Title:
No-till and Curve Numbers – A Closer Look

dc.contributor.author Endale, Dinku M. en_US
dc.contributor.author Schomberg, Harry S. en_US
dc.contributor.author Fisher, Dwight S. en_US
dc.contributor.author Jenkins, Michael B. en_US
dc.contributor.corporatename United States. Agricultural Research Service en_US
dc.contributor.corporatename J. Phil Campbell, Senior, Natural Resource Conservation Center en_US
dc.contributor.editor Carroll, G. Denise en_US
dc.date.accessioned 2013-02-22T20:26:26Z
dc.date.available 2013-02-22T20:26:26Z
dc.date.issued 2011-04
dc.description Proceedings of the 2011 Georgia Water Resources Conference, April 11, 12, and 13, 2011, Athens, Georgia. en_US
dc.description.abstract Since its inception in the 1950s, worldwide adoption and use of the Curve Number (CN) methodology for estimating runoff has highlighted some inconsistencies, limitations and problems. Analysis of curve numbers derived from 34 years of rainfall-runoff data, gathered from a 2.7 ha Georgia Piedmont catchment managed under no-till, showed that the average CN (57) that led to mean runoff estimate matching the mean measured runoff was 16 less than the average of the range of CN values (73) given in standard handbook tables for the catchment. The derived median value of the initial abstraction ratio (λ) was 0.04, compared to 0.2, the standard value. Many researchers recommend 0.05 for λ. Use of standard CN coefficients and values for fields managed in no-till, and possibly other conservation tillage systems, would likely lead to overestimation of runoff. en_US
dc.description.sponsorship Sponsored by: Georgia Environmental Protection Division U.S. Geological Survey, Georgia Water Science Center U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service Georgia Institute of Technology, Georgia Water Resources Institute The University of Georgia, Water Resources Faculty en_US
dc.description.statementofresponsibility This book was published by Warnell School of Forestry and Natural Resources, The University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia 30602-2152. The views and statements advanced in this publication are solely those of the authors and do not represent official views or policies of The University of Georgia, the U.S. Geological Survey, the Georgia Water Research Institute as authorized by the Water Research Institutes Authorization Act of 1990 (P.L. 101-307) or the other conference sponsors. en_US
dc.identifier.isbn 0-9794100-24
dc.identifier.uri http://hdl.handle.net/1853/46235
dc.language.iso en_US en_US
dc.publisher Georgia Institute of Technology en_US
dc.publisher.original Warnell School of Forestry and Natural Resources, The University of Georgia en_US
dc.relation.ispartofseries GWRI2011. Environmental Protection en_US
dc.subject Water resources management en_US
dc.subject Curve number methodology en_US
dc.subject Estimating runoff en_US
dc.subject Tillage en_US
dc.title No-till and Curve Numbers – A Closer Look en_US
dc.type Text
dc.type.genre Proceedings
dspace.entity.type Publication
local.contributor.corporatename Georgia Water Resources Institute
local.contributor.corporatename School of Civil and Environmental Engineering
local.contributor.corporatename College of Engineering
local.relation.ispartofseries Georgia Water Resources Conference
relation.isOrgUnitOfPublication 8873b408-9aff-48cc-ae3c-a3d1daf89a98
relation.isOrgUnitOfPublication 88639fad-d3ae-4867-9e7a-7c9e6d2ecc7c
relation.isOrgUnitOfPublication 7c022d60-21d5-497c-b552-95e489a06569
relation.isSeriesOfPublication e0bfffc9-c85a-4095-b626-c25ee130a2f3
Files
Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Thumbnail Image
Name:
5.6.4Endale.pdf
Size:
130.04 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description: