Research Article ISSN 22780092

International Journal of Advances in Earth Sciences, Volume 1, Issue 2, 2012, 68-76

Copyright 2012, All rights reserved Research Publishing Group
www.rpublishing.org

68

GIS supported Geomorphologic Instantaneous Unit Hydrograph
(GIUH) of Varuna river basin using Geomorphological
Characteristics
Kailash Narayan, Prof. P. K. S. Dikshit Dr. S. B. Dwivedi
Department of Civil Engineering, IIT (BHU), Varanasi-221005, U.P., India
Received 25 September 2012; received in revised form 18 December 2012; accepted 28 December 2012

ABSTRACT
Geographical Information System (GIS) support based Geomorphological characteristics of Varuna
river catchments located in Varanasi district of Uttar Pradesh have been used to generate Geomorphologic
Instantaneous Unit Hydrograph (GIUH). GIUH can be used as a transfer function for modeling the
transformation of excess rainfall into surface runoff, in which excess rainfall is an excitation to the hydrologic
system. The extracted drainage network of the basin using the ArcGIS provides the shape of the basin is nearly
oblong in nature with flat topography. The maximum and minimum elevation of the basin is 95 m and 65 m
above MSL, respectively. Varuna River is the fourth order catchments comprised of about 3315 km
2
area.
Length of maximum order stream is 138 km, whereas Stream-area ratio (R
a
), Bifurcation ratio (R
b
), Stream-
length ratio (R
l
) is 4.76, 4.28, 2.40 respectively. The estimates for the peak characteristics of design flood
hydrograph obtained from the GIUH based approach are 34.94 m
3
/s peak discharges obtained for 13.5 hours of
peak time for average velocity of 3.0 m/s considering the same design storm pattern.

Key Words: runoff estimation; geomorphological instantaneous unit hydrograph; geographic information
system; ungauged catchment.

1. Introduction
Geomorphological Instantaneous Unit Hydrograph (GIUH) is a workable approach, which has directs
applicability to an ungauged catchment for estimation of runoff response resulting from a rainfall response. It
does not require conventional methods of regionalization of unit hydrograph; wherein, the historical rainfall-
runoff data of a number of gauged catchments are required to be analyzed. Because of these characteristics
GIUH is gaining popularity and widespread acceptance among scientific community. Availability and accuracy
of adequate runoff data for small and medium catchments is always under question, especially in developing
countries like India. Changing climatic conditions are causing geo-spatial changes in catchment area and
variation in rainfall pattern. Also, due to different anthropogenic and geoclimatic changes, the land use pattern is
also undergoing a gradual shift and this has direct impact on rainfall characteristics of the catchment. Thus
hydrological behavior of ungauged catchment is evident on the coupling of hydrological characteristic of the
catchment with the geomorphological parameters. The concept of the Geomorphologic Instantaneous Unit
Hydrograph (GIUH) was introduced by Rodriguez-Iturbe and Valdes (1979) as a first step in the direction of
coupling the hydrologic characteristics of a catchment with the geomorphologic parameters. The GIUH
approach has direct applicability for ungauged or scantily gauged catchments wherein rainfall data are available
but runoff data are not given. The GIUH approach is more advantageous than the conventional IUH methods
such as the Clark IUH model (Clark, 1945) and the Nash IUH model (Nash, 1957) since it avoids the
requirement of stream flow data. Also, dynamic nature of the parameters of Clark and Nash IUH models
requires regular revision because of changing land use and climatic conditions. Further, the GIUH approach is
more beneficial than the regionalization techniques as it does not require any information about the other
catchments in the hydro-meteorologically homogeneous region. It also eliminates use of stream flow data for the
catchment for which it is to be applied.
Narayan et al./ International Journal of Advances in Earth Sciences, Volume 1, Issue 2, 2012, 58-67
69

