See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: [Link]

net/publication/283448952

Runoff Coefficient for different hilly micro watersheds under different land uses

Article · April 2015

CITATION READS
1 1,934

3 authors, including:

Parmendra Prasad Dabral

North Eastern Regional Institute of Science and Technology
73 PUBLICATIONS 1,253 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Parmendra Prasad Dabral on 06 January 2017.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Journal of Indian Water Resources Society,
Vol 35, No.2, April, 2015

RUNOFF COEFFICIENT FOR DIFFERENT HILLY MICRO WATERSHEDS

UNDER DIFFERENT LAND USES
Pulkabha Chowdhury1, P. P. Dabral1 and R. K. Singh2

ABSTRACT
The study was carried out to estimate maximum runoff coefficients under different land uses of a hilly watershed. Nine different land uses
(Live stock based farming system -W1, timber plantation -W2, agro-forestry -W3, agriculture in bench terrace -W4, agri-horti-silvipastoral
system -W5, horticulture -W6, natural vegetation -W7, fellow under shifting cultivation-W8 and pine plantation -WAEW) were considered
under farming system research project site at ICAR Research Complex for NEH Region, Umiam, Meghalaya. The rational method for
computing runoff coefficient under different land uses of nine hilly micro watersheds has been successfully used. Amongst the nine different
micro watersheds, the highest mean monthly maximum runoff coefficient (0.432) was found in micro watershed W 8 (average slope 54.87%)
followed by micro watersheds W2 (average slope 38%) and W3 (average slope 33%) with mean monthly values of maximum runoff
coefficient of 0.291 and 0.271 respectively. The lowest mean monthly maximum runoff coefficient (0.0705) was found in micro watershed
W7 (average slope 53.18%). In the micro watersheds W1 (average slope 32%), W4 (average land slope 32.18%), W5 (average slope 32.42%)
and W6 (slope 41.77%) mean monthly maximum runoff coefficient values were obtained 0.0906, 0.1348, 0.1167 and 0.1754 respectively.
For the sediment producing events, the maximum runoff coefficients for the micro watersheds W1,W2,W3, W4, W5 and W6 were found in the
range of 0.085-0.098, 0.356-0.518, 0.293-0.359, 0.105-0.191, 0.105-0.189 and 0.181-0.458 respectively. The mean values of maximum
runoff coefficient for the micro watersheds W1, W2, W3, W4, W5 and W6 were found 0.091, 0.421, 0.319, 0.138, 0.147 and 0.336 respectively.
Keywords : Runoff Coefficient, Land Uses, Hilly micro watershed

