United States Department of Agriculture Natural Resources Conservation Service

Part 630 Hydrology National Engineering Handbook

Chapter 9

Hydrologic Soil-Cover Complexes

Rain clouds Cloud formation

Precipitation Evaporation
ta tio n

fro

ti o

ti o

ir a

po

an

ce ru

noff

Infiltration

Soil Percolation Rock Deep percolation Ground water Ocean

(210-VI-NEH, July 2004)

fr o

Surfa

ms

va

Tr

tr e

sp

ra

am

fr o m

from oc

n iratio Transp

ve

s o il

ge

ean

Chapter 9

Hydrologic Soil-Cover Complexes

Part 630 National Engineering Handbook

Issued July 2004

The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, religion, age, disability, political beliefs, sexual orientation, or marital or family status. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDAs TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, Room 326W, Whitten Building, 14th and Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, DC 20250-9410 or call (202) 720-5964 (voice and TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer.
(210-VI-NEH, July 2004)

Acknowledgments

Chapter 9 was originally prepared by Victor Mockus, retired hydraulic engineer, USDA Soil Conservation Service, and was published in 1964. It was reprinted with minor revisions in 1969. This version was prepared by the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS)/Agricultural Research Service (ARS) Curve Number Work Group and Helen Fox Moody, hydraulic engineer, NRCS, Beltsville, Maryland. Members of the NRCS/ARS Curve Number Work Group are: Natural Resources Conservation Service Donald E. Woodward (retired) Robert D. Nielsen, soil scientist, Lincoln, Nebraska Robert Kluth (retired) Arlis Plummer, hydraulic engineer, Lincoln, Nebraska Joe Van Mullem (retired) Gary Conaway (retired) Agricultural Research Service William J. Gburek, hydrologist, University Park, Pennsylvania Keith Cooley (retired) Allen T. Hjelmfelt, Jr. (retired) Virginia A. Ferreira (retired) University of Arizona Richard H. Hawkins, Ph.D., professor, Tucson, Arizona

(210-VI-NEH, July 2004)

9i

Chapter 9

Hydrologic Soil-Cover Complexes

Part 630 National Engineering Handbook

9ii

(210-VI-NEH, July 2004)

Chapter 9

Hydrologic Soil-Cover Complexes

Contents:

630.0900 630.0901

General Determinations of complexes and curve numbers

91 91

(a) Agricultural land ........................................................................................... 91 (b) National and commercial forest: forest-range ........................................... 94 (c) Urban and residential land .......................................................................... 98 630.0902 References 914

Tables

Table 91 Table 92 Table 93

Runoff curve numbers for agricultural lands Runoff curve numbers for arid and semiarid rangelands Runoff curve numbers for hydrologic soil-cover complexes in Puerto Rico

92 95 96

Table 94

Runoff curve numbers; tentative estimates for sugarcane hydrologic soil-cover complexes in Hawaii

97

Table 95

Runoff curve numbers for urban areas

99

Figures

Figure 91

Estimating runoff curve numbers of forest-range complexes in Western United States: herbaceous and oak-aspen complexes

94

Figure 92

Estimating runoff curve numbers of forest-range complexes in Western United States: juniper-grass and sage-grass complexes

94

Figure 93 Figure 94

Composite CN with connected impervious area Composite CN with unconnected impervious areas and total impervious area less than 30%

98 912

(210-VI-NEH, July 2004)

9iii

Chapter 9

Hydrologic Soil-Cover Complexes

Part 630 National Engineering Handbook

Examples Example 91 Calculation of composite urban residential CN with different percentage of impervious area than that assumed in table 95 Example 92 Calculation of a composite urban residential CN with different CN for the pervious area than that assumed in table 95 Example 93 Determine the composite CN with unconnected impervious areas and total impervious area less than 30%

910

911

913

9iv

(210-VI-NEH, July 2004)

Chapter 9

Hydrologic Soil-Cover Complexes

630.0900

General

A combination of a hydrologic soil group (soil) and a land use and treatment class (cover) is a hydrologic soil-cover complex. This chapter gives tables and graphs of runoff curve numbers (CNs) assigned to such complexes. This CN indicates the runoff potential of a complex during periods when the soil is not frozen. A higher CN indicates a higher runoff potential and specifies which runoff curve of appendix A or figure 102 in National Engineering Handbook, part 630 (NEH 630), chapter 10, is to be used in estimating runoff for the complex. Applications and further description of CNs are given in NEH 630, chapters 10 and 12.

