177

Chapter 10
Splash and wash processes on soil in experimental
trays exposed to natural rainfall
Abstract: The complex interactions between rainfall-driven erosion processes and rainfall
characteristics, slope gradient, soil treatment and soil surface processes are not very well
understood. A combination of experiments under natural rainfall and a consistent physical theory
for their interpretation is needed to shed more light on the underlying processes. The present
study demonstrates such a methodology. An experimental device employed earlier in laboratory
studies was used to measure downslope rain splash and splash-creep, lateral splash, upslope
splash, and rainfall-driven runoff transport (wash) from a highly aggregated clay-rich oxisol
exposed to natural rainfall in West Java, Indonesia. Two series of measurements were made: the
first with the soil surface at angles of 0-, 5-, 15- and 40-; and the second all at an angle of 5- but
with different tillage and mulching treatments. A number of rainfall erosivity indices were
calculated from rainfall intensity measurements and compared with measured transport
components. Overall storm kinetic energy correlated reasonably well to sediment transport, but
much better agreement was obtained when a threshold rainfall intensity (20 mm h
-1
) was
introduced. Rain splash transport measurements were interpreted using a recently developed
theory relating detachment to sediment transport. Furthermore, a conceptually sound yet simple
wash transport model is advanced that satisfactorily predicted observed washed sediment
concentrations. The lack of replication precluded rigorous assessment of the effect of slope and
soil treatment on erosion processes, but some general conclusions could still be drawn. The
results stress the importance of experiments under conditions of natural rainfall.
Parts of this chapter are published as: Van Dijk, A.I.J.M., Bruijnzeel, L.A. and Eisma, S.E. A
methodology to study rain splash and wash processes under natural rainfall. Hydrological
Processes 16 (in press)
10.1. Introduction
Rain splash - soil detachment and transport by impacting rain drops - is an important
first step in soil erosion. Unconcentrated (sheet) runoff usually does not have enough
power to actively detach and entrain soil particles (Rose, 1993), but particles detached by
rain splash may subsequently be transported by the flow (Hudson, 1995; Kinnell, 1990).
On short steep slopes (e.g. bench terrace risers) rain splash may be the dominant
transport mechanism (Chapter 9 and 13). Physical understanding of the processes causing
A.I.J.M. van Dijk (2002) Water and Sediment Dynamics in Bench-terraced Agricultural
Steeplands in West Java, Indonesia. PhD Thesis, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam
CHAPTER 10 - SPLASH AND WASH UNDER NATURAL RAINFALL
178
detachment and transport by falling rain drops has improved considerably over the last
two decades, mainly by laboratory experiments (Poesen and Savat, 1981; Ghadiri and
Payne, 1986, 1988; Poesen and Torri, 1988; Sharma and Gupta, 1989; Salles and Poesen,
2000).
Unfortunately, the results of laboratory studies are not readily translated to field
situations. For example, rainfall kinetic energy has been related to rain splash in both
natural and laboratory studies (Kneale, 1982; Salles and Poesen, 2000), but the manner in
which kinetic energy was varied and estimated differs between the two experiment types.
Changes in simulated rainfall kinetic energy are normally achieved by using (uniform)
drops of different size or fall height, while rainfall intensity is often high (Free, 1960;
Quansah, 1981; Poesen, 1985). By contrast, natural rainfall kinetic energy depends
primarily on the rain drop size distribution (although moderated by wind) and in field
studies is often not measured but estimated using empirical relationships with rainfall
intensity (see Chapter 7 for a recent review). A comparable difference relates to the
apparent existence of a rainfall kinetic energy threshold observed in both laboratory and
field experiments. Individual water drops have to overcome a critical kinetic energy
threshold before they are actually able to dislodge and transport soil particles (Sharma
and Gupta, 1989; Salles et al., 2000). At first sight this appears to agree well with
findings that use of a threshold intensity (or corresponding kinetic energy) correlates
better to sediment transport measurements than does gross kinetic energy (e.g. Hudson,
1965; see Section 10.4.1). The moments of natural rain drop size distributions increase
with rainfall intensity in a gradual manner, however (despite considerable temporal
variation, see Chapter 7). No sudden increase in the proportion of drops with higher than
threshold kinetic energy occurs, therefore, and even very low intensity rainfall will
contain some erosive rain drops. This renders the existence of a threshold kinetic energy
for natural rainfall difficult to explain in physical terms. Furthermore, laboratory
experiments by Riezebos and Epema (1985) indicated that the average distance over
which particles are splashed depends on the height from which artificial drops fell. The
amounts of splash transport measured in most rain splash experiments depend on both
detachment (expressed on an area basis) and splash distance (Chapter 8). As drop fall
heights in the laboratory are different from natural rainfall, this further complicates
extrapolation of laboratory experiments.
A similar case can be made with regard to rainfall-driven sediment transport by
runoff, denoted here by the term wash. Laboratory experiments have greatly improved
the physical understanding and mathematical description of wash transport (Moss, 1988;
Kinnell, 1990; Proffitt and Rose, 1991; Heilig et al., 2001), but most involved artificial
rainfall at a constant rate and uniform soil material. For obvious reasons, natural rainfall
and field soils present added complexity whereas, in addition, experimental boundary
conditions (rainfall rate, water inflow or outflow rates, flow depth and velocity) can no
longer be controlled outside the laboratory and, in fact, become closely related.
The problems outlined above clearly indicate that to understand rainfall-driven
erosion processes experiments under natural rainfall remain indispensable. The current
study demonstrates a methodology to study rain splash and wash under such conditions.
This was done using experimental soil trays modified slightly from the design used by
Wan et al. (1996) in laboratory studies. The soil trays were filled with a highly
aggregated clay-soil exposed to the natural rainfall regime prevailing in West-Java,
Indonesia, during two consecutive periods covering 17 and 15 storms, respectively. After
each event, different components of sediment transport were measured separately.
During the first period, the devices were placed at four different angles to investigate the
CHAPTER 10 - SPLASH AND WASH UNDER NATURAL RAINFALL
179
effects of slope on splash on wash processes, whereas during the second period, the
effect of mulch cover and frequent tillage were studied.
Various rainfall erosivity indices proposed in literature were tested as predictors of
splash and wash transport for this specific combination of soil and rainfall regime. A
