Arab J Geosci (2016) 9: 170
DOI 10.1007/s12517-015-2228-2
ORIGINAL PAPER
Rainfall-runoff modelling of Doddahalla watershed—
an application of HEC-HMS and SCN-CN in ungauged
agricultural watershed
K. Ibrahim-Bathis 1 & S. A. Ahmed 1
Received: 25 September 2014 / Accepted: 23 November 2015 / Published online: 25 February 2016
# Saudi Society for Geosciences 2016
Abstract The scarcity of reliable rainfall-runoff recorded data
in Doddahalla watershed is a serious problem for the analysis
of the hydrology of watersheds. Sustainable management of
the available water in this area is only possible when there was
sound information on the rainfall-runoff and other hydrologi-
cal determinants that influence the water resource. Consider-
ing the current problem rainfall-runoff. simulation is carried
out using the HEC-HMS hydrological simulation model with
integrated use of remote sensing and GIS. Tropical Rainfall
Measuring Mission 3 hourly and Indian Meteorological De-
partment daily rainfall datasets are utilised. Cartosat-1
CartoDEM (30 m) was used to delineate the sub-watershed
and generate the stream network. Geospatial Hydrologic
Modeling Extension (HEC-GeoHMS), along with ArcHydro
extension in ArcGIS 9.3 utilised to create the input file for use
in HEC-HMS. Indian Remote Sensing Satellite Linear Imag-
ing and Self Scanning sensors (LISS-III, 24 m) and Survey of
India (SOI) toposheet are used to prepare the soil and land use
map. All the data are georectified and reprojected to Geo-
graphic Coordinate System-World Geodetic System 1984
(GCS WGS) Universal Transverse Mercator (UTM) zone 43
North for the easy handling in GIS environment. SCS-CN loss
model and SCS unit hydrograph as a transform method was
applied to simulate the excess storm water to direct runoff in
the watershed. The Muskingum-Cunge model used as channel
routing. The model is validated by using field observation data
and discharge data from the neighbouring Hoovinahole
* K. Ibrahim-Bathis
ibrahimbathis@gmail.com
S. A. Ahmed
ashfaqsa@hotmail.com
1
Department of Applied Geology, Kuvempu University,
Shankaraghatta, Shivamogga District, Karnataka 577451, India
watershed. The results of simulated and observed stream flow
show greater confidence and the reliability of the model. Sim-
ilar procedure and calibration parameters applied to the
ungauged Doddahalla watershed for estimating the rainfall-
runoff. The research result gives a general idea regarding the
stream flow, peak flow and velocity of the peak flow. The
present study concludes that the stimulated result can be use-
ful for the water and land resource planning and management
practice in the Doddahalla watershed. The models can be best
utilised in ungauged watershed and water scarce region where
the monitored data are limited, and runoff estimation is man-
datory to sustain the water resources.
Keywords HEC-HMS . HEC-GeoHMS . SCS-CN .
CartoDEM . Doddahalla watershed . Ungauged watershed
Introduction
The term watershed applies to a naturally occurring hydrolog-
ic unit that contributes storm runoff to a single waterway clas-
sified on the basis of its geographical area (AIS and LUS
1990). Shortage of water in most of the water scarce region
is not only caused by low or unpredictable rainfall pattern but
also due to the lack of capacity to conserve and manage the
available rainwater in a sustainable manner. Some of the water
scarce arid and semi-arid watersheds in India where rainfall
patterns are unpredictable are subject to undergo various hy-
drological constraints. Surface runoff estimation based on
rainfall is one of the prerequisites for planning and execution
of water resource projects (Manoharan and Murugappan
2012; Majidi and Shahedi 2012; Masoud 2015). The ability
of rainwater harvesting is of vital importance to sustain agri-
culture and other economic activities in drought-prone areas
of arid and semi-arid regions (Keblouti et al. 2015). The non-
170 Page 2 of 16 Arab J Geosci (2016) 9: 170

Fig. 1 Location map of Doddahalla watershed with sub-watersheds and major stream overlaid

