WATER RESOURCES RESEARCH, VOL. 38, NO. 10, 1208, doi:10.

1029/2001WR000864, 2002

A similarity approach to predict landscape saturation

in catchments
Santosh K. Aryal1
Cooperative Research Centre for Catchment Hydrology, Department of Civil Engineering, Monash University, Melbourne,
Victoria, Australia

Emmett M. O’Loughlin
Rosedale, New South Wales, Australia

Russell G. Mein
Cooperative Research Centre for Catchment Hydrology, Department of Civil Engineering, Monash University, Melbourne,
Victoria, Australia

Received 30 July 2001; revised 28 February 2002; accepted 28 February 2002; published 23 October 2002.

[1] An investigation into landscape saturation has been carried out analytically using
similarity parameters derived from topographic, soil, and climatic attributes. Three
parameters (an input index (q/Z)(L/KS), convergence ratio (CR), and profile factor (B))
define the extent of hillslope saturation. From these, a single dimensionless parameter has
been derived to describe the occurrence of saturation in planar, concave, and convex
profile hillslope shapes, and with parallel, convergent, and divergent planforms. The
relationship can be represented by a single dimensionless curve. The theory derived in this
paper provides a basis for combining the individual parameters into a similarity criterion
for saturation in landscapes. The theory and ensuing similarity hypothesis are applied to
three natural catchments near Canberra, Australia, and are tested against observed rainfall-
runoff data. The results support the validity of the similarity approach. There is a clear link
between the distribution of hillslope similarity parameters and catchment saturation
behavior. INDEX TERMS: 1821 Hydrology: Floods; 1860 Hydrology: Runoff and streamflow; 1866
Hydrology: Soil moisture; KEYWORDS: hydrologic similarity, hillslope shapes, hydrological processes,
process-wise similarity, scaling, hillslope saturation
Citation: Aryal, S. K., E. M. O’Loughlin, and R. G. Mein, A similarity approach to predict landscape saturation in catchments, Water
Resour. Res., 38(10), 1208, doi:10.1029/2001WR000864, 2002.

1. Introduction applied elsewhere. This is the basic issue in catchment

[2] Previous work on catchment similarity has dealt
almost exclusively with the comparison of lumped or total
response of catchments to rainfall, particularly their flood
magnitudes and timing. Some studies used scaled labo-
ratory models, others were based on the similarity of
geomorphologic indicators. These concentrated on the
behavior of stream channel networks and the hydraulic
aspects of hydrograph production. While these concepts
may be applicable to large catchments where channel flow
processes are the dominant factors that shape the hydro-
graph, they are usually irrelevant in smaller catchments, of
the order of some hundreds of hectares. Catchments of
this size make up the bulk of experimental sites. They
range from the hillslope scale to basins containing second
or third-order streams. The major question we face is
whether data from the experimental catchments can be
1 investigate the steady state behavior of saturation zones in
Now at CSIRO Land and Water, Wembley, Western Australia,
Australia.
Copyright 2002 by the American Geophysical Union.
0043-1397/02/2001WR000864
26 - 1
similarity.
[3] The timing and magnitude of flows from smaller
catchments are regulated by processes in the landscape
rather than in the stream channels. These processes depend
strongly on soil and topography, so the question of sim-
ilarity in smaller catchments must address these variables.
We have taken a process-based approach to define similarity
criteria, giving particular attention to the causative factors of
the total catchment response to rainfall. It emphasizes the
way that water drains through the landscape, and how the
characteristics of runoff-producing zones are affected by
soils and topography.
[4] This paper deals with the issue of similarity criteria
for steady state saturation behavior in hillslopes, and
extends the results to small catchments containing second
or third-order streams. Its aims are (1) to derive similarity
parameters and analytical expressions for the size of runoff-
producing areas (saturated zones) in hillslopes, (2) to
hillslopes and to explore the relative importance of their
profile and planform geometries and scale, and (3) to apply
the similarity criteria to small natural catchments to test their
validity.
26 - 2 ARYAL ET AL.: SIMILARITY APPROACH FOR LANDSCAPE SATURATION
2. Background
[5] Two landscapes are said to be similar with respect to a
specific process if their responses to an appropriately scaled
input are similar. These process outputs, the dependent
variables, are functions of catchment properties, the inde-
pendent variables, given by the topographic, soil, and
climatic characteristics. The independent variables can be
grouped into parameters that are either nondimensional, or
have a dimension that can be normalized with a variable of
similar dimension. The strength of dimensional analysis is
that it allows development of parsimonious relationships
between physical processes and catchment characteristics
[Willgoose et al., 1991]. This practice has been used with
success in the field of fluid dynamics, but similar success
has not been achieved in hydrology [Dooge, 1986].
[6] The need for similarity studies in hydrology was
raised in the early 1950s, e.g., by Langhaar [1951]. Pre-
vious work on catchment similarity using physical labora-
tory models of catchments, imitating the well established
practice in the field of hydraulics has had limited success
due to the lack of complete similitude. It was concluded that
digital computers have a greater potential usefulness in
hydrologic studies than have physical models, suggesting
that there is no need for further proliferation of the latter
(Mamisao [1952], as discussed by Chery [1967], Amorocho
and Hart [1965], Chery [1967, 1969], and Eagleson
[1969]).
[7] Rodriguez-Iturbe et al. [1979] suggested hydrologic
similarity of two catchments based on indicators derived
from geomorphologic unit hydrograph (GUH) [Rodriguez-
Iturbe and Valdes, 1979]. Attempts to describe similarity in
terms of such geomorphologic numbers are likely to be
affected by one of its major shortcomings, as GUH based
methods do not account for all the hydrological processes
that convert rainfall into streamflow [Sivapalan et al.,
1990]. Also, catchments with topologically similar net-
works can produce different response indicating the top-
ology of the network only is unable to capture catchment
response [Surkan, 1969]. Limitations of such GUH based
methods have been discussed [e.g., Hebson and Wood,
1982].
[8] Quite different approaches to describe similarity
behavior of landscapes have been based on the topographic
indices ln (a/tanb) and ln(a/Ktanb) developed by Beven and
Kirkby [1979], where a the area drained per unit contour
length at a given point, tanb is the local slope gradient and K
is the lateral saturated hydraulic conductivity. Beven and
Wood [1983], Iorgulescu and Jordan [1994], Thomson and
Moore [1996], Moore and Thomson [1996], Freer et al.
[1997], and Western et al. [1999] have correlated these
indices with the saturation behavior of landscapes with
varying degrees of success.
[9] An approach based on the similitude of nondimen-
sional similarity parameters, derived from topographic, soil
and climatic attributes for specific hydrological processes
conceptually seems to hold promise [O’Loughlin, 1997;
Blöschl, 2001]. An example of this approach is given by
Sivapalan et al. [1987] who use five parameters to assess
similarity of dominant runoff generation mechanisms.
Doubts have been raised about the likelihood that any two
catchments could satisfy all those parameters [e.g., Wood et
al., 1990], and only two have been found to be useful in
determining similarity by Larsen et al. [1994]. Later Siva-
palan et al. [1990] coupled the GUH based model and
partial area runoff generation model by Sivapalan et al.
[1987] to estimate flood frequency distributions.
[10] Although considerable efforts have been put into
studying hydrologic similarity by several methods, definitive
studies of similarity behavior of catchments, based on sim-
ilarity or dissimilarity of dominant hillslope processes, have
not yet been published or accepted in the field of hydrology.
This is due primarily to a lack of analytical relationships
between the flow processes that occur in the landscape and
quantitative descriptors of topographic, soil, and climate
attributes. Previous research into hillslope processes has
mostly been expressed in terms of qualitative landscape
descriptors [Dunne and Black, 1970a, 1970b; Anderson
and Burt, 1978a, 1978b; Carson and Kirkby, 1972].
3. Definition of Terms and Underlying
Assumptions
[11] We denote hillslope type by a two-word name
describing its shape in plan and in profile. For example a
convergent-convex hillslope has a convergent planform
geometry and convex profile. A compound hillslope is
defined as a hillslope with both nonparallel planform
geometry and nonplanar profile; e.g., convergent-concave.
Figure 1 shows the types of hillslopes used.
[12] The assumptions for our theoretical derivations are
similar to those made by other researchers in analyzing
hillslope behavior, e.g., O’Loughlin [1986], Sivapalan et al.
[1987], Moore and Grayson [1991], Barling et al. [1994],
Ambroise et al. [1996a] and many others. The principal
assumptions are: the surface soil is underlain by a lower
permeability layer, downslope flow is predominantly
through the saturated soil lying above the low permeability
layer (driven by a hydraulic gradient equal to the local
surface slope), local vertical recharge is effectively instanta-
neous, soil depth is uniform, the surface across the hillslope
width is planar, and there is no macropore flow.
4. Similarity Parameters
[13] We start with a nondimensional parameter, the wet-
ness index W, which is a measure of saturation at a location
p in a hillslope and is given by [O’Loughlin, 1986]
Z
1
W ð pÞ ¼ qda ð1Þ
S*Tb
where S* is the local slope; T is the soil transmissivity (the
integral of the saturated hydraulic conductivity K [LT 1]
over the soil depth Z [L]); a is the upslope contributing area
at p [L2]; b is the contour length subtending the area a [L];
and q is the net drainage flux (rainfall minus losses) in the
hillslope [LT 1]. For simplicity, we assume that K is
uniform over the soil depth Z, which is also constant over
the hillslope. The transmissivity T is then equal to KZ.
[14] The wetness index in (1) is conceptually similar to the
topographic index ln(a/tanb) of Beven and Kirkby [1979]. At
a given location, the value of W depends, among other
things, on the profile and the planform geometry of the
hillslope. For a uniform
R net rainfall over a parallel hillslope
of width b, the term qda in (1) equals to qAc, where Ac is the
 ARYAL ET AL.: SIMILARITY APPROACH FOR LANDSCAPE SATURATION 26 - 3

Figure 1. Different shapes of basic hillslopes (after R. Suzuki, as discussed by Tsukamoto and Ohta
[1988]).

upslope contributing area. The saturation zone boundary
(thus the saturated area As) can be determined by putting
W = 1 in (1), which, for a parallel hillslope, gives
Ac q ¼ K Z S* b ð2Þ
[15] For planar hillslopes, S* is equal to the overall slope
S. Expressing Ac in terms of total and saturated area (At and
As respectively) and noting that At = Lb (where L is the
planform length of the hillslope) in a parallel-planar hill-
slope, we obtain
As 1
¼1q L ð3Þ
At Z KS
[16] A zero or negative value of (As/At) in (3) implies no
saturation. As seen in (3), the extent of area that is saturated
(As/At) at steady state in a parallel-planar hillslope is a
function of two parameters, L/KS, and the ratio of q to the
soil depth, Z. The product (q/Z)(L/KS) (= p1), termed the
input index, is a nondimensional parameter that gives the
aggregated effects of hillslope attributes (scale and soil) and
drainage flux in causing saturation. A value of p1 greater
than 1 not only guarantees saturation in parallel-planar
hillslopes but also determines the location of the saturation
zone boundary. p1 can be modified to account for the
influence of hillslope shape factors in causing saturation,
as described later.
5. Similarity of Saturation Zones in Hillslopes:
Theoretical Development
5.1. Characterization of Hillslope Shapes
An arbitrary constant B, (called the profile factor), denotes
the degree of concavity or convexity of the profile. Table 1
gives the relevant equations that are used to calculate
concave and convex hillslope profiles, and expressions for
the profile function f (X ) defined by
S* ¼ Sf ð X Þ ð4Þ
[18] The profile function determines the local slope S*
(= dh/dx) at any point X (= x/L), and is obtained by
differentiating the concave and convex profile equations in
Table 1, respectively. S is the average slope (= H/L), where
H is the overall hillslope height.
[19] In Table 1, Y = h/H, and h is the surface elevation
of the profile at a distance x from the bottom of the
hillslope. In the concave and convex profile equations in
Table 1 the profile factor B determines the degree of
concavity or convexity of the profile such that when B
approaches 0, these equations yield Y = X (a planar
profile). For planar hillslopes f (X ) = 1. Nondimensional
profiles of concave and convex hillslopes generated using
the concave and convex profile equations in Table 1 are
shown in Figure 2.
Table 1. Concave and Convex Hillslope Profile Equations and
Profile Functions
Profiles Concave (B > 0) Convex (B < 0)
tan1 fBð X 1Þgþtan1 ð BÞ 1
ð BX Þ
Profile equations Y ¼ tan1 ð BÞ
Y ¼ tan
tan1 ð BÞ

[17] Hillslope profiles can be described by relations given Profile functions f ðX Þ ¼ B

f1þB2 ð X 1Þ2 gtan1 ðBÞ
f ð X Þ ¼ f1þB2 X 2Bgtan1 ðBÞ
by Zaslavsky and Rogowski [1969] and O’Loughlin [1981].
26 - 4 ARYAL ET AL.: SIMILARITY APPROACH FOR LANDSCAPE SATURATION
Figure 2. Concave, convex, and planar hillslope profiles
for different profile factors (B).
[20] The extent of convergence or divergence of different
hillslope shapes in plan is defined by the convergence
ratio CR, the ratio of ridge length to the outlet length,
br/bo. The value of CR denotes convergent (CR > 1),
divergent (CR < 1), or parallel (CR = 1) hillslopes. For the
convergent and divergent shapes shown in Figure 1 the ratio
of saturated area As, to the total area At can be expressed in
terms of X and CR as
As X ð2  X þ XCRÞ
¼ ð5Þ
At 1 þ CR
where X is the location of the saturated zone boundary.
5.2. Saturation in Compound Hillslopes
[21] Previous researchers have noted the influence of the
degree of convergence and profile shape of natural land-
scapes on the extent of saturation zones [Kirkby and
Chorley, 1967; Dunne and Black, 1970a, 1970b; Anderson
and Burt, 1978a, 1978b]. In the following section, we study
planar, concave and convex hillslopes with parallel, con-
vergent and divergent planforms to quantitatively describe
the effects of hillslope profile and planform shapes and the
similarity parameter input index (p1) on the development of
saturation zones.
[22] Equations (2), (4) and (5) can be generalized to
calculate the extent of saturation in convergent/divergent
hillslopes:
X ð2  X þ XCRÞ f ðX Þ
¼1q L ð6Þ
1 þ CR Z KS lð X Þ
where l(X ), a function of planform geometry, termed the
plan function, given by
1 þ CR
lð X Þ ¼ ð7Þ
2ð1  X þ XCRÞ
[23] Equation (6) is a general equation depicting the
compound effects of planform and profile geometry on
hillslope saturation. The equation contains the basic input
index (p1) as well as the effects of topographic profile and
planform geometry. It can be used to calculate the extent of
steady state saturation in all hillslopes types shown in
Figure 1. Equation (6), cubic in terms of X, has one real
positive root and two complex conjugate roots for all
concave and most convex hillslopes of all planform shapes.
For hillslopes with higher convexity however, (6) may have
more than one real root for a certain range of input values.
We consider first the set of hillslopes which yield a single
positive root. For such roots the extent of saturated area in
compound hillslopes is:
As f ðX r Þ
¼ 1  q L  ð8Þ
Z KS lðXr Þ
At
where Xr is the single real positive root of (6). The term
l(X )/f (X ) in (6), which is the ratio of the plan and profile
shape functions, is termed the shape function and is denoted
by l(X ).
[24] A plot of (8) gives a general, nondimensional, shape-
independent curve for saturation in hillslopes of all profile
and planform shapes (Figure 3). Comparing (3) and (8) it
can be seen that this curve is normalized with both the
profile and planform shape functions, thus collapsing indi-
vidual curves for hillslopes with different profile and plan-
form shapes into a single curve. The individual saturation
curves showing the effects of hillslope shapes are described
in the following sections.
5.2.1. Prediction of Saturation in Parallel-Concave/
Convex Hillslopes
[25] Equation (6) can be used to calculate the location of
the saturated zone boundary X measured from the bottom of
hillslopes with parallel planform (CR = 1) as:
f ðX Þ
X ¼ 1  q L  ð9Þ
Z KS
[26] Equation 9 shows that the saturated zone boundary
for parallel-concave and parallel-convex hillslopes is a
function of the input index (q/Z)(L/KS), as well as the slope
function f (X ) which is a function of X and the profile factor
B. Figure 4 shows the hillslope saturation curves computed
for three concave hillslopes with profile factors B of 3, 2
and 1, and a planar hillslope (B  0), depicting scale-
independent curves for parallel-concave hillslopes. It also
shows that hillslopes with concavity B = 3, 2 and 1 start to
Figure 3. The general, nondimensional, shape-indepen-
dent saturation curve for all hillslope types.
 ARYAL ET AL.: SIMILARITY APPROACH FOR LANDSCAPE SATURATION
Figure 4. Percent saturation area for parallel-concave
hillslopes as a function of concavity only.
exhibit saturation for 75%, 64%, and 35% lower values of
the input index than for a planer hillslope respectively. This
provides a quantitative estimate of the influence of con-
cavity on hillslope saturation.
[27] For highly convex hillslopes, (9) can produce more
than one positive real root. To demonstrate the multiple-root
phenomenon, equation (9) and the convex profile function
equation in Table 1 have been solved to produce the
saturation response curve with respect to q (Z = 1) for a
hillslope with convexity B = 2 and L/KS = 500 days
(Figure 5). Up to a value of q = 3.6 mm/day [(q/Z)(L/KS) =
1.8], the hillslope remains unsaturated; for steady state
drainage flux values between 3.6 and 3.9 mm/day, the
hillslope becomes saturated at multiple locations. Figure 6
shows an example of such midslope saturation for the case
of three positive roots.
[28] This phenomenon is due to the configuration of a
convex hillslope in which the slope is steepest at the base,
and which gradually decreases upslope (Figure 6a). These
upslope areas, although they have smaller contributing
areas, are susceptible to saturation because of their flatter
slopes. At the same time, the lower hillslope areas are also
prone to saturation because of high contributing areas from
upslope. Hillslope locations between these two, which are
steeper than the areas upslope and have smaller contribu-
ting areas than the downslope locations, may not be
saturated for the same value of q. This can result in
saturation patches at both the upslope and bottom loca-
tions, with a nonsaturated area in between. For hillslopes
with still higher convexity, the occurrence of midslope
saturation with no saturation at lower hillslope locations is
also possible. In the example corresponding to Figure 5,
when the net drainage flux exceeds the value 3.9 mm/day,
the upslope and downslope saturation areas join and
become a continuous wet patch.
[29] The term ‘‘hanging swamp’’ is often used to describe
midslope saturation. Many instances of their occurrence
have been observed by the authors in natural catchments
with convex hillslopes. The existence of the hanging swamp
phenomenon has also been demonstrated through hydro-
logic simulation using a physically based model, TOPOG
[Aryal, 1998].
26 - 5
[30] Figure 7 shows steady state saturation curves as a
function of convexity for all values of (q/Z )(L/KS ), and
illustrates that a convex hillslope (B = 1) required a 27%
larger input index than planar hillslope to exhibit saturation.
It also shows the plot for a hillslope with higher concavity
(B =  2) exhibiting the effects of multiple saturation zones.
In this case, for a value of (q/Z )(L/KS ) > 1.97 the hillslope
ceases to exhibit the hanging slope behavior.
5.2.2. Prediction of Saturation in Convergent/
Divergent-Planar Hillslopes
[31] Equation (6) can be used to investigate the effects
of convergence and divergence in planar hillslopes [B 
0, f (X ) = 1]. In (6) the value of the plan function l(X )
affects the likelihood of saturation at location X in
convergent and divergent hillslopes. In convergent hill-
slopes, the plan function is greater than 1 near the
hillslope base, thus creating a more favorable condition
for saturation than in parallel-planar hillslopes. In the case
of divergent hillslopes, the value of l(X ) is less than 1 in
the lower part of the hillslope, thus making saturation at
such locations less likely. Hence, in the case of divergent
hillslopes, the input index [(q/Z )(L/KS )] needs to be
larger to cause saturation at these locations. Figure 8
shows normalized curves of the steady state saturated area
in convergent and divergent hillslopes as a function of
convergence ratio only. It can be seen that for convergent
and divergent hillslopes (CR = 5 and 0.2 respectively),
saturation starts occurring at 67% lower and 67% higher
values of the input index compared with the parallel
hillslope respectively.
5.2.3. Prediction of Saturation in Compound Hillslopes
[32] In (6) the shape function l(X ) [= l(X )/f (X )] scales
the combination of the width of flow and slope at the
location X and indicates the susceptibility of that location
to being saturated. For highly concave and convergent
hillslopes, the value of l(X) is higher at the lower reaches
of the hillslopes, making those areas most prone to
saturation even for a small value of drainage flux. The
shape function thus gives the relative importance of plan-
form and profile geometry in causing saturation at a point.
The shape functions for concave hillslopes with different
convergence ratios CR and profile factors B are plotted
Figure 5. Plot of q versus location of saturation zones in a
highly convex hillslope (B = 2, L/KS = 500 days).
26 - 6 ARYAL ET AL.: SIMILARITY APPROACH FOR LANDSCAPE SATURATION
Figure 6. (a) Profile and (b) plan of a convex hillslope (B = 2). The plan view shows the existence of
a ‘‘hanging swamp.’’
against X in Figure 9. The curves show, for example, that
for a convergent and highly concave (CR = 3 and B = 3)
hillslope, the shape function is four times higher than for
the concave hillslope with CR = 1 and B = 1 at the
