METHODS FOR RUNOFF COMPUTATION

Several models and methods are used to estimate or compute runoff, ranging from simple
empirical formulas to complex hydrological models. Some commonly used methods include:
1. The Rational Method: Primarily used for small catchment areas, it estimates the peak runoff
rate based on the catchment area's size, the rainfall intensity, and a runoff coefficient that
reflects surface permeability and land use.
2. The Curve Number (CN) Method: Developed by the USDA Natural Resources
Conservation Service (NRCS), it uses soil type, land use, and antecedent moisture conditions
to calculate runoff volume. It's widely used in agricultural and urban watershed planning.
3. Hydrological Simulation Models: Tools like the Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT)
or the Hydrologic Engineering Centre's Hydrologic Modelling System (HEC-HMS) simulate
the hydrological cycle in great detail over large areas, taking into account various land and
water interactions, including runoff.

ESTIMATION OF SOIL LOSS

The control of erosion is essential to maintain the productivity of soil and to improve or
maintain downstream water quality. The reduction of soil erosion to tolerable limits necessitates the
adoption of properly planned cropping practices and soil conservation measures. Several methods
exist for the measurement of soil loss from different land units. These include the measurements from
runoff plots of various sizes for each single land type and land use, small unit source watersheds, and
large watersheds of mixed land use. However, to estimate soil erosion, empirical and process based
models (equations) are used. Universal Soil Loss Equation (USLE) is an empirical equation. It
estimates the average annual mass of soil loss per unit area as a function of most of the major factors
affecting sheet and rill erosions. Estimating soil loss is considerably more difficult than estimating
runoff as there are many variables, both natural such as soil and rainfall and man-made such as
adopted management practices. The soil loss considerably depends on the type of erosion. As a result,
models, whether empirical or process-based, are necessarily complex if they are to include the effect
of all the variables. For some purposes, meaningful and useful estimates of sediment yield can be
obtained from models, and the best example is the estimation of long-term average annual soil loss
from a catchment by using the Universal Soil Loss Equation (USLE).
The Universal Soil Loss Equation (USLE)
The filed soil loss estimation equations development began in 1940 in USA. Zing (1940)
proposed a relationship of soil loss to slope length raised to a power. Later in 1947, a committee
chaired by Musgrave proposed a soil-loss equation having some similarity to the present day USLE.
Based on nearly 10,000 plot year runoff plot data, Wischmeier and Smith (1965) developed the
universal soil loss equation, which was later refined with more recent data from runoff plots, rainfall
simulators and field experiences. It is the most widely used tool for estimation of soil loss from
agricultural watersheds for planning erosion control practices. The USLE is an erosion prediction
model for estimating long term averages of soil erosion from sheet and rill erosions from a specified
land under specified conditions (Wischmeier and Smith, 1978).
It provides an estimate of the long-term average annual soil loss from segments of arable land
under various cropping conditions. The application of this estimate is to enable farmers and soil
conservation advisers to select combinations of land use, cropping practice, and soil conservation
practices, which will keep the soil loss down to an acceptable level. The equation (USLE) is presented
as below.

where, A = soil loss per unit area in unit time, t ha-1 yr -1,
 R = rainfall erosivity factor which is the number of rainfall erosion index units for a particular
location,
K = soil erodibility factor - a number which reflects the susceptibility of a soil type to erosion,
i.e., it is the reciprocal of soil resistance to erosion,
L = slope length factor, a ratio which compares the soil loss with that from a field of specified
length of 22.6 meters,
S = slope steepness factor, a ratio which compares the soil loss with that from a field of
specified slope of 9%,
C = cover management factor - a ratio which compares the soil loss with that from a field
under a standard treatment of cultivated bare fallow, and
P = support practice factor - a ratio of soil loss with support practice like contouring, strip
cropping or terracing to that with straight row farming up and down the slope.
The factors L, S, C and P are each dimensionless ratio which allow comparison of the site for
which soil loss is being estimated with the standard conditions of the database. Knowing the values of
rainfall erosivity, soil erodibility and slope one can calculate the effectiveness of various erosion
control measures with the purpose of introducing a cultivation system in an area with soil loss limited
to the acceptable value. Various factors associated with the above equation are discussed below.
Rainfall Erosivity Factor (R):
It refers to the rainfall erosion index, which expresses the ability of rainfall to erode the soil
particles from an unprotected field. It is a numerical value. From the long field experiments, it has
been obtained that the extent of soil loss from a barren field is directly proportional to the product of
two rainfall characteristics: kinetic energy of the storm and its 30-minute maximum intensity. The
product of these two characteristics is termed as EI or EI30 or rainfall erosivity. The erosivity factor, R
is the number of rainfall erosion index units (EI30) in a given period at the study location. The rainfall
erosion index unit (EI30) of a storm is estimated as:

where, KE = kinetic energy of storm in metric tones /ha-cm, expressed as

where, I = rainfall intensity in cm/h, and

Ι30 = maximum 30 minutes’ rainfall intensity of the storm.
The study period can be a week, month, season or year and this I30 values are different for different
areas. The storm EI30 values for that length of period is summed up. Annual EI30 values are usually
computed from the data available at various meteorological stations and lines connecting the equal
EI30 values (known as Iso-erodent lines) are drawn for the region covered by the data stations for
ready use in USLE.
Soil Erodibility Factor (K):
The soil erodibility factor (K) in the USLE relates to the rate at which different soils erode.
Under the conditions of equal slope, rainfall, vegetative cover and soil management practices, some
soils may erode more easily than others due to inherent soil characteristics. The direct measurement of
K on unit runoff plots reflect the combined effects of all variables that significantly influence the ease
with which a soil is eroded or the particular slope other than 9% slope. Some of the soil properties
which affect the soil loss to a large extent are the soil permeability, infiltration rate, soil texture, size
and stability of soil structure, organic content and soil depth. These are usually determined at special
experimental runoff plots or by the use of empirical erodibility equations which relate several soil
properties to the factor K. The soil erodibility factor (K) is expressed as tons of soil loss per hectare
per unit rainfall erosivity index, from a field of 9% slope and 22 m (in some cases 22.13 m) field
length. The soil erodibility factor (K) is determined by considering the soil loss from continuous
cultivated fallow land without the influence of crop cover or management.
The formula used for estimating K is as follows:

where, K = soil erodibility factor,

A0 = observed soil loss,
S = slope factor, and
ΣEI = total rainfall erosivity index.
Based on runoff plot studies, the values of erodibility factor K have been determined for use in USLE
for different soils of India as reported by Singh et al. (1981).
Topographic Factor (LS)
Slope length factor (L) is the ratio of soil loss from the field slope length under consideration
to that from the 22.13 m length plots under identical conditions. The slope length has a direct relation
with the soil loss, i.e., it is approximately equal to the square root of the slope length (L0.5), for the
soils on which runoff rate is not affected by the length of slope (Zing, 1940).
Steepness of land slope factor (S) is the ratio of soil loss from the field slope gradient to that
from the 9% slope under otherwise identical conditions. The increase in steepness of slope results in
the increase in soil erosion as the velocity of runoff increases with the increase in field slope allowing
more soil to be detached and transported along with surface flow.
The two factors L and S are usually combined into one factor LS called topographic factor.
This factor is defined as the ratio of soil loss from a field having specific steepness and length of slope
(i.e., 9% slope and 22.13 m length) to the soil loss from a continuous fallow land. The value of LS can
be calculated by using the formula given by Wischmeier and Smith (1962):

where, L = field slope length in feet and S = percent land slope.

Wischmeier and Smith (1978) again derived the following equation for LS factor in M.K.S. system,
based on the observations from cropped land on slopes ranging from 3 to 18% and length from 10 to
100 m. The derived updated equation is:

where, λ = field slope length in meters, m = exponent varying from 0.2 to 0.5, and θ = angle of slope.
Crop Management Factor (C):
The crop management factor C may be defined as the expected ratio of soil loss from a
cropped land under specific crop to the soil loss from a continuous fallow land, provided that the soil
type, slope and rainfall conditions are identical. The soil erosion is affected in many ways according
to the crops and cropping practices, such as the kind of crop, quality of cover, root growth, water use
by plants etc. The variation in rainfall distribution within the year also affects the crop management
factor, which affects the soil loss. Considering all these factors, the erosion control effectiveness of
each crop and cropping practice is evaluated on the basis of five recommended crop stages introduced
by Wischmeier (1960). The five stages are:
 Period F (Rough Fallow): It includes the summer ploughing or seed bed preparation.
  Period 1 (Seed Bed): It refers to the period from seeding to 1 one month thereafter.
 Period 2 (Establishment): The duration ranges from 1 to 2 months after seeding.
 Period 3 (Growing Period): It ranges from period 2 to the period of crop harvesting.
 Period 4 (Residue or Stubble): The period ranges from the harvesting of crop to the summer
ploughing or new seed bed preparation.
For determining the crop management factor, the soil loss data for the above stages is
collected from the runoff plot and C is computed as the ratio of soil loss from cropped plot to the
corresponding soil loss from a continuous fallow land for each of the above five crop stages
separately, for a particular crop, considering various combinations of crop sequence and their
productivity levels. Finally, weighted C is computed.

Support Practice Factor (P):

