quantitative evaluation of kallar watershed using ...international journal of geomatics and...

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF GEOMATICS AND GEOSCIENCES

Volume 7, No 2, 2016

© Copyright by the authors - Licensee IPA- Under Creative Commons license 3.0

Research article ISSN 0976 – 4380

Submitted on April 2016 published on November 2016 169

Quantitative evaluation of Kallar watershed using geospatial technology,

Thiruvananthapuram, India Suresh S1, Mani. K2 and Aneesh M. R1

1- Research Scholar, Department of Geography, University College,

Thiruvananthapuram

2- Associate Professor, University College, University College, Thiruvananthapuram2

[email protected]

ABSTRACT

The composition of the stream system of a drainage basin is expressed quantitatively with

stream order, drainage density, bifurcation ratio and stream length ratio (Horton,

1945).Watersheds are hydrologic units that are considered to be efficient and appropriate for

assessment of available resources and subsequent planning and implementation of various

development programs (K.V Seshagiri Rao, 2003).Using watershed as basic unit in

morphometric analysis is the most logical choice because all hydrologic and geomorphic

process occur within the watershed.The quantitative analysis of a drainage basin is an

important aspect of studying the relief and relief characterization of watershed. The

quantitative analyses of morphometric parameters is found to be of immense utility in river

basin evaluation, watershed prioritization for soil and water conservation and natural

resources management at watershed level. (M. Immam Malik et.al, 2011).Geospatial

Information Technology (GIT) i.e. remote sensing coupled with Geographic Information

System (GIS) is very useful in the delineation of drainage system characteristics. In the

present study a detailed quantitative evaluation has been conducted in Kallar Watershed

situated in the southernmost part of Kerala. In this basin, there are large numbers of drainage

systems / channels originated from the Chemmunji Mottai (1717 M) the eastern side of

Western Ghats mountain chain. The study performed manual and computerized delineation

and drainage sampling which enables applying detailed morphological measures. Survey of

India (1: 25,000) topographical maps in combination with remotely sensed data were utilized

to delineate the existing drainage system, thus to identify precisely water divides. The study

introduces an imperial approach of morphometric analysis that can be utilized in different

hydrological assessment (e.g surface water harvesting, flood mitigation) as well as the

applied analysis using remote sensing and GIS in the rest of the drainage systems of the

Kerala.

Keywords: Drainage system, quantitative analysis, geospatial technology, Kallar river

1. Introduction

The quantitative analysis of drainage system is an important aspect of evaluating drainage

characterization including landform processes, soil physical properties and erosional

characterization of watershed. Systematic description of the geometry of a drainage basin and

its stream channel system requires measurements of linear aspects of the drainage network,

areal aspects of the drainage basin, and relief (gradient) aspects of channel network and

contributing ground slopes (Rhodes W. Fairbridge, 1968).A watershed is the surface area

drained by a part or the totality of one or several given water courses and can be taken as a

basic erosional landscape element where land and water resources interact in a perceptible

manner (Imran Malik M et.al., 2011). Watersheds are the fundamental units of the fluvial

landscape and a geometric characteristics, networks and quantitative description of drainage

Quantitative evaluation of Kallar watershed using geospatial technology, Thiruvananthapuram, India

Suresh S et al.,

International Journal of Geomatics and Geosciences

Volume 7 Issue 2, 2016 170

texture, pattern and shape (Abrahams, 1984).The quantitative evaluation of linear, aerial and

relief aspects play a crucial role in determining watershed prioritization of micro-watersheds

(Rekha V.B et al,. 2011). Morphometric analysis provides quantitative description of the

basin geometry to understand initial slope or inequalities in the rock hardness, structural

controls, recent diastrophism, geological and geomorphic history of drainage basin (Strahler,

1964). Evaluation of the morphometric parameters necessitates preparation of drainage map,

ordering of the various streams, measurement of the catchment area and perimeter length of

drainage channels, drainage density and frequency bifurcation ratio, texture ratio, circulatory

ratio and constant channel maintenance which helps to understand the nature of drainage

basins (Narendra K et.al., Vijith H et.al (2006)). In the present day geospatial technology

provide a flexible environment and a powerful tool for the manipulation and analysis of

spatial information. The satellite remote sensing has the ability to provide synoptic view of

large area and is very useful in analyzing drainage morphometry (Rajiv Chopra et.al. (2005).

2. Study area

The present study has been conducted in Kallar river basin of Trivandrum (Map.1). The grid

extension of this basin is from 80 39’N to 80 45’ N and 770E to 77012’E. This basin is a fifth

order basin which is fully and partially covers Vithura, Peringamala, Tholicode and

Nanniyodu panchayath with an area of about 160 Sq.Km. underlain by biotite gneiss,

charnokite and khondalite.Kallar River is certainly a channel with perennial flow originating

from the Chemmunji Mottai (1717 m) in the south eastern part of this basin and joins with

Vamanapuram River. The total length of the river is 29 Km. The river is well known for its

abundance of attractive round shaped boulders and pebbles, especially in the upper reaches

and middle portion of its course. This area is famous for ecotourism.This basin experienced

tropical humid climate with an oppressive summer and gets rainfall both from the south west

and the north east monsoons. South west monsoon starts from the end of May or the

beginning of June and fades out by September, while the north east monsoons commences in

October. The annual average rainfall is 61.93 inches.December, January and February are the

coolest months in the year. March, April and may are generally very hot. The annual average

temperature is 27.840C.

Figure 1: Location Map


Suresh S et al.,



3. Methodology

The Landsat Enhanced Thematic Mapper (ETM+) image of geo-coded false colour

composites (FCC), and Google Terrain data were used for the present study. The Survey of

India (SOI)Toposheets 58 H2 NE and 58 H2 NW on a scale of 1:25,000 was used as a base

for the delineation of watershed and stream vectorization. These streams have been used for

morphometric analysis. The slope map was prepared from the Google terrain web application.

The morphometric parameters have been divided into three categories: basic parameters,

derived parameters and shape parameters. The data in the first category includes stream order,

stream number, basin length, drainage pattern, Maximum and minimum heights and area etc,.

Those of second category are bifurcation ratio, mean bifurcation ratio, slope, aspect,

meandering ratio, stream length ratio, RHO coefficient, stream frequency, drainage density,

stream junction density, dominant flow direction, longitudinal profile, Sinuosity, drainage

texture, Constant channel maintenance, basin relief and basin ratio etc,. The shape parameters

include circulatory ratio, elongation ratio, form factor, asymmetry factor and traverse

topographic symmetry. The quantitative computation of Kallar River basin is s mainly based

on Horton’s (1964) and Strahler (1964) methods. The morphometric parameters are derived

with the help of ESRI’s ArcGIS 9.3 package.

4. Results and Discussion

4.1 Geomorphology

Geomorphologically the area is marked by highly undulating topography includes elongated

hill ridges, syncline and anticline in the north, valley fill, piedmont zone, denudational

structural hills,rolling plain in the western part and active perennial streams (Map.2). The

streams are developed from the syncline valleys surrounded by anticline ridges in the north,

south and eastern part. Kallar basin slope is controlled by the crescent nature of the slope.

Figure 2: Geomorphology

4.2 Drainage pattern

The arrangement of streams in a drainage system constitutes the drainage pattern, which in

turn reflects mainly structural or lithological control of underlying rocks. (Al Saud M, 2009).

Almost 90% area of the Kallar basin is drained by dendritic pattern. Rectangular pattern

(Figure 1) and parallel pattern (Figure 2) are also present in the basin.


Suresh S et al.,



.

Figure 3: Rectangular Pattern Figure 4: Parallel Pattern

4.3 Drainage density

Horton (1932) introduced the drainage density (D) as an important indicator of the linear

scale of landform elements in stream eroded topography. Low drainage density leads to

coarse drainage texture while high drainage density leads to fine drainage texture (Strahler,

1964). The drainage density in Kallar River Basin ranges from <2 (Low) to 9 (Very High)

(Map.3). Low Dd value indicate high permeable sub-surface material and low relief. Whereas,

high Dd value deciphered impermeable sub-surface materials and high relief.

Figure 5: Drainage density map

4.4 Stream junction density

Connections between streams is an important one in a drainage morphometry.

Geomorphologist often used stream junction density as an indicative function to describe the

water infiltration property (M. Al Saud, 2009). The diversity in the number of junctions

between streams can specify a tight hydrological property. In this study the stream intersect

junction, also described as “nodes” plotted using GIS system (Figure 3). A 100 meter buffer

zone was created for the nodes (stream intersect junction) to derive the overlapped influence

and stream junction density between neighboring nodes (Figure 4). Areas with higher


Suresh S et al.,



drainage density imply complex geological structure concentration. The high density of

stream junction indicates high infiltration rate, and thus water recharges is easy and percolate

into acquiferous rock formation.

Figure 6: Stream Junction Point Figure 7: Stream Junction and its buffer area

4.5 Stream Frequency (Fs)

According to HortonStream frequency or channel frequency (Fs) is the total number of

stream segments (Nu) of all orders per unit area of the basin (a).Stream frequency decides the

surface run-off and angle of a slope. The value of Stream frequency for the basin indicates an

increase in stream population with respect to increasing drainage density. Stream Frequency

of the study area is 7.01.

4.6 Stream Order (Nu)

Stream ordering is a method of assigning a numeric order to links in a stream network. Some

characteristics of streams can be inferred by simply knowing their order. The details of

stream characteristics confirm Horton’s first law (1945) “law of stream numbers” which

depict that the number of streams of different orders in a given drainage basin tends closely to

approximate an inverse geometric ratio.In the present study, ranking of streams has been

carried out based on the method proposed by Strahler (1964). It is noticed that the maximum

frequency is in the case of first order streams. It is also noted that there is a decrease in stream

frequency as the stream order increase. The perusal of Table.1 shows the stream order of

Kallar River basin. The logarithm of stream number versus stream order (Fiq:5) showed in

the form of straight line.


Suresh S et al.,



Figure 8: Horton’s first law using Kallar River basin data

4.7 Stream Length (Lu)

Stream length is an indicative of chronological developments of the stream segments

including interlude tectonic disturbances. Generally the total length of stream segment is

maximum in the first order streams and decreases as the stream order increases. The value of

stream length (Lu) for each order, main channel length and also longest dimensions parallel

to the principal drainage line (Clp) forKRB is shown in Table2.Longer lengths of streams are

generally indicative of flatter gradient (Om Shankar Srivastava et.al,.2014).The details of

stream length characteristics confirm Horton’s second law (1945) “law of stream length”

which states that the average length of streams of each of the different orders in a drainage

basin tends closely to approximate a direct geometric ratio.Plotting of the logarithm of stream

order and stream length relationship(Figure 6) showed that the linear pattern which is an

indicative of the homogenous rock material is subjected to weathering-erosion. Deviation

from its general behavior indicates that the terrain is characterized by variation in lithology

and topography.

Figure 9: Horton’s Second law using Kallar River basin Data

4.8 Stream number (Nu)

The designation of stream order is the first step in the drainage basin analysis. In the Present

study, ranking of streams has been carried out based on the method proposed by Strahler

(1964). The order wise streams and their total number in a basin are counted with the help of

GIS Software (Table 1). It is obvious that the total number of streams gradually decreases as

the stream order increases.

4.9 Bifurcation ratio (Rb)

Bifurcation ratio (Rb) is the ratio between the numbers of stream segments in one order to the

number in the next higher order (Schumm, 1956). It may also be considered as an index of

relief and dissections (Horton (1945).It is also used as a tool to identify the shape of the basin.

The mean bifurcation ratio of the Kallar watershed is 6.11 (Table 1) which indicates a strong

structural control on the drainage pattern. To determine the mean bifurcation around the

perimeter Schumm (1956) has used this method. In kallar River Basin, the weighted Mean

Bifurcation Ratio is 4.30 (Table 1).


Suresh S et al.,



Table1: Stream order, streams number, and bifurcation ratios in Kallar River bain

Su Nu Rb Nu-r Rb*Nu-r Rbwm

I 849 I

4.30

II 215 3.94 1064 4192.16 II

III 46 4.67 261 1429.02 III

IV 12 3.83 58 222.14 IV

V 1 12 13 156.00 V

Total 1123 24.44 1396 5999.32 Total

Su: Stream Order, Nu : Number of Streams,Rb : Bifurcation Ratios, Rbm : Mean bifurcation

ratio*,Nu-r : Number of Stream used in the Ratio, Rbwm : Weighted mean bifurcation ratios

4.10 Mean stream length (Lum)

Mean Stream Length (Lum) is a characteristic property related to the drainage network

components and its associated basin surfaces (Strahler, 1964). It is a dimensionless property

that reveals the characteristics of the size of a component of drainage network and its

contributing basin set (Ajoy Das et.al., 2012). It has been computed by dividing the total

stream length of order ‘u’ by the number of segments in the order. In kallar River Basin, the

calculated mean stream length is 224.6.