Geomorphological control on basin hydrology is evident on geomorphometry-hydrology relationship.
The role of basin geomorphology in controlling the hydrological response of a river basin is known for a long
time. Earlier works (Barlow, 1915; Strange, 1928; Inglis and Desouza, 1929; Snyder, 1938; Horton, 1945;
Taylor and Schwartz, 1952) have provided an understanding of basin geomorphology- hydrology relationship
through empirical relations. Snyder (1938) proposed that catchment area, shape of basin, topography, channel
slope, stream density and channel storage affects the shape of hydrograph. On that basis, he proposed an
empirical equation of unit hydrograph (called synthetic unit hydrograph-SUH) based on catchment area, shape
of the basin and averaging out other parameters with a coefficient. Further advancement was made by different
workers notably by Clark (1945), Nash (1960) and Koutsoyiannis and Xanthopoulos (1989). Koutsoyiannis and
Xanthopoulos (1989) highlighted the advantage of parametric approaches for derivation of unit hydrograph in
order to establish a relationship between the UH and catchment characteristics. However, these relationships are
characterised by some constants, which represent the ensemble average of geomorphological control on the
river discharge.
Geomorphology of a river basin describes the status of topographic features of the surfaces and
streams, and its relationship with hydrology provides the geomorphological control on basin hydrology (Jain
and Sinha, 2003). Geomorphology reflects the topographic and geometric properties of the watershed and its
drainage channel network. It controls the hydrologic processes from rainfall to runoff, and the subsequent flow
routing through the drainage network. The role of basin geomorphology in controlling the hydrological response
of a river basin is known for a long time. Moreover, for any infrastructural development, it is very useful tool for
first hand overview of the basin. It is advantageous in case of laying out the urban drainage and irrigation canal
system, aqueducts, study the physiographic impacts on environment, and selection of silt disposal site,
hydropower site (Sarkar and Gundekar, 2007), recharge zone, percolation tank, retention tank, dam site, etc.
This drainage network of the river basin can provide a significant contribution towards flood management and
water logging program (Jain and Sinha, 2003). The derivation of the GIUH uses the assumption that a stream of
a certain order has a known linear response function of the familiar or complex probability distributions
(Rodriguez-Iturbe and Valdes, 1979; Kirshen and Bras, 1983; Rinaldo et al., 1991; Jin, 1992; Fleurant et al.,
2006; etc.). The effect of linear channels in the hydrologic response was introduced by Kirshen and Bras (1983).
Thus, the GIUH based transfer function approach is applicable in such a situation where rainfall data is available
but runoff data are not, and it is a more powerful technique for the flood estimation than the commonly used
parametric Clark model (Clark, 1945) and Nashs cascade technique (Nash, 1957) (Yen and Lee, 1997; Bhaskar
et al., 1997; Jain et al., 2000; Lohani et al., 2001; Kumar et al., 2002; Sarangi et al., 2007; Bhadra et al., 2008;
etc.). Another advantage of GIUH technique is its potential for deriving the unit hydrograph (UH) using the
geomorphologic characteristics obtainable from topographic map / remote sensing, possibly linked with
geographic information system (GIS) and digital elevation model (DEM) (Rodriguez-Iturbe and Valdes, 1979;
Rosso, 1984; Sahoo et al., 2006; Kumar et al., 2007; etc.). However, the GIUH technique is applicable for the
estimation of the direct runoff component of the stream flow and hence, can be used to generate the direct runoff
hydrograph (DRH). Once the DRH is computed, the flood hydrograph can be simply obtained by adding the
base flow component. The main objective of this paper is to use GIS support based geomorphological
Characteristics of Varuna river basin to GIUH approach for the estimation of design flood.

2. Material methodology
2.1 Geomorphologic Parameters
Physical characteristics of the drainage basin and drainage network are of prime importance as they
reflect hydrological behavior, and also used for evaluating the hydrologic response of the basins. Physical
characteristics of the drainage basin include drainage area; basin shape, ground slope, and centroid (i.e. centre of
gravity of the basin). Channel characteristics include channel order, channel length, channel slope, channel
profile, and drainage density.
2.1.1 Basin order and channel order
Stream ordering is a method of assigning a numeric order to links in a stream network. This order is a
method for identifying and classifying types of streams based on their number of tributaries. Some
Narayan et al./ International Journal of Advances in Earth Sciences, Volume 1, Issue 2, 2012, 58-67
70