location X = 0.1. The net effect of two opposing factors on
saturation (e.g. divergent-concave) is to diminish it, as
shown by the value of l(X ) for divergent (CR = 0.3) and
concave (B = 3) hillslopes.
[33] A plot for several compound hillslopes, showing
the effects of plan and profile geometries on saturation
zones for the index (q/Z )(L/KS ), is given in Figure 10.
Figure 10 shows that a high degree of convergence,
compounded with higher concavity of the hillslope, (e.g.,
Figure 7. Saturation behavior of parallel-convex hill-
slopes as a function of the convexity of the hillslopes. The
curve for B = 2 shows the sum of the noncontiguous
saturation areas in a hillslope with a hanging swamp. The
response of a parallel-planar hillslope is also shown for
comparison.
CR = 5, B = 2) yields a saturated area, even for a small
input value of (q/Z )(L/KS ). Similar curves for other
combinations of planform and profile hillslope shapes
can also be easily determined and plotted. Figure 10 also
shows the combined saturated area curve for a divergent-
convex hillslope which was determined by summing the
nonadjacent saturated areas.
6. Application to Natural Catchments
[34] The analytical expressions derived for steady state
saturation were applied to three natural catchments to
determine their ability to predict the saturation phenomenon
observed in nature. As discussed earlier (section 2), there
are other examples of application of saturation indices [e.g.,
Beven and Kirkby, 1979] to natural catchments including
Figure 8. Saturation area curves for convergent (CR = 5),
divergent (CR = 0.2), and parallel hillslopes with planar
profiles for all L/KS.
 ARYAL ET AL.: SIMILARITY APPROACH FOR LANDSCAPE SATURATION
Figure 9. Variation of shape function l(X ) with locations
in hillslopes of different shapes (only the concave profiles
are shown).
those of Iorgulescu and Jordan [1994] who used the topo-
graphic index to map waterlogged soil, and to validate the
TOPMODEL concept.
6.1. Method of Application
[35] Under conditions where runoff from infiltration
excess is negligible, quick flow (produced from rain falling
on saturated areas) can be a good indicator of the extent of
saturated areas in a catchment. Hence, quick flow itself,
which often constitutes a major portion of the catchment
outflow, can be predicted by the extent of saturated areas,
assuming no quick flow is due to fast macropore flow
[O’Loughlin, 1981; Woods and Sivapalan, 1997]. We cal-
culate quick flow directly from observed streamflow data,
and compare it with theoretically calculated quick flow
volumes.
[36] The following steps were used to apply the analysis
to natural catchments: (1) each natural catchment was
subdivided into simple hillslopes, each having a single
predominant geometry; (2) the topographic and soil proper-
ties of each hillslope were obtained from topographic maps
and from field data respectively; (3) the net drainage flux
was deduced from the observed streamflow data by separat-
ing the base flow; (4) storm events were extracted from
rainfall data; (5) the saturated areas were computed for each
hillslope using equations (6) and (5).
[37] By summing the individual hillslope saturation areas,
the total saturated area of each catchment was calculated.
The quick flow generated in each catchment during several
storm events (as saturation-excess overland flow) was then
determined from the depth of net storm rain on the calcu-
lated saturated area.
6.2. Selection of Catchments
[38] The Bushrangers, Bulls Head and Pago catchments
in the Brindabella Ranges near the western boundary of the
Australian Capital Territory (ACT) near Canberra (Latitude
35.31S, Longitude 149.19E) were chosen primarily
because of the data available for them. These catchments
are all moderately steep, with slopes up to 80%. The mean
annual rainfall in this area is approximately 1100 mm. The
26 - 7
catchments are covered with native forest containing differ-
ent species of Eucalypt and a sparse understorey of shrubs.
Detailed descriptions of vegetation and soil in the Brinda-
bella Ranges are given by O’Loughlin et al. [1982] and
Talsma [1983].
[39] The Bushrangers catchment is 108 ha, with an
altitude range of 955 to 1280 m (Figure 11). This catchment
consists of several subcatchments draining into wet seepage
areas. The soil depths in this catchment are 0.65 to 1 m. The
Bulls Head catchment is 83 ha, with an altitude range of
1165 to 1365 m. One third of the catchment is underlain at 1
to 2 m depth by highly weathered metamorphosed Ordo-
vician sedimentary rock, with the average soil depth of 1.7
m at the lower reaches of the hillslopes. The remaining area
is underlain at 0.5 to 1.5 m depth by weathered Silurian
granite [Talsma and Hallam, 1980], while the lower reaches
of the hillslopes have an average soil depth of 1.3 m. The
Pago catchment (43 ha) lies adjacent to the Bulls Head
catchment with an elevation range of 1135 to 1365 m. The
entire Pago catchment is underlain at 0.5 to 1.5 m depth by
Silurian granite. The average soil depth at the lower reaches
of the hillslopes of this catchment is similar to Bulls Head.
6.3. Partitioning of Catchments and Extraction of Data
[40] The Bushrangers, Bulls Head and Pago catchments
were divided into 15, 23 and 16 land units consisting of
simple hillslopes similar to those shown in Figure 11 for
Bushrangers catchment. The contour maps used were
1:10000 maps prepared using areal photographs of the same
scale. These data have been used in the past by many
researchers [e.g., O’Loughlin, 1981, 1986, 1990; O’Lough-
lin et al., 1982; T. Talsma, Catchment soil studies, CSIRO
Division of Forest Research, unpublished Hydrology Sec-
tion reports 1979, 1980] and were found to be quite
satisfactory. The partitioned land units were approximated
by idealized hillslopes of regular geometry such that the
area of each ideal hillslope was equal to the corresponding
subarea of the catchment, and the basic planform shape
unchanged [see, e.g., Beven and Wood, 1983]. Hillslopes 1,
Figure 10. Steady state saturation curves for compound
hillslopes. The curve for B = 2, CR = 0.5 (divergent-
convex) was calculated by summing the nonadjacent
saturated areas.
26 - 8 ARYAL ET AL.: SIMILARITY APPROACH FOR LANDSCAPE SATURATION
Figure 11. Partitioning of Bushrangers catchment into simple hillslope subcatchments. The contour
interval is 5 m.
4, 6 –9 and 11 in Figure 11 are convergent; hillslopes 2, 3, 5,
10, 12 and 13 are divergent and hillslopes 14 and 15 are
parallel.
[41] The length L and convergence ratio CR for the
idealized hillslopes were obtained from topographic maps.
By plotting the nondimensional sectional profile of the
hillslope against the template of standard B profiles, the
value of the profile factor B for each hillslope was deter-
mined. In doing so, the value of B at the lower parts was
adopted in preference to an overall B value for the hillslope
as most saturation activities occur at the footslopes.
[42] Soil hydraulic conductivities measured by T. Talsma
(Catchment soil studies, CSIRO Division of Forest
Research, unpublished Hydrology Section reports, 1979,
1980) at several locations in these catchments using a
constant-head well permeameter were used to calculate
transmissivities separately for each hillslope. In the Bush-
rangers, Bulls Head and Pago catchments, the geometric
means of these were 1.5 105 m2/s, 5.2 105 m2/s and
2.9 105 m2/s, respectively, which are of the same order
of magnitude used by O’Loughlin [1986] for Bushrangers.
6.4. Selection of Rainfall and Streamflow Events
[43] Rainfall data was taken from the Bendora dam
station (570958), a few kilometers south of Bushrangers,
Bulls Head and Pago catchments, and at similar altitude.
The data from this station are continuous and of good
quality. Less than five percent of the rainfall and runoff
data were missing. To approximate steady state saturation,
rainfall events were selected such that they followed a long
wet period. For these catchments, a period greater than
about four months allowed the catchment to attain a steady
state, which was apparent from the near-constant base flow
during the later months. Seven such periods were selected
from 25 years (1967 – 1992) of concurrent rainfall and
runoff records for these catchments. The storm events used
to calculate overland flow were those that occurred imme-
diately after the period for which steady state conditions
were approximated.
[44] Base flow was separated from total storm flow using
a digital filter technique [Lyne and Hollick, 1979]. The
steady state drainage fluxes for the selected storm events
were determined for these catchments. O’Loughlin [1986]
and Moore et al. [1986] observed that the drainage fluxes
given by mean base flow during the storm event, rather than
the initial values, give better predictions of storm runoff.
These mean values of drainage flux apparently account for
the dynamic changes in saturation area during the event.
The calculated mean drainage fluxes (q) for all events are
shown in Table 2.
6.5. Comparison of Computed and Observed Quick
Flow Volumes
[45] The saturated areas were calculated from extracted
topographic, soil and climatic variables using (6) and (5)
from the base flow derived from the digital filter. The quick
 ARYAL ET AL.: SIMILARITY APPROACH FOR LANDSCAPE SATURATION 26 - 9

