2016
DOI: 10.1007/s12205-016-0148-7
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Investigating practical alternatives to the NRCS-CN method for direct runoff estimation using slope-adjusted curve numbers

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 8 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 13 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The LULC and HSG layers were spatially integrated, and Curve Number II (CN II) values were assigned to each LULC-HSG class based on their combination. Subsequently, CNII was converted into (CNI) and (CNIII) associated with (AMC-I) and (AMC-III) using Equations ( 1) and ( 2), respectively [32].…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The LULC and HSG layers were spatially integrated, and Curve Number II (CN II) values were assigned to each LULC-HSG class based on their combination. Subsequently, CNII was converted into (CNI) and (CNIII) associated with (AMC-I) and (AMC-III) using Equations ( 1) and ( 2), respectively [32].…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…They showed that the initial abstraction parameter was significantly different from the original one recommended by the NRCS. Moon et al [17], Ebrahimian et al [18] and Shi et al [19] conducted studies related to determining the volume of runoff, taking into account the slopes of the catchments. They found that the surface runoff determined by the NRCS-CN method with adjustment for catchment slope had values much closer to the runoff observed compared to the original method.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%