mathematical theory relating splash transport to detachment (Chapter 8) was employed to
interpret splash measurements. Furthermore, a simple conceptual model is proposed to
interpret wash measurements. Given the high variability of erosion processes expected in
(semi-) natural conditions, the lack of replication for the various treatments precluded a
rigorous statistical assessment of the effects of different slope gradients and treatments.
Some interesting observations could still be made, however, and an assessment of the
usefulness of the splash and wash model theory was possible.
10.2. Materials and methods
10.2.1. Site and soil
Experiments were conducted within the framework of the Cikumutuk Hydrology and
Erosion Research Project (CHERP). This project studies erosion dynamics in the small
(125 ha) but steep agricultural Cikumutuk catchment, situated about 60 km East of
Bandung in the volcanic uplands of West Java. All experiments were carried out between
19 February and 9 April 1999 near the project laboratory (7-03S; 108-04W) at an
altitude of 580 m a.s.l.. The area receives an annual rainfall of ca. 2650 mm, with a drier
season (average monthly rainfall less than 60 mm) generally extending from July until
September.
The soil used was a Red Latosol according to the Indonesian Soil Classification
System (Soeporaptohardjo, 1961) or a Haplorthox according to USDA nomenclature,
which had developed in Pleistocene and Holocene andesitic tuffs with kaolinite as the
dominant clay mineral (P.P. Hehuwat, pers. comm.) and a median dispersed particle size
of 1.2 m. Material used in the experiments was collected from the top 10 cm of the beds
of reverse sloping bench terraces. Soil texture was silty clay with very little sand (ca.
70% clay, 30% silt). The soil was highly aggregated with crumbly sub-angular
aggregates sometimes attaining a diameter of more than 8 mm and a median dry-sieved
size of 3.2 mm; median wet-sieved aggregate size was ca. 1.1 mm. More details about the
site and soil properties are given in Chapter 3.
10.2.2. Experimental design
A combined splash and runoff collecting system slightly modified from Wan et al.
(1996) was used. The device consisted of a central soil tray with dimensions of 0.60 x
0.30 x 0.10 m (LxWxH), with sediment collectors attached to all sides, to separately
measure sediment transport by wash and the respective directional components of splash
on a sloping surface. The original device is described in detail by Wan et al. (1996),
while the modified version is shown in Fig. 10.1.
Runoff flowed over an apron attached to the soil tray and into a small runoff guiding
trough at the downslope end of the soil tray (Fig. 10.1b). Unlike the design by Wan et al.
(1996), the present collecting system had a separate piece of flattened U-shaped metal to
CHAPTER 10 - SPLASH AND WASH UNDER NATURAL RAINFALL
180
Fig. 10.1 (a) Overall and (b) longitudinal cross sectional view of the combined splash
and runoff collection system used in the present study as modified from Wan et al.
(1996). Drawings are not to scale, for full explanation see text.
CHAPTER 10 - SPLASH AND WASH UNDER NATURAL RAINFALL
181
runoff collector lid and intercept any splashed sediment. The downslope splash board
was roofed to prevent the later from being splashed back onto the soil. The cover of the
runoff trough rested on the apron of the wash collector with four small extensions,
leaving a slot of 5 mm height for the runoff to enter. During preliminary trials, substantial
amounts of coarse aggregates were splashed or pushed through this slot by rain drops and
ended up on the runoff apron. A small portion of these aggregates was eventually washed
into the runoff collecting trough, thereby obscuring the distinction between washed and
splashed sediment. To separate most of this splash-creep sediment (Moeyersons, 1975)
from washed sediment proper, the runoff collecting trough was covered with 2 mm nylon
mesh. Any sediment remaining in the trough was added to the splash-creep sediment
fraction. This might result in an over-estimate of wash transport, because fine sediment
not initially washed ended up in the container, or an under-estimate, because some
sediment did not reach the runoff container but remained on the apron or in the runoff
guiding trough (Fig. 10.1b).
The upslope, lateral and downslope splash transport components were collected in
separate collectors equipped with splash boards. In the original design of Wan et al.
(1996) the boards extended 0.30 m above the soil surface, but the boards were extended
to 0.50 m in the present study to avoid sediment loss from devices placed at angles of up
to 40-. The splash collectors were attached to the soil tray in such a way that the boards
could always be positioned vertically and were detachable from the splash boards to
facilitate sampling (Fig. 10.1b). Cover strips were added to guide all sediment from the
boards into the collectors. Unlike the device used by Wan et al. (1996), the lateral and
upslope splash boards were not equipped with roofing, as this might interfere with rain
falling on the soil. Small perforations were made 1 cm above the bottom of the splash
collectors to allow drainage of excess rain water, while at the same time maintaining a
water layer preventing water and sediment from splashing back onto the soil or moving
in suspension.
10.2.3. Experimental procedures
Two series of experiments were conducted with four devices each; the first series
was carried out between 19 February and 20 March 1999 and covered 17 storms, whereas
the second series was conducted from 23 March to 9 April 1999 during 15 storms. Before
each series of measurements, a 4 cm thick layer of coarse (8-30 mm) gravel was placed
on the bottom of each soil tray to facilitate drainage through holes at the downslope end
of the soil tray (Fig. 10.1b). On top of the gravel, a wet piece of cloth was placed and the
tray was filled with soil to the apron of the wash collector and up to 2-3 mm below the
rims of the splash collectors. Used soil material was not dried or sieved (although large
litter was excluded) and had an estimated initial moisture content of ca. 55% in both
measuring series, remaining well-aggregated. The soil was not artificially wetted prior to
the experiments, but after the first substantial storm some soil material was added to re-
attain the original level, after which the measurements were started.
For the first series of measurements, the devices were placed at angles of 0-, 5-, 15-
and 40-. In the second series, all devices were placed at an angle of 5-; the soil of two
devices was partially covered with mulch, while a third was tilled after each event and
the fourth served as control. Actual mulch cover, provided by partly decomposed maize
stalks and leaves, was determined by digital analysis of overhead photographs at 35%
and 55%, respectively (both accurate within 3%). Tillage was done after each storm
CHAPTER 10 - SPLASH AND WASH UNDER NATURAL RAINFALL
182
using a small rake with nails protruding 3 cm, breaking up any crusts that might have
formed.
Sediment transport components were sampled after each storm. First, the volume of
water in the runoff container was measured to the nearest millilitre, after which the water
and sediment were transferred to a beaker. Some coagulating agent (Al
2
(SO
4
)
3