4.11 Stream length ratio (Lur)

Stream length ratio indicates the stage of geomorphic processes in a basin.Table 2 gives the

average value of Lur as 2.01 which depicts that as stream length ratio increased from low to

high, the geomorphic process in Kallar River Basin is also increased from youth to mature

geomorphic stage. (Magesh N.S et.al., 2012)

Table 2: Stream length, and stream length ratio in Kallar River Basin

Su: Stream Order, Lu :Streams length,Lur : Stream length ratio, Lurm : Mean Stream length

ratio*,Lur-r :Streamlength used in the Ratio, Luwm : Weighted mean Stream lengthratios

Table 3: Morphometric analysis of Kallar River Basin

Su Lu Lu/Su Lur Lur-r Lur*Lur-r Luwm

I 339.06 0.40

1.76

II 130.18 0.61 1.52 469.24 713.24

III 50.84 1.10 1.93 181.02 349.37

IV 36.60 3.05 2.58 87.44 225.60

V 6.25 6.25 2.04 42.85 87.41

Total 562.93 11.41 8.07 780.55 1375.62

Mean 2.01

S.

No Morphometric Parameters Formula Reference Result

A. Drainage Network

1. Stream Order (Su) Hierarchical Rank Strahler (1952) 1 to 5

2. 1st Order Stream (Suf) Suf=N1 Strahler (1952) 849


Suresh S et al.,



3. Stream Number (Nu) Nu=N1+N2+…Nn Horton (1945) 1123

4. Stream Length (Lu) Kms Lu+L1+L2+….Ln Strahler (1964) 562.93

5. Stream Length Ratio See Table 2 Strahler (1964) 1.5-2.04

6. Mean Length Ratio (Lurm) See Table 2 Horton (1945) 2.01

7. Weighted Mean Stream

Length Ratio (Luwm) See Table 2 Horton (1945) 1.76

8. Bifurcation Ratio (Rb) See Table 1 Strahler (1964) 3.94-12

9. Mean Bifurcation Ratio

(Rbm) See Table 1 Strahler (1964) 6.11

10. Weighted Mean Bifurcation

Ratio (Rbwm) See Table 1 Strahler (1953) 4.30

11. Main Channel Length (Cl)

Kms GIS Software - 30.60

12. Valley Length (VI) Kms GIS Software - 13.83

13. Minimum Aerial Distance

(Adm) Kms GIS Software - 23.00

14. Channel Index (Ci) Ci=CI/Adm Miller (1968) 1.33

15. Valley Index (Vi) Vi=VI/Adm Miller (1968) 0.60

16. Rho Coefficient (ρ) ρ = Lur/Rb Horton (1945) 0.32

B. Basin Geometry

17. Length from W’s Center to

mouth of W’s (Lcm) Kms GIS Software Black (1972) 10.73

18. Width of W’s at the Center of

Mass (Wcm) Kms GIS Software Black (1972) 8.23

19. Basin Length (Lb) Kms GIS Software Schumn (1956) 23

20. Mean Basin Width (wb) Wb=A/Lb Horton (1936) 7.16

21. Basin Area (A) Sq Kms GIS Software Schumn (1956) 164.83

22. Mean Area Ratio (Arm) Table.4 Kuldeep Pareta

(2011) 7.25

23. Weighted Mean Area Ratio

(Arwm) Table.4

Kuldeep Pareta

(2011) 4.27

24. Basin Perimeter (P) Kms GIS Software Schumn (1956) 66.73

25. Relative Perimeter (Pr) Pr = A/P Schumn (1956) 1.47

26. Length Area Relation (Lar) Lar = 1.4xA0.6 Hack (1957) 29.94

27. Lemniscate’s (K) K = Lb2/A Chorley (1957) 3.20

28. Unity Shape Factor (Ru) Ru=Lb/(A)1/2 Kishan Singh

Rawat (2013) 1.79

29. Watershed Shape Factor (Ws) Ws= Cl/A Kishan Singh

Rawat (2013) 0.18

30. Shape Index (Sw) Sw=1/Rf Kishan Singh

Rawat (2013) 3.22

31. Form Factor Ratio (Rf) Rf = A/Lb2 Horton (1932) 0.31

32. Shape Factor Ratio (Rs) Sf = Lb2/A Horton (1932) 3.20

33. Elongation Ratio (Re) Re = 2/Lb x (A/π)0.5 Schumn (1956) 0.65

34. Elipticity Index (Ie) Ie = π x Vl2/ 4A Kuldeep Pareta

(2011) 0.91

35. Texture Ratio (Rt) Rt = N1/P Schumn (1956) 12.72

36. Circulatory Ratio (Rc) Rc = 12.57 x (A/P2) Miller (1953) 0.50

37. Circulatory Ration (Rcn) Rcn = A/P Strahler (1964) 2.47


Suresh S et al.,



38. Drainage Texture (Dt) Dt = Nu / P Horton (1945) 16.82

39. Compactness Coefficient (Cc) Cc = 0.2841 x P/A0.5 Gravelius

(1914) 1.48

40 Fitness Ratio (Rf) Rf = C1/P Melton (1957) 0.45

41. Mountain Front Sinuosity

Index (Smf) Smf = Lmf / Ls

Reyaz Ahmad

DAR (2013) 2.64

42. Stream Length – Gradient

Index (SL) SL= (∆H/∆L) L

Reyaz Ahmad

DAR (2013) 1657 m

43. Wandering Ratio (Rw) Rw = C1/Lb Smart & Sukan

(1967) 1.78

44. Sinuosity Index (S) S=SL/VL Muller (1968) 2.02

45. Meandering Ratio (Mr) Mr= LS/LC Hussah Al Saif

(2010) 0.60

46. Watershed Eccentricity (τ) τ = [(|Lcm2-

Wcm2|)]0.5/Wcm Black (1972) 0.83

47. Centre of Gravity of the

watershed (Gc) GIS Software Rao (1998)

7706’17’’

E &

8041’42’’

N

48. Hydraulic Sinuosity Index

(His) %

His = ((Ci-Vi)/(Ci-1)) x

100 Mueller (1968) 221.21

49. Topographic Sinuosity Index

(Tsi)

Tsi = ((Vi-1) / (Ci-1)) x

100 Mueller (1968) 121.21

50. Standard Sinuosity Index

(Ssi) Ssi = Ci / Vi Mueller (1968) 2.21

51.

Longest Dimension Parallel

to the Principal Drainage Line

(C1p) Kms

GIS Software - 28.55

C Drainage Texture Analysis

52. Stream Frequency (Fs) Fs = Nu / A Horton (1932) 6.81

53. Drainage Density (Dd) Km /

Kms2 Dd = Lu / A Horton (1932) 3.41

54. Infiltration Number (If) If = Fs x Dd Faniran (1968) 23.22

55. Fineness Ratio (Rfn) Rfn=Lb/P Melton (1957) 0.34

56. Constant of Channel

Maintenance (Kms2 / Km) C=1/Dd

Schumm

(1956) 0.29

57. Drainage Intensity (Di) Di = Fs / Dd Faniran (1968) 1.99

58. Length of Overland Flow

(Lg) Kms Lg = 1/Dx2 Horton (1945) 0.58

D Relief Characterizes

59. Height of Basin Mouth (z) m GIS Analysis/Contour - 60

60. Maximum Height of the

Basin (Z) m GIS Analysis/Contour - 1717

61. Total Basin Relief (H) m H=Z-z Strahler (1952) 1657

62. Relief Ratio (Rhl) Rhl = H/Lb Schumm

(1956) 72.04

63. Absolute Relief (Ra) m GIS Analysis - 1717

64. Relative Relief Ratio (Rhp) Rhp = Hx100/P Melton (1957)

65 Dissection Index (Dis) Dis=H/Ra Singh & 0.96


Suresh S et al.,



4.12 Basin area (A)

The total drainage area (A) of Kallar River basin is 165 Sq.Km. Schumm (1956) established

an interesting relation between the total watershed area and the total stream length, which are

supported by the contributing areas. Width of watershed at the center of mass shows the value

Dubey (1994)

66. Channel Gradient (Cg)

m/Kms Cg=H/{(π/2)xClp} Broscoe (1959) 36.97

67. Gradient Ratio (Rg) Rg=(Z-z)/Lb Sreedevi

(2004) 0.072

68. Watershed Slope (Sw) Sw = H/Lb Kuldeep Pareta

(2011) 72.04

69. Ruggedness Number (Rn) Rn = Dd x (H/1000) Patton & Baker

(1976) 5.65

70. Melton Ruggedness Number

(MRn) MRn = H/A0.5 Melton (1965) 129.15

71. Total Contour Length (Ctl)

Kms GIS Analysis - 1716

72. Contour Interval (Cin) m GIS Analysis - 20

73. Length of Two Successive

Contours (L1+L2) Km GIS Analysis - 49.87

74. Average Slope Width of

Contour (Swc) Swc = A / {(L1+L2)/2} Strahler (1952) 6.61

75. Slope Analysis (Sa) GIS Analysis / DEM - 00 –

50.020

76. Average Slope (S)% S=(Z x (Ctl/H)) / (10 x

A)

Wenthworth’s

(1930) 1.07

77 Mean slope of overall Basins

(θs) Θs = (Ctl x Cin)/A Chorley (1979) 2.08

78 Hypsometric Integrals (Hi)% Hypsometric Curve Strahler (1952) 49% (MS)

79. Erosion Integrals (Ei)% Hypsometric Curve Strahler (1952) 51%

80. Longitudinal Profile Curve

Area (A1) Sq.Kms

Area between the curve

of the Profile and

Horizontal Line

Snow &

Slingerland

(1987)

77.84

81. Asymmetry Factor (AF) 100 x (Ar/At) J.D Das (2011) 36.45

82. Traverse Topographic

Symmetry (T) T= Da/Dd J.D Das (2011) 0.74

83. Dominant Flow Direction GIS Analysis M. Al Saud

(2009) East-West

84. Time of Concentration of

Runoff (Tc)

Tcmin=3.258x(Lm/Rr)0

.5

Johnstone and

Cross 2.12

85. Time of Concentration of

Runoff (Tc)

TcHours= 0.3x

(Lm/Rr25)0.76 Temez 2.05

86. Total Volume of Rainfall

Average

Rainfall(mm)/1000 x

Ax106

Hussah Al-Saif

(2010)

255

million

m2/yr

87. Width / Length Ratio (Wlr) WLr = Wb/Lb Hussah Al-

Saifk(2010) 0.31


Suresh S et al.,



of 8.23 Km. and the measured mean basin width is 7.16 km. Mean area ratio (7.25), weighted

mean area ratio (4.27) has been calculated and shown in Table (3)

4.3 Basin length (Lb)

The basin length is measured along the trunk stream line. The basin length of Kallar river

basin is 23 Km. Length from the watershed center to mouth of watershed is 10.73 Km

(Table.3).

4.14 Basin Perimeter (P)

Basin perimeter (P) is the total length of the drainage basin boundary. It is also used to

calculate drainage texture (Dt), Texture Ratio (Rt), and also it may be used as an indicator of

size and shape of the watershed. The perimeter of Kallar basin is 66.73 Km., the relative

perimeter is 1.47 (Table.3).

4.15 Length area relation (Lar)

Hack (1957) have calculated the stream length and basin area are related by a simple power

function. According to his formula the value of length area relation for Kallar basin is 29.94.

4.16 Lemniscate’s (K)

Lemniscate’s value (K) is used to determine the slope of the basin (Choreley,1957). The

calculated value of K is 3.20 (Table.3) which shows that the watershed occupies the

maximum area in its region of inception with large number of streams of higher order.

4.17 Form Factor (Ff)

Form factor is an important parameter to predict the flow intensity of a basin of a defined

area (Horton 1945). The range of form factor value is from 0.12 to 0.59 (Table.3) suggesting

that the shape of the basin is elongated. Higher the value of the form factor, higher the peak

flows. The form factor value of Kallar basin is 0.31 showing that the basin is elongated in

shape and flows for longer duration.

4.18 Elongation ratio (Re)

Elongation ratio is a very significant index in the analysis of basin shape. Strahler stated that

this ratio runs between 0.6 and 1.0 over a wide variety of climatic and geologic types. These

values can be grouped as,< 0.7 Elongated, 0.8 – 0.7 Less Elongated, 0.8 – 0.9 Oval and > 0.9

Circular. The Kallar basin’s Elongation ratio value is 0.65 (Table.3) shows that the basin is

elongated in nature.