Table 2. Comparison of Calculated and Observed Overland Flow Volumes of Pago, Bulls Head, and Bushrangers
Catchmentsa
Events Total Storm q, mm/d Calculated Saturated Percentage of Total vol_obs vol_cal diff %
Rainfall, mm Area, m2 Catchment Area

Pago
Oct. 1969 19.1 1.16 15212 3.5 169 232 37
Sept. 1980 33.3 0.40 2022 0.5 469 35 93
Sept. 1978 60.9 1.52 22750 5.2 1248 1109 11
Nov. 1983 74.3 2.20 34679 7.9 1783 2061 16
July 1974 89.8 2.44 41843 9.6 2512 3006 20
Aug. 1983 103.0 1.96 30717 7.0 3313 2530 24
Jan. 1984 113.4 1.78 27627 6.3 2457 2506 2

Bulls Head
Oct. 1969 19.1 1.28 14705 1.8 559 224 60
Sept. 1980 33.3 0.32 0 0.0 702 0 100
Sept. 1978 60.9 1.81 37165 4.4 2146 1811 16
Nov. 1983 74.3 2.84 89676 10.7 3121 5330 71
July 1974 89.8 2.95 95175 11.4 5505 6837 24
Aug. 1983 103.0 2.68 83075 9.9 5368 6843 27
Jan. 1984 113.4 2.51 75571 9.0 5039 6856 36

Bushrangers
Oct. 1969 19.1 0.35 45370 4.2 766 692 10
Sept. 1980 33.3 0.45 72627 6.7 3072 1935 37
Sept. 1978 60.9 0.70 154431 14.2 5029 7525 50
Nov. 1983 74.3 1.05 253142 23.3 11113 15047 35
July 1974 89.8 0.87 208798 19.2 9168 15000 64
Aug. 1983 103.0 0.84 200123 18.4 15840 16485 4
Jan. 1984 113.4 0.79 185339 17.0 11369 16814 48
a
Here vol_obs is from observed quick flow volume (m3), vol_cal is calculated quick flow volume (m3) from observed base
flow and observed rainfall using equations (5) and (6), q is net drainage flux (mm/d), and diff% is difference in the volumes (%).

flow (storm overland flow) volumes were then calculated
from the depth of the net storm rainfall on the calculated
saturation area. The calculated storm overland flow volumes
were compared with the observed quick flow volumes for
seven events for each of these catchments (Table 2). The
table lists the storm events and their magnitudes, steady
drainage fluxes, calculated saturated areas, observed and
calculated flow volumes, and their percentage difference for
the three catchments.
[46] With some exceptions, the calculated overland flow
volumes vary from the observed ones by up to 100%, which
may seem high. However, in the following subsection, a
sensitivity analysis of parameters shows that the saturation
area is highly sensitive to the parameters L/KS and q/Z in
these catchments. With respect to L/KS, the high variability
of K found in nature, and the accompanying sampling
errors, is sufficient to explain the differences between
observed and calculated values. Spatial variations of rainfall
observed in nature can also account for difference between
observed and calculated runoff [e.g., Chapman, 1970].
Therefore sensitivity to the parameter q/Z could also explain
some of the discrepancies in the above results.
6.6. Sensitivity Analyses
[47] The sensitivity of calculated saturation areas in Pago,
Bulls Head and Bushrangers catchments to changes in L/KS,
q/Z, CR and B were evaluated for two events each, Sep-
tember 1978 and August 1983. The sensitivity analysis
examined the effects of doubling and halving the base value
of K. For the other parameters, a change of ±20% was used
in the sensitivity analysis because of their relatively lower
variability. The effect of assuming all hillslope profiles as
planar was also analyzed. Figure 12 shows the base values
and the change in saturated areas for the parameter changes
made in the sensitivity studies.
[48] Since the processes that determine the sizes of
saturated areas are not linear, catchments show different
degrees of sensitivity to similar percentage changes in a
parameter value. For example, in the case of the September
1978 event for Bulls Head catchment, a 20% increase in q/Z
resulted in an increase in the saturated area of 58%, whereas
a 20% decrease in the q/Z value decreased the saturated area
by a smaller amount (42%). It is noted here that the
saturation area during this event was also rather small
(4.4%), therefore the effect of these changes results in a
range of saturated area of 2.6 –6.9% which could be seen as
rather minor. In these cases expressing the sensitivity as a
percentage may be misleading due to the smaller base
values involved.
[49] Catchments shown to be sensitive to an increase of
some parameters may not exhibit similar responses to a
similar decrease in the same parameters. As seen in Figure
12, the relative sensitivity of the saturation area to each
parameter is not fixed and depends on a combination of
the other parameters, and is specific to each event in a
particular catchment. The computed saturation area is most
sensitive to L/KS and q/Z, and least sensitive to CR and B.
Those catchments whose overall profile shapes are already
close to planar (e.g. Bushrangers) showed little effect of
the simplification made assuming all hillslopes to be
planar. The most affected catchment was Bulls Head
(72% and 15% difference for September 1978 and
August 1983 events respectively), whose hillslopes have
an equal mixture of concave and convex profiles. In all
26 - 10 ARYAL ET AL.: SIMILARITY APPROACH FOR LANDSCAPE SATURATION
Figure 12. The results of sensitivity analyses showing absolute change in saturated area with various
changes in the parameters in Bushrangers, Bulls Head, and Pago catchments.
cases, the effect of uncertainty due to K is much greater
than the effect of assuming all hillslopes to be planar. This
emphasizes that form factors have less influence than K.
This supports the findings of Iorgulescu and Jordan
[1994] who suggested that topography is relevant but not
sufficient to override soil and geological factors in deter-
mining saturated area.
7. Similarity Applications
[50] Equation (8) provides a theoretical basis for com-
bining catchment and input climatic variables to describe
similarity criteria for landscape saturation. The distribu-
tions of the parameters CR, B, L/KS, q/Z and a suitable
combination of these, as given by the theories derived in
section 5 are examined below. The characteristics of these
distributions in natural catchments are then used to pro-
pose similarity criteria for storm runoff from saturated
zones.
7.1. Distribution of Independent Parameters in the
Brindabella Catchments
[51] Analysis of hillslope profile shapes in the catchments
of the Brindabella Range showed that hillslopes of Bulls
Head have an approximately equal distribution of convex
and concave profiles, lying within the profile factor (B)
values of ±2. The hillslopes of Pago also consist mostly of
an equal number of convex and concave hillslopes, but with
a smaller spread of B [within B = 1 and 2] than Bulls
Head. The majority of hillslopes of Bushrangers are planar
and convex, with a relatively narrow spread of B values
(between B = ±1) suggesting that Bushrangers has approx-
imately planar hillslopes. Consequently, as seen in Figure
12, the effect of simplifying all hillslope profiles of Bush-
rangers to planar had a negligible impact on the predicted
saturated area.
[52] Examination of convergence ratios of hillslopes of
all three catchments indicated that the majority of landscape
units of Pago are of divergent planform geometry (median
CR = 0.1). The median values of CR for Bulls Head and
Bushrangers hillslopes are 0.7 and 1.0, suggesting mostly
divergent and parallel planform shapes respectively.
[53] The distribution of L/KS of hillslopes for the three
catchments showed that hillslopes of Bushrangers catch-
ment have the largest values of L/KS, followed by Pago and
Bulls Head. In general, for an identical drainage flux in