Fig. 2 Schematic diagram of Doddahalla watershed as HEC-HMS input (sub-watershed and streams are delineated from Cartosat DEM using HEC-
GeoHMS tool on ArcMap GIS software)
Arab J Geosci (2016) 9: 170
Fig. 3 Input satellite images of Doddahalla watershed
availability of reliable surface runoff data is a serious problem
in hydrological modelling (Chandramohan and Durbude
2001; Reshma et al. 2010; Ebrahimian et al. 2012; Al-Hasan
and Mattar 2014). Conventional runoff estimations are time-
consuming, expensive, error-prone and quite difficult at the
inaccessible region of many of the watersheds in the country.
The main drawback of traditional or conventional techniques
led to the infrequency of the surveys and the consequent fail-
ure for updating changes in vegetative cover and land use. As
these two were primary governing factor in runoff pro-
cess, they naturally affect infiltration, erosion, and
evapotranspiration (Melesse and Shih 2002). The use
of remote sensing techniques for hydrological modelling
has gained momentum to estimate surface runoff in both
gauged and ungauged watersheds (Nayak and Jaiswal
2003; Ebrahimian et al. 2012; Abushandi and Merkel
2013). Computation of input parameters for the existing
hydrological models and identification of hydrological
response unit are the significant contribution of GIS to
Page 3 of 16 170
identify areas of watershed with the similar hydrologic
response (Melesse and Shih 2002).
Models, such as, the University of British Columbia Wa-
tershed Model (UBCWM) (Loukas and Vasiliades 2014), Soil
Water and Assessment Tool (SWAT) (Milewski et al. 2009),
Geomorphological Instantaneous Unit Hydrograph (GIUH)
are used universally to estimate runoff in ungauged water-
sheds. These models are applied to simulate a rainfall-runoff
process in gauged watersheds successfully for the last four
decades, but the representation of flow in ungauged watershed
remains a challenge among the hydrologist (Vassova 2013).
The international community has recognized challenging
problem of these ungauged watershed, and as a result, the
International Association of Hydrological Sciences (IAHS)
had declared the previous decade (2003–2012) the Bdecade
of the ungauged basin^ (Loukas and Vasiliades 2014). The
IAHS Decade on Prediction in Ungauged Basins (PUB) was
an important new effort and an international research initiative
to encourage the development of science and technology to
provide hydrological data in the ungauged watershed where
the ground-based observation data are unavailable (Vassova
2013; Loukas and Vasiliades 2014). The Hydrologic Engi-
neering Center-Hydrologic Modeling System (HEC-HMS)
used in this study, as, it uses, Soil Conservation Service-
Curve number (SCS-CN) loss model and SCS Unit
Hydrograph as a transform methods to simulate rainfall runoff
in the watershed (Tiwari et al. 1997; Mishra et al. 2004; Gupta
and Panigrahy 2008; Ebrahimian et al. 2012; Abushandi and
Merkel 2013; Mohammad and Adamowski 2015). The chan-
nel routing is done using Muskingum-Cunge simulation mod-
el. SCS-CN (now called National Resources Conservation
Service NRCS-CN) developed in 1950 by the Soil Conserva-
tion Service (USDA-SCS, 1972) and widely used to estimate
direct runoff from small and ungauged basins. NRCS-CN
works well with agricultural watersheds, as it combines the
watershed parameters and the climatic factors into one entity
called the curve number (USDA-SCS 1972; Knebl et al. 2005;
Razi et al. 2010; Majidi and Shahedi 2012; Tahmasbinejad
et al. 2012; Abushandi and Merkel 2013; Gad 2013;
Halwatura and Najim 2013).
Most research works on HEC-HMS found that there
was a good correlation between the measured and estimat-
ed runoff depth using GIS and NRCS-CN method
(Melesse and Shih 2002; Nayak and Jaiswal 2003; Zhan
and Huang 2004; Marechal 2004; Ebrahimian et al. 2012;
Abushandi and Merkel 2013). Geospatial techniques are
used to provide quantitative measurements of drainages
basin morphology for input into runoff models so as to
estimate runoff response. Due to lack of sufficient data in
one hand and complexity of hydrological systems on the
other, it causes the inevitable use of rainfall-runoff simu-
lation models in the present study area, the Doddahalla
watershed. The Doddahalla watershed is considered to
170 Page 4 of 16
Fig. 4 LULC map, soil classifications map, hydrological soil group map and curve number map of Doddahalla watershed
be one of the driest watersheds in Karnataka state. Many
studies conducted on arid and water scarce region where
the monitored data are limited and runoff estimation is
mandatory to sustain the water resources (Yusop et al.
2007; Bournaski et al. 2009; Chu and Steinman 2009;
Cydzik and Hogue 2009; Kang and Merwade 2011;
Majidi and Shahedi 2012; Tahmasbinejad et al. 2012;
Halwatura and Najim 2013). The research results give a
general idea regarding the stream flow, peak flow and
velocity of the peak flow. Validation of rainfall-runoff
models with respect to local observational data is used
to improve model predictability. Model results match with
the observed values from stream-flow measurement shows
the greater confidence in the reliability of the model
(Halwatura and Najim 2013).
Study area
The Doddahalla watershed is part of Krishna basin in southern
India. The watershed covering an area of 1082 sq km lying in
between Chitradurga, Hiriyur and Challakere taluk of
Chitradurga district in Karnataka. Chronically, the study area
is drought-prone with a mean annual rainfall of 688 mm. Ag-
riculture and several of the other economic activities largely
depend on rainfall. Geographically the area extends between
76°21′14.95″E to 76°50′34.82″E longitude and 14°4′9.42″N
Arab J Geosci (2016) 9: 170
to 14°25′24.19″ N latitude (Fig. 1). Undulating plains with a
gentle slope cover the major part. Clay, clay loam, sandy clay
and silt clay are major soils, and different food crops are the
major agricultural practice. Seventy-eight percent of the total
area belongs to agricultural land that includes agricultural
plantation and various other cash crops. Sixty percent of the
net crop land belongs to Kharif season that entirely depends
on rainfall. Double crops practices only along the tanks and
stream where there is an abandoned source of water. The var-
iability in the southwest monsoon leads to failure in the crops.
During 2002–2004 periods, the region faced variability in
both southwest and northeast monsoon, which caused the fail-
ure of the agricultural economy. The failure of agriculture or
other economic activities in this region can be minimised by
conserving and managing the available rainwater in a
sustainable manner.
The scarcity of reliable rainfall-runoff recorded data in
Doddahalla watershed is a serious problem that researchers
face for the exploration of the hydrology of watersheds. Sus-
tainable management of the available water in this region is
only possible when there was sound information on the
rainfall-runoff and other hydrological determinants that influ-
ence the water resource. Considering the current problem the
region rainfall-runoff simulation is done for a single storm on
9 October 2011 to 13 October 2011 using the HEC-HMS
hydrological simulation model with integrated use of remote
sensing and GIS. The same procedure adopted for estimating
Arab J Geosci (2016) 9: 170 Page 5 of 16 170

the rainfall-runoff for 5 years (2008–2012) considering the
storm events during the rainy days. The simulated data can
be useful for planning and management practices of water
resource in the Doddahalla watershed or any other similar
region where the gauge data is limited.
Materials and methodology
Ecological infrastructure such as land use and land cover type
and soil characteristics affects the infiltration characteristics
and influences the storage coefficient and runoff behaviour.
Surface runoff depends on the spatial distribution of rainfall.
Cartosat-1 CartoDEM (30 m) was used to delineate the sub-
watershed and generate the stream network by Hydrologic
Engineering Center-Geospatial Hydrologic Modeling Exten-
sion (HEC-GeoHMS), along with ArcHydro extension in
ArcGIS 9.3. HEC-GeoHMS used to create the input file in
the form of sub-catchment boundaries, to create a meteorolog-
ical model, for use in HEC-HMS. A comprehensive descrip-
tion of HEC-GeoHMS found in the user manual (Fleming and
James 2010). Schematic diagram of 23 sub-watersheds and
streams are delineated from Cartosat DEM using HEC-
GeoHMS spatial tool in ArcMap GIS software (Fig. 2). Indian
Remote Sensing Satellite (IRS) Linear Imaging and Self-
Scanning sensors (LISS-III, 24 m) and Survey of India
(SOI) toposheet (57 B/7, 57 B/8, 57 B/11, 57 B/12, 57 B/15
and 57 B/16) are used to prepare land use and land cover map
(Fig. 3). All the data are georectified and reprojected to Geo-
graphic Coordinate System-World Geodetic System 1984
(GCS WGS) Universal Transverse Mercator (UTM) zone 43
North for the easy handling in GIS environment. Satellites
data are enhanced and processed in Erdas Imagine 9.2 for
the better visualization. Extensive field study and online Goo-
gle Earth visualization were utilized to rectify and update the
data.
Land use and soil type
Sub-watershed level land use land cover map derived from the
IRS LISS III season wise images of 2009–2011. Supervised
classification along with NDVI techniques are used to classify
the images according to the standard classification techniques.
The accuracy of the classified image is checked through field
information along with the Google Earth visualization and
pre-existing maps. Most of the area is classified under

Table 1 Percentage area of land

use land cover classes of sub- Sub-watershed Land use land cover class area in %
watersheds of Doddahalla
watershed Kharif Rabi Kharif + Rabi Waste land Forest Water bodies Settlements