(aq)
) was
added and after the sediment had settled the supernatant water was decanted. Sediment
adhering to the splash boards or to the cover of the runoff guide (Fig. 10.1b) was
transferred into the corresponding collectors, using a small paintbrush (when dry) or a
wash bottle (when wet). Next, the collectors were taken out and sediment was washed
into crucibles, as was splash-creep sediment on the apron and in the runoff trough. The
suspended wash sediment and the splashed sediment were dried to constant mass at
80-C. Sediment was allowed to cool and attract moisture from the air (increasing mass
by 1-4%) before mass was measured to the nearest 0.001 g.
10.2.4. Rainfall characteristics and erosivity indices
Storm rainfall depth was measured using a standard rain gauge (100 cm
2
orifice),
while rainfall intensity was measured with a custom-built tipping bucket-logger system,
calibrated and resampled into five-minute intervals following methods outlined in
Chapter 11. A number of erosivity indices proposed in literature was calculated for each
individual storm using the rainfall intensity data. The indices and corresponding
equations are listed in Table 10.1 and include storm rainfall depth (P in mm), storm
kinetic energy flux (E
K
in J m
-2
), the amount of rain falling at an intensity higher than a
threshold intensity R
0
(P
Ro
in mm), the kinetic energy corresponding to that amount of
rainfall (E
Ro
in J m
-2
), rainfall intensity raised by an (optimised) power (R
b
), the USLE
rainfall or R factor (EI
30
; Wischmeier and Smith, 1978) and the AI
m
index of Lal
(1976). The USLE rainfall factor is calculated as the product of event kinetic energy and
maximum 30-minutes rainfall, whereas the AI
m
index is the product of rainfall depth and
maximum rainfall intensity for a short interval (five minutes in this case). More complex
erosivity indices involving rain drop size and drop momentum or kinetic energy have
also been proposed on the basis of theoretical considerations (inter alia, Meyer, 1965;
Riezebos and Epema, 1985; Gilley and Finkner, 1985; Salles and Poesen, 2000), but to
calculate such indices for natural rainfall would require detailed knowledge of the
corresponding rain drop size distributions.
Rainfall kinetic energy was estimated using the general relationship proposed in
Chapter 7:
( ) [ ] R e
K
042 . 0 exp 52 . 0 1 3 . 28 [10.1]
where e
K
(in J m
-2
mm
-1
) is the kinetic energy load of rain falling at intensity R (in mm
h
-1
). Measurements of rain drop size distribution made on the spot for intensities ranging
from 0.2 to 124 mm h
-1
(N=21) using the stained filter paper technique (Hall, 1970) did
produce a relationship that was not appreciably different from Eq. [10.1] (Van Dijk,
unpublished data). Calculated kinetic energy flux was corrected for the increase of drop
fall velocity with altitude by multiplying the results of Eq. [10.1] with a factor 1.06 (cf.
Chapter 7). To calculate the EI
30
index (Wischmeier and Smith, 1978; Table 10.1), storm
kinetic energy was also estimated using the set of equations proposed by these authors. A
CHAPTER 10 - SPLASH AND WASH UNDER NATURAL RAINFALL
183
number of erosivity indices involve the use of a threshold rainfall intensity or empirical
coefficient (cf. Table 10.1). These were evaluated using two different approaches. Firstly,
coefficient values for each individual series of sediment transport component
measurements were optimised by least squares using the Levenberg-Marquardt method.
For each device, this yielded five different coefficient values (i.e. for upslope, lateral and
downslope splash, splash-creep and wash transport, respectively) and, therefore, 40
values in total (two measured periods with four devices each). The median of these 40
values was subsequently used to calculate erosivity indices again. In both modes, the
coefficient of determination associated with a one-parameter linear regression between
event sediment transport amounts and storm erosivity index was used as a measure of
performance.
10.2.5. Interpretation of rain splash transport components
Upslope, lateral and downslope splash and splash-creep transport rates (all in g m
-1
)
across the boundaries of the soil tray were calculated by dividing the amount of splashed
sediment by the (projected) length of that particular side. From these, gross downslope
splash transport (q
g
) was calculated as downslope splash plus splash-creep, whereas
Description Equation
storm rainfall depth (mm) P
storm kinetic energy (J m
-2
) ( )