4.19 Drainage texture (Dt)

Drainge texture depends upon a number of natural factors such as relief aspect and storage of

development underlying lithology, infiltration capacity, vegetation, rainfall and climate.

(Smith 1950). Based on Smith classification drainage texture can be classified as < 4.0 –

course texture, 4.0 to 10.0 – intermediate texture, 10.0 to 15.0 – fine texture and > 15.0 –


Suresh S et al.,



ultra fine (bad land topography). The drainage texture value of Kallar basin is 16.82 (Table.3)

depicting the ultra-fine texture with bad land topography.

4.20 Circulatory Ratio (Rc)

The range of circulatory ratio is from 0 (line) to 1 (in a circle). Miller (1953) described the

basin circulatory ratios range from 0.4 to 0.5 which indicates strongly elongated and highly

permeable homogenous geologic materials. Author computed circulatory value of Kallar

basin is 0.50 (Table.3) showing highly permeable homogenous geologic materials with

strongly elongated in shape.

4.21 Compactness Coefficient (Cc)

Compactness coefficient is the relationship of the shape of the basin to a circle.If the value of

Compactness coefficient is equal to one then the basin has a perfect circle (Gravelius 1914).

In kallar basin the compactness coefficient value is 1.48 (Table.3) implicit that the basin

shape is not a perfect circle.

4.22 Sinuosity index (Si)

The degree of wandering or winding applied especially to river channels. In general, the

range of sinuosity value is from 1 to 4 or more. Rivers having the sinuosity value of 1.5 are

called sinuous. If the sinuosity value is above 1.5 then it is meandering (Wolman and Miller,

1964). It is a significant quantitative index for interpreting the significance of channels in the

evolution of landforms and beneficial for geologist, geomorphologists and hydrologists.In the

study area the calculated value of wandering ratio is 1.78, sinuosity index is 2.02 and the

meandering ratio is 0.83. Hydraulic Sinuosity Index is 221.21, Standard sinuosity index is

2.21(Table.3).Thus the value shows a meandering course for the Kallar River in nature

(Figure 7).

Figure 10: Meandering river course

4.22.1 Drainage texture analysis

4.23 Stream Frequency (Fs)

All the stream segments up to a given order which are present in a drainage basin, and divides

this by the area drained by the streams up to that order, the quotient is called “stream

frequency” (Adrian E. Scheidegger, 1970). In the study area the computed value of stream

frequency is 6.81 (Table.3).

4.24 Fineness Ratio (Rfn)

This parameter is used to measure of topographic fineness and stream network characteristics.

Table.3 shows the fineness ratio for Kallar River Basin.


Suresh S et al.,



4.25 Constant of channel maintenance (C)

The constant of channel maintenance is a property of landforms (Schumn, 1956). It reveals

the number of Km2 of watershed surface that is needed to maintain one linear kilometer of

stream channel. In general, the higher the constant of channel maintenance, greater the

permeability of the rocks of that basin (P. Prabu et.al, 2013). In the Kallar basin the value of

constant channel maintenance is 0.29 (Table.3) envisages that lower the permeability of the

rocks.

4.26 Drainage Intensity (Di)

The calculated value of drainage intensity in Kallar basin is 1.99(Table.3) shows low

drainage intensity. The lower value of drainage intensity reveals drainage density and stream

frequency have little effect on the extent to which the surface has been lowered by agents of

denudation. Surface runoff is not quickly removed from the watershed making it highly

susceptible to flooding, gully erosion and landslides (Pareta).

4.27 Infiltration Number (If)

Infiltration number gives an idea about the infiltration characteristics of the watershed

(Faniran 1968). The higher the infiltration number, the lower will be infiltration and the

higher runoff. The study area infiltration number is 23.22 (Table.3) shows lower infiltration

and higher runoff.

4.28 Length of overland flow (Lg)

Length of overland flow is one of the most important independent variable affecting both

hydrologic and hydrographic development of drainage basin. In the study area, the length of

overland flow is low (0.58) (Table.3). It implicit short flow paths, steep ground slopes, more

runoff and less infiltration.

4.28.1 Relief characteristics

4.29 Relief Ratio (Rhl)

Relief ratio is thedifferences in the elevation between the highest point of a basin (on the

main divide) and the lowest point on the valley floor. The relief ratio of Kallar basin is 0.072

and relative relief ratio is 2.48 (Table.3) reveals that the presence of basement rocks that are

exposed in the form of small ridges and mounds with lower degree of slope.

4.30 Channel gradient (Cg)

The channel gradient of Kallar basin is 18.48m/Sq.Kms (Table.3). The main channel slope

decreases with increasing order number. This testifies the relationship between the slope of

the streams and their orders.


Suresh S et al.,



4.31 Ruggedness number (Rn)

The ruggedness number of Kallar basin is 5.65 (Table.3). The low ruggedness value depicts

that area is less prone to soil erosion and have intrinsic structural complexity in association

with relief and drainage density (Pareta, 2011).

4.32 Melton ruggedness number (MRn)

Melton in 1965 explained the slope index that provides specialized representation of relief

ruggedness. In study area, the computed melton ruggedness value is 129.15 (Table.3).

4.33 Dissection Index (Dis)

Dissection index is a parameter implying the degree of dissection or vertical erosion and the

stages of terrain or landscape development in any given physiographic region (Singh and

Dubey, 1994). The value of dissection index vary from 0 to 1 where 0 indicates complete

absence of vertical dissection/erosion and hence dominance of flat surface and 1 envisage the

vertical cliffs, it may be at vertical escarpment of hill slope or at sea shore. The dissection

value of Kallar basin is 0.96(Table.3) reveals the basin having almost vertical escarpment of

hill slope.

4.34 Gradient ratio (Rg)

Gradient ratio is an indicator of channel slope which is capable of assessing the runoff

volume (Sreedevi, 2004). In the study area gradient ratio value is 0.072 (Table.3) which

enunciates the mountainous nature of the terrain.

Table 4: Stream Order, Stream Order wise Mean Area in Kallar River Basin

Su Nu Am Ar Arwm

I 849 0.13

4.27

II 215 0.52 4

III 46 2.44 4.89

IV 12 9.35 3.83

V 1 152.39 16.29

Total 1123 164.83

Mean 7.25

4.35 Drainage basin asymmetry (Af)

The drainage basin asymmetry is used to calculate the presence of active tectonic

deformation and was developed to evaluate the tectonic tilting at drainage basin scales

(Devesh et.al., 2010).Af value more or less than 50 indicates a tilt (J.D. Das et.al, 2011). The

computed asymmetry factor for Kallar River Basin is 36.45 (Table.3) deciphered the basin

has tilted.