This factor is the ratio of soil loss with a support practice to that with straight row farming up
and down the slope. The conservation practice consists of mainly contouring, terracing and strip
cropping. The soil loss varies due to different practices followed.
Use of USLE
There are three important applications of the universal soil loss equation. They are as follows:
 It predicts the soil loss;
 It helps in identification and selection of agricultural practices; and
 It provides the recommendations on crop management practices to be used.
 USLE is an erosion prediction model and its successful application depends on the ability
to predict its various factors with reasonable degree of accuracy. It is based on
considerably large experimental data base relating to various factors of USLE.
 Based on 21 observation points and 64 estimated erosion values of soil loss obtained by
the use of USLE at locations spread over different regions of the country, soil erosion
rates have been classified into 6 categories.
Limitations of Universal Soil Loss Equation
The equation involves the procedure for assigning the values of different associated factors on
the basis of practical concept. Therefore, there is possibility to introduce some errors in selection of
the appropriate values, particularly those based on crop concept. Normally R and K factors are
constants for most of the sites/regions in the catchment, whereas, C and LS vary substantially with the
erosion controlled measures, used. The following are some of the limitations of the USLE:
Empirical
The USLE is totally empirical equation. Mathematically, it does not illustrate the actual soil
erosion process. The possibility to introduce predictive errors in the calculation is overcome by using
empirical coefficients.
Prediction of Average Annual Soil Loss
This equation was developed mainly on the basis of average annual soil loss data; hence its
applicability is limited for estimation of only average annual soil loss of the given area. This equation
computes less value than the measured, especially when the rainfall occurs at high intensity. The
storage basin whose sediment area is designed on the basis of sediment yield using USLE should be
inspected after occurrence of each heavy storm to ensure that the sedimentation volume in the storage
basin is within the limit.
Non-computation of Gully Erosion
This equation is employed for assessing the sheet and rill erosions only but cannot be used for
the prediction of gully erosion. The gully erosion caused by concentrated water flow is not accounted
by the equation and yet it can cause greater amount of soil erosion.
Non-computation of Sediment Deposition
The equation estimates only soil loss, but not the soil deposition. The deposition of sediment
at the bottom of the channel is less than the total soil loss taking place from the entire watershed.
Nevertheless, the USLE can be used for computing the sediment storage volume required for
sediment retention structures., Also the USLE equation can be used as a conservative measure of
potential sediment storage needs, particularly where sediment basins ranges typically from 2-40 ha
and runoff has not traveled farther distance and basin is intended to serve as the settling area. Again, if
the drainage on any site is improperly controlled and gully erosion is in extensive form, then this
equation underestimates the sediment storage requirement of the retention structure.
During the estimation of contribution of hill slope erosion for basin sediment yield, care
should be taken as it does not incorporate sediment delivery ratio. This equation cannot be applied for
predicting the soil loss from an individual storm, because the equation was derived to estimate the
long term mean annual soil loss. The use of this equation should be avoided for the locations, where
the values of different factors associated with the equation, are not yet determined.
Revised Universal Soil Loss Equation (RUSLE)
Over the last few decades, a co-operative effort between scientists and users to update the
USLE has resulted in the development of RUSLE. The modifications incorporated in USLE to result
the RUSLE are mentioned as under (Kenneth et.al. 1991):
 Computerizing the algorithms to assists the calculations.
 New rainfall-runoff erosivity term (R) in the Western US, based on more than 1200 gauge
locations.
 Some revisions and additions for the Eastern US, including corrections for high R-factor areas
with flat slopes to adjust splash erosion associated with raindrops falling on ponded water.
 Development of a seasonally variable soil erodibility term (K).
 A new approach for calculating the cover management term (C) with the sub-factors representing
considerations of prior land use, crop canopy, surface cover and surface roughness
 New slope length and steepness (LS) algorithms reflecting rill to inter-rill erosion ratio
 The capacity to calculate LS products for the slopes of varying shapes
 New conservation practices value (P) for range lands, strip crop rotations, contour factor values
and subsurface drainage.
Modified Universal Soil Loss Equation (MUSLE)
The USLE was modified by Williams in 1975 to MUSLE by replacing the rainfall energy
factor (R) with another factor called as ‘runoff factor’. The MUSLE is expressed as

where, Y = sediment yield from an individual storm (in metric tons),

Q = storm runoff volume in m3 and qp = the peak rate of runoff in m3/s.
All other factors K, (LS), C and P have the same meaning as in USLE. The values of Q and
qp can be obtained by appropriate runoff models. In this model Q is considered to represent
detachment process and qp is the sediment transport. It is a sediment yield model and does not need
separate estimation of sediment delivery ratio and is applicable to individual storms. Also it increases
sediment yield prediction accuracy. From modeling point of view, it has the advantage that daily,
monthly and annual sediment yields of a watershed can be modeled by combining appropriate
hydrological models with MUSLE.
 SCS-CN METHOD
The SCS curve-number (SCS-CN) method was developed by the Soil Conservation Service
for estimating runoff volume (SCS, 1969). It is widely used to estimate runoff from small-to medium-
sized watersheds. It relies on only one parameter, i.e., curve number CN.
Basic Concepts
Runoff volume Vq is the total volume of runoff water occurring over a period of time expressed as

Where, Qt is the discharge at time t.

This runoff volume resulted due to the precipitation occurred on a drainage basin. The Curve
Number Method is based on two phenomena. The fundamental hypotheses of this method are:
Runoff starts after an initial abstraction Ia (mainly consists of interception, surface/depression storage,
and infiltration) has been satisfied,
The ratio of actual retention of rainfall to the potential maximum retention S is equal to the
ratio of direct runoff to rainfall minus initial abstraction.
To describe the phenomena, mathematically the relationship can be expressed as:

Where F is the actual retention, S is the potential maximum retention, P is the accumulated
rainfall depth, Ia is the initial abstraction.
After runoff has started, the actual retention equals to rainfall minus initial abstraction and
runoff.
Thus,
F = P - Ia – Vq (6.3)
Putting Eq. (6.3) in (6.2) gives

Thus,

To eliminate the need to estimate the two variables Ia and S in Eq. (6.5), a regression analysis
was made on the basis of recorded rainfall and runoff data from small drainage basins (SCS 1972).
The following average relationship was found

Physically it means that for a given storm, 20% is the initial abstraction before the start of
runoff. For Indian conditions,