INTRODUCTION In the NE Hills Region of India, such type of runoff

Runoff coefficient (C) is defined as the ratio of the peak runoff coefficients estimation study is rare for different land use
rate to the rainfall intensity. In the actual condition, the runoff systems. The selected site of the current study is located in the
rate within the catchment varies from place to place or ICAR Research Complex for North Eastern Hills Region,
watershed to watershed because of different soil properties and Barapani (Umiam), Meghalaya. The area consists of typical
land-use. In any water resource design, the values of the runoff hilly undulating terrain with the elevation varying between 952
coefficient are taken from standard tables depending on the and 1082 meters above mean sea level. The experimental site
description of the area. The main concern in selecting the falls under class VII land. Nine micro watersheds with areas
runoff coefficient values is that these values are chosen based varying from 0.52 ha to 3.8 ha were identified to determine the
on the personal judgment, which sometimes may be quite effect of land use systems on runoff yield. The average slope
vague. Singh (1992) mentioned that watershed runoff of the experimental watersheds varied from 32.02 to 53.18 per
coefficients depend upon the land use, soil type and slope of cent. For the present experimental site, Satapathy and Panda
the watershed. Runoff coefficients are needed to calculate (2006) estimated the maximum runoff coefficients for storm
storm water runoff rate using the Rational method. Bayazıt with antecedent rainfall of more than 5.25 cm. However, no
(1995) concluded that the runoff coefficient values generally information is available for the study area for different land
change between 0.05 and 0.50. Adhikari et al. (2002) carried uses on the estimation of maximum runoff coefficients for
out studies on runoff coefficient using rational formula for 03 mean monthly basis, considering the storms of all events and
sites of the semi - arid region of India. Long term runoff, also for those events which produce sediments. Therefore, the
rainfall data and stage level records were used in the study. present study was planned to estimate maximum runoff
The results show that the estimated ‘C’ values are 40 to 60 % coefficients (month wise) and mean monthly maximum runoff
less than the ‘C’ values obtained from the standard table. They coefficients under different land uses, considering the storms
used the estimated values of ‘C’ in in determining the peak of all events and also for those events which produce
discharge and thereby the size of the structure and water sediments.
disposal systems get reduced resulting in the reduction of the
cost of the various structures. Cerdan et al. (2004) analyzed
MATERIALS AND METHODS
345 rainfall-runoff events in different size catchments in About the Study Area
France. Results indicated that the larger the catchment area The site of the current study was at the ICAR Research
smaller is the runoff coefficient. Dhaka et al. (2013) studied Complex for North Eastern Hills Region situated at Barapani
the estimation of rational runoff coefficients for Texas (presently Umiam) in the state of Meghalya; Barapani
watersheds. Runoff coefficients were also estimated from (Umiam) is located between 25o41’N latitude and between
observed rainfall and runoff data of more than 1600 events in 91o54’, and 91o63’E longitudes and 22 km away from Shillong
these watersheds. (Meghalaya). The area comprises of rolling terrains and steep
slopes interspersed with valleys and plateaus. The area
1. Department of Agricultural Engineering, North Eastern Regional
Institute of Science and Technology, Nirjuli (Itanagar)-791109,
consisted of typical hilly undulating terrain with the altitude
Arunachal Pradesh varying between 952 and 1082 meters above mean sea level.
2. Agricultural Engineering Division, ICAR Research Complex for The study area typically represents the soil and climate
NEH Region, Barapani (Umiam), Meghalaya. conditions of North Eastern Region. The mean annual rainfall
Manuscript No.: 1407 is 2390 mm with more than 88% occurring during the period

34
 J. Indian Water Resour. Soc., Vol 35, No. 2, April 2015

from May-October. The daily temperature during a year was ranging from 1.7 to 3.8 mm day-1. Average monthly rainfall of
recorded to be varied widely between 1 oC to 32.5OC. The the site is 205 mm. During June-September average monsoon
relative humidity remains between 75 to 83% during the most rainfall is 359 mm. The maximum mean monthly rainfall of
of the period, but reduces to as low as 58% during 15 th week 443.9 mm usually occurs in July, while the minimum rainfall
and attains peak values of 90% during the month of August of 14.6 mm occurs in December. Most of the rain is
and October. Bright sunshine hours vary from 9 to 11 hours convectional in origin. Storm precipitation can exceed 100 mm
during the months of November to April and remains in the on occasions with rainfall intensities as high as 20–25 mm hr-1
range of 2 to 8 hours during May to October. During the period for considerable periods. The experimental area falls under the
from February to April the wind velocity is quite prominent class VII land. The soil belonging to typic paleudalf series with
and remains in the range of 4.2-12.9 km hr-1. The evaporation clay loam texture has pH from 5.4 to 6.2. The average slope of
rate during the month of March and April remains very high in the experimental watersheds varied from 32.02 to 53.18 per
the range of 4.1 mm day-1 to 9.0 mm day-1. The average value cent. Details of the experimental watersheds under various
of evaporation rate during the rest of the year was found to be farming systems are presented in Table 1 and Fig.1.