Suresh S et al.,



4.36 Hypsometric curve (Hs)

A graph showing the proportion of landmass which stands above a given datum is called

hypsometric curve. These are plotted in terms of percentage of total area or absolute areas on

the horizontal axis and with altitude on the vertical axis (H.M Saxena et.al, 2009). These

curves are closely related to geomorphic and tectonic evolution of drainage basin in terms of

their forms and processes (Schumn, 1956).A low hypsometric integral value suggests that the

basin was old, eroded, and evenly dissected drainage basin and high integral value reveals

that most of the topography is less eroded and high relative to the mean elevation such as

young uplifted ranges cut by deeply incised meander. The hypsometric integrals of Kallar

basin is 49% (Table.5)which means 49% area of the total land still to be eroded (Figure 8)

and river basin is set towards the old stage of the cycle of erosion.

Table 5: Hypsometric Data

Heigh

t in

meter

s

Area

in sq.

Km

Percenta

ge of

height

Percentage

of an Area

Cumulative

% of

Height

Cumulativ

e % of

Height

Cumulative

% of an

Area

Cumul

ative %

of an

Area

0-240 109.3

5 2.428 66.342 2.428 100 66.342 100

241-

540 21.65 7.891 13.136 10.319 97.572 79.478 33.658

541-

820 15.72 13.77 9.538 24.089 89.681 89.016 20.52

821-

1100 9.11 19.43 5.527 43.519 75.911 94.543 10.98

1101-

1400 7.89 25.31 4.787 68.829 56.481 99.33 5.45

1401-

1681 1.09 31.18 0.661 100 31.17 100 0.67

Total 164.8

1 100 100


Suresh S et al.,



Figure 11: Hypsometric Curve of Kallar River Basin

4.37 Dominant flow direction

Dominant flow direction is an important parameter in great hydrologic importance. The

dominancy of stream flow in a particular direction is indicative to land mass orientation of

the basin terrain.The dominant flow direction as well as the landmass direction of Kallar

basin is from east to west.

4.38 Longitudinal profile

The longitudinal profile of a main channel shows a property of channel geometry that gives

clues to geologic processes and geomorphic history of an area (Suresh et al, 2014). In Kallar

river basin longitudinal profiles are drawn along the river direction from east to west

direction (Fiq.10) which implicit cascade relief in the upper river basin having alternative

hard and soft rocks underlying it. After flowing 10 Kms. the river attain its mature stage

where sinuous riverflow and meandering course are common.

Figure 12: Longitudinal Profile of Kallar River Basin

4.39 Time of concentration (Tc)

The time of concentration is often defined as the time required for a particle of water to travel

from the most hydrologically remote point in the watershed to the point of collection.

Drainage density, bifurcation ration etc., have incorporated for predicting runoff. Numerous


Suresh S et al.,



methods exist for estimating time of concentration. In this study, time of concentration is

derived from two equations they are Johnstone and cross method and Temez equations. The

value derived from both equations reflects almost similar time of concentration i.e. 2.12 and

2.05 (Table.3) respectively.

4.40 Unity Shape Factor (Ru)

Unity shape factor is a technique which is used to measure the expansion of watershed with

respect to the basin length. Value of (Ru) is 1.79 (Table.3) reveals watershed having linear

expansion and high value of basin length 23 km.

4.41 Watershed Shape Factor (Ws)

Watershed shape factor analysis provides information about how much areal expansion with

respect to the main channel length (Lm) in any watershed. The value of (Ws) for Kallar river

basin is 0.18 (Table.3) due to much areal expansion with respect to main channel length (Lm)

of watershed 30.60 Km.

4.42 Shape Index (Sw)

The shape index of kallar river basin is 3.22 (Table.3). The drainage network development of

Kallar is in a length to width ratio of 1:3 and so drainage channels tend to develop more along

the north south width than east to west directions.

4.43 Width – Length ratio (WLr)

Width-length ratio is one of the techniques through which one can estimate river basin runoff

variation, and thus governs the connection between different water reaches and the primary

water courses (Hussah Al Saif (2010). If the value of (WLr) increases, the runoff duration

will increase and vice versa. The width-length ratio of Kallar basin is 0.31 (Table.3).

4.44 Stream length – Gradient Index (Sl)

The stream length-Gradient index (Sl) is a useful technique for the evaluation of relationship

between potential tectonic activity, rock resistance, topography, and length of the stream and

also to analyze the characterization of stream gradient ((Reyaz Ahmad Dar et.al (2013). In

landscape evaluation, it is assumed that stream profiles adjust quite rapidly to rock resistance.

The result shows SL of 1657 (Table.3) reveals study area cross hard rocks and reflects

relatively high tectonic activity ((Reyaz Ahmad Dar et.al (2013).

4.45 RHO Coefficient (RHO)

This parameter was explained by Horton (1945). It plays a crucial role that determines the

relationship between the drainage density and the physiographic evolution of the basin, and

allows the evaluation of the storage capacity of the drainage network. It is highly influenced

by geologic, geomorphologic, climatic, biologic and anthropogenic factors. The computed

value of RHO coefficient for the Kallar river basin is 0.32 (Table.3).


Suresh S et al.,



4.46 Gradient Ratio (Rg)

Gradient ratio is an indicator of river slope, which enables assessment and estimate of the

runoff volume (Kuldeep Pareta et.al., (2013). The KRB has an Rg of 0.078 (Table.3) which

reflects the mountainous nature of the terrain. Approximately 52% of the stream flows

through mountainous areas..

4.47 Watershed Eccenticity (τ)

Black (1972) coin the word watershed eccentricity (τ), a dimensionless factor. The computed

value of watershed eccentricity in KRB is 0.83 (Table.3).

4.48 Centre of Gravity of the watershed (GC)

Centre of Gravity of the Kallar watershed basin has been calculated using GIS Software. The

grid value of centre of Gravity is 7706’17.68’’ E, 804’41.82’’N (Table.3).

4.49 Length of Oveland Flow (Lg)

Length of Overland flow is one of the most important independent variables affecting both

hydrologic and hydrographic development of drainage basins. The Lg value of KRB is 0.58

(Table.3) indicatingshort flow paths, steep ground slopes, more runoff and less infiltration.