The value of Ia is subjected to corrections based on different AMC conditions and soil type
and can vary from 0.1S to 0.4S. For red soil (Alfisol) and black soil (Vertisol), Ia value is taken as
0.15S and 0.3S respectively (Dhruvanarayana, 1993).
Combining Eqns. (5) and (6) gives
 The Eq. (6.8) is the rainfall-runoff relationship used in the CN Method. It allows the runoff
depth to be estimated from rainfall depth, given the value of the potential maximum retention S.
Estimation of S
Estimation of the potential maximum retention, S in a watershed is very difficult as it depends
on the characteristics of soil-vegetation-land use (SVL) complex and antecedent soil-moisture
conditions. The Soil Conservation Service (SCS) expressed S as a function of curve number as:

or

Where CN is a dimensionless number ranging from 0-100, S is in inches. For SI unit of S

(mm) the Eq. (6.9) is modified to

The usual practice to compute runoff, Vq, first compute S for given CN values (using
Eq.6.10) and then substitute S in the (Eq. 6.8).
For example: For paved areas, when CN equals 100, S becomes zero (Eq.6.10) and all rainfall
will become runoff (Eq.6.8). In contrasts, for highly permeable, flat lying soils, when CN equals zero,
S will go to infinity, (Eq. 6.10), hence, all rainfall will infiltrate and there will be no runoff. In
drainage basins, the reality will be in between these two conditions.

To estimate the volume of direct runoff Eq. (6.8) and (6.10) can be used for the known
amount of precipitation and curve number. The SCS (1969) developed a graphical solution as shown
in Fig. 6.2 of these equations. Either of these approaches can be made to estimate the volume of
surface runoff.
Limitations of SCS CN Method
The followings are the limitations of SCS curve number method:
(i) The soil group of the basin should have uniform hydrologic characteristics.
(ii) Rainfall should be uniform and distributed uniformly over the basin area.
(iii) All other hydrologic characteristics should be uniform.
As most of the drainage basins do not satisfy the above assumptions, this curve number
method over-predicts by a large magnitude.
Peak Flow Rate Determination using SCS-CN
The SCS-CN estimates the peak runoff rate by using the following equation developed by
Ogrosky and Mockus (1957) by using the 6-hour rainfall as the design frequency of small watersheds.

Where Qp is peak rate of runoff in m3/s, Q is the runoff depth in cm, A is area of watershed
in ha, tp is the time to peak in hour. Time to peak, tp, is estimated from time of concentration, tc, in
hour, using the following equation:

The time of concentration, tc can be determined by the CN Method using the following
equation (Schwab et al., 1993):

Where L is the longest flow length in metre, CN is the curve number, Sg is the average slope
of the watershed in percent.
Hydrologic Soil Group
The CN values are highly dependent on the soil surface. The soil surfaces are grouped into 4
classes which are known as hydrologic soil groups. These are classified into 4 classes on the basis of
runoff potential of the surface and are described below:
  Group-A: (Lowest Runoff Potential): Soils in this group have the lowest runoff potential
(high infiltration rates) even when thoroughly wetted and consist chiefly of deep, well to
excessively drained sands or gravels. These soils have a high rate of water transmission.
 Group-B: (Moderately Low Runoff Potential): Soils having moderate infiltration rates when
thoroughly wetted and consisting chiefly of moderately deep to deep, well drained to
moderately well-drained soils with moderately fine to moderately coarse textures. These soils
have a moderate rate of water transmission.
 Group-C: (Moderately high Runoff Potential): Soils having slow infiltration rates when
thoroughly wetted and consisting chiefly of soils with a layer that impedes downward
movement of water, or soils with moderately fine to fine texture. These soils have a slow rate
of water transmission.
 Group-D: (Highest Runoff Potential): Soils having very slow infiltration rates when
thoroughly wetted and consisting chiefly of clay soils with a high swelling potential, soils
with a permanent high water table, soils with a clay pan or clay layer at or near the surface
and shallow soils over nearly impervious material. These soils have a very slow rate of water
transmission.
The characteristics and ranges of infiltration rates of the soil groups are described in Table 6.1.
Table 6.1. Soil group classification (Source: Singh, 1992)

Minimum infiltration
Group Soil characteristics
rate(in./h)

A Deep sand, deep loss, and aggregated silts 0.3-0.45

B Shallow losses and sandy loam 0.15-0.30

Clay loams, shallow sandy loam, soils in organic

C 0.05-0.15
content, and soils usually high in clay

Soils that swell upon wetting, heavy plastic clays,

D 0-0.05
and certain saline soils

Antecedent Moisture Condition (AMC)/Antecedent Runoff Conditions

Antecedent Moisture Condition is the preceding relative moisture of the pervious surfaces
prior to the rainfall event. AMC is an important factor in runoff process because it reflects the relative
saturation of the soil, which influences the infiltration process. AMC is also known as Antecedent
Runoff Condition (ARC). Antecedent moisture considered as low, when there has been little
preceding rainfall and high, when there has been considerable preceding rainfall prior to the rainfall
event under consideration. For purpose of practical application, SCS suggests three levels of AMC as
follows:
AMC-I: Soils are dry but not to wilting point. Satisfactory cultivation has taken place.
AMC-II: Average conditions.
AMC-III: Sufficient rainfall has occurred within the immediate past 5 days. Saturated soil conditions
prevail.
 The limits of these three AMC classes, based on total rainfall magnitude in the previous 5
days, are given in Table 6.2. It is to be noted that the limits also depend upon the seasons like growing
season and dormant season are considered.
Table 6.2. AMC for determining the value of CN

