|
UPSI Digital Repository (UDRep)
|
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Abstract : Universiti Pendidikan Sultan Idris |
| The different peak discharge value estimated in the rational method (RM) model is caused by the various methods used to determine the runoff coefficient (C) parameter. The C value can be defined as the total amount of rainfall generated to become the runoff. Various studies have been conducted to produce C values that differ from one to another. For example, the C values suggested by the Manual of Storm Water Management (MSMA) and the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) differed. To estimate C values, land use classification is confusing, unorganized, and not uniform, and therefore, the application of suggested C value is still doubtful to be applied in Malaysia. Thus, this research focused on estimating the C value based on the land use classification for urban areas in Penang using a rainfall simulator. The runoff coefficient will be generated from various surface types at a plot scale representing urban land use. The result obtained shows that the C values were 0.79?0.89 (asphalt), 0.85?0.92 (concrete), 0.77?0.89 (zinc), 0.73?0.85 (brick), 0.85?0.96 (asbestos), 0.8?0.93 (tiled roof), 0.17?0.63 (grass 2�?7�), and 0.35?0.69 (bare soil 2�?7�). The variation of the C value was influenced by the total amount of rainfall, surface imperviousness, soil moisture, soil and surface characteristics, slope, and vegetation cover. There were significant differences in the C value obtained in this study compared to the C value of MSMA (asphalt and brick) and the C value of ASCE (concrete and asbestos, grass, and exposed soil). Four factors that influenced the differences of C values in this research were environmental conditions, namely scale, surface physical condition, and soil antecedent moisture. The multiple comparison test showed a significant difference in the peak discharge estimated using RM compared to the gauged peak discharge. Nevertheless, peak discharge estimated from various C values in the RM did not show any statistical differences. In conclusion, this study found that the rainfall simulator could be used as a suitable and efficient modus operandi in terms of cost and time for runoff studies. ? 2021, Saudi Society for Geosciences. |
| References |
Abu-Ashour J, dan Lee, H. (2000) Transport of bacteria on sloping soil surfaces by runof. Environ Toxicol 15:149–153. American Society of Civil Engineers, ASCE (1969) Design and construction of sanitary and storm sewers. Manual and Reports on Engineering Practice No. 37. New York. Ben-Zvi A (1989) Toward a new rational method. J Hydraul Eng 115(9):1241–1255. Cardoso, T., Machado, R., & Mortene, M. (2019). Determination of the runof coefcient (C) in catchments based on analysis of precipitation and fow events. https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints2 01907.0208.v1. Christiansen, J.E. (1942) Irrigation by sprinkling. California Ag Expt Sta Bulletin 670, University of California, Berkeley, CA. Croke J, Mockler S, Fogarty P, Takken I (2005) Sediment concentration changes in runof pathways from a forest road network and the resultant spatial pattern of catchment connectivity. Geomorphology 68:257–268. Davidová, T., Dostál, T., David, V., & Strauss, P. (2015). Determining the protective efect of agricultural crops on the soil erosion process using a feld rainfall simulator. Plant Soil and Environment, 61, 109–115. https://doi.org/10.17221/903/2014-PSE. DeBano LF (2000) Water repellency in soils: a historical overview. J Hydrol 231–232:195–206. Department of Irrigation and Drainage, Malaysia. Urban Stormwater Management Manual for Malaysia, Kuala Lumpur: PNMB, Chapter 13, pp. 1–2; Chapter 14, pp.1 – 24, 2000. Duncan MJ (1972) The performance of a rainfall simulator and an investigation of plot hydrology. MAgrSc thesis. University of Canterbury, New Zealand. Hayes, D. C. dan Young, R. L. (2006) Comparison of peak discharge and runof characteristic estimates from the rational method to feld observations for small basins in central Virginia. USGS Scientifc Investigation Report, 2005–5254. Herngren, L., Goonetilleke, A. dan Ayoko, Godwin. (2004) Investigation of urban water quality using artifcial rainfall. Proceedings of the International Conference: Watershed 2004, Dearborn, Michigan, CD Rom Publication. Hudson NW (1963) Raindrop size distribution in high intensity storms. Rhodesian Journal of Agricultural Research 1:6. Hudson, N.W. (1965) The infuence of rainfall on the mechanics of soil erosion, MSc thesis, University of Cape Town. Kadioglu M, ŞEN Z (2001) Monthly precipitation-runof polygons and mean runof coefcients. Hydrol Sci J 46(1):3–11. Kafy, A.A., Faisal, A-A., Raikwar, V., Al Rakib, A., Kona, M.A. and Ferdousi, J., 2021. Geospatial approach for developing an integrated water resource management plan in Rajshahi, Bangladesh. Environmental Challenges, 4, p.100139. Keya, D., & Hama Karim, T. (2020). Simulation of rainfall intensity and slope gradient for determination of soil runof coefcient at micro-plot scale. https://doi.org/10.25156/ptj.v10n1y2020.pp12-1. Kuichling E (1889) The relation between the rainfall and the discharge of sewers in populous districts. Trans. ASCE 20:1–60. Lawrence AI, Marsalek JB, Ellis JB, Urbanos B (1996) Storm-water detention and BMPs. J Hydraul Res 34(6):719–813. McCune RH, Wong SL, dan Rawls, W.J. (1984) Estimating urban time of concentration. J Hydr Engrg 110(7):887–904. Merz R, Blöschl G, dan Parajka, J. (2006) Spatio-temporal variability of event runof coefcients. J Hydrol 331:591–604. Roesner, L. A. (1999) The hydrology of urban runof quality management. Dalam In Sustaining Urban Water Resources in the 21st century. Edited by Rowney, A. C. et al., ASCE. Sen S, Srivastava P, Yoo KH, Dane JH, Shaw JN, Kang MS (2008) Runof generation mechanisms in pastures of the Sand Mountain region of Alabama—a field investigation. Hydrol Process 22(21):4222–4232. Schueler TR (1987) Controlling urban runof: a practical manual for planning and design urban BMPs. Washington Council Governments, Washington DC. Tew Kia Hui (1999) Production of Malaysian soil erodibility nomograph in relation to soil erosion issues. VT Soil Erosion Research & Consultancy. Selangor, Malaysia. Walsh CJ (2000) Urban impacts on the ecology of receiving waters: a framework for assessment, conservation and restoration. Hydrobiologia 431:107–114. Young CB, McEnroe BM, Rome AC (2009) Empirical determination of rational method runoff coefficients. J Hydrol Eng 14(12):1283–1289. |
| This material may be protected under Copyright Act which governs the making of photocopies or reproductions of copyrighted materials. You may use the digitized material for private study, scholarship, or research. |