630.0901 Determinations of complexes and curve numbers

(a) Agricultural land
Complexes and assigned CNs for combinations of soil groups of NEH 630, chapter 7 and land use and treatment classes of NEH 630, chapter 8 are given in table 91. Also given are some complexes that make applications of the table more direct. Impervious and water surfaces, which are not listed, are always assigned a CN of 98.

(1) Assignment of CNs to complexes Table 91 was developed as follows: The data literature was searched for watersheds in single complexes (one soil group and one cover); watersheds were found for most of the listed complexes. An average CN for each watershed was obtained using rainfall-runoff data for storms producing the annual floods. The watersheds were generally less than 1 square mile in size, the number of watersheds for a complex varied, and the storms were of 1 day or less duration. The CNs of watersheds in the same complex were averaged and all CNs for a cover were plotted. A curve for each cover was drawn with greater weight given to CNs based on data from more than one watershed, and each curve was extended as far as necessary to provide CNs for ungaged complexes. All but the last three lines of CN entries in table 91 are taken from these curves. For the complexes in the last three lines of table 91, the proportions of different covers were estimated and the weighted CNs computed from previously derived CNs.
Table 91 has not been significantly changed since its construction in 1954 although CNs for crop residue cover treatment has been added. Supplementary tables for special regions have been developed and are shown later in this chapter.

(210-VI-NEH, July 2004)

91

Chapter 9

Hydrologic Soil-Cover Complexes

Part 630 National Engineering Handbook

(2) Use of table 91 Chapters 7 and 8 of NEH 630 describe how soils and covers of watersheds or other land areas are classified in the field. After the classification is completed, CNs are read from table 91 and applied as described

in chapter 10. Because the principal use of CNs is for estimating runoff from rainfall, the examples of applications are given in chapter 10.

Table 91

Runoff curve numbers for agricultural lands 1/

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Cover description - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - cover type treatment 2/ hydrologic condition 3/

- - CN for hydrologic soil group - A B C D

Fallow

Bare Soil Crop residue cover (CR)

--Poor Good Poor Good Poor Good Poor Good Poor Good Poor Good Poor Good Poor Good Poor Good Poor Good Poor Good Poor Good Poor Good Poor Good Poor Good Poor Good

77 76 74 72 67 71 64 70 65 69 64 66 62 65 61 65 63 64 60 63 61 62 60 61 59 60 58 66 58 64 55 63 51

86 85 83 81 78 80 75 79 75 78 74 74 71 73 70 76 75 75 72 74 73 73 72 72 70 71 69 77 72 75 69 73 67

91 90 88 88 85 87 82 84 82 83 81 80 78 79 77 84 83 83 80 82 81 81 80 79 78 78 77 85 81 83 78 80 76

94 93 90 91 89 90 85 88 86 87 85 82 81 81 80 88 87 86 84 85 84 84 83 82 81 81 80 89 85 85 83 83 80

Row crops

Straight row (SR) SR + CR Contoured (C) C + CR Contoured & terraced (C & T) C & T + CR

Small grain

SR SR + CR C C + CR C&T C & T + CR

Close-seeded or broadcast legumes or rotation meadow

SR C C&T

See footnotes at end of table.

92 (210-VI-NEH, July 2004)

Chapter 9

Hydrologic Soil-Cover Complexes

Part 630 National Engineering Handbook

Table 91

Runoff curve numbers for agricultural lands 1/ Continued

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Cover description - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - cover type treatment 2/ hydrologic condition 3/

- - CN for hydrologic soil group - A B C D

Pasture, grassland, or rangecontinuous forage for grazing 4/ Meadow-continuous grass, protected from grazing and generally mowed for hay Brush-brush-forbs-grass mixture with brush the major element 5/ Woods-grass combination (orchard or tree farm) 7/

Poor Fair Good Good

68 49 39 30

79 69 61 58

86 79 74 71

89 84 80 78

Poor Fair Good Poor Fair Good Poor Fair Good ---

48 35 30 6/ 57 43 32 45 36 30 59

67 56 48 73 65 58 66 60 55 74

77 70 65 82 76 72 77 73 70 82

83 77 73 86 82 79 83 79 77 86

Woods 8/

Farmstead--buildings, lanes, driveways, and surrounding lots Roads (including right-of-way): Dirt Gravel
1/ 2/ 3/ Average runoff condition, and Ia=0.2s.

