Difference between revisions of "Examples of RUSLE practice management factors for construction sites"
m |
m |
||
| Line 30: | Line 30: | ||
<td>Maximum downslope length (ft)</td> | <td>Maximum downslope length (ft)</td> | ||
<td>P factor</td> | <td>P factor</td> | ||
| − | |||
</tr> | </tr> | ||
<tr> | <tr> | ||
| Line 36: | Line 35: | ||
<td>350</td> | <td>350</td> | ||
<td>0.6</td> | <td>0.6</td> | ||
| − | |||
</tr> | </tr> | ||
<tr> | <tr> | ||
| Line 42: | Line 40: | ||
<td>250</td> | <td>250</td> | ||
<td>0.5</td> | <td>0.5</td> | ||
| − | |||
</tr> | </tr> | ||
<tr> | <tr> | ||
| Line 48: | Line 45: | ||
<td>200</td> | <td>200</td> | ||
<td>0.5</td> | <td>0.5</td> | ||
| − | |||
</tr> | </tr> | ||
<tr> | <tr> | ||
| Line 54: | Line 50: | ||
<td>125</td> | <td>125</td> | ||
<td>0.6</td> | <td>0.6</td> | ||
| − | |||
</tr> | </tr> | ||
<tr> | <tr> | ||
| Line 60: | Line 55: | ||
<td>75</td> | <td>75</td> | ||
<td>0.7</td> | <td>0.7</td> | ||
| − | |||
</tr> | </tr> | ||
<tr> | <tr> | ||
| Line 66: | Line 60: | ||
<td>60</td> | <td>60</td> | ||
<td>0.8</td> | <td>0.8</td> | ||
| − | |||
</tr> | </tr> | ||
<tr> | <tr> | ||
Revision as of 20:08, 31 October 2016
Examples of RUSLE practice management factors for construction sites. Source: NYDEC, 2005.
Link to this table
| Surface condition | P factor | |
|---|---|---|
| Bare soil loose | 1.0 | |
| Freshly disked or rough irregular surface | 0.9 | |
| Compact smooth by equipment up and down hill | 1.3 | |
| Compact smooth by equipment across slope | 1.2 | |
| Contoured furrows | ||
| Slope (%) | Maximum downslope length (ft) | P factor |
| 1-2 | 350 | 0.6 |
| 3-5 | 250 | 0.5 |
| 6-8 | 200 | 0.5 |
| 9-12 | 125 | 0.6 |
| 13-16 | 75 | 0.7 |
| 17-20 | 60 | 0.8 |
| >20 | 50 | 0.8 |