W700 40.62 42.20 5.43 6.69 1.47 2.42 1.18

W670 30.60 2.44 0.80 20.12 44.13 1.56 0.34
W660 41.80 33.53 5.04 15.62 2.74 0.10 1.18
W640 48.07 36.29 4.59 7.48 – 2.62 0.94
W630 48.06 35.09 4.90 3.76 – 7.43 0.74
W620 53.49 31.55 2.68 9.02 – 2.38 0.88
W600 34.74 45.35 5.70 8.49 – 4.66 1.06
W590 27.22 57.02 10.03 3.86 – 1.19 0.66
W560 14.90 0.70 8.25 27.27 20.65 4.01 24.22
W540 24.55 43.90 7.97 14.65 – 3.02 5.91
W530 2.05 93.17 0.40 1.24 – 2.87 0.27
W520 50.24 10.11 16.89 5.39 10.61 5.39 1.37
W500 42.07 0.00 28.65 5.80 – 13.26 10.22
W480 75.28 5.27 12.36 3.89 0.12 2.47 0.62
W460 68.37 6.64 5.68 1.46 – 16.57 1.29
W450 65.91 0.30 15.54 13.74 – 4.46 0.03
W440 61.95 – 15.07 11.59 7.68 2.04 1.67
W430 70.93 – 11.86 6.47 – 10.20 0.54
W420 82.04 3.93 8.80 0.86 – 3.72 0.66
W400 76.14 – 14.67 4.73 – 3.44 1.02
W380 69.67 – 19.69 7.43 – 2.25 0.96
W370 65.40 – 6.89 23.64 – 3.36 0.70
W360 66.49 – 20.71 7.90 – 4.19 0.71
Watershed total 47.48 23.26 8.44 10.05 4.73 3.71 2.33
170 Page 6 of 16 Arab J Geosci (2016) 9: 170

Table 2 Percentage area of each

soil classes in each sub- Sub- Soil types area in %
watersheds of Doddahalla watershed
watershed Clay Clay Loamy Sandy Sandy clay Sandy Silty
loam sand clay loam loam clay

W700 48.21 6.15 8.93 – 10.24 22.81 –

W670 1.91 – 5.12 – 17.65 72.90 –
W660 36.63 8.40 14.42 – 9.87 26.72 –
W640 39.51 6.35 13.13 0.95 15.78 15.38 5.34
W630 35.26 3.72 4.17 0.25 28.30 13.07 7.06
W620 0.29 – – 12.02 22.41 29.29 32.73
W600 24.54 1.80 10.41 1.40 25.53 16.59 14.00
W590 59.83 11.71 3.16 – 15.28 8.17 –
W560 0.00 0.00 16.18 8.76 15.45 36.87 –
W540 44.24 10.66 2.46 – 18.08 17.30 –
W530 88.74 3.47 – – 0.41 4.23 –
W520 – – – 5.94 56.56 – 27.19
W500 – – – – 41.10 35.42 –
W480 2.10 14.10 – – 57.33 17.92 3.22
W460 – – – 1.43 16.19 43.74 20.80
W450 – – – – 27.11 67.83 –
W440 – – – – 52.77 40.12 –
W430 – – – 7.61 21.52 59.76 –
W420 – – – 25.19 3.61 56.09 10.74
W400 – – – 4.64 50.59 39.83 –
W380 – – – 18.25 25.52 52.24 –
W370 – – – 11.52 16.51 66.80 –
W360 – – – – 44.75 50.33 –
Watershed 20.48 3.61 4.45 4.15 23.36 31.82 5.71
total

cropland consisting of Kharif, Rabi and double crops (Fig. 4 restrictive layer or water table (USDA-SCS 1972 NEH Part
and Table 1). 630 Chapter 7). The transmission rate of water, texture, struc-
A soil map of the study area is prepared and updated from ture and degree of swelling when saturated, will have similar
the district soil map obtained from the Zilla Panchayat office runoff responses (USDA-SCS 1972 NEH Part 630 Chapter 6).
at Chitradurga (Fig. 4). Major soils found in the area are sandy The runoff potential of soil from group D to group A is in-
loam (31 %), sandy clay loam (23 %), and clay (20 %) creasing (Melesse and Shih 2002).
(Table. 2). Soils are further classified into four hydrological
soil groups A, B, C and D (HSG) as per their infiltration rate Rainfall data
(Fig. 4), (Table. 3). The groupings based on the premise that
soils found within a climatic region are similar in depth to a Doddahalla watershed receives moderate rainfall and mostly
concentrated in the month of October. Fifteen-year rainfall
data are collected from Indian Meteorological Department
Table 3 Classification of hydrological soil group based on the soil
texture (USDA 1986; Kumar et al. 1997; Prakasa Rao et al. 2011) (IMD). Daily and 3 hourly (3B42 V7 0.25 × 0.25°) rainfall
data extracted from the TRMM Online Visualization and
HSG Infiltration rate (mm/h) Soil texture Analysis System (TOVAS). Both the datasets compared for
A High >25 Sand, loamy sand, or sandy loam
the historical study of rainfall anomaly in the Doddahalla wa-
B Moderate 12.5–25 Silt loam or loam
tershed. TRMM 3 hourly rainfall datasets used for the hydro-
logical simulations on 9 October 2011 to 13 October 2011
C Low 2.5–12.5 Sandy clay loam
(Fig. 5). The TRMM radar data provide the reasonable char-
D Very low <2.5 Clay loam, silty clay loam,
sandy clay, silty clay or clay acterization of the spatial and temporal distribution of the
rainfall on the actual event being simulated. Without this
Arab J Geosci (2016) 9: 170 Page 7 of 16 170

Fig. 5 TRMM rainfall 14

distribution graph of Doddahalla
12
watershed on 9 October 2011 to TRMM rainfall (mm)
12 October 2011

Rainfall in mm
10

09:00

15:00
15:00
18:00
21:00
00:00
03:00
06:00

12:00
15:00
18:00
21:00
00:00
03:00
06:00
09:00
12:00

18:00
21:00
00:00
03:00
06:00
09:00
12:00
15:00
09-10-2011 10-10-2011 11-10-2011 12-10-2011
Date and Time

information, it is a very gross approximation of the rainfall
event and the source of much of the error. Rainfall values are
probably one of the greatest uncertainties and vary spatially
and temporally. In India, the rainfall is a most variant factor,
and it always depends on the monsoon winds. Runoff is more
in October, because of the southwest monsoon; the saturated
soil and depression was almost filled. Hence, storm events of
October month are selected for modelling the surface runoff in
Doddahalla watershed. Daily rainfall data collected from IMD
were also used to estimate the total rainfall-runoff volume for
the last 5 years.
Prakasa Rao et al. 2011). The curve number map of
Doddahalla watershed shown in Fig. 4. AMC defined as
the summation of 5-day precipitation prior to the runoff-
producing storm, and it indicates the watershed wetness
and availability of soil storage. Three levels of AMC are
used; AMC-I for dry, AMC-II for normal and AMC-III
for wet conditions (Table. 4).
CN grid were prepared using CN grid tool in HEC-
GeoHMS extension in the ArcGIS 9.3 giving the input as land
use with CN value, soil group and DEM (Table. 5). For a sub-

NRCS curve number (CN)