-----

72 76

82 85

87 89

89 91

Crop residue cover applies only if residue is on at least 5 percent of the surface throughout the year. Hydrologic condition is based on combinations of factors that affect infiltration and runoff, including (a) density and canopy of vegetative areas, (b) amount of year-round cover, (c) amount of grass or close-seeded legumes, (d) percent of residue cover on the land surface (good >20%), and (e) degree of surface toughness. Poor: Factors impair infiltration and tend to increase runoff. Good: Factors encourage average and better then average infiltration and tend to decrease runoff. For conservation tillage poor hydrologic condition, 5 to 20 percent of the surface is covered with residue (less than 750 pounds per acre for row crops or 300 pounds per acre for small grain). For conservation tillage good hydrologic condition, more than 20 percent of the surface is covered with residue (greater than 750 pounds per acre for row crops or 300 pounds per acre for small grain). Poor: < 50% ground cover or heavily grazed with no mulch. Fair: 50 to 75% ground cover and not heavily grazed. Good: > 75% ground cover and lightly or only occasionally grazed. Poor: < 50% ground cover. Fair: 50 to 75% ground cover. Good: > 75% ground cover. If actual curve number is less than 30, use CN = 30 for runoff computation. CNs shown were computed for areas with 50 percent woods and 50 percent grass (pasture) cover. Other combinations of conditions may be computed from the CNs for woods and pasture. Poor: Forest litter, small trees, and brush are destroyed by heavy grazing or regular burning. Fair: Woods are grazed, but not burned, and some forest litter covers the soil. Good: Woods are protected from grazing, and litter and brush adequately cover the soil. (210-VI-NEH, July 2004) 93

4/

5/

6/ 7/ 8/

Chapter 9

Hydrologic Soil-Cover Complexes

Part 630 National Engineering Handbook

(b) National and commercial forest: forest-range

(1) Forest-range in Western United States In the forest-range regions of the Western United States, soil group, cover type, and cover density are the principal factors used in estimating CNs. Figures 91 and 92 show the relationships between these factors and CNs for soil-cover complexes used to date. The figures are based on information in table 21, part 2, of the USDA Forest Service's Handbook on Methods of Hydrologic Analysis (USDA 1959b). The amount of litter is taken into account when estimating the density of cover.
Present hydrologic conditions are determined from existing surveys or by reconnaissance, and future conditions from the estimate of cover and density changes resulting from proper use and treatment. Table 92 lists CNs for arid and semiarid rangelands. It is used like table 91.

Figure 91

Estimating runoff curve numbers of forestrange complexes in Western United States: herbaceous and oak-aspen complexes

100
Soil group

D C

80

Curve number

B 60

C 40 B 20
AMC II Herbaceous Oak-Aspen

20 40 60 80 Ground cover density in percent

100

Figure 92

Estimating runoff curve numbers of forestrange complexes in Western United States: juniper-grass and sage-grass complexes

100

80
Soil g
Curve number

roup

60

C C B

40
AMC II Juniper-grass Sage-grass

20

20 40 60 80 Ground cover density in percent

100

94

(210-VI-NEH, July 2004)

Chapter 9

Hydrologic Soil-Cover Complexes

Part 630 National Engineering Handbook

Table 92

Runoff curve numbers for arid and semiarid rangelands 1/

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Cover description - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - cover type hydrologic condition 2/

- - - - - Hydrologic soil group - - - - A 3/ B C D

Herbaceousmixture of grass, weeds and low-growing brush, with brush the minor element

Poor Fair Good Poor Fair Good Poor Fair Good Poor Fair Good Poor Fair Good 63 55 49

80 71 62 66 48 30 75 58 41 67 51 35 77 72 68

87 81 74 74 57 41 85 73 61 80 63 47 85 81 79

93 89 85 79 63 48 89 80 71 85 70 55 88 86 84

Oak-aspenmountain brush mixture of oak brush, aspen, mountain mahogany, bitter brush, maple, and other brush

Pinyon-juniperpinyon, juniper, or both; grass understory

Sage-grasssage with an understory of grass

Desert shrubmajor plants include saltbush, greasewood, creosotebush, blackbrush, bursage, paloverde, mesquite, and cactus
1/ 2/

3/

Average runoff condition, and Ia = 0.2s. For range in humid regions, use table 91. Poor: <30% ground cover (litter, grass, and brush overstory). Fair: 30 to 70% ground cover. Good: >70% ground cover. Curve numbers for group A have been developed only for desert shrub.

