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

    Runoff Curve Number: Has It Reached Maturity?

    Source: Journal of Hydrologic Engineering:;1996:;Volume ( 001 ):;issue: 001
    Author:
    Victor M. Ponce
    ,
    Richard H. Hawkins
    DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)1084-0699(1996)1:1(11)
    Publisher: American Society of Civil Engineers
    Abstract: The conceptual and empirical foundations of the runoff curve number method are reviewed. The method is a conceptual model of hydrologic abstraction of storm rainfall. Its objective is to estimate direct runoff depth from storm rainfall depth, based on a parameter referred to as the “curve number.” The method does not take into account the spatial and temporal variability of infiltration and other abstractive losses; rather, it aggregates them into a calculation of the total depth loss for a given storm event and drainage area. The method describes average trends, which precludes it from being perfectly predictive. The observed variability in curve numbers, beyond that which can be attributed to soil type, land use/treatment, and surface condition, is embodied in the concept of antecedent condition. The method is widely used in the United States and other countries. Perceived advantages of the method are (1) its simplicity; (2) its predictability; (3) its stability; (4) its reliance on only one parameter; and (5) its responsiveness to major runoff-producing watershed properties (soil type, land use/treatment, surface condition, and antecedent condition). Perceived disadvantages are (1) its marked sensitivity to curve number; (2) the absence of clear guidance on how to vary antecedent condition; (3) the method's varying accuracy for different biomes; (4) the absence of an explicit provision for spatial scale effects; and (5) the fixing of the initial abstraction ratio at 0.2, preempting a regionalization based on geologic and climatic setting.
    • Download: (1.288Mb)
    • Show Full MetaData Hide Full MetaData
    • Get RIS
    • Item Order
    • Go To Publisher
    • Price: 5000 Rial
    • Statistics

      Runoff Curve Number: Has It Reached Maturity?

    URI
    http://yetl.yabesh.ir/yetl1/handle/yetl/49335
    Collections
    • Journal of Hydrologic Engineering

    Show full item record

    contributor authorVictor M. Ponce
    contributor authorRichard H. Hawkins
    date accessioned2017-05-08T21:23:03Z
    date available2017-05-08T21:23:03Z
    date copyrightJanuary 1996
    date issued1996
    identifier other%28asce%291084-0699%281996%291%3A1%2811%29.pdf
    identifier urihttp://yetl.yabesh.ir/yetl/handle/yetl/49335
    description abstractThe conceptual and empirical foundations of the runoff curve number method are reviewed. The method is a conceptual model of hydrologic abstraction of storm rainfall. Its objective is to estimate direct runoff depth from storm rainfall depth, based on a parameter referred to as the “curve number.” The method does not take into account the spatial and temporal variability of infiltration and other abstractive losses; rather, it aggregates them into a calculation of the total depth loss for a given storm event and drainage area. The method describes average trends, which precludes it from being perfectly predictive. The observed variability in curve numbers, beyond that which can be attributed to soil type, land use/treatment, and surface condition, is embodied in the concept of antecedent condition. The method is widely used in the United States and other countries. Perceived advantages of the method are (1) its simplicity; (2) its predictability; (3) its stability; (4) its reliance on only one parameter; and (5) its responsiveness to major runoff-producing watershed properties (soil type, land use/treatment, surface condition, and antecedent condition). Perceived disadvantages are (1) its marked sensitivity to curve number; (2) the absence of clear guidance on how to vary antecedent condition; (3) the method's varying accuracy for different biomes; (4) the absence of an explicit provision for spatial scale effects; and (5) the fixing of the initial abstraction ratio at 0.2, preempting a regionalization based on geologic and climatic setting.
    publisherAmerican Society of Civil Engineers
    titleRunoff Curve Number: Has It Reached Maturity?
    typeJournal Paper
    journal volume1
    journal issue1
    journal titleJournal of Hydrologic Engineering
    identifier doi10.1061/(ASCE)1084-0699(1996)1:1(11)
    treeJournal of Hydrologic Engineering:;1996:;Volume ( 001 ):;issue: 001
    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