characteristics of streams can be inferred by simply knowing their order. Stream order were designated
according to Horton (1945) and slightly modified by Strahler (1952). In this the smallest fingertip tributaries are
designated order 1. Where two first order channels join, a channel segment of order 2 is formed; where two of
order 2 join, a segment of order 3 is formed; and so fourth. The trunk stream through which all discharge of
water and sediment passes is therefore the stream segment of the highest order.
2.1.2 Basin area
Drainage area (A) is represented by the area enclosed within the boundary of the watershed divide. It is
the most important characteristic for hydrologic design. Drainage area of drainage basin of a given order u is
defined as the total area projected upon a horizontal plane, contributing overland flow to the channel segment of
the given order and including all tributaries of lower order.
2.1.3 Basin shape
The basin shape may influence the hydrograph shape, especially for small watersheds. For example, if
the watershed is long and narrow, then it will take longer time for water to travel from the most extreme point to
the outlet and the resulting hydrograph shape is flatter. For more compacted watershed, the runoff hydrograph is
expected to be sharper with a greater peak and shorter duration. Numerous symmetrical and irregular forms of
drainage areas are encountered in practice. To define the basin shape, a multitude of dimensionless parameters
were used to quantify and these are: form factor, shape factor, elongation ratio, circulatory ratio, and
compactness coefficient (Table-1). These factors involve watershed length, area and perimeter. The watershed
length can be defined as the length of the main stream from its source (projected to the perimeter) to the outlet.
Clearly, the form factor is less than unity and its reciprocal, the shape factor, is greater than unity. A square
drainage basin has the shape factor equals to unity, whereas the long narrow drainage basin would have a shape
factor greater than unity. The elongation ratio, circulatory ratio, and compactness coefficient approach to unity
as the watershed shape approached to circle.
Table 1: Watershed shape parameters
Parameter Definition Formula
Shape Factor
( )
2
Wat er sh ed L eng t h
Wat er sh ed A rea

2
L
A

Form Factor
( )
2
Watershed Area
Watershed Length

2
A
L

Elongation Ratio
Diameter of circle of Watershed Area
Watershed Length

0.5
1.128A
L

Compaction
Coefficient
Watershed Perimeter
Perimeter of circle of Watershed area

0.5
0.2821
r
P
A

Circulatory Ratio
Watershed Area
Areaof circleof Watershed area

2
12.57
r
A
P


2.1.4 Basin slope
Basin slope has a pronounced effect on the velocity of overland flow, watershed erosion potential, and
local wind systems. Average basin slope is defined as (Singh, 1989)

h
S
L
= (1)
Where S is the average basin slope (m/m), h is the fall (m) (i.e. difference in maximum and minimum
elevations), and L is the horizontal distance (m) over which the fall occurs.

Narayan et al./ International Journal of Advances in Earth Sciences, Volume 1, Issue 2, 2012, 58-67
71

2.1.5 Drainage basin similarity
Strahler (1957) hypothesized the drainage basin similarity as follows:

2
b
A
C
L
=

(2)
Where, A is the area of the drainage basin, L
b
is the length of the basin and C is the constant for basin similarity.
The value of C will be nearly equal for geomorphologically similar basins.
2.2 Determination of Hortons ratio
Three of Hortons ratios namely bifurcation ratio (R
b
), stream-length ratio (R
l
) and stream-area ratio
(R
a
) are unique representative parameters for a given watershed and are fixed values for a given watershed
system.
2.2.1Bifurcation ratio (R
b
)
Bifurcation ratio (Rb) was computed using Hortons law of stream numbers which stated, The number
of stream segments of each order form an inverse geometric sequence with order number or

1
/
b i i
R N N
+
=

(3)
Where,
i
N and
1 i
N
+
are the number of streams in order i and i+1 respectively, 1,2,3.... , i and = O O is the
highest stream order of the watershed. The value of R
b
for watersheds varies between 3 to 5. This law is an
expression of topological phenomenon, and is a measure of drainage efficiency.
2.2.2 Stream-length ratio (R
l
)
This law was given by Horton (1945) which says the mean lengths of stream segments of each of the
successive orders of a basin tend to approximate a direct geometric sequence.