n
i
i K K
t R e E
1
Amount of rainfall falling at higher
than threshold intensity (mm)
( )

>

0
0 1
R R
i
i R
t R P
Kinetic energy of rainfall falling at higher
than threshold intensity (in J m
-2
)
( )

>

0
0 1
R R
i
i K R
t R e E
power function of rainfall intensity ( )



n
i
i
b b
t R R
1
EI
30
index (Wischmeier and Smith, 1978)
30 30
R E EI
K

AI
m
index (Lal, 1976)
5
PR AI
m

Table 10.1. Rainfall erosivity indices as used in the present study and their method of
calculation. P (in mm) denotes rainfall depth, R (in mm h
-1
) rainfall intensity, t (in h) time
interval length, E
K
(in J m
-2
) kinetic energy flux, e
K
(in J m
-2
mm
-1
) kinetic energy load, R
0
(in
mm h
-1
) threshold rainfall intensity, R
30
and R
5
(in mm h
-1
) maximum rainfall intensity for 30-
and 5-minute periods, respectively, and b an empirical coefficient.
CHAPTER 10 - SPLASH AND WASH UNDER NATURAL RAINFALL
184
upslope transport was subtracted from these to derive net downslope transport (q
n
).
Dividing transported amounts by rainfall erosivity yielded estimates for lateral and gross
and net downslope splash transportability (T
lat
, T
g
and T
n
, respectively, with units
depending on the erosivity index used).
In Chapter 8 an expression was derived relating splash transport (q in g m
-1
) across a
boundary to soil detachment on an area basis ( in g m
-2
). If the splashed particles are
exponentially re-distributed around their source, this relation is given by:

q [10.2]
where (in m) is the weighed average splash length. The (projected) splash distance
changes on a slope because of changes to the splash process and the effect of the slope
itself on the trajectories of splash (Ghadiri and Payne, 1986, 1988; Chapter 8). The
current experimental design unfortunately did not produce measurements of average
splash distance. Field measurements yielded values of 1 cm for all-sided splash on
sub-horizontal (2-3-) bench terrace beds and 12 cm for downslope splash on 30-40-
terrace risers, respectively (Chapter 9). If a change in slope only affects the component of
splash length in the direction of the slope gradient, and not that parallel to the slope, then
lateral splash length should equal for all slopes. Tentatively making this assumption
and using a value of =1 cm, lateral transportability (T
lat
) values were used to obtain
estimates of soil detachability (D) with Eq. [10.2].
It was demonstrated in Chapter 8 that splash transport measured from confined areas
(such as the soil trays) represents an under-estimate, increasing with the ratio of average
splash length over tray size. Correction factors listed in Chapter 8 for current
combinations of tray size and expected splash length suggests under-estimations to be
small overall, except perhaps for downslope splash on the steepest slope, which may
have been under-estimated by up to 10%.
10.2.6. Interpretation of runoff and wash transport
Measured storm runoff volumes were divided by the projected area of soil to obtain
total event runoff depth Q
tot
(in mm). The spatially variable infiltration (SVI) model of
Yu et al. (1997c) was used to estimate soil infiltration characteristics from these event
runoff amounts. The model assumes an exponential spatial distribution of infiltration
rates and successfully simulated runoff from (sections of) bench terraces in the study area
(Chapter 12). After an initial addition infiltration (F
0
in mm) has taken place, runoff
equals rainfall excess and can be expressed as a one-parameter function of rainfall
intensity:
1
]
1

,
_

m
m
I
R
I R Q exp 1 [10.3]
where Q (in mm h
-1
) is instantaneous runoff rate and I
m
(in mm h
-1
) average maximum
infiltration rate when the entire area generates runoff (Yu et al., 1997c). For each of the
eight data-sets a single value of I
m
was used with resampled rainfall intensity data to
CHAPTER 10 - SPLASH AND WASH UNDER NATURAL RAINFALL
185
model runoff depth for all storms. Its value was optimised by least squares using the
Levenberg-Marquardt method. Model performance for event runoff depths was
expressed by model efficiency (ME) sensu Nash and Sutcliffe (1970).
A simple conceptual model of wash transport was based on the recognition that the
maximum possible concentration of detached particles in rain water, directly after
impact, is given by the ratio of total detachment () for the event to event rainfall (P). If
it is assumed that a constant washed fraction j of the detached sediment settles slowly
enough to be transported across the downslope end of the soil area before settling, then
event soil loss by wash (M
wash
in g m
-2
) may be approximated by:
tot tot tot wash wash
Q
P
DE
j Q
P
j Q c M

[10.4]
where c
wash
(in kg m
-3
) is the concentration of washed sediment in runoff. On a soil area
of limited extent, such as used in the present experiments, Eq. [10.4] introduces an error
because material that is splashed out from the soil area is not available anymore for wash
transport, but this error is demonstrably very small in the present case. Presumably, j will
be dependent on the size distribution of the detached particles, but may also vary as a
function of slope gradient and roughness (Moss, 1988; Kinnell, 1990; Proffitt and Rose,
1991; Heilig et al., 2001). It is acknowledged that the assumption of j being constant
regardless of rainfall pattern and intensity probably represents a simplification of reality.
The performance of the combined runoff and wash transport model (Eqs. [10.3] and
[10.4]) was tested using observed sediment concentrations. Detachability derived from
lateral splash transport were used, together with j values optimised using the Levenberg-
Marquardt method. Predicted sediment concentrations were multiplied with modelled
event runoff depths to yield wash transport amounts that were compared with those
observed. Model performance was investigated by calculating Nash-Sutcliffe model
efficiency (ME), both in terms of sediment concentration and wash transport amounts for
events. In addition, for comparison calculations were made using a single optimised
overall sediment concentration for each device.
10.3. Results
10.3.1. Rainfall and performance of erosivity parameters
Rainfall patterns during the two measuring periods are shown in Fig. 10.2, while
rainfall characteristics are listed in Table 10.2. The first series of measurements (19
February - 20 March 1999) counted 17 storms of 1-39 mm, while the second series of
measurements (23 March - 9 April 1999) included 15 storms of 4-57 mm.
The average coefficients of determination (r
2
) for the one-parameter linear
regression equations between event sediment transport components and storm erosivity
indices are listed in Table 10.3. The best result overall was obtained using the kinetic
energy of rainfall above an optimised threshold intensity (r
2
=0.58), giving the best
predictions for 22 of the 40 data sets. Optimised threshold values for individual data sets
were 2-24 mm h
-1
, with the most extreme values still resulting in rather low r
2
values and
being associated with low overall transport amounts (upslope splash on a 40- slope and
of splash from the mulched soil). Applying the median (and average) optimised threshold
CHAPTER 10 - SPLASH AND WASH UNDER NATURAL RAINFALL
186
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
20-Feb 28-Feb 8-Mar 16-Mar 24-Mar 1-Apr 9-Apr
S
t
o
r
m

d
e
p
t
h

(
m
m
)
Series I Series II
Fig. 10.2. Patterns of daily rainfall during the two experimental periods in 1999.
Experiment series I II
Period 19 Feb - 20 Mar 23 Mar - 9 April
Number of days 28 16
Rainfall characteristics
Number of storms 17 15
Total rainfall (mm) 322 366
Average storm depth (mm) 18.9 22.9
Max. storm depth (mm) 38.8 57.0
Maximum R
5
(mm h
-1
) 81 147
Maximum R
30
(mm h
-1
) 51 101
Average rainfall intensity (mm h
-1
) 3.5 4.5
All rainfall
Total kinetic energy, E
K
(J m
-2
) 6234 8199
Average energy content, e
K
(J m
-2
mm
-1
) 19.4 22.4
Only rainfall at intensities >20 mm h
-1
E
20
(J m
-2
, % of total) 3324 (53%) 6090 (74%)
Rainfall (mm, % of total) 134 (41%) 226 (62%)
Average e
20
(J m
-2
mm
-1
) 24.8 26.9
Table 10.2. Characteristics of rainfall during the two periods experiments were carried out at
the study site in West Java, Indonesia.
CHAPTER 10 - SPLASH AND WASH UNDER NATURAL RAINFALL
187
intensity value of 20 mm h
-1
throughout did not decrease the average coefficient of
determination much (r
2
=0.57), whereas the number of best predictions when using a
single coefficient value for each individual erosivity index increased to 26 out of 40
(right-hand column in Table 10.3). The second best performance was obtained by using
the amount of rainfall at intensities higher than a threshold value (r
2
=0.55, best
performance for 8 out of 40 data sets). Median, average and range of these optimised
threshold intensities were very similar to those found for kinetic energy, but correlation
was reduced (r
2
=0.49) when the median value of 20 mm h
-1
was used throughout. A
similar degree of association (r
2
=0.54) was found for a power function of (five-minute
averages of) rainfall intensity (R
b
), but the optimised power values varied widely (a=1.0-
3.0). Using the average and median value (1.70.4) throughout resulted in an average
correlation that was somewhat less (r
2
=0.50). Total storm kinetic energy (E
K
) as an
indicator of splash transport performed less well (r
2
=0.44, best performance for 7 out of
40 cases), as did the AI
m
index of Lal (1976) (r
2
=0.41), even though it was developed
specifically for tropical, high rainfall intensity environments. The USLE rainfall factor
(EI
30
) and storm rainfall (P) per se performed poorest under the studied conditions
(r
2
=0.36 and r
2
=0.35, respectively).
10.3.2. Splash transport
Cumulative amounts of sediment transport components for individual devices and
lateral, gross and net downslope transportability values (T
20,lat
, T
20,g
and T
20,n
,
respectively, in g m
-1
kJ
-1
) relating to the best performing erosivity index E
20
(i.e. E
Ro
with R
0
=20 mm h
-1
), are summarised in Table 10.4.
Despite the lack of replication, trends in splash transport with slope gradient
conformed with expectations: both splash-creep and downslope transport increased with
slope, whereas upslope transport decreased. Lateral splash did not show any obvious
trend. Simultaneously with the increase in downslope splash transport, upslope transport
decreased very rapidly with slope, q

