Introductory
Soil and Water Conservation Engineering
II
Semester 3rd
Feb to 30th
June 2020, 2019-20
Teacher Information
Professor
|
Email
|
Phone
|
Dr.
K. C. Shashidhar
|
shashidhar.kumbar@gmail.com
|
9448103268
|
Class-6 Reference Material
Universal Soil Loss Equation (USLE)
For
estimation of soil loss various methods were developed by different
scientists over a period of time. Some of the most useful methods are
presented in this chapter.
Estimation of Soil Loss
The
control of erosion is essential to maintain the productivity of soil
and to improve or maintain downstream water quality. The reduction of
soil erosion to tolerable limits necessitates the adoption of
properly planned cropping practices and soil conservation measures.
Several methods exist for the measurement of soil loss from different
land units. These include the measurements from runoff plots of
various sizes for each single land type and land use, small unit
source watersheds, and large watersheds of mixed land use. However,
to estimate soil erosion, empirical and process based models
(equations) are used. Universal Soil Loss Equation (USLE) is an
empirical equation. It estimates the average annual mass of soil loss
per unit area as a function of most of the major factors affecting
sheet and rill erosions. Estimating soil loss is considerably more
difficult than estimating runoff as there are many variables, both
natural such as soil and rainfall and man-made such as adopted
management practices. The soil loss considerably depends on the
type of erosion. As a result, models, whether empirical or
process-based, are necessarily complex if they are to include the
effect of all the variables.
For some
purposes, meaningful and useful estimates of sediment yield can be
obtained from models, and the best example is the estimation of
long-term average annual soil loss from a catchment by using the
Universal Soil Loss Equation (USLE).
The
Universal Soil Loss Equation (USLE)
The filed
soil loss estimation equations development began in 1940 in USA. Zing
(1940) proposed a relationship of soil loss to slope length raised to
a power. Later in 1947, a committee chaired by Musgrave proposed a
soil-loss equation having some similarity to the present day USLE.
Based on nearly 10,000 plot year runoff plot data, Wischmeier and
Smith (1965) developed the universal soil loss equation, which was
later refined with more recent data from runoff plots, rainfall
simulators and field experiences. It is the most widely used tool for
estimation of soil loss from agricultural watersheds for planning
erosion control practices. The USLE is an erosion prediction model
for estimating long term averages of soil erosion from sheet and rill
erosions from a specified land under specified conditions (Wischmeier
and Smith, 1978).
It
provides an estimate of the long-term average annual soil loss from
segments of arable land under various cropping conditions. The
application of this estimate is to enable farmers and soil
conservation advisers to select combinations of land use, cropping
practice, and soil conservation practices, which will keep the soil
loss down to an acceptable level. The equation (USLE) is presented as
below.
A=R X K X
L X S X C X P
where,
A =
soil loss per unit area in unit time, t ha-1
yr -1,
R =
rainfall erosivity factor which is the number of rainfall
erosion index units for a particular location,
K =
soil erodibility factor - a number which reflects the susceptibility
of a soil type to erosion, i.e., it is the reciprocal of soil
resistance to erosion,
L =
slope length factor, a ratio which compares the soil loss with that
from a field of specified length of 22.6 meters,
S =
slope steepness factor, a ratio which compares the soil loss with
that from a field of specified slope of 9%,
C =
cover management factor - a ratio which compares the soil loss with
that from a field under a standard treatment of cultivated bare
fallow, and
P =
support practice factor - a ratio of soil loss with support
practice like contouring, strip cropping or terracing to that with
straight row farming up and down the slope.
The
factors L, S, C and P are each dimensionless ratios which allow
comparison of the site for which soil loss is being estimated with
the standard conditions of the database. Knowing the values of
rainfall erosivity, soil erodibility and slope one can calculate the
effectiveness of various erosion control measures with the purpose of
introducing a cultivation system in an area with soil loss limited to
the acceptable value.
Various
factors associated with the above equation are discussed below.