Table 5 Curve number for different land use land cover classes in the
Doddahalla watershed (USDA 1986; Prakasa Rao et al. 2011; Surendra
The NRCS method uses an amalgamation of soil group, Kumar Mishra et al. 2013)
soil conditions, land use and antecedent moisture condi-
tion (AMC) to assign a runoff factor in an area. These Sl No Land use Hydrologic soil
group
runoff factor, called runoff curve numbers (CN), indicate
the runoff potential of the area. CN is a dimensionless A B C D
runoff index values range between 1 and 100. Higher
values of CN indicate higher runoff (USDA 1986). The 1 Agricultural plantations 45 53 67 72
curve numbers for several land use classes computed from 2 Crop land 72 81 88 91
TR-55 standard table and research literature related to the 3 Double crop 62 71 88 91
Indian conditions (Rao et al. 1996; Sahu et al. 2010; 4 Forest plantations 40 55 70 77
5 Forest (degraded) 45 66 77 83
6 Land with scrub 36 60 73 79
Table 4 AMC class (Sahu et al. 2010; Prakasa Rao et al. 2011) 7 Land without scrub 45 66 77 83
8 Barren rocky/stony waste/sheet rock area 96 96 96 96
AMC class 5 days antecedent rainfall Condition
(mm) 9 Fallow land 74 83 88 90
10 Wastelands 71 80 85 88
Dormant Growing 11 Lake/tanks without water 96 96 96 96
season season
12 Lake/tanks with water 100 100 100 100
I <12.7 <35.56 Dry soil not the wilting point 13 River/stream 97 97 97 97
II 12.7–27.94 35.56–53.34 Average conditions 14 Road/railway line 98 98 98 98
III >27.94 >53.34 Saturated soils, heavy rainfall 15 Town/cities 89 92 94 95
or light rain 16 Village 61 75 83 87
170 Page 8 of 16 Arab J Geosci (2016) 9: 170

Fig. 6 Location map of

Hoovinahole watershed (gauged
watershed) and Doddahalla
watershed (ungauged watershed)

watershed that consists of several soil types and land uses, a uses was selected, then no further accounting of directly con-
composite CN is calculated as: nected impervious area is required (Feldman 2000).
X
Ai CN i
CN composite ¼ X
Ai
HEC-HMS model description

The Hydrologic Engineering Center—the Hydrologic Model-

where CNcomposite = the composite CN used for runoff volume
computations,
i = an index of watersheds subdivisions of uniform land use
and soil type,
CN = the CN for subdivision i, and
A = the drainage area of subdivision i.
The CN shown are composite values for the directly con-
nected impervious area and open space. If CN for these land
ing System (HEC-HMS) is a physically based distributed
model, designed to simulate the rainfall-runoff processes of
dendritic watershed systems (Scharffenberg and Fleming
2010). The US Army Corps of Engineers developed this mod-
el and is widely used to simulate and forecast streamflow in
humid, tropical, subtropical and arid watersheds.
The HEC-HMS can be used to simulate a single watershed
or a system of multiple hydrologically connected watersheds.
Arab J Geosci (2016) 9: 170 Page 9 of 16 170

Fig. 7 Simulated and observed total outflow graph of Hoovinahole watershed (gauged watershed) on a storm event from 20 September 2009 to 30
September 2009

The first step in this model is to define the basin area and sub- mainly of interception, infiltration during early parts of
basins, a stream network and other hydrological elements. As the storm, and surface depression storage (Ponce 1994).
any other physically based hydrologic model, HEC-HMS To eliminate the necessity of estimating parameters Ia
simulate most of the key hydrologic processes at a watershed and S in the above equation, SCS was developed, an
scale. The HEC-HMS model requires different datasets in- empirical relation between Ia and S by analyzing
cluding digital elevation model (DEM), weather data, soil type rainfall-runoff data used in both gauged and ungauged
and land use. A comprehensive description of all components watersheds. The empirical relationship, substituting
in HEC-HMS found in the user manual (Scharffenberg and Eq. (2) into Eq. (1) yields
Fleming 2010). The model calculates the precipitation-runoff
response in the basin model when given input from the mete- Ia ¼ 0:2S ð2Þ
orologic model. The control specifications define the period
and time step of the simulation run (Feldman 2000).
ðP−0:2S Þ 2
Pe ¼ ð3Þ
P þ 0:8S
SCS-CN model for rainfall runoff
where, P ≥ 0.2S
The loss rate method that is used in the model is the Soil Eq. (3) is used by the SCS for estimating the depth of direct
Conservation Service (SCS) curve number (CN) loss model runoff from storm rainfall. S, vary in the range of 0 ≤ S ≤ ∞, is
to compute the volume of the stream flow. The SCS-CN mod- transformed into a dimensionless parameter CN, varying in a
el estimates precipitation excess as a function of cumulative
rainfall, soil cover, land use and antecedent moisture, using 80
the following equation: 70
y = 0.8969x -5.7165
60 R² = 0.933
Observed flow (CMS)

2
ðP−IaÞ
Pe ¼ ð1Þ 50
ðP−IaÞ þ S
40
where 30
Pe = accumulated precipitation excess at time t; 20
P = accumulated rainfall depth at time t; 10
Ia = the initial abstraction (initial loss) and
0
S = potential maximum retention, a measure of the ability 0 20 40 60 80 100
-10
of a watershed to abstract and retain storm precipitation. Simulated flow (CMS)
The rainfall-runoff relationship with the initial abstrac- Fig. 8 Correlation between simulated and measured stream flow on a
tion is taken into account. The initial abstraction consists storm event on 20 September 2009 to 30 September 2009
170 Page 10 of 16 Arab J Geosci (2016) 9: 170

Table 6 Input parameters of each

sub-watershed for HEC-HMS Sub-watershed Area (KM2) Impervious % Mean altitude (M) Weighted CN Lag time (hr)
(executed from HEC-GeoHMS)
W700 78.08 20.00 588 63 8.8
W670 65.20 0.00 801 43 6.9
W660 59.93 5.00 612 61 8.4
W640 70.87 6.00 553 66 12.7
W630 74.11 3.00 544 69 10.4
W620 78.72 2.00 483 66 11.7
W600 47.49 3.00 527 68 8.7
W590 32.77 8.00 579 71 6.5
W560 43.23 43.00 667 69 3.6
W540 86.13 8.00 591 70 7.5
W530 31.86 15.00 582 72 6.5
W520 72.96 0.00 506 64 12.2
W500 13.37 5.00 484 73 4.8
W480 39.72 0.00 544 69 4.7
W460 16.78 0.00 477 66 6.5
W450 18.35 2.00 487 57 8.2
W440 34.23 5.00 515 64 7.7
W430 44.52 1.00 484 61 12.2
W420 18.98 2.00 483 60 7.3
W400 26.13 2.00 524 63 9.6
W380 55.55 2.00 451 63 10.5
W370 55.05 2.00 465 56 11.9
W360 10.73 0.00 439 63 5