4.50 Channel Index (Ci) & Valley Index (Vi)

The river channel has divided into number of segments as suggested by Muller (1968) for the

determination of sinuosity parameter. The measurement of valley length, channel length and

shortest distance between the source, and mouth of the river i.e., air lengths are used for

calculation of valley index and channel index (Table.3).

4.51 Length of main channel (Cl)

Length of main channel can be measured along the longest watercourse from the outflow

point to the upper limit of the watershed boundary (Kuldeep Paretta). In the study area,

calculated length of main channel is 30.60 Km (Table.3).

4.52 Texture Ratio (Rt)

Texture ratio (Rt) is an important factor in the drainage morphometric analysis which

depends on the underlying lithology, infiltration capacity and relief aspect of the terrain

(Schumm, 1965). The computed value of texture ratio (Rt) for KRB is 12.72 shows the basin

having very fine texture ratio (Table.3).

5. Conclusion

The gradual morphological changes is manifested in the light of morphotectonic indices.

Integrated spatial technological approach of GIS and Remote Sensing has proved to be an

efficient means to look into the detailed morphotectonic characteristics of KRB. Nature of

terrain, streams, slope and other substantial information are well depicted in the satellite

images and DEM (Digital Elevation Model) data. Various stream morphological inferences


Suresh S et al.,



drawn from GIS based quantitative evaluation can also be informative enough for many

morphotectonic changes attributed to the tectonic activity experienced by the KRB.The KRB

topography can be observed as a surface dissected with intensively developed springs and

stream network. Computed morphotectonic indices indicate certain changes in the KRB

morphologic setting most likely attributed to the tectonic activity. In the study area

morphometric indices have been carried out through the measurement of linear, areal and

relief aspects with more than 80 parameters.

The streams are developed from the syncline valley. It contains of diversity of drainage

pattern. Dendritic pattern is more common which reflects uniform lithology, and where

faulting and jointing are insignificant. The high density of stream junction indicates high

infiltration rate and stream frequency. The relationship between stream length and stream

order also support the homogenous rock materials underlying it. Bifurcation ratio reveals that

the KRB have strong structural control on the drainage pattern. Form factor denotes the

basins having an elongated shape and flow for long duration. The basin also has ultra fine

texture with bad land topography. Sinuosity index value deciphered Kallar River flow is

meandering in nature. Infiltration number and constant of channel maintenance shows lower

permeability of rocks and higher runoff. Hipsometric integral value depicts the Kallar River

is in mature stage. Density, Fequency and Bifurcation Ratio shows the area come under low

to moderate flood probability.

6. References

1. Abrahams AD (1964), Channel Networks, A Geomorphological Perspective, Water

Resources 20, pp 161-168.

2. Adrian E. Scheidegger (1970), Theoretical Geomorphology Second Revised Edition,

George Allen & Unwin Ltd, Springer, London.

3. Ahmed M. Youssef, Biswajeet Pradhan Abdallah Mohamed Hassan (2010), Flash

Flood Risk Estimation along the St.Katherine Road, Southern Sinai, Egypt Using GIS

based Morphometry and Satellite Imagery, Environmental Earth Science, 62, pp 611-

623.

4. Ajos Das, Milan Mondal, Bhaskar Das and Asim Ratan Ghosh (2012), Analysis of

Drainage Morphometry and Watershed Prioritization in Bandu Watershed, Purulia,

West Bengal through Remote Sensing and GIS Technology- A Case Study,

International Journal of Geomatics and Geosciences, 2(4), pp 995-1013.

5. ArcGIS Help Library (2013), Environmental System Research Institute, Inc,

California.

6. Black P.E (1972), Hydrograph Responses to Geomorphic Model Watershed

Characteristics and Precipitation Variables, Journal of Hydrology 17, pp 309-329.

7. Broscoe A.J (1959), Quantitative Analysis of Longitudinal Stream Profiles of Small

Watersheds, Project No. 389-042, Tech. Bep. 18, Geology Department, Columbian

University, ONR, Geography Branch, New York.


Suresh S et al.,



8. Chorley R.J (1972), Spatial Analysis in Geomorphology, Mathuen and Co Ltd.,

London.

9. Das J.D, Yazdana Shujat and Saraf A.K (2011), Spatial Technologies in Deriving the

Morphotectonic Characteristics of Technically Active Western Tripura Region,

Northeast India, Journal of the Indian Society of Remote Sensing, 39 (2), pp 249 –

258.

10. Devesh Walia and Bijay S. Mipun (2010), Hydrological Behavior of Umshing River,

East Khasi Hills, Meghalaya, Acta Geophysica, 58(5), pp 908-921.

11. Faniran. A (1968), The index of Drainage Intensity – A provisional New Drainage

Factor, Australian Journal of Science, 31, pp 328-330.

12. Gravelius H (1914), Flusskunde Goschen’Sche Verlagshandlung, Berlin.

13. Hack J.T (1957), Studies of Longitudinal Profiles in Virginia and Maryland, U.S

Geological Survey Professional Paper, 294 (B), pp 45-97.

14. Hardley R F, Schumm S A (1961), Sediment Sources and Drainage Basin

Characteristics in Upper Cheyenne River Basin, USGS Water Supply Paper, 1531 – B,

US, Geological Survey.

15. Horton R.E (1945), Erosional Development of Streams and their Drainage Basin

Bulletin of the Geological Society of America, 56, pp 275-370.

16. Horton. R.E (1932), Drainage basin Characteristics Transactions, American

Geophysical Union, 13, pp 350-61.

17. Hussah Al Saif (2010), Assessing Flood Vulnerability of Wadi Hanifa Basin and

Surrounding Area, Central Saudi Arabia, Journal of Environmental Hydrology, 18, pp

9.

18. Imran Malik. M, Sultan Bhat and Nissar and Kuchay. A, (2011), Watershed Based

Drainage Morphometric Analyses of Lidder Catchment in Kashmir Valley Using

Geographical Information System, Recent Research in Science and Technology 3(4),

pp 118-126.

19. Johnstone D, Cross W P (1949), Elements of Applied Hydrology, Ronald Press, New

York.

20. Kishan Singh Rawat, A.K. Mishra, Vinod Kumar, Tripathi (2013), Hydro-

Morphometrical Analyses of Sub-Himalayan Region in relation to small hydro-

electronic power, Saudi Society for Geosciences.