(210-VI-NEH, July 2004)

95

Chapter 9

Hydrologic Soil-Cover Complexes

Part 630 National Engineering Handbook

(2) Supplementary tables of CNs Tables 93 and 94 are supplements to table 91 and are used in the same way. Table 93 gives CNs for selected covers in Puerto Rico. The CNs were obtained using a relation between storm and annual data and the annual rainfall-runoff data for experimental plots at Mayaguez, Puerto Rico.

Table 94 gives CNs for sugarcane complexes in Hawaii. The CNs are tentative estimates now undergoing study.

Table 93

Runoff curve numbers for hydrologic soil-cover complexes in Puerto Rico 1/

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - Cover description - - - - - - - - - - - - - cover type and hydrologic condition

- - CN for hydrologic soil group - A B C D

Fallow Grass (bunchgrass or poor stand of sod) Coffee (no ground cover, no terraces) (with ground cover and terraces) Minor crops (garden or truck crops) Tropical kudzu Sugarcane: (trash burned, straight-row) (trash mulch, straight-row) (in holes, on contour) (in furrows, on contour)
1/ Average runoff condition, and Ia = 0.2S.

77 51 48 22 45 19 43 45 24 32

86 70 68 52 66 50 65 66 53 58

91 80 79 68 77 67 77 77 69 72

93 84 83 75 83 74 82 83 76 79

96

(210-VI-NEH, July 2004)

Chapter 9

Hydrologic Soil-Cover Complexes

Part 630 National Engineering Handbook

Table 94

Runoff curve numbers; tentative estimates for sugarcane hydrologic soil-cover complexes in Hawaii 1/

Cover and treatment 2/

- - - - - - - Hydrologic soil group - - - - - - A B C D

Sugarcane: Limited cover, straight row Partial cover, straight row Complete cover, straight row Limited cover, contoured Partial cover, contoured Complete cover, contoured
1/ Average runoff condition and Ia = 0.2S. 2/ Degrees of cover: Limited coverCane newly planted, or ratooned cane with a limited root system; canopy over less than half the field area. Partial coverCane in the transition period between limited and complete cover; canopy over half to nearly the entire field area. Complete coverCane from the stage of growth when full canopy is provided to the stage at harvest. Straight-row planting is up and down hill or cross-slope on slopes greater than 2 percent. Contoured planting is the usual contouring or cross-slope planting on slopes less than 2 percent.

67 49 39 65 25 6

78 69 61 75 59 35

85 79 74 82 75 70

89 84 80 86 83 79

(210-VI-NEH, July 2004)

97

Chapter 9

Hydrologic Soil-Cover Complexes

Part 630 National Engineering Handbook

(c) Urban and residential land

Several factors, such as the percentage of impervious area and the means of conveying runoff from impervious areas to the drainage system, should be considered in computing CNs for urban areas (Rawls et al., 1981). For example, do the impervious areas connect directly to the drainage system, or do they outlet onto lawns or other pervious areas where infiltration can occur? The urban and residential CNs given in table 95 were developed for typical land use relationships based on specific assumed percentages of impervious area. These CN values were developed on the assumptions that pervious urban areas are equivalent to pasture in good hydrologic condition, impervious areas have a CN of 98 and are directly connected to the drainage system, and the cover types listed have assumed percentages of impervious area as shown in table 95.

(1) Connected impervious areas An impervious area is considered connected if runoff from it flows directly into the drainage system. It is also considered connected if runoff from it occurs as shallow concentrated flow that runs over a pervious area and then into a drainage system.
If all of the impervious area is directly connected to the drainage system, but the impervious area percentages in table 95 or the pervious land use assumptions are not applicable, use equation 91 or figure 93 to compute a composite CN. P CNc = CN p + imp 98 CN p 100

[91]

where: CNc = composite runoff curve number CNp = pervious runoff curve number Pimp = percent imperviousness.

