YaBeSH Engineering and Technology Library

    • Journals
    • PaperQuest
    • YSE Standards
    • YaBeSH
    • Login
    View Item 
    •   YE&T Library
    • ASCE
    • Journal of Hydrologic Engineering
    • View Item
    •   YE&T Library
    • ASCE
    • Journal of Hydrologic Engineering
    • View Item
    • All Fields
    • Source Title
    • Year
    • Publisher
    • Title
    • Subject
    • Author
    • DOI
    • ISBN
    Advanced Search
    JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

    Archive

    NRCS Curve Number Method: Comparison of Methods for Estimating the Curve Number from Rainfall-Runoff Data

    Source: Journal of Hydrologic Engineering:;2022:;Volume ( 027 ):;issue: 010::page 04022023
    Author:
    G. E. Moglen
    ,
    H. Sadeq
    ,
    L. H. Hughes
    ,
    M. E. Meadows
    ,
    J. J. Miller
    ,
    J. J. Ramirez-Avila
    ,
    E. W. Tollner
    DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)HE.1943-5584.0002210
    Publisher: ASCE
    Abstract: A data set comprising rainfall-runoff data gathered at 31 Agricultural Research Service experimental watersheds was used to explore curve number calibration. This exploration focused on the calibrated value and goodness-of-fit as a function of several items: calibration approach, precipitation event threshold, data ordering approach, and initial abstraction value. Calibration methods explored were least-squares, the National Engineering Handbook (NEH) median, and an asymptotic approach. Results were quantified for events exceeding two precipitation thresholds: 0 and 25.4 mm. Natural and frequency-matched data ordering methods were analyzed. Initial abstraction ratios of 0.05 and 0.20 were examined. Findings showed that the least-squares calibration approach applied directly to rainfall-runoff data performed best. Initial abstraction ratios clearly influenced the magnitude of the calibrated curve number. However, neither ratio outperformed the other in terms of goodness-of-fit of predicted runoff to observed runoff. Precipitation threshold experiments produced mixed results, with neither threshold level producing a clearly superior model fit. Frequency-matching was not considered to be a valid analysis approach, but was contrasted with naturally ordered results, indicating a bias toward producing calibrated curve numbers that were 5–10 points larger.
    • Download: (2.231Mb)
    • Show Full MetaData Hide Full MetaData
    • Get RIS
    • Item Order
    • Go To Publisher
    • Price: 5000 Rial
    • Statistics

      NRCS Curve Number Method: Comparison of Methods for Estimating the Curve Number from Rainfall-Runoff Data

    URI
    http://yetl.yabesh.ir/yetl1/handle/yetl/4289216
    Collections
    • Journal of Hydrologic Engineering

    Show full item record

    contributor authorG. E. Moglen
    contributor authorH. Sadeq
    contributor authorL. H. Hughes
    contributor authorM. E. Meadows
    contributor authorJ. J. Miller
    contributor authorJ. J. Ramirez-Avila
    contributor authorE. W. Tollner
    date accessioned2023-04-07T00:31:43Z
    date available2023-04-07T00:31:43Z
    date issued2022/10/01
    identifier other%28ASCE%29HE.1943-5584.0002210.pdf
    identifier urihttp://yetl.yabesh.ir/yetl1/handle/yetl/4289216
    description abstractA data set comprising rainfall-runoff data gathered at 31 Agricultural Research Service experimental watersheds was used to explore curve number calibration. This exploration focused on the calibrated value and goodness-of-fit as a function of several items: calibration approach, precipitation event threshold, data ordering approach, and initial abstraction value. Calibration methods explored were least-squares, the National Engineering Handbook (NEH) median, and an asymptotic approach. Results were quantified for events exceeding two precipitation thresholds: 0 and 25.4 mm. Natural and frequency-matched data ordering methods were analyzed. Initial abstraction ratios of 0.05 and 0.20 were examined. Findings showed that the least-squares calibration approach applied directly to rainfall-runoff data performed best. Initial abstraction ratios clearly influenced the magnitude of the calibrated curve number. However, neither ratio outperformed the other in terms of goodness-of-fit of predicted runoff to observed runoff. Precipitation threshold experiments produced mixed results, with neither threshold level producing a clearly superior model fit. Frequency-matching was not considered to be a valid analysis approach, but was contrasted with naturally ordered results, indicating a bias toward producing calibrated curve numbers that were 5–10 points larger.
    publisherASCE
    titleNRCS Curve Number Method: Comparison of Methods for Estimating the Curve Number from Rainfall-Runoff Data
    typeJournal Article
    journal volume27
    journal issue10
    journal titleJournal of Hydrologic Engineering
    identifier doi10.1061/(ASCE)HE.1943-5584.0002210
    journal fristpage04022023
    journal lastpage04022023_10
    page10
    treeJournal of Hydrologic Engineering:;2022:;Volume ( 027 ):;issue: 010
    contenttypeFulltext
    DSpace software copyright © 2002-2015  DuraSpace
    نرم افزار کتابخانه دیجیتال "دی اسپیس" فارسی شده توسط یابش برای کتابخانه های ایرانی | تماس با یابش
    yabeshDSpacePersian
     
    DSpace software copyright © 2002-2015  DuraSpace
    نرم افزار کتابخانه دیجیتال "دی اسپیس" فارسی شده توسط یابش برای کتابخانه های ایرانی | تماس با یابش
    yabeshDSpacePersian