Total Rain in Previous 5 days

AMC Type
Dormant season Growing Season

I Less than 13 mm Less than 36 mm

II 13 to 28 mm 36 to 53 mm
III More than 28 mm More than 53 mm

Runoff Curve Number Determination

The determination of the CN value for a watershed is a function of soil characteristics,
hydrologic condition and cover or land use. CN values for Hydrological soil cover (Under AMC-II
conditions) for Indian conditions are given in Table 6.3. For watersheds with multiple soil types or
land uses, an area-weighted CN should be calculated. Table 6.4 shows the CN values for fully
developed and developing urban areas. For AMC condition I and III, the multiplying factors given in
Table 6.5 are used to convert the curve number for respective AMC conditions at interval of 10. For
other values of CN, multiplication factor can be obtained after interpolation.
Table 6.3. Runoff curve numbers (AMC-II) for the Indian conditions

Sl. No Landuse Treatment/Practice Hydrologic condition Hydrologic soil group

A B C D

1 Straight row ------- 76 86 90 93

Poor 70 79 84 88
Contour
Cultivated Good 65 75 82 86

Poor 66 74 80 82
Contour and

terraced
Good 67 75 81 83

Poor 59 69 76 79
Bunded
Good 95 95 5 95
 Paddy(rice) -----

With under stony cover ----- 39 53 67 71

2
Orchards
Without under Stony cover ----- 41 55 69 73

Dense ----- 26 40 58 61

3 open ----- 28 44 60 64
Forest

shrubs 33 47 64 67

------ Poor 68 79 86 89

4 Fair 49 69 79 84
Pasture

Good 39 61 74 80

5 Wasted Land ------ ----- 71 80 85 88

6 Hard surface ------ ------ 77 86 91 93

Table 6.4. Runoff curve number (values for fully developed and developing urban areas)

Curve numbers for

Cover description
hydrologic soil group

Average %

Cover type and hydrologic condition impervious A B C D

area

Open space (lawns, parks, golf courses, cemeteries, 39

etc.): 49

Good condition (grass cover > 75%) 68

61 74 80
Fair condition (grass cover 50% to 75%)
69 79 84
Poor condition (grass cover less than 50%) 79 86 89

Impervious areas: Paved parking lots, roofs,

driveways, compacted gravel, etc. (excluding right-
of-way) 98 98 98 98

Small open spaces within developments or ROW: 72 82 87 89

Streets and roads:

Paved: curbs and storm sewers (including right-of-

way) 90 93 95 97

Paved: open ditches (including right-of-way) 83 89 92 93

Gravel (including right-of-way) 76 85 89 91

Dirt (including right-of-way) 72 82 87 89

Urban districts: Commercial and business 85 89 92 94 95

Industrial 72 81 88 91 93

Residential districts by average lot size:

1/8 acre or less (townhouses) 65 77 85 90 92

1/4 acre 38 61 75 83 87

1/3 acre 30 57 72 81 86

1/2 acre 25 54 70 80 85

1 acre 20 51 68 79 84

2 acres 12 46 65 77 82

Developing urban areas:

Newly graded areas (pervious areas only, no

vegetation) 77 86 91 94

Table 6.5. Multiplication factor for converting AMC II to I and III conditions
 Factors to convert from AMC II to
Curve number/ weighted curve number for AMC II
AMC I AMC II

10 0.40 2.22

20 0.45 1.85

30 0.50 1.67

40 0.55 1.50

50 0.62 1.40

60 0.67 1.30

70 0.73 1.21

80 0.79 1.14

90 0.87 1.07

100 1.00 100

Example 6.1: In a watershed shown in the figure below, a water harvesting structure is planned to
construct at point A. The catchment area to this point is 137 ha, out of which 78 ha area is under
groundnut cultivated in straight row, 29 ha area is under fodder cultivation and remaining area is
covered with tree plantation. The prevailing soil type of the catchment is vertisol and rainfall analysis
suggested 86.4 mm 6-hours duration rainfall can be expected for 25 years return period and
experience frequent rainfall in the season. Determine the potential runoff volume that can be
generated from this catchment.
Solution: Since the soil type is vertisol (black soil), the hydrologic soil group of this catchment is D.
Using Table 3 the CN values for ground nut cultivation, fodder cultivation and plantation would be
93, 80 and 73 respectively.

Hence the weighted curve number would be

= (93×78+80×29+73×30)/137 = 85.86 or 86(say)

Since the area experience frequent rainfall, the AMC conditions would be III.

By linear interpolation, the multiplying factor for CN value of 86 would be 1.1. Hence the
converted CN value would be 86×1.1 = 95.6

Now, compute S, we know that

Therefore, S = 11.7

Since the soil type is black soil, Ia will be equal to 0.25S

Now

= 73.2 mm

Total volume of storage structure when all the runoff to be stored will be 10ha-m approximately.