more conceptually logical range of 0 ≤ CN ≤ 100 (Mishra et al.
2004). The parameter S in Eq. (3) related to CN by
25400
S¼ −254 ð4Þ
CN
SCS unit hydrograph accomplished the model of direct flow
which includes the transformation of precipitation into surface
runoff. Since the area is semi-arid to arid, the base flow is con-
sidered as negligible (Abushandi and Merkel 2013). A long
succession of storms may produce subsurface flow or changes
in base flow even in arid climates. The probability of this occur-
ring is less in arid than in humid climates (USDA-SCS 1972).
SCN lag method
This method uses CN lag method tool to compute the basin lag
time in hours using the SCS curve number method (weighted
time of concentration or time from the center of mass of excess
rainfall hyetograph to the peak of runoff hydrograph).
L0:8  ðS þ 1Þ0:7
Lag ¼ ð5Þ
1900  Y 0:5
Where, Lag = basin lag time (hours)
L = hydraulic length of the watershed (feet)
Y = basin slope (%)
S = potential maximum retention, measure using Eq (4)
Channel routing—Muskingum-Cunge model
The Muskingum-Cunge channel routing procedure incorpo-
rated into the Natural Resources Conservation Service
(NRCS) Technical Release 20 (TR-20) hydrologic model
(Reshma et al. 2010). The Corps of Engineers HEC added it
as a flood-routing option in the HEC-1 program 1990. Al-
though popular and easy to use, the Muskingum model in-
cludes parameters that are not physically based and thus are
difficult to estimate. Further, the model is based upon assump-
tions that often violated in natural channels. An extension, the
Muskingum-Cunge model, overcomes these limitations
(Brunner and Garbrecht 1991). If there is no observed
hydrograph data available for calibration for any area, then
Muskingum-Cunge is the best model for the channel routing
(Feldman 2000). All the necessary physical parameters for the
Muskingum-Cunge model can be estimated from maps, aerial
photographs and field surveys (Fenton 2010). Manning’s
roughness coefficient is selected according to BGuide for
Selecting Manning’s Roughness Coefficients for Natural
Channels and Flood Plains^ by Arcement and Schneider
(USGS-water supply). In this study, the open source Google
Arab J Geosci (2016) 9: 170 Page 11 of 16 170

Earth images and satellite images along with the field data are
used for the geometric study of the streams and channels.
Then, the Manning’s roughness coefficient values are
assigned according to the geometric characteristics and the
condition of the streams and channels. The most important
factors, that affect the selection of channel roughness coeffi-
cients values are the type and size of the materials that com-
pose the bed and banks of the channel and the shape of the
channel (Arcement and Schneider 1989, USGS-water supply
2339). If the channel properties vary significantly along the
routing reach, the reach is subdivided and modelled as a series
of linked sub-reaches, with the properties of each defined
separately. Google Earth online visualization reduces the ex-
tensive field study, and it helps to study the inaccessible area
where field study becomes difficult.
Model validation
There is no easy way to verify and validate the simulated
runoff volumes without observed data. The best method is to
use regional relationships from gauged watershed that have
similar watershed and rainfall characteristics, or to apply the
same estimation methods and transfer the parameters
employed in the gauged watershed to a similar ungauged wa-
tershed (Post and Jakeman 1999; Kokkonen et al. 2003;
Bardossy 2007; Loukas and Vasiliades 2014). The largest dif-
ficulty with the validation process is assessing the available
data. There are many unknowns in any given watershed. Rain-
fall is one of the most important parameters in a watershed
model and probably one of the greatest uncertainties and
varies spatially and temporally. Other watershed physical
characteristics such as land cover, vegetation type, vegetation
density, soil conditions, soil type and antecedent moisture
condition are the major factor governing and influence the
surface runoff. To find a watershed with the similar watershed
characteristic in both the gauged and ungauged watershed is a
challenging task. The simulated results of Doddahalla water-
shed validated through an adjacent gauged neighbouring
Hoovina hole watershed of Vedavathi sub-catchment (Fig. 6)
that has similar watershed and rainfall characteristics. Daily
and hourly discharge data of Hoovina hole watershed (collect-
ed from Central Water Commission (CWC)) used for the cal-
ibration and validation of rainfall runoff during 20 October

Table 7 Simulated result of each sub-watershed of Doddahalla watershed on 9 October 2011 to 13 October 2011 storm event

Sub-watershed RF (mm) Loss (mm) Excess (mm) Direct runoff (mm) Total flow (CMS) Peak discharge (CMS) Time of peak

W700 11.18 8.38 2.79 2.79 21.06 2.62 11 Oct 2011, 00:00
W670 14.99 14.22 0.76 0.76 3.88 0.44 12 Oct 2011, 09:00
W660 10.92 10.16 1.27 1.02 6.88 0.86 11 Oct 2011, 00:00
W640 10.92 9.65 1.52 1.52 9.90 0.99 11 Oct 2011, 03:00
W630 10.92 9.65 1.52 1.02 9.14 1.01 11 Oct 2011, 03:00
W620 10.16 9.40 1.02 0.76 6.75 0.83 11 Oct 2011, 03:00
W600 7.37 6.60 0.51 0.51 2.66 0.31 11 Oct 2011, 03:00
W590 6.86 5.84 1.02 0.76 2.86 0.37 11 Oct 2011, 00:00
W560 13.97 7.11 6.86 6.35 27.73 5.37 12 Oct 2011, 06:00
W540 6.10 5.33 0.76 0.76 6.29 0.69 11 Oct 2011, 00:00
W530 5.08 3.81 1.27 0.76 2.78 0.39 11 Oct 2011, 00:00
W520 4.83 4.57 1.02 0.76 1.03 0.12 11 Oct 2011, 06:00
W500 4.57 4.32 0.51 0.51 0.54 0.13 11 Oct 2011, 00:00
W480 4.83 4.83 0.25 0.25 0.75 0.16 11 Oct 2011, 00:00
W460 4.06 3.81 0.00 0.00 0.18 0.05 11 Oct 2011, 03:00
W450 4.57 4.32 0.25 0.25 0.34 0.06 11 Oct 2011, 03:00
W440 4.83 4.57 0.51 0.25 1.28 0.17 11 Oct 2011, 03:00
W430 4.57 4.32 0.25 0.25 0.71 0.09 11 Oct 2011, 06:00
W420 4.06 3.81 0.25 0.25 0.30 0.07 11 Oct 2011, 03:00
W400 5.08 4.57 0.25 0.25 0.61 0.08 11 Oct 2011, 03:00
W380 4.06 3.81 0.25 0.25 0.95 0.15 11 Oct 2011, 06:00
W370 4.06 3.81 0.25 0.25 0.82 0.12 11 Oct 2011, 06:00
W360 4.06 3.81 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.03 11 Oct 2011, 00:00
170 Page 12 of 16 Arab J Geosci (2016) 9: 170