Sheet flow is flow over plane surfaces that usually occurs in the headwater of streams immediately after the rainfalls impact. Sheet flow has very shallow flow depths of 0.05 to 0.1 foot, Figure 93 Composite CN with connected impervious area with laminar flow characteristics of parallel or nearly parallel flowlines and a maximum flow length of 100 100 feet.
Pervious CN = 90 80 70 80 60 70 50 40 60

Shallow concentrated flow occurs downstream from sheet flow and upstream from flow in a defined channel. In shallow concentrated flow, the water flows in nonparallel flow paths, and flow depths range from 0.1 foot to as much as 0.5 foot. In concentrated flow the water follows definite channels that are a discernable feature on the ground surface. See NEH 630, Chapter 15, Time of Concentration, for more information on these flow types.

90

Composite CN

50

40 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Connected impervious area (percent)

98

(210-VI-NEH, July 2004)

Chapter 9

Hydrologic Soil-Cover Complexes

Part 630 National Engineering Handbook

Table 95

Runoff curve numbers for urban areas 1/

Cover description cover type and hydrologic condition

Average percent impervious area 2/

- - CN for hydrologic soil group - A B C D

Fully developed urban areas (vegetation established) Open space (lawns, parks, golf courses, cemeteries, etc.) 3/ Poor condition (grass cover < 50%) Fair condition (grass cover 50% to 75%) Good condition (grass cover > 75%) Impervious areas: Paved parking lots, roofs, driveways, etc. (excluding right-of-way) Streets and roads: Paved; curbs and storm sewers (excluding right-of-way) Paved; open ditches (including right-of-way) Gravel (including right-of-way) Dirt (including right-of-way) Western desert urban areas: Natural desert landscaping (pervious areas only) 4/ Artificial desert landscaping (impervious weed barrier, desert shrub with 1- to 2-inch sand or gravel mulch and basin borders) Urban districts: Commercial and business Industrial Residential districts by average lot size: 1/8 acre or less (town houses) 1/4 acre 1/3 acre 1/2 acre 1 acre 2 acres Developing urban areas Newly graded areas (pervious areas only, no vegetation)
1/ 2/

68 49 39

79 69 61

86 79 74

89 84 80

98 98 83 76 72

98 98 89 85 82

98 98 92 89 87

98 98 93 91 89

63

77

85

88

96

96

96

96

85 72

89 81

92 88

94 91

95 93

65 38 30 25 20 12

77 61 57 54 51 46

85 75 72 70 68 65

90 83 81 80 79 77

92 87 86 85 84 82

77

86

91

94

3/ 4/

Average runoff condition, and Ia = 0.2S. The average percent impervious area shown was used to develop the composite CNs. Other assumptions are as follows: impervious areas are directly connected to the drainage system, impervious areas have a CN of 98, and pervious areas are considered equivalent to open space in good hydrologic condition. CNs shown are equivalent to those of pasture. Composite CNs may be computed for other combinations of open space type. Composite CNs for natural desert landscaping should be computed using figures 93 or 94 based on the impervious area percentage (CN=98) and the pervious area CN. The pervious area CNs are assumed equivalent to desert shrub in poor hydrologic condition.

(210-VI-NEH, July 2004)

99

Chapter 9

Hydrologic Soil-Cover Complexes

Part 630 National Engineering Handbook

Example 91

Calculation of composite urban residential CN with different percentage of impervious area than that assumed in table 95

Given:

Table 95 gives a CN of 70 for a -acre lot in HSG B with an assumed impervious area of 25 percent. The pervious area CN is 61. Find the CN to be used if the lot has 20 percent impervious area. Method 1Solve equation 91 with CNp, the pervious runoff curve number, equal to 61 and Pimp, the percent imperviousness, equal to 20:
20 CNc = 61 + ( 98 61) 100 CNc = 61 + (.20 )( 37 ) CNc = 61 + 7.4 CNc = 68.4 4 round to 68

Problem: Solution:

The CN difference between 70 in table 95 and 68 reflects the difference in percent impervious area. Method 2Enter figure 93 with the percentage of impervious area equal to 20 and move up to a point a little above the curve representing a pervious curve number of 60 to find the point for a pervious CN of 61. Read the Composite CN of 68 on the left axis. The CN difference between 70 in table 95 and 68 reflects the difference in percent impervious area.