PERMISSIBLE SOIL EROSION

Permissible soil erosion is the amount of soil loss that a soil can withstand without degrading
its long-term productivity. The idea of permissible erosion is to establish a limit on the amount of soil
that can be lost through erosion processes over a specified period (usually annually) without
compromising future productivity or environmental health.
Permissible erosion rates vary depending on soil type, vegetation cover, land use, and climate
conditions.
 Mg/ha/yr is considered a permissible erosion limit based on the assumption that this rate of
erosion equals soil formation.
LANDUSE AND CAPABILITY CLASSIFICATION
The land in any place is used for several purposes such as crop and livestock production,
forestry, housing, recreation, residential areas, markets, roads, railways etc. The most desired way of
using a particular land is possible when one can understand the type of the soil in the land capability
classification which gives complete information regarding various parameters based on which
classification is done.
1. Soil Use and Land Capability Classification
Land capability classification is a system of grouping soils primarily on the basis of their
capability to produce common cultivated crops and pasture plants without deterioration over a long
period of time. Land capability classification is subdivided into capability class and capability
subclass. Important factors on which the classification is based are:
 The soils are well managed and cropped under a mechanized system.
 Land requiring improvements including clearing that can be possible by the farmer with his
own means is classed according to its limitations or likely hazards due to its use after the
improvements are made. Land requiring improvements beyond the means of the farmer
himself is classed according to its present condition.
 Other factors like distances to markets, kind of roads, location, size of farms, type of
ownership, cultural patterns, skill or resources of individual operators and hazard of crop
damage by natural calamities like storms are not considered.
The classification does not include capability of soils for trees, tree fruits, small fruits, ornamental
plants, recreation or wildlife. The classes are based on intensity, rather than kind of their limitations
for agriculture. Each class includes many kinds of soil and many of the soils in any class require
different management and treatment.
2. Land Capability Classes and their Characteristics
In this classification the mineral soils are grouped into seven classes on the basis of soil
survey information. Soils classes as 1, 2, 3 and 4 are considered capable of sustained use for
cultivated field crops, those in classes 5 and 6 only for perennial forage crops and those in class 7 for
neither.
 Class 1 - Soils in this class have no significant limitations in use for crops. The soils are deep,
well to imperfectly drained, hold moisture well, and in the virgin state were well supplied
with plant nutrients. They can be managed and cropped without difficulty. Under good
management practices, they are moderately high to high in productivity for a wide range of
field crops.
 Class 2 - Soils in this class have moderate limitations that restrict the range of crops or
require moderate conservation practices. The soils are deep and hold moisture well. The
limitations being moderate, the soils can be managed and cropped with a little difficulty.
Under good management practices, they are moderately high to high in productivity for a
fairly wide range of crops.
 Class 3 - Soils in this class have moderately severe limitations that restrict the range of crops
or require special conservation practices. The limitations are more severe than for class 2
soils. They affect one or more of the following practices: timing and ease of tillage, planting
and harvesting, choice of crops, and methods of conservation. Under good management they
are fair to moderately high in productivity for a fair range of crops.
 Class 4 - Soils in this class have severe limitations that restrict the range of crops or require
special conservation practices or both. The limitations seriously affect one or more of the
 following practices: timing and ease of tillage, planting and harvesting, choice of crops and
methods of conservation. The soils are low to fair in productivity for a fair range of crops but
may have high productivity for a specially adapted crop.

Fig. 25.1. Land Capability Classes. (Source: Dhillon, 2004)