Table 8 Simulated results of

major streams of Doddahalla Stream Length Up Elv in DnElv PI Time of peak PD Time of peak V
watershed on 9 October 2011 to (KM) M in M (CMS) inflow (CMS) discharge (M/S)
13 October 2011 storm event
R180 14.46 607 549 5.37 12 Oct 2011, 4.91 12 Oct 2011, 0.94
06:00 09:00
R210 1.99 549 542 5.34 12 Oct 2011, 5.14 12 Oct 2011, 0.92
09:00 09:00
R230 2.79 542 530 5.14 12 Oct 2011, 4.77 12 Oct 2011, 0.89
09:00 09:00
R250 12.01 530 494 5.11 12 Oct 2011, 5.06 12 Oct 2011, 0.83
09:00 12:00
R310 20.71 601 494 0.44 12 Oct 2011, 0.43 11 Oct 2011, 0.36
09:00 21:00
R260 4.52 494 486 5.63 11 Oct 2011, 5.60 11 Oct 2011, 0.72
03:00 03:00
R320 18.17 549 486 2.62 11 Oct 2011, 2.56 11 Oct 2011, 0.66
00:00 03:00
R240 11.52 486 471 9.18 11 Oct 2011, 9.08 11 Oct 2011, 0.78
03:00 06:00
R110 9.62 520 495 0.16 11 Oct 2011, 0.15 11 Oct 2011, 0.26
00:00 06:00
R130 8.09 495 471 0.36 11 Oct 2011, 0.35 11 Oct 2011, 0.38
06:00 09:00
R140 4.22 471 470 10.32 11 Oct 2011, 9.97 11 Oct 2011, 0.61
06:00 06:00
R50 2.12 470 457 9.96 11 Oct 2011, 9.91 11 Oct 2011, 0.96
06:00 09:00
R30 12.01 457 437 10.01 11 Oct 2011, 9.92 11 Oct 2011, 0.86
09:00 09:00
R10 4.46 437 431 10.17 11 Oct 2011, 10.03 11 Oct 2011, 0.77
09:00 12:00

Up/Dn Elv upstream/downstream elevation, V velocity at the time of peak flow, PI/PD peak inflow/peak
discharge

2009 to 30 October 2009. The parameters are calibrated to fit simulated discharge data gives more accuracy and satisfies the
the simulated flow data to the observed flow data (Fig. 7). The suitability of the model to predict the runoff in the arid and
correlation coefficient (R2) determined between observed and ungauged watershed (Fig. 8). A similar procedure is adopted

Fig. 9 HEC-HMS simulated hydrograph of sub-watershed W670 shows the total precipitation, soil infiltration and total outflow
Arab J Geosci (2016) 9: 170
Fig. 10 HEC-HMS simulated hydrograph of sub-watershed W560 shows the total precipitation, soil infiltration and total outflow
to the ungauged Doddahalla watershed to estimate the rainfall
runoff. Simulated runoff data of Doddahalla watershed are
reliable when it examined with the land cover characteristic.
Result and discussion
The scarcity of reliable rainfall-runoff recorded data is a seri-
ous problem for planning and sustainable management of the
available water in Doddahalla watershed. Considering the cur-
rent problem of limited data on rainfall-runoff in the study
area, rainfall-runoff simulation is done for a storm on 9 Octo-
ber 2011 to 13 October 2011using the HEC-HMS hydrologi-
cal simulation model with integrated use of remote sensing
and GIS. The similar procedure is adopted for estimating the
rainfall-runoff for the last 5 years (2008–2012) by considering
the storm events in the most of the season. SCS curve number
as loss method and SCS unit hydrograph as a transform meth-
od applied in the HEC-HMS model to simulate the storm
Fig. 11 Percentage map water
infiltration into soil and surface
runoff to the total precipitation in
the Doddahalla watershed
Page 13 of 16 170
water runoff in the watershed. SCS-CN developed in 1950
by the Soil Conservation Service (USDA-SCS, 1972) and
subsequently updated by the National Resources Conserva-
tion Service (NRCS), widely used to estimate direct runoff
from small and ungauged basins as it requires only one pa-
rameter (curve number) to estimate rainfall losses in a water-
shed. Curve number can easily assign with respect to soil,
vegetative properties and antecedent moisture condition in
an ungauged watershed. According to the TR-55 and available
literature, most suitable curve number are assigned to each
land use class (Table. 5). Composite CN or weighted CN for
each sub-watershed assigned through HEC-GeoHMS exten-
sion in ArcGIS environment (Table. 6). TRMM 3 hourly
(3B42 V7 0.25 × 0.25°) rainfall data is used to simulate 9
October 2011 to 13 October 2011 storm event in HEC-HMS
to study the rainfall- runoff scenario in the study area. Simu-
lated results for each sub-watershed and the major streams
shown in the Tables 7 and 8. Sub-watershed W670 shows high
soil infiltration and less outflow compared other sub-
170 Page 14 of 16 Arab J Geosci (2016) 9: 170

Fig. 12 Simulated result shows 16.00

behaviour of the individual sub- 14.00 Rain fall Soil Infiltration Out flow
watershed towards the rainfall, 12.00
soil infiltration and outflow of a

Millimeter
10.00
storm event on 9 October 2011 to
13 October 2011 8.00

6.00

4.00

2.00

0.00

Sub-watersheds

watershed (Fig. 9). The area consisted of thick vegetation and
covered by loamy sand soils that enhance soil infiltration and
reduces the surface runoff. Whereas sub-watershed W560
shows a strong outflow and less soil infiltration which cause
more surface runoff (Fig. 10). Because the majority of the area
is covered with built-up land and rock outcrops, which is
considered as an impervious layer. The simulated result highly
satisfies with the runoff properties of this region, and hence,
results may be utilised for the future water-related projects.
Figure 11 shows the runoff and soil loss properties of each
sub-watershed. If it is compared with land use and soil map, it
shows a direct relationship between the runoff and soil infil-
tration. i.e. runoff appears more in the impervious layer and
soil infiltration is more on the highly vegetated region. The
sub-watershed consist of high clay soil covers shown more
runoff values. Rainfall variability had seen from upstream to
downstream; the upstream region receives more rainfall than
the downstream. Figure 12 shows the rainfall distribution,

Table 9 Simulated result of each

sub-watershed in Doddahalla SW 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
watershed for the period 2008-
2012 RF RO RF RO RF RO RF RO RF RO

W360 741.3 374.2 747.4 379.2 730 364.9 190.2 16.2 636.7 290.1
W370 741.3 330.7 747.4 335.4 730 321.9 190.2 9.3 636.7 251.8
W380 741.3 384.4 747.4 389.5 730 375.0 190.2 18.1 636.7 299.2
W400 741.3 330.7 747.4 335.4 730 321.9 190.2 9.3 636.7 251.8
W420 741.3 394.3 747.4 399.5 730 384.9 190.2 20.1 636.7 308.1
W430 741.3 422.9 747.4 428.2 730 413.1 190.2 26.3 636.7 333.7
W440 741.3 431.9 747.4 437.3 730 422.1 190.2 28.4 636.7 341.9
W450 741.3 440.8 747.4 446.2 730 430.8 190.2 30.6 636.7 349.9
W460 741.3 564.8 747.4 570.7 730 554.0 190.2 72.4 636.7 464.9
W480 741.3 427.4 747.4 432.7 730 417.6 190.2 27.3 636.7 337.8
W500 741.3 449.4 747.4 454.9 730 439.4 190.2 32.8 636.7 357.8
W520 741.3 466.1 747.4 471.7 730 456.0 190.2 37.4 636.7 373.1
W530 833.4 566.9 855.7 587.6 810 545.2 436.7 216.2 701.3 445.8
W540 833.4 575.1 855.7 595.9 810 553.3 436.7 221.8 701.3 453.3
W560 833.4 605.9 855.7 627.0 810 583.8 436.7 243.4 701.3 481.8
W590 833.4 554.3 855.7 574.8 810 532.8 436.7 207.7 701.3 434.2
W600 833.4 583.0 855.7 603.9 810 561.2 436.7 227.3 701.3 460.6
W620 833.4 550.0 855.7 570.5 810 528.5 436.7 204.8 701.3 430.3
W630 833.4 532.2 855.7 552.4 810 511.0 436.7 193.2 701.3 414.1
W640 833.4 493.8 855.7 513.5 810 473.2 436.7 169.1 701.3 379.4
W660 833.4 483.5 855.7 503.1 810 463.1 436.7 163.0 701.3 370.3
W670 833.4 364.2 855.7 381.5 810 346.4 436.7 97.7 701.3 266.1
W690 833.4 377.7 855.7 395.2 810 359.5 436.7 104.4 701.3 277.7
W700 833.4 390.8 855.7 408.6 810 372.3 436.7 111.1 701.3 288.9