21. Kuldeep Pareta, Upasana Pareta (2011), Quantitative Morphometric Analyses of a

Watershed of Yamuna Basin, India Using ASTER (DEM) Data and GIS, International

Journal of Geomatics and Geosciences, 2(1), pp 248-269.


Suresh S et al.,



22. Magesh N.S, Jitheshlal K.V, Chandrasekar N and Jini K.V (2012), GIS Based

Morphometric Evaluation of Chimni and Mupily Watershed, Parts of Western Ghats,

Thrissur District, Kerala, India, Earth Science Informatics, 5, pp 111-121.

23. Majid Hussain (2009) Physical Geography, Fourth Edition, Rawat Publications, New

Delhi.

24. Melton M.A (1957), An Analysis of the Relations among Elements of Climate,

Surface Properties and Geomorphology, 389042 (11), Columbia University.

25. Mueller J.E (1968), An Introduction to the Hydraulic and Topographic Sinuosity

Indexes Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 58, pp 371-385.

26. Narendra K and Nageswara Rao K (2006), Morphometry of the Meghadrigedda

Watershed, Visakhapatnam District, Andhrapradesh using GIS and Resource Sat Data,

Journal of the Indian Society of Remote Sensing, 34(2), pp 101-110.

27. Om Shankar Srinivastave, Denis D.M, Santhosh Kumar Srivastava (2014),

Quantitative Morphometric Analyses of a Semi Urban Watershed, Trans Yamuna,

Drainage at Allahabad using Cartosat (DEM) Data and GIS, International Journal of

Modern Engineering Research.

28. Patton P.C and Baker V.R (1976), Morphometry and Floods in Small Drainage Basins

Subject to Diverse Hydrogeomorphic Controls,Water Resources Research, 12(5), pp

941-952.

29. Prabu. P and Baskaran R (2013), Drainage Morphometry of Upper Vaigai River Sub-

Basin, Western Ghats, South India using Remote Sensing and GIS, Journal

Geological Society of India, 82, pp 519-528.

30. Rajiv Chopra, Raman Deep Dhiman and Sharma P.K (2005), Morphometric Analyses

of Sub-Watersheds in Gurdaspur District, Punjab using Remote Sensing and GIS

Techniques Journal of the Indian Society of Remote Sensing, 33(4), pp 532-539.

31. Rao D.P (2002), Remote Sensing Application in Geomorphology, International

Society for Tropical Ecology, 43 (1), pp 49-59.

32. Rekha V.B, George A.V and Rita M (2011), Morphometric Analyses and Micro-

Watershed Prioritization of Peruvanthanam Sub-Watershed, The Manimala River

Basin, Kerala, South India, Environmental Research Engineering and Management,

No.3 (57), pp 6-14.

33. Reyaz Ahmad DAR, Rakesh Chandra, Shakil Ahmad Romshoo (2013),

Morphometric and Lithostratigraphic Analysis of Intermontane Karewa Basin of

Kashmir Himalayas, India, Journal of Mountain Science, 10, pp 1-15.

34. Rhodes W. Fairbridge (1968), The Encyclopedia of Geomorphology (Encyclopedia of

Earth Sciences Series, Volume II), Reinhold book Corporation, New York,

Amsterdam, London.


Suresh S et al.,



35. Sajikumar S (2001), Micro Level and Water Resource Studies for Sustainable Land

Use Development. A Case of Vamanapuram River Basin, Kerala.

36. Samir M, Zaid, Elsayed A Zaghloul and Farid K. Ghanem (2013), Flashflood Impact

Analysis of Wadi Abu-Hasah on Tell El-Amarna Archaeological Area using GIS and

Remote Sensing, Australian Journal of Basic and Applied Sciences, 7(2), pp 865-881.

37. Saxena H.M, Rahul Saxena and Pooja Saxena (2009), Dictionary of Physical

Geography, Rawat Publication.

38. Schumm S.A (1954), Evolution of Drainage Systems & Slopes in Badlands at Perth

Anboy, New Jersey, Bulletin of the Geological Society of America, 67, pp 597-646.

39. Seshagiri Rao K.V, 2003, Watersheds Comprehensive Development, B.S Publications,

Hyderabad, Page.1

40. Singh S and Dubey A (1994), Geo-Environmental Planning of Watersheds in India

Allahabad, India, Chugh Publications, 28 (A), 69.

41. Smart J.S and Surkan A.J (1967), The Relation between Mainstream Length and Area

in Drainage Basins, Water Resources Research, 3(4), pp 963-974.

42. Smith K G (1950), Standards for Grading Textures of Erosional Topography AMJ Sci

248, 655-668.

43. Sreedevi T K, Shiferaw B and Wani S P (2004), Adarsha Watershed in Kothapally

Understanding the Drivers of Higher Impact, An Open Access Journal, ICRISAT.

44. Strahler AN (1957), Quantitative Analysis of Watershed Geomorphology,

Trans.Amer Gephr.Un., 38, pp 913-920.

45. Strahler AN (1964), Statistical Analysis in Geomorphic Research, The Journal of

Geology, 62, pp 1-25.

46. Suresh S, Mani K, Rajesh S and Alaguraja P (2014), Morphometric analyses and

Integrated Watershed Management Using Geospatial Technologies, A Case Study of

Pambar River Basin, Idukki District, Kerala, Coastal Tech, Dept. of Industries and

Earth Sciences, Tamil University, Thanjavur, pp 632-642.

47. Temez J R (1978), Calculohidrometeorologico de caudalesmaximos en

pequenascuencasnaturales, Ministerio de obras publicasy Urban-‘ismo, Direccion

General de Carreteras.

48. Vijith H and Satheesh R (2006), GIS Based Morphometric Analyses of Two Major

Upland Sub-Watersheds of Meenachil River in Kerala, Journal of the Indian Society

of Remote Sensing, 34(2), pp 181-185.

49. Water Research Commission Project (2012), Implementing Uncertainty Analyses in

Water Resources Assessment and Planning, Report on Surface, No.K5/2056.


Suresh S et al.,



50. Wentworth C.K (1930), A Simplified Method of Determining the Average Slope of

Land Surfaces, American Journal of Sciences, 21, pp 184-194.

51. Wolmen M.G and Miller J.P (1964), Magnitude and Frequency of Forces in

Geomorphic Processes, Journal of Geology, 68, pp 54-74.

quantitative evaluation of kallar watershed using ...international journal of geomatics and...

Documents