Table 1: Details of experimental watersheds under various land use system

Land Total Relief Maximum Maximum Average Soil Soil and Water
Use/Watersheds Area (m) Length width(m) slope Texture Conservation
(ha) (m) (%) measures
Agriculture (Fodder 1.39 99.0 301 65 32.00 Clay Contour bunds,
crops)-W1 contour trenches
and bench
terraces
Forestry (Timber, 3.80 100.0 320 230 38.00 Clay -
fuel, fodder)-W2
Agro-forestry 2.94 100.0 295 175 33.00 Clay -
(Timber, fuel fodder,
trees, pine apple,
fodder, grasses,
legumes crops)-W3

Agriculture (Food 0.64 82.0 240 65 32.18 Clay Contour bunds

crops)-W4 and bench
terraces

Agri-horti- 1.58 89.0 260 85 32.42 Clay Contour bunds,

silvipastoral system Bench terraces
(Food fodder and and half moon
Fodder crops) -W5 terraces

Horticulture-W6 3.13 138.0 515 85 41.77 Clay Contour bunds,

(Fruit and vegetable Bench terraces &
crops) half moon
terraces

Natural vegetation-W7 1.03 91.0 250 70 53.18 Clay -

(Natural flora)
Agriculture (Fallow 0.52 65.0 185 48 54.87 Clay -
under shifting
cultivation)-W8

Pine plantation & 3.54 120.0 464 126 32.37 Clay -

natural vegetation-
WAEW
(Pine tree and natural
flora)
(Source: Satapathy, K.K. and Panda, R.K., 2006; Satapathy, 1996)
35
 J. Indian Water Resour. Soc., Vol 35, No. 2, April 2015

Fig. 1: Micro watershed W1-W8 and WAEW

Available Data on actual, simultaneous measurements of both rainfall and

The rainfall data of recording type rain-gauge were collected runoff in the project area. The runoff coefficient from an
from a meteorological observatory situated in ICAR Research individual rainstorm is defined as runoff divided by the
Complex at Umaiam (Barapani) for the period 1983-2006. corresponding rainfall both expressed as a depth over the
Runoff data (1983-2006) were also collected from different catchment area (mm):
micro watersheds recorded at different stage level recorder Runoff [mm]
C (1)
located in the different micro watersheds of the study area. Rainfall [mm]
In the study area almost 70-80% of the annual rainfall is Quite a large number of investigators have estimated runoff
confined to only monsoon months (June-September). The total coefficient through heuristic approach on the basis of a
water yield, base flow, surface flow and peak flow were different empirical formula, but Rational Method is the only
estimated through stage level recorder chart analysis. method widely used all over the world. Rational Method is
Estimation of Runoff Coefficient suitable for small catchments only because the time of
An analysis of the rainfall-runoff relationship and subsequently concentration of small catchments is small. In Rational Method
an assessment of relevant runoff coefficients should be based the peak runoff is calculated based on the assumption that the
36
 J. Indian Water Resour. Soc., Vol 35, No. 2, April 2015

time of concentration is equal to the rainfall duration. For Q = CIA English units (2)
small catchments, this assumption may hold true in most
CIA
circumstances. One of the assumptions of Rational Method is Q Metric units (3)
that rainfall intensity over the entire catchment remains K
constant during the storm duration. However, in case of a large
catchment it stands a high probability that rainfall intensity Where, Q = an estimate of the peak rate of runoff, measured in
varies in various part of the large catchment. In addition, for cubic feet (meters) per second, C = the fraction of rainfall that
long duration of rainfall, it is rare that the rainfall intensity appears as surface runoff from the drainage area (the ratio of
remains constant over the entire rainstorm and a shorter surface runoff to rainfall), I = the average rainfall intensity,
duration but a more intense rainfall could produce a higher measured in inches (millimeters) per hour, A = the drainage
peak runoff. Moreover, a reduction of peak runoff is also area, measured in acres (hectares) (the area of land that drains
brought about by the temporary storage of storm water like into a given intake or culvert inlet) and K = 360.
channels within the catchment. In the present study area, most Time of concentration (Tc) is the time for the runoff to become
of the micro watershed is very small in size. Therefore, established and flow from the most remote part of the drainage
Rational Method was used to estimate the runoff coefficient area to drainage outlet. In this study, the value of estimated T c
for different micro watershed under different land uses. obtained from commonly used Kirpitch formula as given
Rational Method below:
The calculation used for this is referred to as “The Rational Tc = 0.0078 (3.28 Lv / √S’) 0.77 (4)
Method,” and it depends primarily on the following formula:
Where, Tc is the time of concentration, min; Lv, length of a