SW sub-watershed, RF rainfall in mm, RO runoff in mm

Arab J Geosci (2016) 9: 170
relative runoff and soil loss for each sub-watershed on 9 Oc-
tober 2011 to 13 October 2011 storm event. It is observed that
once the rain occurs it takes almost 24 h to reach the outlet
point of the watershed. The stream velocities also depend on
the watershed characteristics. The high velocity seen in the
impervious region and hard rock terrain where the resistance
to flow is least. The high velocity also tends to erode more
soil. Results for all the 23 sub-watershed are analyzed and
studied their hydrological properties. A similar procedure
was applied to estimate the rainfall of for the last 5 years from
2008 to 2012. CN was updated according to the AMC
(Table. 4). Event-based simulation is modelled for only rainy
days. The total outflow from the watershed is estimated for
each year (Table. 9). The results show that 2011 has variability
in the rainfall in the past 8 years. The sub-watershed which
consist more greenery has less runoff value. For example, the
sub-watershed W670, W660 and W560 are subjected to least
runoff, whereas W540, W520, W380, W370 and W360 are
subjected to more runoff. The runoff data of the each sub-
watershed indicate the physiographic features and the water-
shed characteristics.
Conclusion
HEC-HMS 3.5 hydrological model is used to simulate the
rainfall-runoff in the Doddahalla watershed. The area is prone
to drought and shows high variability in monsoon rainfall.
The study area is characterized by scarcity of runoff data and
is one of the ungauged watersheds in the dry and arid region of
the country. TRMM 3 hourly rainfall data are used to simulate
the rainfall-runoff. Rainfall values are probably one of the
greatest uncertainties and vary spatially and temporally.
Cartosat-1 CartoDEM (30 m) was used to delineate the sub-
watershed and generate the stream network by Geospatial Hy-
drologic Modeling Extension (HEC-GeoHMS), along with
ArcHydro extension in ArcGIS 9.3. HEC-GeoHMS was also
used to delineate the physical properties and create the input
file in the form of sub-catchment boundaries, a meteorological
model, for use in HEC-HMS. SCS curve number loss method
is used to estimate the excess rainfall and surface runoff in
Doddahalla watershed. Careful study has done to assign the
CN for the different land use. Due to the insufficient and lack
of observed data, simulated result are validated based on the
field-measured parameters and field observations. The simu-
lated results provide essential information on the rainfall-run-
off, watershed runoff characteristics, stream flow and their
velocity, peak flow and their respective time. As there are
plenty of ungauged rural watershed present in the country, this
approach can be applied to simulate river flows and other
hydrological application in the watershed. The present study
concludes that the simulated result can be useful for the water
and land resource planning and management practice in the
Page 15 of 16 170
Doddahalla watershed. The models can best utilised in the
ungauged watershed and water scarce region where the mon-
itored data are limited, and runoff estimation is mandatory to
sustain the water resources.
Acknowledgments The authors thank the chairman, Department of
Applied Geology for extending all the facilities in the department. The
data support from Indian Meteorological Department, Central Water
Commission and BHUVAN, ISRO, Govt. of India is duly acknowledged.
The authors thank the co-ordinator UGC-SAP (DRS-II), Department of
Applied Geology for providing the satellite data. Finally, the first author
wishes to thank the Ministry of Minority Affairs and University Grant
Commission for providing Maulana Azad National Fellowship (MANF)
for pursuing the doctoral degree
References
Al-Hasan AAS, Mattar YES (2014) Mean runoff coefficient estimation
for ungauged streams in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Arab J
Geosci 7:2019–2029. doi:10.1007/s12517-013-0892-7
Abushandi E, Merkel B (2013) Modelling rainfall runoff relations using
HEC-HMS and IHACRES for a single rain event in an arid region of
Jordan. Water Resour Manag 27:2391–2409. doi:10.1007/s11269-
013-0293-4
AIS and LUS (1990) Watershed atlas of India, Department of Agriculture
and Cooperation. All India soil and land Use survey. IARI Campus,
New Delhi
Arcement GJ, Schneider VR (1989) Guide for selecting manning’s rough-
ness coefficients for natural channels and flood plains-metric ver-
sion. U.S. Geological Survey Water-supply Paper 2339,
Washington, DC
Bardossy A (2007) Calibration of hydrological model parameters for
ungauged catchments. Hydrol Earth Syst Sci 11:703–710
Bournaski E, Iliev R, Kirilov L (2009) HEC-HMS modelling of rainstorm
in a catchment. The mesta case study. C R Acad Bulg Sci 62:1141–
1146
Brunner G, Garbrecht J (1991) A muskingum-cunge channel flow routing
method for drainage networks. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,
Institute for Water Resources, Hydrologic Engineering Center,
Davis, CA
Chandramohan T, Durbude DG (2001) Estimation of runoff using small
watershed models. Hydrol J 24(2):45–53
Chu XF, Steinman A (2009) Event and continuous hydrologic modeling
with HEC-HMS. J Irrig Drain E-ASCE 135:119–124
Cydzik K, Hogue TS (2009) Modeling post fire response and recovery
using the hydrologic engineering center hydrologic modeling sys-
tem (HEC-HMS). J Am Water Res Assoc 45:702–714
Ebrahimian M, Ainuddin Nuruddin A, Mohd Soom MAB, Sood AM
(2012) Application of NRCS-curve number method for runoff esti-
mation in a mountainous watershed. Caspian J Env Sci 10(1):103–
114
Mohammad FS, Adamowski J (2015) Interfacing the geographic infor-
mation system, remote sensing, and the soil conservation service–
curve number method to estimate curve number and runoff volume
in the Asir region of Saudi Arabia. Arab J Geosci. doi 10.1007/
s12517-015-1994-1
Feldman AD (2000) Hydrologic modeling system, technical reference