1 / i i
l
R L L + =

(4)
Where
1
1
,
i
N
i i j
j
L L
N
=
=

is the average length of channel of order i,
The lengths of channels of a given order are determined largely by the type of soil covering the
drainage basin. Generally, more pervious the soil, longer will be the channel length of a given order. Also,
higher is the R
l
more will be the imperviousness. Generally it varies between 1.5 and 3.5.
2.2.3 Stream-area ratio (R
a
)
The Channel area of order i, A
i
is the area of the watershed that contributes to the channel segment of
order i and all lower order channels. It can be quantified as:

1
/
a i i
R A A
+
=

(5)
Where A
i
is the average area of order i and
,
1
1
i
N
i i j
j i
A A
N
=
=

is the total area that drains into the stream of order
i.
2.3 GIUH-based Nash Model
It is documented that the shape of the GIUH and the Nash IUH are very close for a given basin, ordered
according to Shreves theory (Shreve 1966), and the deterministic concept of routing through linear reservoirs
(Rosso 1984; Chutha and Dooge 1990). The concepts of the GIUH and the Nash IUH models are used to derive
the GIUH-based Nash model. The complete shape of the GIUH can be obtained by linking q
p
and t
p
of the
GIUH with the scale (k) and shape (n) parameters of the Nash IUH model.
0.43
1.31 /
p l
q R V L
O
=

(6)
Narayan et al./ International Journal of Advances in Earth Sciences, Volume 1, Issue 2, 2012, 58-67
72

0.38
0.55
0.44( / )( / ) .
p b a l
t L V R R R

O
=

(7)
0.55 0.05
* 0.5764[ / ] *
p p b a l
q t R R R =

(8)
Eq. (8) is independent of stream velocity V.
The governing equation of the Nash IUH model is expressed as:

1
1
( ) ( / ) exp( / )
( )
n
u t t kn t k
k n

=
I

(9)
Where, u(t) denotes IUH ordinates in hour
-1
, t is sampling time interval in hour.
By equating the first derivative (with respect to t) of Nash IUH equation to zero,

1 ( 1)
ln[ ( )] 0
n
u t
t k t
c
= + =
c

(10)
t becomes the time to peak discharge, t
p
.

( 1)
p
t t k n = =

(11)
Thus,

1
1
exp[ ( 1)].( 1)
( )
n
p
q n n
k n

=
I

(12)
Multiplying q
p
and t
p
and equating we get

1
( 1)
* exp[ ( 1)].( 1)
( )
n
n
qp tp n n
n

=
I

(13)

1 0.55 0.05
( 1)
exp[ ( 1)].( 1) 0.5764[ / ] *
( )
n
b a l
n
n n R R R
n

=
I

(14)
The Nash parameter n, can be obtained by solving the above equation using the Newton-Rapson
method. The Nashs parameter k for the given velocity V and the known value of the parameter n as follows:

0.55
0.38
0.44 1
. . .
( 1)
b
l
a
R l
k R
V R n
O
| |
=
|

\ .

(15)
The derived values of n and k are used to determine the complete shape of the Nash based GIUH.

3. Result and Discussion
India is divided into seven hydro-meteorological zones and is further divided into twenty six hydro-
meteorological sub-zones [i.e. sub-zones 1(a) to 1(g), 2(a) to 2(c), 3(a) to 3(i), 4(a) to 4(c), 5(a), 5(b), 6 and 7]
(Jain et al., 2007). The Varuna catchment was picked up from hydro-meteorological subzone 3(c). The River
Varuna is a minor tributary of the Ganges. The Varuna rises at 2536 N 827 E, flows east-to-southeast for
some 110 km from Phulpur Tahsil of Allahabad, and joins the Ganges at 251946N 8302 40E.It drains
approximately 3315 km
2
area of the central-east part of the Uttar Pradesh. The extracted drainage network of the
basin using the ArcGIS is shown in Fig. 1. The shape of the basin is nearly oblong in nature. Topography is
nearly flat with low terrains at upstream end of the basin. The maximum and minimum elevation of the basin is
95 m and 65 m above MSL, respectively. The climate of the basin is ranging from semi arid to sub humid
Narayan et al./ International Journal of Advances in Earth Sciences, Volume 1, Issue 2, 2012, 58-67
73

tropical with average annual rainfall at different locations is 850-1100 mm. Approximately, 75 percent of total
rainfall is due to the occurrence of North-West Monsoon (Mid June to Mid October). The mean minimum and
maximum temperature over the basin is 1 to 48 C with daily mean sunshine of 8 hours. The relative humidity
varies between 10-90 percent. The potential evapotranspiration experienced in the basin is nearly 1200 mm.