being 35%, 15% and 0.8% of lateral splash

transport rates at 5-, 15- and 40-, respectively (Table 10.4). Regular tillage and mulch
cover had a marked effect on splash transport: lateral splash from the soil tilled after
Index Coefficient optimised Parameter statistics Using median value
Average
r
2
N
best fit
Median Average
(st.dev.)
Range Average
r
2
N
best fit
E
Ro
0.58 22 20 20 (3) 2 24 0.57 26
P
Ro
0.55 8 20 18 (5) 3 24 0.49 5
R
b
0.54 10 1.7 1.7 (0.4) 1.0 3.0 0.50 1
E
K
0.44 - - - - 0.44 7
AI
m
0.41 - - - - 0.41 -
EI
30
0.36 - - - - 0.36 -
P 0.35 - - - - 0.35 1
Table 10.3. Performance of the various rainfall erosivity indices listed in Table 10.1 in
explaining the variance in 40 data sets, covering five sediment transport components from
four experimental soil trays during two periods (see text for further explanation).
CHAPTER 10 - SPLASH AND WASH UNDER NATURAL RAINFALL
188
every storm was 44% of that from the bare control, whereas this ratio was 21% and 9%
on the soil with 35% and 55% mulch cover, respectively. Similarly, net downslope splash
Series I
(P=332 mm; E
20
=3324 J m
-2
)
Series II
(P=366 mm; E
20
=6090 J m
-2
)
Slope 0- 5- 15- 40- 5- 5- 5- 5-
Treatment - - - - - tilled
MC=
0.35
MC=
0.55
Splash transport (g m
-1
)
splash-creep 80.8 299.3 374.8 913.7 373.0 240.6 96.5 34.5
downslope 170.1 315.5 309.9 820.4 288.5 106.1 39.5 28.1
lateral 212.8 203.3 139.1 207.7 145.7 64.3 30.7 13.4
upslope 255.9 71.7 21.5 1.6 85.6 35.7 33.7 14.7
net downslope -5.0 543.1 663.1 1732.5 576.0 311.0 102.3 48.0
Transportability (g m
-1
kJ
-1
)
lateral (T
20,lat
) 64 61.1 41.9 62.5 23.9 10.6 5 2.2
gross downslope (T
20,
) 75.5 185 206 521.7 108.6 56.9 22.3 10.3
net downslope (T
20,S
) (-1.5) 163.4 199.5 521.2 94.6 51.1 16.8 7.9
Runoff and wash transport
total runoff depth (Q
tot
in mm) 2.5 42.5 29.2 36.9 60.0 88.4 44.5 16.9
runoff coefficient (rc in %) 0.75 12.8 8.8 11.1 16.0 24.2 12.2 5.0
sediment conc. in runoff (g l
-1
) 1.33 5.28 6.75 8.62 2.51 1.65 0.91 0.71
wash transport (g m
-1
) 2.0 134.6 118.3 159.1 90.4 87.3 24.2 7.2
wash/total transport (%)
a
100%
b
19.9% 15.1% 8.4% 13.6% 21.9% 19.1% 13.0%
Runoff modelling
infiltration rate (I
m
in mm h
-1
) 1375 70 98 74 151 79 309 839
model efficiency (ME) 0.52 0.69 0.68 0.84 0.53 0.54 -0.05 0
avg. absolute error (mm) 0.1 1.0 0.9 2.1 1.8 3.2 2.3 0.9
diff. cum. runoff (sim.-obs., %) -2% -3% 5% 6% -16% -6% -39% -37%
Wash transport modelling
detachability (D
20
in g J
-1
) 13.4 12.8 8.8 13.1 5 2.2 1 0.5
washed fraction (j in %) 0.9 3.0 4.4 4.1 2.3 4.5 4.9 8.1
ME for concentration -0.14 0.62 0.63 0.72 -0.16 -0.11 -0.22 -0.07
ME for transport -0.81 0.84 0.8 0.9 0.61 -0.04 -0.19 -2.25
diff. cum. transp. (sim.-obs.) 16 -1 -11 12 -22 16 -4 -31
ME using average conc.
c
-3.15 0.77 0.57 0.72 0.43 -1.12 -1.85 -4.39
diff. cum. transport (sim.-obs.)
using average concentration
-14 13 12 25 -14 -5 -42 -49
a
total meaning gross downslope splash and wash transport.
b
theoretical value.
c
ME relating to transport, not sediment concentration.
Table 10.4. Summary of measurements and modelling of various rain splash and wash transport
components from eight experimental devices, with different inclination and treatments, during
two consecutive periods. Listed are transported amounts and transportability values
corresponding to different splash transport components; measurements of runoff and wash
transport, and the results and performance of modelling of runoff and wash transport. These last
are compared with using a constant, average sediment concentration unrelated to event erosivity.
CHAPTER 10 - SPLASH AND WASH UNDER NATURAL RAINFALL
189
transport was reduced to 54%, 18% and 8% of transport on the bare control for the
respective treatments (Table 10.4).
Gross and net downslope splash transportability showed an increase with slope,
increasing from 76 and -2 g m kJ
-1
, respectively at 0-, to 522 and 521 g m kJ
-1
at 40-
slope. The first series of experiments produced lateral transportability values of 42-64 g
m kJ
-1
, but at 24 gm kJ
-1
, the value derived for the control treatment in the second
experiment was much lower. Downslope splash transportability at 5- also differed
between the first and the second experiment, at 185 versus 109 g m kJ
-1
for gross, and
163 versus 95 g m kJ
-1
for net transportability, respectively. The form of the relationship
between gross or net downslope transportability and slope gradient can be illustrated by
expressing the former as a ratio to lateral transportability (Fig. 10.3ab). This reduces the
0
2
4
6
8
10
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
S
T
d
o
w
n
/
T
l
a
t
T
down
=1 + 9.35 S
0.44
T
lat
r
2
=0.90
(a)
0
2
4
6
8
10
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
S
T
n
e
t
/
T
l
a
t
T
net
=9.36 S
0.42
T
lat
r
2
=0.95
(b)
Fig. 10.3. Relationships between slope gradient (S) and the ratio (a) of gross downslope to
lateral transport (T
down
/T
lat
) and (b) of net downslope to lateral splash transport (T
net
/T
lat
).
Note that the open circle represents the result for the tilled treatment, which was not included
in regression analysis as this treatment strongly affected erosion processes.
CHAPTER 10 - SPLASH AND WASH UNDER NATURAL RAINFALL
190
influence of differences between soil conditions, treatments and rainfall characteristics
between the various devices. Power functions described the observations well, even
though these were limited to only four slope gradients and largely without replication.
Using an average lateral splash length of 1 cm with measured lateral transportability
values yielded detachability values of 13-20 g J
-1
for the first experimental period (Table
10.4). Repeating the exercise for the untreated soil in the second series of measurements
gave a much lower value of 7.5 g J
-1
, compared with 3.3, 1.6 and 0.7 g J
-1
for the soils
with tillage and 35% and 55% mulch cover, respectively.
10.3.3. Runoff and wash transport
Table 10.4 lists the observed amounts of runoff and wash transport, optimised values
of average maximum infiltration rate (I
m
, cf. Eq. [10.3]), associated runoff model
efficiency (ME), average absolute differences between modelled and observed storm
runoff depth and differences between cumulative amounts. Cumulative runoff
coefficients were 9-13% during the first series, except for the horizontal slope producing
only 0.75% of incident rainfall. In the second series, runoff coefficients were 5-24%. The
lowest runoff coefficient in the second experiment was associated with the 55% mulch
cover treatment, while the highest runoff coefficient was found for the tilled soil (Table
10.4). The SVI model predicted runoff satisfactorily except for the mulched soils.
Excluding these, model efficiency was 0.52-0.84 and cumulative measured and modelled
runoff depths differed by less than 16% (Table 10.4). The difference for the mulched
soils was -37 and -38%, but absolute differences between modelled and observed storm
runoff depths for these treatments were no larger than those for the other devices at 5-
slope (0.9-2.3 mm versus 0.9-3.2 mm; Table 10.4). Use of an initial infiltration (F
0
sensu
Yu et al., 1997c) did not improve model performance. Resulting I
m
values were 70-151
mm h
-1
in most cases, except for the two mulch treatments (309 mm h
-1
and 839 mm h
-1
)
and the horizontal soil (1375 mm h
-1
).
The average sediment concentration in runoff (in g l
-1
), total wash transport (g m
-1
)
and the relative contribution of wash transport to total downslope sediment transport (i.e.
net downslope splash plus wash transport) are listed in Table 10.4. Also given are wash
transport model efficiency (ME) for event washed sediment concentration and transport,
respectively, cumulative differences between observed and predicted wash transport, and
results obtained with a single optimised sediment concentration. Sediment concentrations
from the horizontal device (1.3 g l
-1
) were notably lower than for the inclined devices
during the first experiment (5.3-8.6 g l
-1
). On the other hand, concentration from the bare
control soil at 5- in the second experiment was lower by a factor two compared with the
first experiment (2.5 versus 5.3 g l
-1
). At 1.7 g l
-1
, sediment concentration in runoff from
the tilled soil was 66% lower than from the control, while application of 35% and 55% of
soil cover reduced concentrations to 37% and 28%, respectively (Table 10.4).
Disregarding the horizontal soil, the absolute magnitude of wash transport did not appear
to increase much with slope whereas net downslope splash did, and hence the relative
importance of wash transport in total downslope transport decreased with slope, from 14-
20% for untreated soil at 5- slope, to 15% at 20- slope, to 8% at 40- slope. In the second
series the relative contribution by wash transport was 13-22% without a clear pattern
(Table 10.4).
CHAPTER 10 - SPLASH AND WASH UNDER NATURAL RAINFALL
191
In Fig. 10.4a, overall lateral splash transportability (T
20,lat
) and average sediment
concentration (c
wash
) for the eight data sets are compared for the eight devices. There
appears to be a reasonably well-defined, proportional relationship between the two for
slopes 5-, which offers support for the modelling approach followed (cf. Eqs. [10.2]
and [10.4]). As illustrated in Fig. 10.4b, agreement between observed and predicted
sediment concentrations in surface wash was satisfactory considering the large variation
in event concentrations (Fig. 10.4b). In all cases, Eq. [10.4] explained more of the
variations in observed event wash transport than modelled runoff depth with a single
optimised concentration only, but model efficiency was still less than zero for four
c
avg
= 0.12 T
20,lat
r
2
= 0.85
0
2
4
6
8
10
0 20 40 60 80
T
20,lat
(g m kJ
-1
)
A
v
e
r
a
g
e

c
w
a
s
h
g

(
g

l
-
1
)
horizontal tray
(a)
0.1
1
10
100
0.1 1 10 100
Observed c
wash
(g l
-1
)
P
r
e
d
i
c
t
e
d