 Class 5 - Soils in this class have very severe limitations that restrict their capability to
produce perennial forage crops and improvement practices are feasible. The limitations are so
severe that soils are not capable of use for sustained production of annual field crops. The
soils are capable of producing native or tame species of perennial forage plants and may be
improved by the use of farm machinery. The improvement practices may include clearing of
bush, cultivation, seeding, fertilizing and water control.
 Class 6 - Soils in this class are capable only of producing perennial forage crops and
improvement practices are not feasible. The soils provide some sustained grazing for farm
animals, but the limitations are so severe that improvement by use of farm machinery is
impractical. In this class, terrain may be unsuitable for use of farm machinery or the soils may
not respond to improvement or the grazing season may be very short.
 Class 7 - Soils in this class have no capability for arable culture or permanent pasture. This
class also includes rock land, other non-soil areas, and bodies of water too small to be shown
on the maps.
 Class 0 - Organic soils (not placed in capability classes).
3. Land Capability Sub-Classes
Subclass Descriptions: Capability sub-class is the second category in the land capability
classification system. It represents the soils physical, chemical or atmospheric limitation due to which
the land use is further restricted. These land capability sub-classes can be described as below.
 'c' Adverse Climate - This subclass denotes a significant adverse climate for crop production
as 'median' climate which is defined as one with sufficiently high growing-season
temperatures to bring crops to maturity.
  'd' Undesirable Soil Structure and/or Low Permeability - This subclass indicates soils that are
difficult to till or soils where water is absorbed very slowly or where the depth of rooting zone
is restricted by conditions other than a high water table or consolidated bedrock.
 'e' Erosion - This subclass includes soils where damage from erosion is a limitation to
agricultural use. Damage is assessed on the loss of productivity and on the difficulties in
farming land with gullies.
 'f' Low Fertility - This subclass includes soils having low fertility that is either correctable
with careful management with the use of fertilizers and soil amendments or is difficult to
correct by any practical means. The limitations may be due to lack of plant nutrients, high
acidity or alkalinity, low cation exchange capacity, high levels of carbonates or presence of
toxic compounds.
 'i' Inundation by Streams or Lakes - This subclass includes soils subjected to inundation
causing crop damage or restricting agricultural use.
 'm' Moisture Limitations - This subclass consists of soils where crops are affected by drought
owing to inherent soil characteristics. These soils usually have low water-holding capacity.
 'n' Salinity - Soils of this subclass possess excessive soluble salts which adversely affect crop
growth or restrict the range of crops that may be grown.
 'p' Stoniness - These soils are sufficiently stoney to hinder tillage, planting and harvesting
operations.
 'r' Consolidated Bedrock - This subclass includes soils where the presence of bedrock near
the surface restricts their agricultural use. Consolidated bedrock at depths greater than 90 cm
from the surface is not considered as a limitation except on irrigated lands where a greater
depth of soil is desirable.
 's' Two interpretations were accorded to subclass s. In the case of maps generally prepared
before 1969, subclass s was used in place of subclasses d, f, m or n. If two or more of
subclasses d, f, m or n are applicable to the same area, then again subclass s may be used. On
most of the maps prepared after 1969, the applicable subclass d, f, m or n appear if an area is
classified with a single subclass. For areas classified with two or more of the d, f, m or n
subclasses, subclass s will appear denoting a combination of subclasses.
 't' Topography - This subclass is made up of soils where topography is a limitation. Both the
percent of slope and the pattern or frequency of slopes in different directions affect the cost of
farming and the uniformity of growth and maturity of crops as well as creates erosion hazard.
 'w' Excess Water - This subclass includes soils where excess water other than brought about
by inundation is a limitation to agricultural use. Excess water may result from inadequate soil
drainage, a high water table, seepage or runoff from surrounding areas.
 'x' - This subclass is comprised of soils having a limitation resulting from the cumulative
effect of two or more of the adverse characteristics.
4. Identification of Classes in Field
Soil and climatic limitations in relation to the use, management, and productivity of soils are
the basis for differentiating capability classes. Classes are based both on the degree and number of
limitations affecting the kind of use, risks of soil damage if mismanaged, needs for soil management
and risks of crop failure. It comes from research findings, field trials and experiences of farmers and
other agricultural workers. Among the more common kinds of information obtained are soil and water
losses, kinds and number of plants that can be grown, weather conditions as they affect the plants and
the effect of different levels of management practices on plant response. This information along with
the laboratory data on soil profiles is analyzed. Careful analysis of this information proves useful not
only in determining the capability of these individual types of soil but also in assessing the suitable
use and management of the related soils. Where information on response of soils to management is
lacking, the estimates of yields and the grouping of soils into capability units, sub-classes, and classes
are based on an evaluation of combinations of the followings:
 Ability of the soil for plant response due to management practices and use of nutrients as
evident by the availability of organic-matter content, ease of maintaining a supply of plant
nutrients, percentage base saturation, cation-exchange capacity, clay mineral type, parent
material type, available water holding capacity, response to added plant nutrients, or other soil
characteristics.
 Texture and structure of the soil to the depth that influences the environment of roots and the
movement of air and water.
 Susceptibility to erosion as influenced by the kind of soil (and slope) and the effect of erosion
on land use and management.
 Continuous or periodic water logging in the soil caused by slow permeability of the
underlying material, a high water table or flooding.
 Depth of soil material to layers inhibiting root penetration.
 Salts toxic to plant growth.
 Physical obstacles such as rocks, deep gullies, etc.
 Climate (temperature and effective moisture).
Although the soils of any area may differ from one another in only a few dozen
characteristics, none can be taken for granted. Extreme deficiencies or excesses of trace elements, for
example, can be vital. Any unfavorable fixed or recurring soil or landscape features may limit the safe
and productive use of the soil. One unfavorable feature in the soil may so limit its use that extensive
treatment would be required. Several minor unfavorable features collectively may become a major
problem and thus limit the use of the soil. The combined effect of these in relation to the use,
management, and productivity of soils is the criterion for different capability units. Some of the
criteria used to differentiate between the capability classes are discussed in the following sections.
The criteria and ranges in characteristics suggested assume that the effects of other soil characteristics
and qualities are favorable and are not limiting factors in placing the soils in the specific capability
classes.
5. Arid and Semiarid, Stony, Wet, Saline-Sodic and Overflow Soils
The capability-class designations are assigned to soils subject to flooding, poorly or
imperfectly drained soils, stony soils, dry soils needing supplemental water and soils having excess
soluble salts or exchangeable sodium on the basis of continuing limitations and hazards after removal
of excess water, stones, salts and exchangeable sodium.
The soils are classified into the following kinds on the basis of their existing continuing
limitations and hazards:
 Dry soils (arid and semiarid areas) now irrigated
 Soils from which stones have been removed
 Wet soils that have been drained
 Soils from which excess quantities of soluble salts or exchangeable sodium have been
removed
 Soils that have been protected from overflow.
The soils are classified into the following kinds on the basis of their continuing limitations
and hazards as if the correctable limitations had been removed or reduced:
 Dry soils not irrigated now but for which irrigation is feasible and water is available
 Stony soils for which stone removal is feasible
 Wet soils not drained now but for which drainage is feasible,
  Soils that contain excess quantities of soluble salts or exchangeable sodium feasible to
remove
The soils are classified into the following kinds on the basis of their existing continuing
limitations and hazards if the limitations cannot be feasibly corrected or removed:
 Dry soils,
 Stony soils,
 Soils with excess quantities of saline and sodic salts,
 Wet soils,
 Soils subject to overflow
6. Climatic Limitations
Climatic limitations (temperature and moisture) affect capability. Extremely low temperatures
and short growing seasons are limitations. Limited natural moisture supply affects the capability in
sub humid, semiarid and arid climates. As the classification in any locality is derived in part from the
observed performance of crop plants, the effects of the interaction of climate with soil characteristics
must be considered. The capability of comparable soils decreases as effective rainfall decreases. In an
arid climate, the moisture from rainfall is not enough to support crops. Arid land can be classed as
suited to cultivation (class I, II, III or IV) only if the moisture limitation is removed by irrigation.
Wherever the moisture limitation is removed, the soil is classified according to the effects of other
permanent features and hazards that limit its use and permanence, without losing sight of the practical
requirements of irrigation farming.
7. Wetness Limitations
Excess water in the soil presents a hazard or limits to its use. Such water may be a result of
poor soil drainage, high water table, overflow (includes stream overflow, ponding, and runoff water
from higher areas), and seepage. Wet soils are classified according to their continuing soil limitations
and hazards after drainage. In determining the capability of wet areas, emphasis is laid on the
practices considered practical now or in the foreseeable future.
8. Toxic Salts
Presence of soluble salts or exchangeable sodium in amounts toxic to most of the plants can
be a serious limiting factor in land use. Where toxic salts are the limiting factor, the following ranges
are the general guides until more specific criteria are available:
 Class II -- Crops slightly affected.
 Class III -- Crops moderately affected.
 Classes IV-VI -- Crops seriously affected on cultivated land. Usually only salt-tolerant plants
will grow on non-cultivated land. In irrigated areas, even after leaching, severe salinity or
large amounts of sodium remains or is likely to recur.
 Class VII -- Satisfactory growth of useful vegetation is impossible, except possibly for some
of the most salt-tolerant forms.
9. Slope and Hazard of Erosion
The steepness of slope, length of slope and shape of slope (convex or concave) all directly
influence the soil and water losses from a field. Wherever available, research data on annual soil loss
under given levels of management are used on sloping soils to differentiate between the capability
classes.
10.Soil Depth
Effective depth includes the total depth of the soil profile favorable for root development. In
some soils, this includes the C horizon; in a few case only the A horizon is included. Where the depth
is the limiting factor, the following ranges are commonly used:
 Class I, 36 inches (91.44 cm) or more
  Class II, 20-36 inches (50.8 - 91.44 cm)
 Class III, 10-20 inches (25.4 - 50.8 cm)
 Class IV, less than 10 inches (25.4 cm)
These ranges in soil depth between classes vary from one section of the country to another depending
on the climate. In arid and semiarid areas, irrigated soils in class I are 60 inches or more in depth.
11.Previous Erosion
On some kinds of soils, previous erosion reduces crop yields and the choice of crops
materially; on others the effect is not great. The effect of past erosion limits the use of soils (1) where
subsoil characteristics are unfavorable or (2) where soil material favorable for plant growth is shallow
to bedrock or material similar to bedrock. Therefore, in some soils, the degree of erosion influences
the capability grouping.
12.Available Moisture-Holding Capacity
Water-holding capacity is an important quality of soil. Soils that have limited moisture-
holding capacity are likely to have limitations in variety of crops that can be grown. They also present
fertility and other management problems. The ranges in water-holding capacity for the soils in the
capability classes vary to a limited degree with the amount and distribution of effective precipitation
during the growing season. Within a capability class, the range in available moisture-holding capacity
varies from one climatic region to another.