simple (parallelplanar) hillslopes with similar soil depths,
lower values of L/KS indicate a smaller percentage of
saturated area.
7.2. Similarity of the Extent of Saturated Area
[54] The relationship that exists when the saturation
boundary occurs at location X in a hillslope is given by
(8). Thus, for a given drainage flux, the product of topo-
graphic and soil parameters [(L/KSZ)l(X )/f (X )], called the
combined parameter (V ), should provide a measure of the
likelihood of saturation in natural catchments. Rewriting (8)
in terms of the combined parameter V, we obtain
As 1
¼1 ð10Þ
At qV
If the value of V is large, a smaller value of q is needed to
cause the same degree of saturation (given by As/At). By
plotting distributions of this combined parameter for
different catchments and comparing them, insights into
the similarity behavior of saturation processes in these
catchments may be gained. If the distribution of V for
hillslopes in a catchment shows a tail of large values, then,
for a given q, a large number of hillslopes of that catchment
are likely to become saturated at (or around) the location X.
7.3. Distributions of the Combined Parameter
[55] Figure 13 shows frequency distribution plots of the
parameter V at location X = 0.1 for the three catchments. The
distributions of the combined parameter for Bulls Head and
Pago catchments are similar, whereas Bushrangers has a
markedly different distribution, containing larger values of
the combined parameter (L/KSZ )l(X )/f (X ). These distribu-
tions of the combined parameter provide a means for
 ARYAL ET AL.: SIMILARITY APPROACH FOR LANDSCAPE SATURATION
Figure 13. A cumulative frequency distribution of the
combined parameter (L/KSZ)l(X )/f (X ) at X = 0.1 for Pago,
Bulls Head and Bushrangers catchments. The data point
corresponding to the cumulative frequency of 1 for
Bushrangers catchment is not shown, as it lies beyond the
range of abscissa chosen here.
comparing the similarity or dissimilarity of saturation pro-
cesses in different catchments.
1. For a similar range of steady state drainage flux (q),
which causes saturation boundaries to occur at locations
given by the value of X equal to (or around) 0.1, Pago and
Bulls Head catchments are likely to show similarity of
saturation; and
2. The distribution of the combined parameter for
Bushrangers, showing a tail of large values of V at X =
0.1, implies that more hillslopes of Bushrangers catchment
are prone to saturation at this location. In this case, due to
large values of the V parameter, even ‘small’ values of q
would cause many hillslopes to be saturated at these
locations (at the lower hillslope positions). In section 7.4
this interpretation is tested against observed data.
7.4. Investigation of Similarity of Steady State
Saturation Area Based on Similarity of the
Combined Parameter
[56] The inference drawn from the distributions of the
combined parameter shown in Figure 13 was ‘‘tested’’ with
the observed storm events. Figure 14 shows the responses of
these catchments for three representative events from the
seven events given in Table 2. These three examples are
chosen to represent small, medium and large storm volumes
respectively. The percentage of saturation area for the seven
events in Table 2 varied from 0% to 11% for Bulls Head,
0.5% to 10% for Pago and from 4% to 23% for the
Bushrangers catchment. This indicates that the median
values of X were less than 0.1 for all of these events in
the first two catchments, and for some of these events in the
third.
[57] The similarity of the saturation process in these three
catchments is related to the similarity of the distributions of
their combined parameter. The quick flow hydrographs of
all these events, taken as indicators of saturated area, show a
remarkable compliance with the trend predicted by the
distributions of the combined parameter (Figure 13). For
all events, Bulls Head and Pago show similar quick flow
26 - 11
response per unit area, suggesting similarity in the extent of
saturation areas. Table 3 shows the values of observed quick
flow volumes per unit area of Pago, Bulls Head and
Bushrangers catchments for all the seven events. Except
for the smallest storm event (October 1969), the values for
the former two catchments are comparable. The Bush-
rangers catchment, with a long tail of large V values, shows
a distinctly larger quick flow response implying a larger
percentage of saturated area. In this case, the response of
Bushrangers catchment is dissimilar to the response of the
other two catchments (see Table 3), as predicted by the
dissimilar distributions of the parameter V.
8. Discussion
[58] This analytical study of steady state saturation
behavior in landscapes has used nondimensional similarity
parameters extracted from topographic, soil and climatic
attributes to derive nondimensional expressions for compar-
ing the extent of saturated area on different hillslopes. Our
work was motivated by the need for adopting a process-
based approach [see, e.g., O’Loughlin, 1997; Blöschl, 2001]
akin to that of Sivapalan et al. [1987] who studied similarity
in dominant runoff generation mechanisms rather than total
catchment runoff response. Our approach differs from ear-
lier studies of hydrologic similarity in five respects:
1. Most of the research relating the position and
expansion of saturated areas to geology, hillslope topogra-
phy, and soil and rainfall characteristics is qualitative in
nature [e.g., Kirkby and Chorley, 1967; Dunne and Black,
1970a, 1970b; Carson and Kirkby, 1972; Anderson and
Burt, 1978a, 1978b; Beven and Wood, 1983]. We have
quantified effects of hillslope, soil and climatic attributes on
changes in saturation patterns in hillslopes. The effects of
hillslope planform and profile geometries have been
explicitly incorporated to investigate the physical controls
of hillslope shapes on saturation. Thus we are able to show
that a convex hillslope with uniform soil depth can
experience saturation at midhillslope location without
exhibiting saturation at lower hillslope regions. Further-
more, our method provides a direct measure of the extent of
saturated area and not just the presence of saturation at a
location [cf. Beven and Kirkby, 1979; O’Loughlin, 1986].
2. Previous studies have involved the use of more than
one similarity measure. Our method uses a single parameter
(V) comprising soil hydraulic and hillslope shape attributes
that are physically based and easily field measurable, and it
does not contain any parameters that require estimation by
fitting rainfall-runoff models to storm hydrographs [cf.
Sivapalan et al., 1987; Larsen et al., 1994].
3. Earlier studies applied different forms of similarity
theory to real or synthetic catchments using output derived
from rainfall-runoff models [e.g., Rodriguez-Iturbe et al.,
1979; Rodriguez-Iturbe and Valdes, 1979; Larsen et al.,
1994]. We have tested the derived similarity principles
using observed rainfall, hydraulic conductivity and runoff
data from three natural catchments. This avoids any effects
that shortcomings in the structure of a rainfall-runoff model,
or its parameterization may have on similarity parameters.
4. Many models of saturation-excess runoff compute the
value of a topographic or wetness index using a digital
elevation model (DEM) analysis [e.g., Grayson et al., 1992;
Ambroise et al., 1996b]. The use of DEMs is highly data
26 - 12 ARYAL ET AL.: SIMILARITY APPROACH FOR LANDSCAPE SATURATION