Table 2: Peak runoff (Q), time of concentration (Tc), rainfall intensity (I) and maximum runoff coefficient
(C) values for different micro watersheds

May June July

Micro
watershed Q Tc I C Q Tc I C Q Tc I C
( m3 s-1) (min) (mm hr-1) (m3 s-1) (min) (mm hr-1) (m3 s-1) (min) (mm hr-1)
W1 0.0035 13.7 11.90 0.0761 0.0060 13.7 13.85 0.1122 0.0065 13.7 15.98 0.1053
W2 0.0280 15.9 11.90 0.2229 0.0300 15.9 13.85 0.2052 0.0600 15.9 15.98 0.3557

W3 0.0200 13.7 11.90 0.2058 0.0260 13.7 13.85 0.2299 0.0450 13.7 15.98 0.3448
W4 0.0100 11.0 11.90 0.0191 0.0110 11.0 13.85 0.1810 0.0130 11.0 15.98 0.1854

W5 0.0200 12.0 11.90 0.0945 0.0030 12.0 13.85 0.1218 0.0050 12.0 15.98 0.1760

W6 0.0200 26.9 11.90 0.1933 0.0220 26.9 13.85 0.1827 0.0400 26.9 15.98 0.2879
W7 0.0020 14.7 11.90 0.0587 0.0022 14.7 13.85 0.0555 0.0039 14.7 15.98 0.0875

W8 0.0022 11.1 11.90 0.1280 0.0065 11.1 13.85 0.3249 0.0150 11.1 15.98 0.6499
WAEW 0.0020 21.3 11.90 0.0171 0.0120 21.3 13.85 0.0881 0.0350 21.3 15.98 0.2227

August September October

Micro
watershed Q Tc I C Q Tc I C Q Tc I C
(m3s-1) (min) (mm hr-1) (m3s-1) (min) (mm hr-1) (m3s-1) (min) (mm hr-1)

