Accounting for Spatiotemporal Variations of Curve Number Using Variable Initial Abstraction and Antecedent Moisture
- 37 Downloads
The curve number (CN) of a watershed varies spatially due to heterogeneity, and temporally due to changes in soil moisture, land cover, temperature, and other processes. The conventional event-scale lumped-parameter CN method lacks the capability to account for spatiotemporal variations, which diminishes the accuracy of its predictions. Heterogeneity causes several parameters of the CN method, including the initial abstraction (Ia), to vary with event rainfall (P), so one way to account for heterogeneity is to treat Ia as a function of P. This modification to the CN method gives rise to variable Ia models. Including antecedent moisture (M) is a common way to account for the temporal variation of CN. This paper presents an improved method of including M, which when used together with variable Ia can allow for accounting of both spatial and temporal variability. A suite of models that use M and/or variable Ia was evaluated using published event-scale data from several studies along with rainfall-runoff observations from two small watersheds in South Carolina, USA. Including M in the CN models significantly improved the accuracy of the runoff predictions, whereas including variable Ia alone resulted in modest improvements. The best performance, NSE > 0.8, was achieved when both variable Ia and M were included together. These modifications significantly improve runoff predictions while only modestly increasing the complexity of the CN method.
KeywordsCurve number Initial abstraction Antecedent moisture Rainfall-runoff modeling Watershed heterogeneity Spatiotemporal variations
We appreciate the efforts of John Smink and Katherine Sciera in collecting the field data used in this study. Primary funding was provided by the USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS-69-4639-1-0010) through the Changing Land Use and Environment (CLUE) Project at Clemson University. Additional support was provided by the USDA Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension Service under project number SC-1700278.
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of Interest
The authors have no conflict of interest to declare.
- Brocca L, Melone F, Moramarco T, Singh V (2009) Assimilation of observed soil moisture data in storm rainfall-runoff modeling. J Hydrol Eng 14:153–165. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)1084-0699(2009)14:2(153). CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- D’Asaro F, Grillone G (2012) Empirical investigation of curve number method parameters in the Mediterranean area. J Hydrol Eng 17(10):1141–1152. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)HE.1943-5584.0000570 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Epps TH, Hitchcock DR, Jayakaran AD, Loflin DR, Williams TM, Amatya DM (2013) Curve number derivation for watersheds draining two headwater streams in lower coastal plain South Carolina, USA. JAWRA Journal of the American Water Resources Association 49:1284–1295. https://doi.org/10.1111/jawr.12084 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Hawkins R., Ward T., Woodward D. and Van Mullem J. 2008. Curve number hydrology: state of practice. American Society of Civil Engineers, Reston.Google Scholar
- Hendriks MR (2010) Introduction to physical hydrology. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
- McCuen RH (2003) Modeling hydrologic change: statistical methods. Lewis Publishers, Boca RatonGoogle Scholar
- Mishra SK, Singh VP (2002) SCS-CN-based hydrologic simulation package. In: Singh VP, Frevert DK (eds) Mathematical models in small watershed hydrology. Water Resources Publications, Highlands Ranch, pp 391–464Google Scholar
- NRCS (2003) National engineering handbook: part 630, hydrology. USDA, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
- Ponce V, Hawkins R (1996) Runoff curve number: has it reached maturity? J Hydrol Eng 1:11–19. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)1084-0699(1996)1:1(11). CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Rallison R.E. and Miller N. (1982) Past, present, and future SCS runoff procedure. p. 353-364. Proceedings of the international symposium on rainfall runoff modeling: Rainfall-runoff relationship, Mississippi State University, Mississippi. May 18-21, 1981 Water Resources Publications, Littleton, ColoradoGoogle Scholar
- Santikari V. P. 2017. Evaluating Effects of Construction-Related Land Use Change on Streamflow and Water Quality (Doctoral dissertation). Chapters 3 and 5. https://tigerprints.clemson.edu/all_dissertations/1942
- Soil Conservation Service (1956) National engineering handbook: section 4, hydrology. USDA, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
- Soulis KX, Valiantzas JD, Dercas N, Londra PA (2009) Investigation of the direct runoff generation mechanism for the analysis of the SCS-CN method applicability to a partial area experimental watershed. Hydrol Earth Syst Sci 13:605–615. https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-13-605-2009 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Woodward D.E., Hawkins R.H. and Quan Q.D. (2002) Curve number method: Origins, applications and limitations. Hydrologic modeling for the 21st century: 2nd federal interagency hydrologic modeling conference, Las Vegas, Nevada. July 28 – August 1, 2002Google Scholar
- Woodward D., Hawkins R., Jiang R., Hjelmfelt J. A., Van Mullem J., Quan Q. 2003. Runoff curve number method: Examination of the initial abstraction ratio. p. 1–10. World water & environmental resources congress, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States. June 23-26, 2003. American Society of Civil EngineersGoogle Scholar