manual. US Army Corps of Engineers, Hydrologic Engineering
Center, Davis, CA., USA
Fenton JD (2010) Accuracy of Muskingum-Cunge flood routing,
Technical report, Alternative Hydraulics Paper 3, http://
170 Page 16 of 16
johndfenton.com/Papers/03-Accuracy-of-Muskingum Cungeflood-
routing.pdf
Fleming MJ, James HD (2010) HEC-GeoHMS geospatial hydrologic
modeling extension, user’s manual version 5.0. US Army Corps of
Engineers, Hydrologic Engineering Center, Davis, CA., USA
Gad MA (2013) A useful automated rainfall-runoff model for engineering
applications in semi-arid regions. Comput Geosci 52:443–452
Gupta PK, Panigrahy S (2008) Predicting the spatiotemporal variation of
run-off generation in India using remotely sensed input and Soil
Conservation Service curve number model. Curr Sci India 95(11):
1580–1587
Halwatura D, Najim MMM (2013) Application of the HEC-HMS model
for runoff simulation in a tropical Catchment. Environ Model Softw
46:155–162
Kang K, Merwade V (2011) Development and application of a storage–
release based distributed hydrologic model using GIS. J Hydrol 403:
1–13
Keblouti M, Ouerdachi L, Berhail S (2015) The use of weather radar for
rainfall runoff modeling, case of Seybouse watershed (Algeria).
Arab J Geosci 8:1–11. doi:10.1007/s12517-013-1224-7
Knebl MR, Yang ZL, Hutchison K, Maidment DR (2005) Regional scale
flood modeling using NEXRAD rainfall, GIS, and HEC-HMS/
RAS: a case study for the San Antonio river basin summer 2002
storm event. J Environ Manage 75:325–336
Kokkonen TS, Jakeman AJ, Young PC, Koivusalo HJ (2003) Predicting
daily flows in ungauged catchments: model regionalization from
catchment descriptors at the Coweeta Hydrologic Laboratory,
North Carolina. Hydrol Process 17:2219–2238. doi:10.1002/hyp.
1329
Kumar P, Tiwari KN, Pal DK (1997) Establishing SCS runoff curve
number from IRS digital database. J Indian Soc Remote Sensing
19:246–251
Majidi A, Shahedi K (2012) Simulation of rainfall-runoff process using
green-ampt method and HEC-HMS model (case study: Abnama
watershed, Iran). Int J Hydraulic Eng 1(1):5–9. doi:10.5923/j.ijhe.
20120101.02
Loukas A, Vasiliades L (2014) Streamflow simulation methods for
ungauged and poorly gauged watersheds. Nat Hazards Earth Sys
14:1641–1661. doi:10.5194/nhess-14-1641-2014
Manoharan A, Murugappan A (2012) Estimation of runoff in an
ungauged rural watershed, Tamil Nadu State, India. Int J Eng Sci
Technol (IJEST) 4(02):449–456
Marechal D (2004) A soil-based approach to rainfall-runoff modelling in
ungauged catchments for England and Wales. Dissertation,
Cranfield University
Masoud M (2015) Rainfall-runoff modeling of ungauged Wadis in arid
environments (case study Wadi Rabigh-Saudi Arabia). Arab J
Geosci 8:2587–2606. doi:10.1007/s12517-014-1404-0
Melesse AM, Shih SF (2002) Spatially distributed storm runoff depth
estimation using Landsat images and GIS. Comput Electron Agr
37:173–183
Milewski A, Sultan M, Yan E, Becker R, Abdeldayem A, Soliman F,
Gelil KA (2009) A remote sensing solution for estimating runoff
and recharge in arid environments. J Hydrol 373:1–14
Arab J Geosci (2016) 9: 170
Mishra SK, Gajbhiye S, Pandey A (2013) Estimation of design runoff
curve numbers for Narmada watersheds (India). J Applied Water
Eng Res 1(1):69–79. doi:10.1080/23249676.2013.831583
Mishra SK, Jain MK, Singh VP (2004) Evaluation of SCSCN-based
model incorporating antecedent moisture. Water Resour Manag
18(6):567–589
Nayak TR, Jaiswal RK (2003) Rainfall-runoff modeling using satellite
data and GIS for Bebas river in Madhya Pradesh. 1E(I) J 84:47–50
Prakasa Rao BS, Pernaidu P, Amminedu E, Rao TV, Satyakumar M, Sathi
Devi K, Jagadeeswara Rao P, Srinivas N, Bhaskara Rao N (2011)
Run-off and flood estimation in Krishna river delta using remote
sensing & GIS. J Ind Geophys Union 15(2):101–112
Ponce VM (1994) Engineering Hydrology, Principles and Practices.
Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs
Post DA, Jakeman AJ (1999) Predicting the daily stream flow of
ungauged catchments in SE Australia by regionalising the parame-
ters of a lumped conceptual rainfall-runoff model. Ecol Model 123:
91–104
Rao KV, Bhattacharya AK, Mishra K (1996) Runoff estimation by curve
number method—case studies. J Soil Water Conserv 40:1–7
Razi MAM, Ariffin J, Tahir W, Arish NAM (2010) Flood estimation
studies using hydrologic modeling system (HEC-HMS) for Johor
river, Malaysia. J Applied Sci 10(11):930–939
Reshma T, Sundara Kumar P, Ratna Kanth Babu MJ, Sundara Kumar K
(2010) Simulation of runoff in watersheds using SCS-CN and
Muskingum-Cunge methods using remote sensing and geographical
information systems. Vol 25:31–42
Sahu RK, Mishra SK, Eldho TI (2010) An improved AMC-coupled
runoff curve number model. Hydrol Process 24(20):2834–2839
Scharffenberg WA, Fleming MJ (2010) Hydrologic modeling system
HEC-HMS user manual version 3.5. US Army Corps of
Engineers, Hydrologic Engineering Center, Davis, CA., USA
Tahmasbinejad H, Feyzolahpor M, Mumipou M, Zakerhoseini F (2012)
Rainfall-runoff simulation and modeling of Karun River using
HEC-RAS and HEC-HMS models, Izeh Distric, Iran. J Applied
Sc 12(18):1900–1908
Tiwari KN, Kanan N, Singh RD, Ghosh SK (1997) Watershed parameters
extraction using GIS and remote sensing for hydrologic modeling.
Asian-pacific Remote Sensing GIS J 10(1):43–52
USDA (1986) Urban hydrology for small watersheds, second ed, techni-
cal release 55. United states Department of Agriculture. Natural
Resources Conservation Service. Conservation Engineering
Division, Washington, D.C.
USDA-SCS (1972) National engineering handbook. USDA,
Washington, DC
Vassova D (2013) Comparison of rainfall-runoff models for design dis-
charge assessment in a small ungauged catchment. Soil Water Res 8:
26–33
Yusop Z, Chan CH, Katimon A (2007) Runoff characteristics and appli-
cation of HEC-HMS for modelling stormflow hydrograph in an oil
palm catchment. Water Sci Technol 56:41–48
Zhan X, Huang ML (2004) ArcCN-runoff: an ArcGIS tool for generating
curve number and runoff maps. Environ Model Softw 19(10):875–879