W1 0.0075 13.7 19.80 0.0981 0.0025 13.7 9.76 0.0663 0.0250 13.7 7.60 0.0852

W2 0.0800 15.9 19.80 0.3828 0.0320 15.9 19.80 0.3106 0.0220 15.9 7.60 0.2742

W3 0.0550 13.7 19.80 0.3401 0.0210 13.7 19.80 0.2635 0.0150 13.7 7.60 0.2417

W4 0.0140 11.0 19.80 0.1611 0.0040 11.0 19.80 0.0934 0.0020 11.0 7.60 0.0600

W5 0.0065 12.0 19.80 0.1847 0.0021 12.0 19.80 0.1210 0.0015 12.0 7.60 0.1110

W6 0.0600 26.9 19.80 0.3485 0.0020 26.9 19.80 0.0200 0.0010 26.9 7.60 0.0197

W7 0.0059 14.7 19.80 0.1059 0.0018 14.7 19.80 0.0645 0.0011 14.7 7.60 0.0506

W8 0.0250 11.1 19.80 0.8741 0.0065 11.1 19.80 0.4611 0.0017 11.1 7.60 0.1549

WAEW 0.0435 21.3 19.80 0.2234 0.0150 21.3 19.80 0.1563 0.0110 21.3 7.60 0.1472

37
 J. Indian Water Resour. Soc., Vol 35, No. 2, April 2015

main valley, m; and S’ is the basin relief. the gauging station. From the rest of the micro watershed, base
flow occurred occasionally when there was continuous heavy
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION rainfall.
Table 2 presents the peak runoff (Q), time of concentration
(Tc), rainfall intensity (I) and maximum runoff coefficients (C) The soil conservation measures, i.e. contour bunds, contour
of nine micro-watersheds. Maximum runoff coefficients of trenches, bench terraces half-moon terraces etc. were practiced
various micro watersheds under different land uses were in all the micro watersheds W1, W4, W5 and [Link]
estimated using twenty four-years monthly rainfall and runoff conservation measures were most effective in retaining 90-
data. Mean monthly rainfall intensities during the month of 100% annual rainfall in situ and simulated the effects of
May, June, July, August, September and October were natural forests. Due to this reason, the micro watersheds W1,
observed 11.90, 13.85, 15.98, 19.80, 9.76 and 7.60 mm hr -1 W4, W5 and W6 had shown comparatively low runoff
respectively. The time of concentration for micro watersheds coefficients, 0.0906, 0.1167, 0.1348 and 0.1754 respectively.
W1, W2, W3, W4, W5, W6, W7 W8 and WAEW were estimated In the micro-watershed W7 (natural vegetation based farming
13.75, 19.93, 13.70, 10.99, 11.95, 26.88, 14.72, 11.07 and system), mean runoff coefficient was found to be the lowest
21.32 minutes respectively. The peak runoff (Q) of micro (0.0705) and no sediment producing event was also observed.
watersheds W1, W2, W3, W4, W5, W6, W7 W8 and WAEW were The micro watershed W7 having undisturbed natural vegetation
recorded in the range of 0.002-0.020, 0.0022-0.030, 0.0039- with substantial vegetative cover which produced very small
0.065, 0.0065-0.080, 0.0018-0.0320 and 0.0010-0.0250 m3 s-1 surface runoff. In the present study, mean runoff coefficients
respectively. for different micro watersheds were found in the range of
0.0906 to 0.4321. This is confirmation of the findings of
Table 3 presents the maximum runoff coefficients (month Satapathy and Panda (2006) who also concluded that
wise) and mean monthly maximum runoff coefficients under maximum runoff coefficients values were in the range of 0.090
different land uses. The maximum runoff coefficients during to 0.410 for the same micro watersheds of the study area.
the month of May, June, July, August, September and October Bayazıt (1995) in his study also concluded that the runoff
for nine different watersheds W1, W2, W3, W4, W5, W6, W7, W8 coefficient values generally ranges between 0.05 and 0.50.
and WAEW were found in the range of 0.0663-0.1122, 0.2052-
0.3828, 0.2058-0.3448, 0.019-0.1854, 0.0945-0.1847, 0.020- After the year 1988, due to the interventions of conservation
0.3485, 0.0506-0.1059, 0.1280-0.8741 and 0.0171- 0.0034 measures like contour bundling, contour trenching, bench
respectively. Amongst the nine different micro watersheds, the terraces and half-moon terraces in micro watersheds W1, W4,
highest mean monthly maximum runoff coefficient (0.432) W5 and W6 and substantial vegetation cover in micro
was found in micro watershed W8 (fallow under shifting watersheds W2 and W3, no sediment producing event was
cultivation and having average slope 54.87%) followed by witnessed. Therefore, runoff coefficients could not be
micro watersheds W2 (forestry based farming system and estimated for the sediment producing event after the year 1988
having average slope 38%) and W3 (agro-forestry based in these micro [Link] the micro watersheds W7, W8
farming system and having average slope 33%) with mean and WAEW, no sediment producing event was found from the
monthly values of maximum runoff coefficient of 0.291 and recorded data since 1984. Hence, runoff coefficient could not
0.271 respectively. During the investigation, the lowest mean be estimated for micro watersheds W7, W8 and WAEW.
monthly maximum runoff coefficient (0.0705) was found in Table 4 presents the maximum runoff coefficients based on
the micro watershed W7 (natural vegetation based farming sediment producing events. The rainfall intensities of the
system having average slope 53.18%). In the micro watersheds micro watersheds W1, W2, W3, W4, W5 and W6 were observed
W1 (livestock based farming system-agriculture having in the range of 12.3-17.3, 8.4-14.56, 8.1-15.3, 12.1-21.2, 8.4-
average slope 32%), W4 (food based agriculture farming 22.5 and 8.4-23.1 mm hr-1 respectively. The time of
system having average land slope 32.18%), W5 (agri-horti- concentration for the micro watersheds W1, W2, W3, W4, W5
silvi-pastoral based farming system having average slope and W6 were estimated 13.75, 19.93, 13.70, 10.99, 11.95,
32.42%) and W6 (horticulture based farming system having 26.88, 14.72, 11.07 and 21.32 minutes respectively. The peak
average slope 41.77%) mean monthly maximum runoff runoff (Q) of the micro watersheds W1, W2, W3, W4, W5 and
coefficient were obtained 0.0906, 0.1348, 0.1167 and 0.1754 W6 were recorded in the range of 0.00405-0.00650, 0.0316-
respectively (Table 3). 0.0660, 0.02152-0.05075, 0.00325-0.00590, 0.00476-0.01746
Results revealed that the mean monthly maximum runoff and 0.01540-0.48180 m3 s-1 respectively. The maximum runoff
coefficients for the micro watersheds W8, W2 and W3 were coefficients for the micro watersheds W1, W2, W3, W4, W5 and
higher than the other micro watersheds. This is due to the fact W6 were found in the range of 0.085-0.098, 0.356-0.518,
that micro watersheds W2 and W3 were having relatively large 0.293-0.359, 0.105-0.191, 0.105-0.189 and 0.181-0.458
areas [W2 (3.8ha), W3 (2.94ha)] and on an average, had respectively. The mean value of maximum runoff coefficients
continuous base flow for 156 and 116 days respectively in a for the micro watersheds W1, W2, W3, W4, W5 and W6 were
year. The annual base flow from these two micro watersheds found 0.091, 0.421, 0.319, 0.138, 0.147 and 0.336 respectively
constitutes about eighty percent of the total water yield. The (Table 4.4). In case of sediment producing events, the highest
micro watershed W8 was having a less vegetative cover and maximum runoff coefficient (0.421) was found in the micro-
land was fallow under shifting cultivation which resulted in watershed W2 (forestry based farming system- timber, fuel,
more runoff. The micro watershed W8 (0.52ha) was adjacent to fodder) whereas the lowest maximum runoff coefficient
micro watershed WAEW (3.54ha) which was having 190 days of (0.0913) was found in the micro-watershed W1 (livestock
continuous base flow. This appeared on the upper reaches of based farming system- agriculture) ( Table 4).