c
w
a
s
h

(
g

l
-
1
)
5 (I)
15
40
5 (II)
MC=0.35
MC=0.55
1:1
(b)
Fig. 10.4. Comparison of (a) overall average sediment concentration in runoff (c
avg
) with
lateral transportability (T
20,lat
) by splash (the horizontal device was not included in the
regression); (b) predicted versus observed concentrations of washed sediment in event runoff
(c
wash
) for six data sets (the horizontal and tilled devices are not shown for reasons explained
in the text; MC denotes mulch cover fraction and 5 (I) and (II) refer to the first and second
experimental series, respectively).
CHAPTER 10 - SPLASH AND WASH UNDER NATURAL RAINFALL
192
devices (Table 10.4). Total wash transport amounts were generally estimated with
reasonable accuracy, however (-31% to +16%), while model performance improved as
the magnitude of wash transport increased. Optimised values of the washed fraction (j)
for the various treatments were of comparable magnitude (except for the horizontal soil),
varying between 2.3 and 4.4% for untreated soil, and somewhat higher for the mulched
soils (4.9 and 8.1%).
10.4. Discussion
10.4.1. Rainfall erosivity indices
For the currently studied combination of soil and rainfall use of the kinetic energy of
rainfall falling at an intensity higher than of 20 mm h
-1
produced the best correlation
between rainfall erosivity and sediment transport. Hudson (1965) concluded that the use
of a threshold intensity of 25 mm h
-1
gave the best results for sediment splashed from
cups in Zimbabwe than did gross kinetic energy, and this KE
25
index has since been used
successfully in Tanzania (Rapp et al., 1972) and Malaysia (Morgan, 1974). For temperate
climates, much lower threshold values have been suggested, e.g. 10 mm h
-1
in Britain
(Morgan, 1977), 6 mm h
-1
in Germany (Richter and Negendank, 1977) and 2.5 mm h
-1
in
the Netherlands (Van Asch and Epema, 1983). A possible physical explanation for a
threshold rainfall intensity may be related to soil water potential changes during a storm:
soil splash has been shown to reach a maximum when the soil is at or near saturation and
a thin water film develops (Sloneker and Moldenhauer, 1974; Ghadiri and Payne, 1986).
Although maximum infiltration rates in excess of 70 mm h
-1
were found in the present
study (Table 10.4), the spatially distributed theory behind Eq. [10.3] suggests that partial
saturation would also have occurred at lower rainfall rates (Yu et al., 1997c). The use of a
power function of rainfall intensity as a measure of erosivity also performed reasonably
well and yielded an optimum exponent of 1.7, which is within the range of 1 to 2
generally reported in both laboratory and field studies (inter alia, Smith and Wischmeier,
1957; Meyer and Wischmeier, 1969; Rose et al., 1983; Nearing et al., 1989; Govers,
1991).
10.4.2. Sources of error and variability
Contrary to what would be expected for the horizontal device, lateral splash rates,
upslope splash transport and the sum of downslope splash and splash-creep were not
all equal, although the differences were not very large: the smallest amount (lateral
splash; 213 g m
-1
) was 17% less than the largest (upslope splash; 256 g m
-1
). Similar
differences presumably occurred in other cases and may be explained by the vertical
distance between the rim of the tray and the soil surface not being equal across the entire
area and for all storms (cf. Kinnell, 1974). Sediment transport itself resulted in a slight
lowering of the soil surface calculated to be 0.2-4.5 mm overall after the various
experiments (cf. Table 10.4; using a bulk density of 950 kg m
-3
) but probably more at the
upslope end of inclined devices. An additional difference between the downslope and the
other sides is that the rim was several millimetres lower here to allow the passage of
surface runoff, whereas on the other sides the rims protruded a few millimetres just to
prevent this. The effect of these errors overall is not thought to be very large, however. A
CHAPTER 10 - SPLASH AND WASH UNDER NATURAL RAINFALL
193
greater problem was to separate splash-creep and washed sediment; the possible error
associated with this was visually estimated to be up to 20% of actual wash transport
amounts.
The greatest variability in measured sediment transport was probably caused by
temporal changes in surface conditions. An important issue in studies of transport from a
confined area such as the experimental device relates to the possible downslope
movement and eventual depletion of a more readily erodible fraction. Field studies have
shown that the finer fraction is more transportable than coarser aggregates, particularly
on steep slopes (Chapter 9). As a result, a coarse, less erodible pavement may develop
and indeed detachment and sediment transport from the devices rather quickly resulted in
the formation of a splash pavement of coarse aggregates on top of a more or less
crusted layer (cf. Savat and Poesen, 1977). Storm-based values of lateral transportability
(T
20
) for the first experiment (calculated as the ratio of event transport to storm erosivity)
indeed showed a tendency to decrease with time, but values during the second series did
not (data not shown). The formation of a splash pavement and the associated decrease of
soil transportability with time were also observed on larger areas in field studies,
however, and can be attributed to the high turn-over rate of soil under the prevailing
tropical rainfall resulting in sorting for size and crust formation, even without lateral loss
of finer aggregates (Wiegman, 1999; Chapter 9).
Lateral transportability for soil at 5- slope was much higher in the first series of
experiments than in the second series. Part of this difference may be related to the fact
that there were more rainless days during the first period (cf. Fig. 10.2). Bryan (1996)
studied the effect of inter-storm conditions in flumes filled with aggregated clay soils and
found that drying and cracking had considerable effects on soil strength and runoff
erosion. In the current study the soil surface was observed to dry out after two or more
days without rainfall during the first, drier period. This occasionally led to initial
cracking not observed during the second period. Field studies on the same soil suggest
that drying and cracking plays a role in the formation of new, loose aggregates
(Wiegman, 1999). Runoff and transport by wash may have been affected even more by
drying: on a few occasions soil shrinkage during dry spells created a small void between
the soil volume and the container. This void disappeared quickly when the soil was
wetted, but presumably caused additional runoff and its sediment load to infiltrate. For
the horizontal soil, an additional error was introduced by the apron on the downslope side
that protruded 1 or 2 mm above the soil surface after the first few storms. This caused
ponding and gave the water more opportunity to infiltrate, explaining the low runoff
coefficient.
Summarising, the measurements were possibly affected by gradual depletion of a
more readily erodible fraction, but this effect could not be separated from surface
lowering and the natural formation of a splash pavement. The effect of these processes
can be reduced by decreasing the length of the experiment, but this leads to problems of
its own as it would prevent natural surface processes occurring during and between
storms (Sutherland et al., 1996; Bryan, 1996).
10.4.3. Splash transport
Lateral splash transport did not change appreciably with slope, which contrasts
results of similar experiments by Wan et al. (1996) on a well-aggregated, volcanic Oxisol
in Hawaii but using artificial rainfall of high intensity (65 mm h
-1
). They observed a more
or less linear increase of lateral splash transport with slope; transport on a 20- slope
CHAPTER 10 - SPLASH AND WASH UNDER NATURAL RAINFALL
194
being more than twice that observed on a 5- slope. If it is assumed that average lateral
splash length did not change with slope in either study, then these differences must
reflect contrasts in the relationship between slope and detachability. In neither soil tray
study independent values of lateral splash length were obtained to substantiate this
contention, but field studies on the presently used soil indicated that detachability
increased with slope for soil aggregates smaller than ca. 1 mm, whereas it remained
constant for larger aggregates (Chapter 9). This may explain part of the difference
between the two soils, as the Hawaiian soil consisted of smaller aggregates overall:
median aggregate size was 0.7 mm versus 1.1 mm in the present case.
Lateral transportability was 24-64 g m kJ
-1
for untreated soils. This compares well
with values derived from field splash cup measurements, indicating a decrease from 32-
64 g m kJ
-1
at the beginning of the rainy season to about 13 g m kJ
-1
after 331 mm of rain
(22 storms) (Chapter 9). Assuming the average splash length of 1 cm derived in the
splash cup experiments yields detachability estimates of 7.5-20 g J
-1
for untreated soil in
the present case. Comparison with literature is difficult because of differences in methods
to estimate storm erosivity and to estimate detachment rates from measured sediment
transport (see Chapter 9 for discussion). Detachability values reviewed by Poesen and
Torri (1988) were 0.19-10 g J
-1
using total storm kinetic energy. Detachability calculated
this way is 6-11 g J
-1
for the current study, i.e. at the high end of the cited range.
Gross and net downslope splash transportability showed a positive relationship with
slope: at 40- gross downslope splash transport was more than two orders of magnitude
larger than upslope transport, while it was eight times larger than lateral transport (Table
10.4). The value of the exponent of the power curve associated with net downslope
transport (0.42; Fig. 10.3b) is rather low compared with values close to unity normally
encountered (Morgan, 1985). There is some literature evidence that the exponent of non-
linear slope-transport relationships decreases with slope. For example, Mosley (1973)
reported a coefficient of 0.8 for slopes up to 20-, whereas Moeyersons and De Ploey
(1976) derived a value of 0.75 for slopes up to 25-. A gradually diminishing effect of
slope was also suggested by Liebenow et al. (1990) for use in the WEPP model.
If detachability, lateral splash length and the fraction splashed downslope do not
change with slope, the ratio of downslope over lateral splash transport corresponds with
the ratio of splash lengths downslope and on a horizontal plane, respectively (cf. Chapter
8). Again using a horizontal splash length of 1 cm yields downslope splash lengths
increasing from 3-5 cm on a 5- slope, to 8 cm at 40-. As the fraction splashed downslope
presumably did increase with slope in reality (cf. Ghadiri and Payne, 1986, 1988), these
values are likely to represent over-estimates and as such are rather low when compared
with an average minimum (projected) downslope splash length of about 12 cm measured
on bare terrace risers at 30-40- slope (Chapter 9).
10.4.4. Runoff and wash transport
Runoff measurements did not suggest any clear influence of slope on infiltration
rate. The maximum average infiltration rates (I
m
) derived for untreated sloping soil (70-
151 mm h
-1
) are within the range found for field runoff plot studies, i.e. 25-225 mm h
-1
for terrace beds and 50-105 mm h
-1
for terrace risers with little to no vegetation cover
(Chapter 12). The markedly higher infiltration rates observed on soils with mulching also
CHAPTER 10 - SPLASH AND WASH UNDER NATURAL RAINFALL
195
correspond well with field observations, suggesting an increase of I
m
by 28-500% after
mulching (Chapter 12).
The proposed wash transport model produced plausible estimates of washed
sediment concentration and transport. Both the proportionality between lateral splash
transport amounts and washed sediment concentrations and the consistency in derived
values of the washed fraction (j) may be taken as further support for the approach taken.
The modest importance of wash transport, from 13-22% of total downslope sediment
transport on 5- slope to 8% on a 40- slope, contrasts with observations by Wan et al.
(1996) for similar experiments and soils. They found the fraction of net downslope
transport contributed by wash transport to be as much as 93% on a 5- slope, decreasing
to 42% on a 20- slope. This difference can be attributed to the higher artificial rainfall
intensity and the less permeable Hawaiian soil (Wan et al., 1996).
10.4.5. Effect of tillage and mulching
Splash transport components for the tilled soil were 42-52% of those from the bare
control (Table 10.4). Tillage caused aggregates to break up and smear, thereby forming a
crust-like layer appearing more compact and less permeable than for the other treatments.
Runoff from the tilled soil was also greater than that from the untreated soil, especially
during the first storms (data not shown).
The reduction of rainfall-driven erosion processes by mulch cover was also observed
in field measurements of splash transport on terrace beds (Chapter 9) and of sediment
transport from sections of terrace beds and risers (Chapter 13). These indicated an
exponential decrease of transport with increasing cover described well by the relationship
(Laflen and Colvin, 1981):
aMC
e MF