Figure 1: Drainage network of Varuna River
3.1 Evaluation of the Geomorphologic Characteristics Using GIS
The geomorphologic characteristics of the study area have been evaluated using the ArcGIS and
ERDAS IMAGINE software. The boundary of the catchment, stream network and contours have been mapped
using Survey of India toposheets (63K2, 63K3, 63K6, 63K7, 63K10, 63K11, 63K15, 63O3) in the scale of 1:50
000. Procedure of digitization was adopted to convert these maps into digital form and storing in ArcGIS. The
Strahlers ordering scheme was followed for ordering of the river network (Strahler, 1957). Table-2 provides the
details of stream numbers, length, average length and average areas for streams of various orders for the study
area.
Table 2: Values of Watershed shape parameters

Parameter Shape Factor Form Factor Elongation Ratio Compaction Coefficient Circulatory Ratio
Value 10.84 0.13 0.42 1.26 0.63
Table 3: Extracted Geomorphological Parameters of the Varuna River Basin

Stream order
No of
stream
Mean stream
length (km)
Mean stream area
(km
2
)
Bifurcation
Ratio (R
b
)
Stream length
Ratio (R
l
)
Stream area
ratio (R
a
)
1 78 9.9 31 4.33 -
2 18 24.2 153 4.50 2.44 4.98
3 4 57.6 699 4.00 2.38 4.56
4 1 138 3315 - 2.39 4.74
Average 4.28 2.40 4.76

Varuna River is the fourth order catchment comprised of about 3315 km
2
area. Length of maximum
order stream is 138 km, whereas R
a
, R
b
, R
l
are 4.76, 4.28, 2.40 respectively and their variations with respect to
Narayan et al./ International Journal of Advances in Earth Sciences, Volume 1, Issue 2, 2012, 58-67
74

stream order is shown in Fig. 2. Fig. 2 shows stream area, stream length will increase linearly in log scale while
the stream number will decrease linearly.

Figure 2: Variation of stream numbers, stream length and stream area with stream order for Varuna River

3.1 Effect of Velocity Parameter on the GIUH
The stage-velocity curve shows variation in average channel velocity from 2.25 (during lean period) to
3.75 (during peak discharge time) m/s. Thus, in order to analyze the effect of average channel velocity on
GIUH, four graphs were generated for the velocity of 2.25, 2.75, 3.25 and 3.75 m/s. The stream velocity is
measure using ADV meter at different locations, while keeping the geomorphic parameters fixed (Fig. 3).
Lower velocity values are corresponding to low stage indicating the lean period. Higher velocity values indicate
higher stage period. Variation in GIUH parameters with respect to velocity reflects the dynamic behavior of
hydrological response of Varuna river basin in different periods. Fig. 3 shows that increase in average channel
velocity causes significant increase in the peak of hydrograph (q
p
) with less time to peak (t
p
). Thus, even though
the general form of GIUH is expressed by average channel velocity peak discharge, Q
p
of hydrograph is found
to be 34.94 m
3
/s, whereas, time to peak t
p
is of the order of 13.5 hour and velocity is 3.0 m/s, considering the
same design storm pattern.

Figure 3: GIUH at different values of channel velocity
Narayan et al./ International Journal of Advances in Earth Sciences, Volume 1, Issue 2, 2012, 58-67
75

4. Conclusions
The present study includes the geomorphological investigation and development of GIUH of 4
th
order
Varuna river basin of India. Our study supports that the GIUH provide a better estimation of q
p
and t
p
. Apart
from its utility for ungauged stations, the GIUH approach provides additional information about the effect of
individual morphometric parameter on flood discharge. Further, the effect of velocity on GIUH reflects the
dynamics of hydrological response of a basin. Thus, apart from getting the better estimation of hydrological
response of river basin, the GIUH provides an understanding of the hydrological response and its variability in
space and time. The successful application of GIUH approach has opened the possibility to derive the unit
hydrograph of often ungauged Varuna River and offers a sound approach for flood management in the region.
Concluding, it may be remarked that the proposed technique, which was not yet developed for the Varuna river
basin of India will, helps the engineers for accurate estimation of the flood hydrograph as well as for the
modeling of pollutants transport. Besides this, the described technique is cost-effective and quite accurate for
determining the GIUH and flood hydrograph for any catchment / basin (gauged or ungauged) as it requires
DEM of the catchment that can be freely obtained from SRTM source.

