The proper determination of the curve number （CN） in the SCS-CN method reduces errors in predicting runoff volume. In this paper the variability of CN was studied for 5 Slovak and S Polish Carpathian catchments. Emp...The proper determination of the curve number （CN） in the SCS-CN method reduces errors in predicting runoff volume. In this paper the variability of CN was studied for 5 Slovak and S Polish Carpathian catchments. Empirical curve numbers were applied to the distribution fitting. Next, theoretical characteristics of CN were estimated. For loo-CN the Generalized Extreme Value （GEV） distribution was identified as the best fit in most of the catchments. An assessment of the differences between the characteristics estimated from theoretical distributions and the tabulated values of CN was performed. The comparison between the antecedent runoff conditions （ARC） of Hawkins and Hjelmfelt was also completed. The analysis was done for various magnitudes of rainfall. Confidence intervals （CI） were helpful in this evaluation. The studies revealed discordances between the tabulated and estimated CNs. The tabulated CNs were usually lower than estimated values; therefore, an application of the median value and the probabilistic ARC of Hjelmfelt for wet runoff conditions is advisable. For dry conditions the ARC of Hjelmfelt usually better estimated CN than ARC of Hawkins did, but in several catchments neither the ARC of Hawkins nor Hjelmfelt sufficiently depicted the variability in CN.展开更多
基金supported by the Slovak Grant Agency VEGA under Project No.1/0776/13 and Project No.1/0710/15Research Project No.N N305 396238 founded by the Polish Ministry of Science and Higher Education
文摘The proper determination of the curve number （CN） in the SCS-CN method reduces errors in predicting runoff volume. In this paper the variability of CN was studied for 5 Slovak and S Polish Carpathian catchments. Empirical curve numbers were applied to the distribution fitting. Next, theoretical characteristics of CN were estimated. For loo-CN the Generalized Extreme Value （GEV） distribution was identified as the best fit in most of the catchments. An assessment of the differences between the characteristics estimated from theoretical distributions and the tabulated values of CN was performed. The comparison between the antecedent runoff conditions （ARC） of Hawkins and Hjelmfelt was also completed. The analysis was done for various magnitudes of rainfall. Confidence intervals （CI） were helpful in this evaluation. The studies revealed discordances between the tabulated and estimated CNs. The tabulated CNs were usually lower than estimated values; therefore, an application of the median value and the probabilistic ARC of Hjelmfelt for wet runoff conditions is advisable. For dry conditions the ARC of Hjelmfelt usually better estimated CN than ARC of Hawkins did, but in several catchments neither the ARC of Hawkins nor Hjelmfelt sufficiently depicted the variability in CN.