38
 J. Indian Water Resour. Soc., Vol 35, No. 2, April 2015
Table3: Peak runoff (Q), time of concentration (Tc), rainfall intensity (I) and maximum runoff coefficient (C)
values for different microwatersheds for the storm events producing sediment yield
W1 W2 W3

Date Q Tc I C Date Q Tc I C Date Q Tc I C

( m3s-1) (min) (mm r-1) ( m3s-1) (min) (mm hr-1) ( m3s-1) (min) (mm hr-1)
7/5/88 0.00405 13.7 12.3 0.0853 5/6/85 0.0660 15.93 14.56 0.4294 6/17/85 0.03490 13.6 11.6 0.2935
7/6/88 0.00509 13.7 14.56 0.0905 6/19/85 0.0629 15.93 13.20 0.4514 8/24/85 0.05075 13.6 12.5 0.3595
7/7/88 0.00650 13.7 17.3 0.0973 8/17/85 0.0575 15.93 14.30 0.3891 10/15/85 0.02152 13.6 8.1 0.3132
8/25/85 0.0616 15.93 12.60 0.4632 6/23/88 0.03545 13.6 15.3 0.2985
9/27/85 0.0553 15.93 10.10 0.5187 6/27/88 0.03990 13.6 13.1 0.3356
10/15/85 0.0316 15.93 8.40 0.3562
10/23/85 0.0363 15.93 8.70 0.3955
5/11/88 0.0538 15.93 13.50 0.3775
6/11/88 0.0652 15.93 14.30 0.4319
6/23/88 0.0621 15.93 14.50 0.4057