Figure 14. Total outflow from three catchments in the Brindabella Range for the (a) September 1980
storm event (total storm rainfall = 33 mm), (b) November 1983 storm event (total storm rainfall = 74
mm), and (c) August 1983 storm event (total storm rainfall = 103 mm).

intensive and requires specialized tools and personnel.

Furthermore, topographic index values are affected by Table 3. Comparison of Observed Quick Flow Values of Pago,
elevation errors in DEMs, and vary with the grid resolution Bulls Head, and Bushrangers Catchments
and DEM analysis techniques used [see Willgoose and
Observed Quick Flow Volume
Perera, 2001]. Our method provides an organized way of Per Unit Area, m3/ha
grouping soil, topography and climatic inputs to hillslope Events
units to predict steady state saturation in simple catchments Storm Date Amount, mm Pago Bulls Head Bushrangers
without resorting to DEMs. We have shown that some
Oct. 1969 19.1 3.9 6.7 7.0
analyses can be done by subdividing catchments into a Sept. 1980 33.3 10.7 8.4 28.2
dozen or so simple hillslopes; a much less data intensive Sept. 1978 60.9 28.5 25.7 46.2
exercise. This somewhat supports Duffy’s [1996] hypothesis Nov. 1983 74.3 40.7 37.3 102.1
that while the rainfall-runoff process is a complex function July 1974 89.8 57.4 65.8 84.3
of topography, soil and climate variability, simple models Aug. 1983 103.0 75.6 64.2 145.6
Jan. 1984 113.4 56.1 60.3 104.5
involving the subdivision of catchments into nonoverlap-
 ARYAL ET AL.: SIMILARITY APPROACH FOR LANDSCAPE SATURATION
ping subregions with similar characteristics can capture
important aspects of this behavior.
5. Willgoose and Perera [2001] developed a conceptual
model to predict the percentage of catchment saturated
which reduces the need for a detailed DEM analysis. Their
approach incorporates a slope-area relationship which uses
mean slope at the bottom of the hillslope but does not
consider its shape. In catchments with predominantly
convex hillslopes, where midslope saturation can occur,
the percentage of catchment saturation determined using
their approach may incorporate large errors.
[59] Antecedent soil moisture conditions in a catchment
and its associated "valley saturated area" play a prominent
role in determining catchment response to rainfall [Dunne,
1978; O’Loughlin, 1981]. For any given value of net
drainage flux q, the distribution of V yields a similarity
criterion for catchment susceptibility to saturation. Thus our
method might be able to address the recognized need for a
better understanding of the physical factors that control the
probability distribution of floods [cf. Potter, 1987; Gupta et
al., 1994; Bobèe and Rasmussen, 1995]. In particular, it
could be used to explore two ideas put forward by Beven et
al. [1988], Wood et al. [1990] and Larsen et al. [1994]. The
first is to explore the classification of watersheds by the
similarity in their runoff generation response. The second is
to examine the extent to which this classification matches
groupings identified during regional flood frequency anal-
ysis. For example, for regional flood peak data in south-
eastern Australia Bates et al. [1998] found that membership
of hydrologically homogeneous regions is determined
largely by a combination of climatic characteristics that is
related to catchment wetness. Application of our method to
the same set of catchments could provide a physical basis
for regionalization in southeastern Australia. This work has
been completed and will be the subject of another paper.
[60] As discussed by Blöschl [2001], the process-wise
similarity approach, as adopted in this study, can also help
in understanding the scaling behavior of catchments. The
relationships between the dominant processes and nondi-
mensional similarity parameters make them amenable to
transferring across different scales and can provide insights
into how the processes change with scale.
[61] Finally, the findings of this study raise the possibility
of using analytical techniques to model the effects of land
use changes such as forest clearing, bushfire or other sudden
land use impacts on hillslope saturation. Usually, however,
detailed transmissivity values and observed base flow
values may not be readily available everywhere. An alter-
native to this approach could incorporate directly mapped
process zones along the lines presented by Wigmosta and
Burges [1997] and Burges et al. [1998].
9. Conclusion
[62] This paper describes landscape steady state satura-
tion behavior in terms of nondimensional similarity param-
eters derived from topographic, soil, and climatic
attributes. The purpose has been to derive nondimensional
analytical expressions to compare the amount of saturated
area for different hillslopes. The similarity parameters that
influence steady state saturation in landscapes are the
input index (q/Z )(L/KS ), the profile factor (B), and the
planform shape factor given by the convergence ratio
26 - 13
(CR). For catchments with similar distributions of the
parameter (L/KSZ )l(X )/f (X ), storm runoff data support
the hypothesis of similar development of saturated areas.
[63] The key finding is that, by grouping variables to
normalize the relationships, the saturation behavior of most
of the geometric shapes given in Figure 1 can be described
by a single curve. This paper also examines the relative
influence of planform and profile geometries of hillslopes
on the extent of saturation.
[64] The theory for the response of idealized hillslopes
derived for steady state saturation was applied to three
catchments of the Brindabella Ranges in the ACT to
determine their response to a range of storm events. Calcu-
lated values of quick flow volumes were compared with the
observed data. In most cases, the predicted volumes were
within a factor of two to the observed ones, and were
certainly within the scope of the data accuracy. Here, steady
state saturation in natural catchments was found to be most
sensitive to two parameters: L/KS and q/Z. The saturated
area was less sensitive to the convergence ratio CR and
profile factor B. In catchments whose hillslope profile
shapes lie within the envelope of standard profile shapes
given by the profile factor B = +1 (concave) and B = 1
(convex), the profile shapes of all hillslopes may be sim-
plified to planar without a substantial effect in the prediction
of the saturation area.
[65] The relationships derived in this paper are specific to
the hillslope shapes adapted to the analysis. However, the
forms of these relationships should provide useful indicators
of the existence of similarity of hillslope runoff generation
behavior with different shape forms, which may not con-
form exactly to these mathematically tractable shapes. The
derivations assume steady state conditions, so the time
dynamics of changes in saturation area have not been
considered. A detailed discussion of saturation area dynam-
ics is beyond the scope of this paper.
[66] Acknowledgments. This research was supported by the Coop-
erative Research Centre for Catchment Hydrology as a part of Project D2:
Regionalisation and scaling of hydrologic data. We thank Craig Beverly
and Chris Maunder for their support with TOPOG. We are thankful for the
comments from Neil Viney, P.E. Weinmann and Mike Trefry on earlier
drafts. We also thank Bryson Bates, Günter Blöschl, Stephen Burges and
two anonymous reviewers for their suggestions.
References
Ambroise, B., K. Beven, and J. Freer, Towards a generalisation of the
TOPMODEL concepts: Topographic indices of hydrologic similarity,
Water Resour. Res., 32(7), 2135 – 2145, 1996a.
Ambroise, B., J. Freer, and K. Beven, Application of a generalized TOP-
MODEL to the small Ringelbach catchment, Vosges, France, Water Re-
sour. Res., 32(7), 2147 – 2159, 1996b.
Amorocho, J., and W. E. Hart, The use of laboratory catchments in the
study of hydrologic systems, J. Hydrol., 3, 106 – 123, 1965.
Anderson, M. G., and T. P. Burt, Towards more detailed field monitoring of
variable source areas, Water Resour. Res., 14(6), 1123 – 1131, 1978a.
Anderson, M. G., and T. P. Burt, The role of topography in controlling
throughflow generation, Earth Surf. Processes, 3, 331 – 344, 1978b.
Aryal, S. K., A similarity approach to characterise the hydrological beha-
viour of landscapes, Ph.D. thesis, Dep. of Civ. Eng., Monash Univ.,
Clayton, Victoria, Australia, 1998.
Barling, R. D., I. D. Moore, and R. B. Grayson, A quasi-dynamic wetness
index for characterizing the spatial distribution of zones of surface satura-
tion and soil water contents, Water Resour. Res., 30(4), 1029 – 1044, 1994.
Bates, B. C., A. Rahman, R. G. Mein, and P. E. Weinmann, Climatic and