[10.5]
where MF is the mulch factor, i.e. the ratio of soil loss from a surface with a fraction MC
of mulch cover over that without mulch, and a is an empirical exponent usually between
3 and 7 (Laflen and Colvin, 1981; Morgan, 1985). Values of a were calculated from
measured gross and net downslope total, splash and wash transport, resulting in values of
3.8-4.9 (4.50.3 on average). This compares well with values found for splash on terrace
beds (3.9-4.1; Chapter 9) and values based on (rainfall-driven) sediment transport from
sections of terrace bed with mulch cover (<2.5; Chapter 13). Both studies indicated that
within a few months the mulch was partially decomposed and burried by sediment,
however, and hence became less effective.
10.5. Concluding remarks
Experiments under natural rainfall are essential to improve our understanding of
rainfall-driven splash and wash transport processes. Although the lack of replication
precluded a more rigorous analysis of the effect of slope, tillage and mulch cover on
these processes, the presented methodology was demonstrated to be suitable for
obtaining such knowledge. The interpretation of splash measurements would be aided
much by knowledge of average splash lengths in different directions on a slope. In future
CHAPTER 10 - SPLASH AND WASH UNDER NATURAL RAINFALL
196
experiments such knowledge may be obtained by dividing the devices splash collecting
containers into parallel compartments or by simultaneous separate experiments following
approaches outlined in Chapter 8. A conceptually sound yet simple wash transport model
was advanced as a first attempt to translate the detailed process knowledge obtained
through laboratory experiments into a physical model predicting wash transport under
natural conditions. Further research is needed to identify and quantify factors
determining the relationship between sediment concentration and splash detachability,
and the manner in which it is influenced by soil and storm characteristics. A combination
of experiments and consistent, physical splash, runoff and wash models such as presented
should be able to shed more light on the precise nature of these various interactions.