The Effects of Rainfall Intensities and Duration on SCS-CN Model Parameters under Simulated Rainfall
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The authors performed an experiment with a rain simulator, in which they evaluated the influence of the rain intensity on the runoff from the experimental plot. Their aim was to verify whether the change in the rain intensity affects the lambda and CN parameters in The Soil Conservation Service Curve Number (SCS-CN) method. I believe that the work has a theme suitable for the journal "Water" and can be useful to readers for analyzing the impact of rain intensity and by pointing out the limitations of the SCS-CN method. However, the authors do not suggest in the article any method or recommendation on how to generalize their findings and use them in specific calculations.
The article is relatively well-conceived, but the level of English in it is gradually declining. It is necessary to correct many typos and grammatical errors. I suggest these improvements (this is not an exhaustive list):
Lines 41-42: I propose to include "rain simulator" into keywords. I also think that "Natural Resource Conservation Service Curve Number model" could be used instead of naming its parameters
Line 81: I suggest – change consistent to same
Line 83: too many spaces around “etc.“
Line 96: some text is probably missing after this line
Line 108: put "by" instead of "in"
Lines 108-112: sentence too long, I recommend splitting it
Line 145: An incomprehensible sentence
Line 172-174: four typos (but they are also in other places)
Lines 186-188: please also describe the constraints (in which lambda and CN are searched)
Lines 189-191: described too briefly, give some specific details
Line 195: NSE, PBIAS and RSR are not used to calibrate the model but to evaluate the modelling results
Lines 196-203: Bad English, bad wording. Do not write in the singular, for example "predicted value, measured value" but in the plural. It is a trend, that these indicators express, not a comparison of two figures.
Line 213: put "is" instead of "as"
Figures 2-5: I strongly suggest that you must give on x-axis amount of precipitation, not the duration of the whole process. I think that it will show much better what you want to say. If you wish to, the duration can be on the secondary x-axis (maybe).
I don't like the comparison with FU very much, because his article dealt with a completely different, more extensive area with various properties on it. Of course, then, the parameters from his work cannot turn out as good as yours, as you do the comparison yours and Fu parameters on your experimental plot with an area of one square meter where you calibrated your SCN model. There is no reason that your parameters will be better in his area (Beijing). Please make some comment in this meaning in the paper.
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Very good paper. It does need a moderate amount of editing to improve grammar and presentation. It merits publication in my opinion. I have attached an edited pdf to point out the problems that I saw.
Comments for author File: Comments.pdf
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