W4 W5 W6
Date Q Tc I C Date Q Tc I C Date Q Tc I C
( m3s-1) (min) (mm hr-1) ( m3s-1) (min) (mm hr-1) ( m3s-1) (min) (mm hr-1)
7/15/8 0.00590 10.99 17.3 0.19184 6/4/85 0.00672 11.95 14.56 0.1052 7/10/84 0.04670 26.8 17.1 0.31411
4
8/5/84 0.00434 10.99 21.2 0.11515 6/5/85 0.00890 11.95 14.16 0.1432 7/18/84 0.02980 26.8 16.3 0.21027
8/21/8 0.00400 10.99 20.5 0.10976 8/17/85 0.01285 11.95 21.00 0.1394 8/3/84 0.05350 26.8 21.2 0.29025
4
8/22/8 0.00530 10.99 19.3 0.15447 8/27/85 0.00980 11.95 21.20 0.1053 8/5/84 0.07000 26.8 20.1 0.40055
4
4/6/85 0.00358 10.99 12.1 0.16643 9/27/85 0.01100 11.95 14.50 0.1729 8/13/84 0.04680 26.8 21.0 0.25632
8/6/85 0.00503 10.99 21.2 0.13346 10/1/85 0.00476 11.95 8.40 0.1291 8/21/84 0.06400 26.8 21.6 0.34079
6/17/8 0.00330 10.99 14.6 0.12714 6/24/88 0.00970 11.95 14.45 0.1518 8/22/84 0.08850 26.8 23.1 0.44065
5
6/24/8 0.00393 10.99 18.2 0.12146 7/4/88 0.01046 11.95 17.30 0.1378 9/23/84 0.02805 26.8 10.7 0.30151
5
6/24/8 0.00478 10.99 14.5 0.18543 7/5/88 0.01061 11.95 17.30 0.1398 6/4/85 0.02730 26.8 17.3 0.18150
8
7/5/88 0.00325 10.99 17.3 0.10567 7/6/88 0.01168 11.95 18.30 0.1454 6/5/85 0.04260 26.8 15.3 0.32024
7/6/88 0.00333 10.99 16.7 0.11216 8/25/88 0.01730 11.95 22.50 0.1752 9/23/85 0.04110 26.8 10.5 0.45021
8/27/88 0.01746 11.95 21.00 0.1894 9/27/85 0.06100 26.8 21.2 0.33094
7/3/89 0.01170 11.95 17.30 0.1541 10/1/86 0.01540 26.8 8.4 0.21086
7/27/89 0.01090 11.95 15.30 0.1623 10/7/86 0.01787 26.8 8.22 0.25004
7/29/89 0.01110 11.95 14.70 0.172 6/23/88 0.04275 26.8 15.3 0.32137
6/27/88 0.48180 26.8 13.6 0.40746
7/5/88 0.04350 26.8 15.7 0.31867
7/6/88 0.04508 26.8 12.3 0.42154
7/8/88 0.06000 26.8 14.3 0.48258

Table 4: Mean value of maximum runoff coefficients (C) of different micro watersheds for
the storm events producing sediment yield