It refers
to the rainfall erosion index, which expresses the ability of
rainfall to erode the soil particles from an unprotected field. It is
a numerical value. From the long field experiments it has been
obtained that the extent of soil loss from a barren field is directly
proportional to the product of two rainfall characteristics: kinetic
energy of the storm and its 30-minute maximum intensity. The product
of these two characteristics is termed as EI or EI30
or rainfall erosivity. The
erosivity factor, R is the number of rainfall erosion index units
(EI30)
in a given period at the study location. The rainfall erosion index
unit (EI30)
of a storm is estimated as:
where,
KE = kinetic energy of storm in metric tones /ha-cm, expressed as
KE=210.3+89log
KE=210.3+89 logI
where,
I = rainfall intensity in cm/h, and Ι 30Ι30
= maximum 30 minutes rainfall
intensity of the storm.
The study
period can be a week, month, season or year and this I30
values are different for different
areas. The storm EI30 values
for that length of period is summed up. Annual EI30
values are usually computed from
the data available at various meteorological stations and lines
connecting the equal EI30
values (known as Iso-erodent lines)
are drawn for the region covered by the data stations for ready use
in USLE.
The soil
erodibility factor (K) in the USLE relates to the rate at which
different soils erode. Under the conditions of equal slope, rainfall,
vegetative cover and soil management practices, some soils may erode
more easily than others due to inherent soil characteristics. The
direct measurement of K on unit runoff plots reflect the combined
effects of all variables that significantly influence the ease with
which a soil is eroded or the particular slope other than 9% slope.
Some of the soil properties which affect the soil loss to a large
extent are the soil permeability, infiltration rate, soil texture,
size and stability of soil structure, organic content and soil depth.
These are usually determined at special experimental runoff plots or
by the use of empirical erodibility equations which relate several
soil properties to the factor K. The soil erodibility factor (K) is
expressed as tons of soil loss per hectare per unit rainfall
erosivity index, from a field of 9% slope and 22 m (in some cases
22.13 m) field length. The soil erodibility factor (K) is determined
by considering the soil loss from continuous cultivated fallow land
without the influence of crop cover or management.
The
formula used for estimating K is as follows:
where, K =
soil erodibility factor, A0
= observed soil loss, S = slope factor, and ΣEI = total rainfall
erosivity index.
Based on
runoff plot studies, the values of erodibility factor K have been
determined for use in USLE for different soils of India as reported
by Singh et al.
(1981). Values of K for several stations are given below
Values
of K for Several Stations(Source: K. Subramanya, 2008)
Station
|
Soil
Type
|
Computed
Values of K
|
Agra
|
Loamy
sand, alluvial
|
0.07
|
Dehradun
|
Dhulkot
silt, loam
|
0.15
|
Hyderabad
|
Red
chalka sandy loam
|
0.08
|
Kharagpur
|
Soils
from laterite rock
|
0.04
|
Kota
|
Kota
clay loam
|
0.11
|
Ootakamund
|
Laterite
|
0.04
|
Rehmankhera
|
Loam,
alluvial
|
0.17
|
Vasad
|
Sandy
loam, alluvial
|
0.06
|
Topographic
Factor (LS)
Slope
length factor (L) is the ratio of soil loss from the field slope
length under consideration to that from the 22.13 m length plots
under identical conditions. The slope length has a direct relation
with the soil loss, i.e., it is approximately equal to the square
root of the slope length (L0.5),
for the soils on which runoff rate is not affected by the length of
slope (Zing, 1940).
Steepness
of land slope factor (S) is the ratio of soil loss from the field
slope gradient to that from the 9% slope under otherwise identical
conditions. The increase in steepness of slope results in the
increase in soil erosion as the velocity of runoff increases with the
increase in field slope allowing more soil to be detached and
transported along with surface flow.
The two
factors L and S are usually combined into one factor LS called
topographic factor.
This factor is defined as the ratio of soil loss from a field having
specific steepness and length of slope (i.e., 9% slope and 22.13 m
length) to the soil loss from a continuous fallow land. The value of
LS can be calculated by using the formula given by Wischmeier and
Smith (1962):
where, L =
field slope length in feet and S = percent land slope.