physical factors that influence the homogeneity of regional floods in
southeastern Australia, Water Resour. Res., 34(12), 3369 – 3381, 1998.
26 - 14 ARYAL ET AL.: SIMILARITY APPROACH FOR LANDSCAPE SATURATION
Beven, K. J., and M. J. Kirkby, A physically based, variable contributing
area model of basin hydrology, Hydrol. Sci. Bull., 24(1), 43 – 69, 1979.
Beven, K. J., and E. F. Wood, Catchment geography and the dynamics of
runoff contributing area, J. Hydrol., 65, 139 – 158, 1983.
Beven, K. J., E. F. Wood, and M. Sivapalan, On hydrological heterogeneity-
Catchment morphology and catchment response, J. Hydrol., 100, 353 –
375, 1988.
Blöschl, G., Scaling in hydrology, Hydrol. Processes, 15, 709 – 711, 2001.
Bobèe, B., and P. Rasmussen, Recent advances in flood frequency analysis,
U.S. Natl. Rep. Int. Union Geod. Geophys. 1991 – 1994, Rev. Geophys.,
33, 1111 – 1116, 1995.
Burges, S. J., M. S. Wigmosta, and J. M. Meena, Hydrologic effects of
land-use change in a zero-order catchment, J. Hydrol. Eng., 3(2), 86 – 97,
1998.
Carson, M. A., and M. J. Kirkby, Hillslope Form and Process, Cambridge
Univ. Press, New York, 1972.
Chapman, T. G., Optimisation of a rainfall-runoff model for an arid zone
catchment, Int. Assoc. Sci. Hydrol. Publ., 96, 126 – 144, 1970.
Chery, D. L., Jr., A review of rainfall-runoff, physical models as developed
by dimensional analysis and other methods, Water Resour. Res., 3(3),
881 – 889, 1967.
Chery, D. L., Jr., A discussion of: Potential of physical models for achiev-
ing better understanding and evaluation of watershed changes, by P. S.
Eagleson, in Effects of Watershed Changes on Streamflow, edited by W.
L. Moore and C. W. Morgan, p. 26, Cent. for Res. in Water Resour.,
Univ. of Tex. at Austin, Austin, 1969.
Dooge, J. C. I., Looking for hydrologic laws, Water Resour. Res., 22(9),
46S – 56S, 1986.
Duffy, C. J., A two-stage integral-balance model for soil moisture and
groundwater dynamics in complex terrain, Water Resour. Res., 32(8),
2421 – 2434, 1996.
Dunne, T., Field studies of hillslope flow processes, in Hillslope Hydrology,
edited by M. J. Kirkby, pp. 227 – 293, John Wiley, New York, 1978.
Dunne, T., and R. D. Black, An experimental investigation of runoff pro-
duction in permeable soils, Water Resour. Res., 6(2), 478 – 490, 1970a.
Dunne, T., and R. D. Black, Partial area contribution to storm runoff in a
small New England catchment, Water Resour. Res., 6(5), 1296 – 1311,
1970b.
Eagleson, P. S., Potential of physical models for achieving better under-
standing and evaluation of watershed changes, in Effects of Watershed
Changes on Streamflow, edited by W. L. Moore and C. W. Morgan, pp.
12 – 25, Cent. for Res. in Water Resour., Univ. of Tex. at Austin, Austin,
1969.
Freer, J., J. McDonnell, K. J. Beven, D. Brammer, D. Burns, R. P. Hooper,
and C. Kendal, Topographic controls on subsurface storm flow at the
hillslope scale for two hydrologically distinct small catchments, Hydrol.
Processes, 11, 1347 – 1352, 1997.
Grayson, R. B., I. D. Moore, and T. A. McMahon, Physically based hydro-
logic modeling, 1, A terrain-based model for investigative purposes,
Water Resour. Res., 28(10), 2639 – 2658, 1992.
Gupta, V. K., O. J. Mesa, and D. R. Dawdy, Multiscaling theory of flood
peaks: Regional quantile analysis, Water Resour. Res., 30(12), 3405 –
3421, 1994.
Hebson, C., and E. F. Wood, A derived flood frequency distribution using
Horton order ratios, Water Resour. Res., 18(5), 1509 – 1518, 1982.
Iorgulescu, I., and J. P. Jordan, Validation of TOPMODEL on a small Swiss
catchment, J. Hydrol., 159, 225 – 273, 1994.
Kirkby, M. J., and R. J. Chorley, Throughflow, overland flow and erosion,
Bull. Int. Assoc. Sci. Hydrol., 12(3), 5 – 21, 1967.
Langhaar, H. L., Dimensional Analysis and Theory of Models, 166 pp.,
John Wiley, New York, 1951.
Larsen, J. E., M. Sivapalan, N. A. Coles, and P. E. Linnet, Similarity
analysis of runoff generation process in real-world catchments, Water
Resour. Res., 30(6), 1641 – 1652, 1994.
Lyne, V. D., and M. Hollick, Stochastic time-varying rainfall-runoff mod-
eling, paper presented at Hydrology and Water Resources Symposium,
Inst. of Eng., Aust., Perth, Australia, 1979.
Mamisao, J. P., Development of agricultural watershed by similitude, M.S.
thesis, Iowa State Coll., Ames, 1952.
Moore, I. D., and R. B. Grayson, Terrain-based catchment partitioning and
runoff prediction using vector elevation data, Water Resour. Res., 27(6),
1177 – 1191, 1991.
Moore, I. D., S. M. Mackay, P. J. Walbrink, G. J. Burch, and E. M.
O’Loughlin, Hydrologic characteristics and modeling of a small forested
catchment in southeastern New South Wales: Pre-logging condition,
J. Hydrol., 83, 307 – 335, 1986.
Moore, R. C., and J. C. Thomson, Are water table variations in a shallow
forest soil consistent with the TOPMODEL concept?, Water Resour. Res.,
32(3), 663 – 669, 1996.
O’Loughlin, E. M., Saturation regions in catchments and their relations to
soil and topographic properties, J. Hydrol., 53, 229 – 246, 1981.
O’Loughlin, E. M., Prediction of surface saturation zones in natural catch-
ments by topographic analysis, Water Resour. Res., 22(5), 794 – 804, 1986.
O’Loughlin, E. M., Modelling soil moisture status in complex terrain,
Agric. For. Meteorol., 50, 23 – 38, 1990.
O’Loughlin, E. M., Like or unlike: How do we tell?, Aust. J. Water Resour.,
2(1), 1 – 7, 1997.
O’Loughlin, E. M., N. P. Cheney, and J. Burns, The Bushrangers Experi-
ment: Hydrologic response of a eucalypt catchment to fire, Natl. Conf.
Publ. Inst. Eng. Aust., 82(6), 132 – 138, 1982.
Potter, K. W., Research on flood frequency analysis: 1983 – 1986, U.S. Natl.
Rep. Int. Union Geod. Geophys. 1983 – 1986, Rev. Geophys., 25, 113 –
118, 1987.
Rodriguez-Iturbe, I., and J. B. Valdes, The geomorphologic structure of
hydrologic response, Water Resour. Res., 15(6), 1409 – 1420, 1979.
Rodriguez-Iturbe, I., G. Devoto, and J. B. Valdes, Discharge response ana-
lysis and hydrologic similarity: The interrelation between the geomor-
phologic IUH and the storm characteristics, Water Resour. Res., 15(6),
1435 – 1444, 1979.
Sivapalan, M., K. J. Beven, and E. F. Wood, On hydrologic similarity, 2, A
scaled model of storm runoff production, Water Resour. Res., 23(12),
2266 – 2278, 1987.
Sivapalan, M., E. F. Wood, and K. J. Beven, On hydrologic similarity, 3, A
dimensionless flood frequency model using a generalized GUH and
partial area runoff generation, Water Resour. Res., 26(1), 43 – 58, 1990.
Surkan, A. J., Synthetic hydrographs: Effects of network geometry, Water
Resour. Res., 5(1), 112 – 128, 1969.
Talsma, T., Soil of the Cotter catchment area, ACT: Distribution, chemical
and physical properties, Aust. J. Soil Res., 21, 241 – 255, 1983.
Talsma, T., and P. M. Hallam, Hydraulic conductivity measurement of
forest catchments, Aust. J. Soil Res., 18, 130 – 148, 1980.
Thomson, J. C., and R. C. Moore, Relations between topography and water
table depth in a shallow forest soil, Hydrol. Processes, 10, 1513 – 1525,
1996.
Tsukamoto, Y., and T. Ohta, Runoff process on a steep forested slope,
J. Hydrol., 102, 165 – 178, 1988.
Western, A. W., R. B. Grayson, G. Blöschl, G. R. Willgoose, and T. A.
McMahon, Observed spatial organization of soil moisture and its relation
to terrain indices, Water Res. Resour., 35(3), 797 – 810, 1999.
Wigmosta, M. S., and S. J. Burges, An adaptive modeling and monitoring
approach to describe the hydrologic behaviour of small catchments,
J. Hydrol., 202, 48 – 77, 1997.
Willgoose, G., and H. Perera, A simple model of saturation excess rainfall
generation based on geomorphology, steady state soil moisture, Water
Resour. Res., 37(1), 147 – 155, 2001.
Willgoose, G., R. L. Bras, and I. Rodriguez-Iturbe, A coupled channel
network growth and hillslope evolution model, 2, Nondimensionalization
and applications, Water Resour. Res., 27(7), 1685 – 1696, 1991.
Wood, E. F., M. Sivapalan, and K. J. Beven, Similarity and scale in wa-
tershed storm response, Rev. Geophys., 28, 1 – 18, 1990.
Woods, R. A., and M. Sivapalan, A connection between topographically
driven runoff generation and channel network structure, Water Resour.
Res., 33(12), 2939 – 2950, 1997.
Zaslavsky, D., and A. S. Rogowski, Hydrologic and morphologic implica-
tions of anisotropy and infiltration in soil profile development, Soil Sci.
Soc. Am. Proc., 33(4), 594 – 599, 1969.


S. K. Aryal, CSIRO Land and Water, Private Bag 5, Wembley, Western
Australia 6913, Australia. (santosh.aryal@csiro.au)
R. G. Mein, CRC for Catchment Hydrology, Department of Civil
Engineering, Monash University, Clayton, Victoria 3168, Australia.
(russell.mein@eng.monash.edu.au)
E. M. O’Loughlin, 1 Nicholas Grove, Rosedale, New South Wales 2536,
Australia. (emmettol@acr.net.au)