Micro watershed W1 W2 W3 W4 W5 W6
Mean value 0.910 0.421 0.320 0.138 0.148 0.340

Results obtained in this study can be applicable to similar W6, W7, W8 and WAEW were found in the range of
characteristics watersheds of a hilly area or similar agro- 0.0663-0.1122, 0.2052-0.3828, 0.2058-0.3448, 0.019-
climatic region. 0.1854, 0.0945-0.1847, 0.020-0.3485, 0.0506-0.1059,
0.1280-0.8741 and 0.0171- 0.0034 respectively.
CONCLUSIONS
Important conclusions of the study are as follows: 2. Amongst the nine different micro watersheds, the
1. The maximum runoff coefficients during the month of highest mean monthly maximum runoff coefficient
May, June, July, August, September and October for (0.432) was found in the micro watershed W 8 (fallow
the nine different watersheds W1, W2, W3, W4, W5, under shifting cultivation and having average slope

39
 J. Indian Water Resour. Soc., Vol 35, No. 2, April 2015

54.87%) followed by the micro watersheds W 2 REFERENCES

(forestry based farming system and having average 1. Adhikari, R. N., Rama Mohab Rao, M. S., Selvi, .,
slope 38%) and W3 (agro-forestry based farming Math, S. K. N., Husenappa, Chandrapa, M. and Reddy,
system and having average slope 33%) with mean K. 2002. Studies on runoff coefficient of rational
monthly values of maximum runoff coefficient of formula. Indian Journal of Soil Conservation.,30 (1)
0.291 and 0.271 respectively. The lowest mean :106-108.
monthly maximum runoff coefficient (0.0705) was
found in the micro watershed W7 (natural vegetation 2. Bayazıt, M. 1995. Istanbul Teknik Üniversitesi Insaat
based farming system having average slope 53.18%). Fakultesi Matbaası. Hidroloji. (6. Baski).
In the micro watersheds W1 (livestock based farming 3. Cerdan, O., Bissonnais, Y. Le, Govers, G., Leconte, V.,
system-agriculture having average slope 32%), W4 Van Oost, K., Couturier A., King, C. and Dubreuil, N.
(food based agriculture, farming system having an 2004. Scale effects on runoff from experimental plots to
average land slope 32.18%), W5 (agri-horti-silvi- catchments in agricultural areas in Normandy, J.
pastoral based farming system having average slope Hydrol., Amsterdam. 299: 4–14, DOI:10.1016/
32.42%) and W6 (horticulture based farming system [Link].
having average slope 41.77%) mean monthly values
of maximum runoff coefficient were obtained 0.0906, 4. Dhakal N., Fang X., Cleveland, T.G., Thompson, D.B.
0.1348, 0.1167 and 0.1754 respectively. and Marzen, L.J. 2013. Estimation of Rational Runoff
Coefficients for Texas Watersheds. CATENA. 107: 35–
3. For the sediment producing events, the maximum 40.
runoff coefficients for the micro watersheds W 1, W2,
W3, W4, W5 and W6 were found in the range of 5. Singh, Vijay P.1992. Elementry Hydrology, Printice-
0.085-0.098, 0.356-0.518, 0.293-0.359, 0.105-0.191, Hall. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersy,973.
0.105-0.189 and 0.181-0.458 respectively. The mean 6. Satapathy, K. K.(1996). Hill slope runoff under
value of maximum runoff coefficients for the micro conservation practices. Research bulletin no. 40, ICAR
watersheds W1, W2, W3, W4, W5 and W6 were found Research Complex for NEH Region, Umroi Road,
0.091, 0.421, 0.319, 0.138, 0.147 and 0.336 Barapani-793103, Meghalya.
respectively.
7. Satapathy, K. K. and Panda, R. K.2006. Runoff
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT production on hill slopes under different land uses.
The authors extremely grateful to the Director, ICAR Journal of Indian Water Resources Society, 26 (1-2):
Research Complex for NEH Region, Barapani (Umiam), 30-38.
Meghalaya for providing the necessary meteorological and
hydrological data for this study.

40
View publication stats