CLASSIFICATION OF ERODED SOILS

The classification of eroded soils is typically based on the extent and severity of the erosion
that has occurred. This classification helps in assessing the impacts of erosion on soil quality and in
determining the necessary management practices to mitigate soil loss and rehabilitate eroded lands.
The following are common categories used to classify eroded soils:
1. Slightly eroded
 Description: Minimal soil loss that has little to no impact on the productive capacity of the
soil.
 Impact: Usually, the soil retains its structure and fertility, requiring minimal intervention to
maintain productivity.
2. Moderately Eroded
 Description: Noticeable soil loss where the top layer of soil is removed but some level of
productive capacity is retained.
 Impact: Soil fertility and structure may be compromised to some extent, necessitating
conservation practices to prevent further erosion and restore soil health.
3. Severely Eroded
 Description: Significant removal of the topsoil layer, exposing subsoil, which is often less
fertile and has poorer physical properties.
 Impact: The productive capacity of the soil is substantially reduced. Extensive soil
conservation and rehabilitation measures are required to restore productivity, such as soil
amendments, cover cropping, and contour ploughing.
4. Very Severely Eroded
 Description: Most of the topsoil is removed, exposing parent material or bedrock in some
places.
 Impact: The land is often considered unsuitable for conventional agriculture without
significant rehabilitation efforts, such as regarding the landscape, adding topsoil, and
employing aggressive erosion control measures.
Special Categories
 Gullied: Characterized by deep channels or gullies formed by running water, making the land
difficult to use for agriculture without major reclamation work.
 Sheet erosion is the uniform removal of soil in thin layers by raindrop impact and shallow
surface flow, which can be hard to detect in the early stages.
 Rill Erosion: Small, narrow channels formed by running water after heavy rains can rapidly
develop into more severe forms of erosion if not addressed.