EN中文

SCIENTIA GEOGRAPHICA SINICA >

2002 , Vol. 22 >Issue 5: 604 - 609

DOI: https://doi.org/10.13249/j.cnki.sgs.2002.05.604

Study on Runoff Calculation Method in Beijing Mountainous Area

Expand
  • 1. Department of Resources and Environmental Sciences, Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875;
    2. Beijing Institute of Water Science, Beijing 100044;
    3. Beijing Soil Loss Conservation Station, Beijing 100073;
    4. Key Laboratory of Environmental Change and Natural Disaster, the Ministry of Education of China, Beijing 100875

Received date: 2001-10-15

  Revised date: 2002-02-10

  Online published: 2002-09-20

Fold

Abstract

Runoff causes soil erosion and environmental pollution. It is very important for soil loss calculation and soil and water resources evaluation to select suitable runoff calculation method. The 30 single storm data of two conventional tillage plots at Puwa watershed, Fangshan County and 13 single storm data of one fallow plot at Shixia watershed, Miyun County were used. Several runoff calculation methods, including GAML revised by Chu, Phillip, Horton, SCS curve number, were compared. The results showed that the model efficiencies of GAML and Phillip were higher than those of Horton and SCS curve number. According to the parameters easily obtained, GAML revised by Chu is suggested when there are the continuous records of rainfall in Beijing mountainous area. If not, SCS curve number should be used. The results can be served as soil and water evaluation and plan.

Cite this article

FU Su-hua, LIU Bao-yuan, WU Jing-dong, DUAN Shu-huai . Study on Runoff Calculation Method in Beijing Mountainous Area[J]. SCIENTIA GEOGRAPHICA SINICA, 2002 , 22(5) : 604 -609 . DOI: 10.13249/j.cnki.sgs.2002.05.604

References

[1] Green W H and Ampt G A. Studies on soil physics. part 1: the flow of air and water through soils[J]. Jour. Ag. Sci. 1911, 4(1):1-24.
[2] Mein R G, Larson C L. Modelling infiltration during a steady rain[J]. Water Resour. Res. 1973, 9(2):384-394.
[3] Shu Tung Chu. Infiltration during an unsteady rain[J]. Water Resource Research. 1978,14(3) :461-466.
[4] Philip J R. The theory of infiltration: 1. the infiltration quation and its solution[J]. Soil Sci. 1957, 8(3): 345-357.
[5] Chow V T, Maidment D R, Mays L W. Applied hydrology [M]. McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1988. 109.
[6] U.S. Soil Conservation Service, National engineering handbook [M]. Hydrology Section 4, 1985.79.
[7] 包为民.格林-安普特下渗曲线的改进和应用[J].人民黄河,1993,9:1～3.
[8] 郭瑛.一种非饱和产流模型的探讨[J].水文,1982,1:1～7.
[9] 郝振纯.黄土地区降雨入渗模型初探[J].水科学进展.1994,5(3):186～192.
[10] Williams J R. EPIC, the erosion-productivity impact calculator, volume 1: model documentation [R]. Agricultural Research Service, U.S.D.A., Washington, D.C..1983.
[11] Knisel W G (ed). Creams: a field scale model for chemicals,runoff, and erosions from agricultural management systems [R], USDA Conservation Research Report No. 26, 1980.
[12] YoungRA, OnsadCA, BoschDD, etal. Agnps: anonpoint source pollution model for evaluating agricultural watersheds [J]. Soil and Water Conservation Society. 1989, 44(2): 168-173.
[13] Nash J E, Sutcliffe J V. River flow forecasting through conceptual models, part 1: a discussion of principles [J]. J.Hydrol. 1970, 10(3) :282-290.
[14] NearingMA, LiuBY, RisseLM, etal. Curve numbers and Green-Ampt effective hydraulic conductivities[J]. Water Resources Bulletin. 1996, 32(1): 125-136.
[15] Rawls W J, Brakensiek D L. Comparison between GreenAmpt and curve number runoff predictions [J]. Trans. Asae1983, 29(6): 1597-1599.
[16] King K W, Arnold J G, Bingner R L. Comparison of GreenAmpt and curve number methods on Goodwin Creek watershed using Swat[J]. Trans. ASAE. 1999, 42(4):1-7.
[17] Clausnitzer V, Hopmans J W and Lstarr J. Parameter uncertainty analysis' of common infiltration models [J].Soil Sci.Soc. Am. J. 1998, 62(6):1477-1487.
Options
Outlines

/

〈 〉