收藏设为首页 广告服务联系我们在线留言

干旱区地理 ›› 2012, Vol. 35 ›› Issue (03): 415-421.

• 气候与水文 • 上一篇    下一篇

SCS-CN 径流模型中CN值确定方法研究

符素华1,王向亮2,王红叶1魏欣1,袁爱萍3   

  1. 1地表过程与资源生态国家重点实验室,北京师范大学地理学与遥感科学学院, 北京100875;  2鞍山师范学院中文系,辽宁鞍山114007;3北京市水土保持工作总站,北京100038
  • 收稿日期:2011-10-23 修回日期:2011-12-19 出版日期:2012-05-25
  • 通讯作者: 符素华
  • 作者简介:符素华(1973-),女,四川岳池人,副教授,主要从事水土保持与水土资源管理研究
  • 基金资助:

    中央高校基本科研业务费专项资金,长江学者和创新团队发展计划;北京市自然科学基金(8072016)资助

Meathod of determining CN value in the SCSCN method

FU Suhua1,WANG Xiangliang2,WANG Hongye1,WEI Xin1,YUAN Aiping3   

  1. 1 State Key Laboratory of Earth Surface Processes and Resource Ecology, School of Geography, Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875, China;  2 Department of Literatures, Anshan Normal College, Anshan 114007, Liaoning, China;  3 Beijing Soil and Water Conservation, Beijing 100038, China
  • Received:2011-10-23 Revised:2011-12-19 Online:2012-05-25
  • Contact: FU Suhua

摘要: 径流计算是区域径流量预报和水土资源评价模型中的重要组成部分。SCS-CN径流模型是一种常用的径流计算方法。径流曲线数(CN)是SCS-CN模型中反映降雨前流域特征的一个综合参数。用北京密云石匣3个小区实测降雨径流资料,用平均值法、中值法、算术平均值法、S对数频率分布法以及渐近线法来反推CN值,并用反推的CN值计算了径流深。用模型效率系数、相关系数和合格率比较了这5种方法确定的CN值计算径流深的优劣。结果表明:从模型有效系数来看,渐近线法得到的模型有效系数最好;从相关系数和合格率来看,算术平均值法的结果最好。相对于渐近线法来讲,算术平均值法计算CN简单,因此建议在计算CN值时用算术平均值法。

关键词: SCS-CN模型, 径流曲线数, 径流

Abstract: Water shortages and nonpoint pollution caused by soil erosion have reached crises point in many regions. Hydrological model, soil erosion model and nonpoint pollution model have been used as the main technique tools which evaluate the risk of water resources, soil erosion and water pollution. Runoff calculation is an important part in the hydrological models and is the basic element in the calculation of water contaminants including sediment, nutrients and pesticides etc. Soil Conservation Service Curve Number (SCS-CN) method has been widely used in many countries and regions. Runoff curve number (CN) is an integrated parameter in the SCS-CN method, which reflects the effect of soil water content, soil type and land use etc. on runoff depth. But SCS-CN method may result in bad prediction accuracy in China because the values of curve number provided by USDA Soil Conservation Service can not be directly used in China due to the differences in landuse,hydrologic soil groups and slope gradient etc. Thus the purpose of this study was to compare the differences in determining CN value by using mean method, arithmetic-mean method, median method, S probability distribution method and asymptotic method and to compare the accuracy of runoff predicted by different CN value. Data of rainfall - runoff from three runoff plots at Shixia, Miyun, Beijing, with a period from 1993 to 2006, were used. Runoff depth was calculated by using SCS-CN method with different CN determining methods. The index of Nash model efficiency, correlation coefficient and acceptance rate were used to evaluate the accuracy of runoff depth predicted by different CN determining methods. The results show that the runoff depth predicted by five methods was significantly different from the measured ones. The asymptotic method had the best Nash model efficiency. But arithmetic-mean method provided with the best correlation coefficient and acceptance rate. Compared to asymptotic method, arithmetic-mean method is simple, thus we recommend that arithmetic-mean method be used to determine the CN value. The antecedent moisture condition had important effects on the results of runoff prediction. The acceptance rate under the AMCII was the best whereas that under the AMCIII was the worst. The results also indicate that it is necessary for further research on the initial abstraction ratio in Beijing area.

Key words: SCS CN method, SCS curve number, runoff

中图分类号: 

  • P334.9