Acknowledgement
Department of Civil Engineering, IIT (BHU) is acknowledged for infrastructure to complete this work. We are
also thankful to anonymous reviewer for his constructive comment to improve the manuscript.
References
Bhadra, A. Pnigrahi, N., Singh, R., Raghuwanshi, N. S., Mal, B. C., and Tripathi, M. P. (2008). Development
of geomorphological instantaneous unit hydrograph model for scantly gauged watersheds,
Environmental Modelling & Software, 23, 1013-1025.
Bhaskar, N. R., parida, B. P., and Nayak, A. K. (1997), Flood estimation for ungauged catchments using the
GIUH, J. Water Resour. Plng. and Mgmt., 12(4), 228-238.
Clark, C. O. (1945), Storage and the unit hydrograph, Trans. Am. Soc. Civ. Engr., 110, 1945-46.
Horton, R. E. (1945), Erosional development of streams and their drainage basins: Hydrophysical approach to
quantitative morphology, Bull. Geol. Soc. Amer.56, 275370
Jain, S. K., Singh, R. D., and Seth, S. M. (2000), Design flood estimation using GIS supported GIUH
Approach Water Resour. Manage., 14, 369-376.
Jain, V. and Sinha, R. (2003), Hyperavulsive-anabranching Baghmati river system, north Bihar plains, eastern
India, Zeitschriftfr Geomorphologie 47(1), 101116.
Kirshen, D. M., and Bras, R. L. (1983), The linear channel and its effect on the geomorphologic IUH,
J. Hydrol., 65, 175-208.
Koutsoyiannis, D. and Xanthopoulos, T. (1989), On the parametric approach to Unit Hydrograph
identification, Water Res. Manage.3, 107128.
Kumar, R., Chatterjee, C., Lohani, A. K., Kumar, S., and Singh, R. D. (2002), Sensitivity analysis of the GIUH
based Clark model for a catchment, Water Resour. Manage., 16, 263-278.
Kumar, R., Chatterjee, C., Singh, R. D., Lohani, A. K., and Kumar, S. (2007), Runoff estimation for an
ungauged catchment using geomorphological instantaneous unit hydrograph (GIUH) model, Hydrol.
Process., 21, 1829-1840.
Lohani, A. K., Singh, R. D., and Nema, R. K. (2001), Comparison of geomorphological based rainfall-runoff
models, CS(AR) Technical Rep., National Inst. of Hydrology, Roorkee,
Nash, J. E. (1960), A Unit Hydrograph study, with particular reference to British catchments, Proc. Inst. Civil
Engg.17, 249282.
Nash, J. (1957), The forms of instantaneous unit hydrograph, Int. Ass. Sci. and Hydrol., Pub. 1, 45(3), 114-
121.
Rinaldo, A., Marani, A., and Rigon, R. (1991), Geomorphological dispersion, Water Resour. Res., 27, 513-
525.
Rodriguez-Iturbe, I., and Valdes, J.B. (1979), The geomorphologic structure of hydrologic response, Water
Resour. Res., 15(6), 1409-1420.
Narayan et al./ International Journal of Advances in Earth Sciences, Volume 1, Issue 2, 2012, 58-67
76

Rosso, R. (1984), Nash model relation to Horton order ratios Water Resour. Res., 20, 914-920.
Sahoo, B., Chatterjee, C., Raghuwanshi, N.S., Singh, R., and Kumar, R. (2006), Flood estimation by GIUH-
based Clark and Nash models J. Hydrologic Engrg.,11(6), 515-525.
Sarangi, A., Madramootoo, C. A., Enright, P., and Prasher, S. O. (2007), Evaluation of three unithydrograph
models to predict the surface runoff from a Canadian watershed Water Resour. Manage., 21, 1127-
1143.
Sarkar, S., and Gundekar H. G. (2007), Geomorphological parameters: are they indicators forinstallation of a
hydropower site? International Conference on Small Hydropower, Kandy, Srilanka, 225.
Singh, V. P. (1989), Hydrologic Systems: Vol II, Watershed modeling, Prentice-Hall, New J ersey 07632,
USA.
Snyder, F. F. (1938), Synthetic Unitgraphs, Transactions of American Geophysics Union, 19
th
Annual
Meeting, Part 2, p. 447.
Taylor, A. B. and Schwartz, H. E. (1952), Unit-hydrograph lag and peak flow related to basin characteristics,
Transact. Amer. Geophys. Union33, 235246.
Yen, B. C., and Lee, K. T. (1997), Unit hydrograph derivation for ungauged watersheds by stream-order laws.
J. Hydrologic Engrg., 2 (1), 1-9.