Wischmeier
and Smith (1978) again derived the following equation for LS factor
in M.K.S. system, based on the observations from cropped land on
slopes ranging from 3 to 18% and length from 10 to 100 m. The derived
updated equation is:
where,
λ = field slope length in meters, m = exponent varying from 0.2 to
0.5, and θ = angle of slope.
Crop
Management Factor (C)
The crop
management factor C may be defined as the expected ratio of soil loss
from a cropped land under specific crop to the soil loss from a
continuous fallow land, provided that the soil type, slope and
rainfall conditions are identical. The soil erosion is affected in
many ways according to the crops and cropping practices, such as the
kind of crop, quality of cover, root growth, water use by plants
etc. The variation in rainfall distribution within the year
also affects the crop management factor, which affects the soil loss.
Considering all these factors, the erosion control effectiveness of
each crop and cropping practice is evaluated on the basis of five
recommended crop stages introduced by Wischmeier (1960). The five
stages are:
Period
F (Rough Fallow): It includes the
summer ploughing or seed bed preparation.
Period
1 (Seed Bed): It refers to the
period from seeding to 1 one month thereafter.
Period
2 (Establishment): The duration
ranges from 1 to 2 months after seeding.
Period
3 (Growing Period): It ranges from
period 2 to the period of crop harvesting.
Period
4 (Residue or Stubble): The period
ranges from the harvesting of crop to the summer ploughing or new
seed bed preparation.
For
determining the crop management factor the soil loss data for the
above stages is collected from the runoff plot and C is computed as
the ratio of soil loss from cropped plot to the corresponding soil
loss from a continuous fallow land for each of the above five crop
stages separately, for a particular crop, considering various
combinations of crop sequence and their productivity levels. Finally,
weighted C is computed. This factor reflects the combined effect of
various crop management practices. Values of factor C for some
selected stations of India are given below,
Values
of Crop Management Factors for Different Stations in India (Source: K
Subramanya, 2008)
Station
|
Crop
|
Soil
Loss, t ha -1y -1
|
Value
of C
|
Agra
|
Cultivated
fallow
|
3.80
|
1.0
|
|
Bajra
|
2.34
|
0.61
|
|
Dichanhium
annualtu
|
0.53
|
0.13
|
Dehradun
|
Cultivated
fallow
|
33.42
|
1.0
|
|
Cymbopogon
grass
|
4.51
|
0.13
|
|
Strawberry
|
8.89
|
0.27
|
Hyderabad
|
Cultivated
fallow
|
5.00
|
1.0
|
|
Bajra
|
2.00
|
0.40
|
Support
Practice Factor (P)
This
factor is the ratio of soil loss with a support practice to that with
straight row farming up and down the slope. The conservation practice
consists of mainly contouring, terracing and strip cropping. The soil
loss varies due to different practices followed. Factor P for
different support practices for some locations of India is presented
below,
Different
Values of Support Practice Factor (P) for Some Indian Locations
(Source: K. Subramanya, 2008)
Station
|
Practice
|
Factor
P
|
Dehradun
|
Contour
cultivation of maize
|
0.74
|
|
Up
and down cultivation
|
1.00
|
|
Contour
farming
|
0.68
|
|
Terracing
and bunding in agricultural watershed
|
0.03
|
Kanpur
|
Up
and down cultivation of Jowar
|
1.00
|
|
Contour
cultivation of Jowar
|
0.39
|
Ootacamund
|
Potato
up and down
|
1.00
|
|
Potato
on contour
|
0.51
|
Use of
USLE
There are
three important applications of the universal soil loss equation.
They are as follows:
-
It
predicts the soil loss;
-
It helps
in identification and selection of agricultural practices; and
-
It
provides the recommendations on crop management practices to be
used.
USLE is an
erosion prediction model and its successful application depends on
the ability to predict its various factors with reasonable degree of
accuracy. It is based on considerably large experimental data base
relating to various factors of USLE.