910

(210-VI-NEH, July 2004)

Chapter 9

Hydrologic Soil-Cover Complexes

Part 630 National Engineering Handbook

Example 92

Calculation of a composite urban residential CN with different CN for the pervious area than that assumed in table 95

Given:

Table 95 gives a CN of 70 for a -acre lot in HSG B with an assumed impervious area of 25 percent. The pervious area CN is 61. Find the CN to be used if the lots pervious area has a CN of 69, indicating fair condition instead of good condition. Method 1Solve equation 91 with CNp, the pervious runoff curve number, equal to 69 and Pimp, the percent imperviousness, equal to 25:
25 CNc = 69 + ( 98 69) 100 CNc = 69 + (.25 )( 29 ) CNc = 69 + 7.25 CNc = 76.25 round to 76

Problem:

Solution:

The CN difference between 70 in table 95 and 76 reflects the difference in the pervious area CN.

Method 2Enter figure 93 with the percentage of impervious area equal to 25 and move up to a point a little below the curve representing a pervious curve number of 70 to find the point for a pervious CN of 69. Read the Composite CN of 76 on the left axis. The CN difference between 70 in table 95 and 76 reflects the difference in the pervious area CN.

(210-VI-NEH, July 2004)

911

Chapter 9

Hydrologic Soil-Cover Complexes

Part 630 National Engineering Handbook

(2) Unconnected impervious areas If runoff from impervious areas occurs over a pervious area as sheet flow prior to entering the drainage system, the impervious area is unconnected. To determine CN when all or part of the impervious area is not directly connected to the drainage system: use equation 92 or figure 94 if the total impervious area is less than 30 percent of the total area or use equation 91 or figure 93 if the total impervious area is equal to or greater than 30 percent of the total area, because the absorptive capacity of the remaining pervious areas will not significantly affect runoff.
P CNc = CN p + imp 98 CN p (1 .05R ) [92] 100

where: CNc = composite runoff curve number CNp = pervious runoff curve number Pimp = percent imperviousness R = ratio of unconnected impervious area to total impervious area When impervious area is less than 30 percent, obtain the composite CN by entering the right half of figure 94 with the percentage of total impervious area and the ratio of total unconnected impervious area to total impervious area. Then move left to the appropriate pervious CN and read down to find the composite CN.

Figure 94

Composite CN with unconnected impervious areas and total impervious area less than 30%
0.0

Per viou sC N= 40
0.5

90

80

70

60

50

1.0

90

80

70

60

50

40

10

20

30

Composite CN

Total impervious area (percent)

912

(210-VI-NEH, July 2004)

Chapter 9

Hydrologic Soil-Cover Complexes

Part 630 National Engineering Handbook

Example 93

Determine the composite CN with unconnected impervious areas and total impervious area less than 30%

Given:

A -acre lot in HSG B has an assumed impervious area of 20 percent, 75 percent of which is unconnected. The pervious area CN is 61. Find the CN to be used for the lot. Method 1Solve equation 92 with CNp, the pervious runoff curve number, equal to 61; Pimp, the percent impervious area, equal to 20; and R, the ratio of unconnected impervious area to total impervious area, equal to 0.75:

Problem: Solution:

20 CNc = 61 + (98 61) (1 0.5 (0.75 )) 100 CNc = 61 + (.20 )( 37 ) (1 0.3 375 ) CNc = 61 + (.20 )( 37 )( 0.625 ) CNc = 61 + 4.62 CNc = 65.62 round to 66
Method 2Enter the right half of figure 94 with the percentage of impervious area equal to 20 and move up to the 0.75 line for the ratio of unconnected impervious area to total impervious area. Then move to the left part of the figure, left to the appropriate pervious CN 61, and read down to find the composite CN 66. The CN considering all the impervious areas to be connected as in example 91 is 68. Example 93 shows that if 75 percent of the impervious area is unconnected, the CN is reduced to 66.

(210-VI-NEH, July 2004)

913

Chapter 9

Hydrologic Soil-Cover Complexes

Part 630 National Engineering Handbook

630.0902

References

Rawls, W.J., A. Shalaby, and R.H. McCuen. 1981. Evaluation of methods for determining urban runoff curve numbers. Trans. Amer. Soc. Agricul. Eng. 24(6):1562-1566. United States Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 1959a. Forest and range hydrology handbook. Washington, DC. United States Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 1959b. Section 1 of Handbook on methods of hydrologic analysis, Section 1. Washington, DC. United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. 1986. Technical Release 55, Urban hydrology for small watersheds. http:// www.wcc.nrcs.usda.gov/hydro//hydro-toolsmodels-tr55.html.

914

(210-VI-NEH, July 2004)