Good 30 55 70 77

Pasture, Poor 68 79 86 89
grassland, or
range Fair 49 69 79 84

Good 39 61 74 80
Table 4 . Factors for Converting Curve Numbers from Rainfall
Condition II to Condition I and III.

Curve Number Condition I Condition III

for Condition II
10 0.40 2.22
20 0.45 1.85
30 0.50 1.67
40 0.55 1.50
50 0.62 1.40
60 0.67 1.30
70 0.73 1.21
80 0.79 1.14
90 0.87 1.07
100 1.00 1.00
Example on the use of the SCS-CN Method

Estimate the runoff from a 51.6-mm rainfall event falling on

a watershed with the characteristics below. Assume the
antecedent 5-day rainfall prior to the storm is 39.9 mm.
What would be the estimated depths of runoff under AMCI
and AMCIII?

Subarea (ha) Soil Group Cover Type Curve Number

and Hydrologic
Condition

2.2 D Citrus/Tree 77
Crops, good
0.9 D Shrubs/Grasses, 80
good
Computation of Watershed Curve Numbers CNI,
CNII, and CNIII

CNII = (2.2 * 77 + 0.9 * 80)/(2.2 + 0.9) = 78

CNI = 0.778*78 = 61

CNIII = 1.154*78 = 90
Example (cont’d)
CNII = 78
P = 51.6 mm

S = 25400/78 -254 = 71.6 mm

Q = (51.6-0.2*71.6)^2/(51.6+0.8*71.6)
= 12.8 mm

Depth of runoff = 12. 8 mm

Example (cont’d)
CNI = 61
P = 51.6 mm

S = 25400/61 -254 = 162.4 mm

Q = (51.6-0.2*162.4)^2/(51.6+0.8*162.4)
= 2.0 mm

Depth of runoff = 2.0 mm

Example (cont’d)
CNIII = 90
P = 51.6 mm

S = 25400/90 -254 = 28.2 mm

Q = (51.6-0.2*28.2)^2/(51.6+0.8*28.2)
= 28.5 mm

Depth of runoff = 28.5 mm

Rainfall and Runoff at a Small Talparo
Watershed

Rainfall and Runoff at a Small Talparo Watershed

(78 rainfall-runoff events)
45

40

35

30
Runoff, mm

25

20

15

10

0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70
Rainfall, mm
Comparison of Measured and Predicted
Runoff (λ = 0.2, AMC Varied)

Measured vs Predicted Runoff

λ = 0.2, AMC Varied
45

40

35
Predicted Runoff, mm

30

25

20

15

10

0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
Measured Runoff, mm
Comparison of Measured and Predicted
Runoff (λ = 0.2, AMC III)

Measured vs Predicted Runoff

λ = 0.2, AMCIII
45

40

35
Predicted Runoff, mm

30

25

20

15

10

0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
Measured Runoff, mm
Comparison of Measured and Predicted Runoff (For
λ = 0, AMC III)

Measured vs Predicted Runoff

λ = 0, AMCIII
50
45
40
Predicted Runoff, mm

35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Measured Runoff, mm
Curve Numbers from Watershed Data
Using Nonlinear Regression

Q = (P – λS)2/[P + (1-λ)S]

λ =0

Q = P2/(P + S)

S = P2/Q - P

CN = 25400/(S + 254)
Histogram of Curve Numbers
Quantiles of Curve Numbers

Min 5% 10% 25% 50% 75% 90% 95% Max

38.4 60.3 68.2 83.1 88.9 93.0 95.7 96.9 97.9

Rainfall-Runoff Scatter Plot for CNI,CNII and
CNIII
Closing Remarks
 The SCS-CN Method is a simple, easy-to-use method
for the estimation of direct runoff from small
watersheds supported by empirical data.

 It is a well established method and is widely used in

the United States (where it originated) and many other
countries.

 It is an effective tool for proper soil and land use

management but will need to be modified for use in
T&T using local empirical data.
 Thank You!

View publication stats