Based on
21 observation points and 64 estimated erosion values of soil loss
obtained by the use of USLE at locations spread over different
regions of the country, soil erosion rates have been classified into
6 categories. Areas falling under different classes of erosion are
shown below,
Distribution
of various erosion classes in India (Source: K Subramanya, 2008)
Range
(Tones/ha/year)
|
Erosion
Class
|
Area
(km2)
|
0-5
|
Slight
|
801,350
|
5-10
|
Moderate
|
1,405,640
|
10-20
|
High
|
805,030
|
20-40
|
Very
high
|
160,050
|
40-80
|
Severe
|
83,300
|
>80
|
Very
severe
|
31,895
|
Limitations
of Universal Soil Loss Equation
The
equation involves the procedure for assigning the values of different
associated factors on the basis of practical concept. Therefore,
there is possibility to introduce some errors in selection of the
appropriate values, particularly those based on crop concept.
Normally R and K factors are constants for most of the sites/regions
in the catchment, whereas, C and LS vary substantially with the
erosion controlled measures, used. The following are some of
the limitations of the USLE:
The USLE
is totally empirical equation. Mathematically, it does not illustrate
the actual soil erosion process. The possibility to introduce
predictive errors in the calculation is overcome by using empirical
coefficients.
This
equation was developed mainly on the basis of average annual soil
loss data; hence its applicability is limited for estimation of only
average annual soil loss of the given area. This equation computes
less value than the measured, especially when the rainfall occurs at
high intensity. The storage basin whose sediment area is designed on
the basis of sediment yield using USLE should be inspected after
occurrence of each heavy storm to ensure that the sedimentation
volume in the storage basin is within the limit.
This
equation is employed for assessing the sheet and rill erosions only
but can not be used for the prediction of gully erosion. The gully
erosion caused by concentrated water flow is not accounted by the
equation and yet it can cause greater amount of soil erosion.
The
equation estimates only soil loss, but not the soil deposition. The
deposition of sediment at the bottom of the channel is less than the
total soil loss taking place from the entire watershed. Nevertheless,
the USLE can be used for computing the sediment storage volume
required for sediment retention structures., Also the USLE equation
can be used as a conservative measure of potential sediment storage
needs, particularly where sediment basins ranges typically from 2-40
ha and runoff has not traveled farther distance and basin is intended
to serve as the settling area. Again, if the drainage on any site is
improperly controlled and gully erosion is in extensive form, then
this equation underestimates the sediment storage requirement of the
retention structure.
During the
estimation of contribution of hill slope erosion for basin sediment
yield, care should be taken as it does not incorporate sediment
delivery ratio. This equation cannot be applied for predicting the
soil loss from an individual storm, because the equation was derived
to estimate the long term mean annual soil loss. The use of this
equation should be avoided for the locations, where the values of
different factors associated with the equation, are not yet
determined.
Revised
Universal Soil Loss Equation (RUSLE)
Over the
last few decades, a co-operative effort between scientists and users
to update the USLE has resulted in the development of RUSLE. The
modifications incorporated in USLE to result the RUSLE are mentioned
as under (Kenneth et.al.
1991):
-
Computerizing
the algorithms to assists the calculations.
-
New
rainfall-runoff erosivity term (R) in the Western US, based on more
than 1200 gauge locations.
-
Some
revisions and additions for the Eastern US, including corrections
for high R-factor areas with flat slopes to adjust splash erosion
associated with raindrops falling on ponded water.
-
Development
of a seasonally variable soil erodibility term (K).
-
A new
approach for calculating the cover management term (C) with the
sub-factors representing considerations of prior land use, crop
canopy, surface cover and surface roughness
-
New slope
length and steepness (LS) algorithms reflecting rill to inter-rill
erosion ratio
-
The
capacity to calculate LS products for the slopes of varying shapes
-
New
conservation practices value (P) for range lands, strip crop
rotations, contour factor values and subsurface drainage.
Modified
Universal Soil Loss Equation (MUSLE)
The USLE
was modified by Williams in 1975 to MUSLE by replacing the rainfall
energy factor (R) with another factor called as ‘runoff factor’.
The MUSLE is expressed as
where, Y =
sediment yield from an individual storm (in metric tones), Q = storm
runoff volume in m3
and qp
= the peak rate of runoff in m3/s.
All other
factors K, (LS), C and P have the same meaning as in USLE (equation
16.1). The values of Q and qp can
be obtained by appropriate runoff models. In this model Q is
considered to represent detachment process and qp
is the sediment transport. It is a sediment yield model and does not
need separate estimation of sediment delivery ratio and is applicable
to individual storms. Also it increases sediment yield prediction
accuracy. From modeling point of view, it has the advantage that
daily, monthly and annual sediment yields of a watershed can be
modeled by combining appropriate hydrological models with MUSLE.
Keywords:
USLE,Rainfall Erosivity Factor, Soil
Erodibility Factor, Soil Loss, Iso-erodent Lines, Topographic Factor.
References
Murty,
V.V.N., Jha, M.K., 2009, Land and Water Management Engineering, Fifth
Edition, Kalyani Publishers, pp.556-563.
Schwab et
al., 1981, Soil and Water Conservation Engineering, Fourth Edition,
Republic of Singapore: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., pp.97-104.
Subramanya,
K., 2008, Engineering Hydrology, Third Edition, New Delhi: Tata
McGraw-Hill, pp.374-379.
Suresh
R.,2007, Soil and water conservation engineering, Second Edition,
Standard Publishers Distributors, New Delhi, pp. 641-674.
Wischmeier,
W.H., and Smith, D.D., 1978, Predicting Rainfall Erosion Losses - A
Guide to Conservation Planning, U.S. Department of Agriculture,
Agriculture Handbook No. 537.
Wischmeier,
W.H., and Smith, D.D., 1965, Predicting Rainfall Erosion Losses from
Crop Land East of the Rocky Mountains Guide for Selection of
Practices Soil and Water Conservation, U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Agricultural Handbook No. 282.
Zingg,
R.W., 1940, Degree and length of land slope as it effects soil loss
in runoff, Agric. Engng. 21: 59-64.
Suggested
Readings
McCool
DK, Brown LC, Foster GR, Mutchler CK, Mayer LD, 1987, Revised slope
steepness factor for the Universal Soil Loss Equation, Trans ASAE 30:
1387–1396.
Narayana,
V. V. Dhruva, 2002, Soil and water conservation research in India,
ICAR, New Delhi, pp. 30-56.
Renard,
K. G., G. R. Foster, G. A. Weesies and J. P. Portar, 1991, RUSLE,
Revised universal soil loss equation, Journal of Soil and Water
Conservation, 46: 30-33.
Singh,
G., Ram Babu, and Subhash Chandra, 1981, Soil loss prediction
research in India, Central Soil and Water Conservation Research &
Training Institute, Dehradun, Bull. No. T-12/D-9, pp. 70.
Smith,
D.D., and W.H. Wischmeier, 1962, Rainfall Erosion, (In) Advances in
Agronomy, 14: 109-148.
Williams,
J.R., 1975, Sediment-yield prediction with Universal Equation using
runoff energy factor, In: Present and Prospective Technology for
Predicting Sediment Yield and Sources, U.S. Dept. Agric, ARS-S-40,
pp. 244-252.
Renard,
K. G., G. R. Foster, G. A. Weesies, D. K. McCool, and D. C. Yoder
(Coordinators), 1995, Predicting Soil Erosion by Water: A Guide to
Conservation Planning with the Revised Universal Soil Loss Equation
(RUSLE), U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agriculture Handbook No. 703
(In Review).
Foster,
G. R., D. K. McCool, K. G. Renard and W. C. Moldenhauer, 1981,
Conversion of the Universal Soil Loss Equation to SI metric units.
Journal of Soil and Water Conservation 36(6): 355-359.