84

TOWARDS A PRECISE DEFWITION

OF DRAINAGE BASN AXIS
E. D. ONGLEY

A BASIC GEOMORPHIC PROPERTY of drainage basins has been variously named

basin length, basin axis, basin diameter and longest dimension. Each is an in-
tuitively simple concept which identifies the properties of shape and orientation
of a drainage basin. Used in conjunction with other basin properties such as
relief and area, derivative properties of elongation ratio (Schumm, 1954, p. 22),
basin elongation ratio (Maxwell, 1960, p. l l ) , relief ratio (Schumm, 1954, p. 22;
Maxwell, 1960, p. 12) and several other form ratios as discussed by Morisawa
(1958) have been employed.
Even the most cursory survey of morphometric literature reveals that the
intuitively simple concept of basin axis, irrespective of the various names attached
to this concept, is one of the most difficult of geomorphic properties to identify
precisely and objectively. An early reference to basin length, though not necessarily
maximum length, was by Horton (1932, p. 351) who expressed this property as
the distance from mouth to a point on the watershed, opposite the head of the
main stream. Problems may arise in defining the head of the main stream when
either Strahler stream ordering or link ordering techniques (Shreve, 1967, p. 179)
are used, or when the basin is very asymmetrical owing to long tributary
streams. More recently Schumm has used the concept in his relief ratio, which he
defined as the ratio between the total relief of a basin (elevation difference of
lowest and highest points of a basin) and the longest dimension of the basin
parallel to the principal drainage line. This axial measurement also appears in
his elongation ratio, defined as the ratio between the diameter of a circle with the
same area as the basin and the maximum length of the basin as measured for
the relief ratio. Though the elongation ratio is equivalent to the Wadell sphericity
ratio employed in petrology, the axial measurement becomes ambiguous in
drainage basin analysis, as basin shape is usually asymmetrical. In short, the
longest straight line dimension of an asymmetrical basin is not usually “parallel
to the principal drainage line”. An alternative to axial measurements is the use
of length of basin perimeter. An example is Miller’s (1953, p. 8) circuk~rity
ratio which is the ratio of the basin area to area of a circle with the same
perimeter as the basin. Length of basin perimeter may also appear in ratios of
Mr. Ongley is a Research Student in the Department of Geography,
University of Sydney.

Australian Geographical Studies, 684-88 (1968).

 ONGLEY: DRAINAGE BASIN AXIS 85
relief such as Melton’s relative relief (1957, p. 5). However, numerous authors
have pointed out that both measures have disadvantages, in that Schumm’s
“longest dimensionn is imprecise, and ratios involving length of basin perimeter
can not discriminate between irregularities arising from gross basin form and from
crenulations of the perimeter. Generally, authors have found perimeter measure-
ments the least distasteful.
Maxwell (1960) reviewed the limitations inherent in both determining
Schumm’s “longest dimension” and in the nondiscriminatory ratios involving basin
perimeter. By eliminating the subjectivity in Schumm’s “longest dimension” one
may use axial measurements in ratios and avoid those involving perimeters. To
facilitate the delimitation of “longest dimension” Maxwell (p. 10) introduced
the term basin diameter defined as:
“. . . the length of the horizontal projection of the straight line extending
from the mouth of the basin to its headwater divide, with the following
criteria applied according to the procedure described below.
“Criteria. The diameter must be a straight line and
1. be essentially parallel to the longest drainage line,
2. divide the main channel into segments such that the sums of segment
lengths on opposite sides of the diameter are approximately equal,
3. be parallel to the line which separates opposite-facing valley slopes,
4. bisect the basin area,
5. be the longest diameter.
“Application. The first criterion listed below is to have the greatest weight
and the last the least weight. If the channel is essentially: straight and longer
than one-half of diameter, use criteria 1, 2 and 3
straight and shorter than one-half of diameter, use criteria 1, 3 and 4
curved and longer than one-half diameter, use criteria 5 , 3 and 2
curved and shorter than one-half diameter, use criteria 3, 4 and 5.”
Maxwell admitted his definition appears cumbersome but claimed that
elaborate application is rarely necessary. It is this writer’s contention that
Maxwell’s definition of basin diameter, while more objective than Schumm’s
“longest dimension” still requires certain subjective decisions. For example,
each of his ‘applications’ requires some mental estimation of diameter in order
to apply the four procedural methods. A measure of the importance of basin
diameter is the fact that it involves three of his twelve basic properties and two
of his seven derivative properties. Specifically, the three basic properties are;
basin diameter, relief which is measured as “elevation differences between the
basin mouth and upper end of the diameter” (p. 12), and basin azimuth which is
the azimuth of the basin diameter and defines the mean directional component
of basin drainage. Of his derivate properties, basin diameter involves basin
elongation ratio which is equivalent to Schumm’s elongation ratio bearing in mind
his redefinition of “longest dimension”, and relief ratio which is akin to Schumm’s
86 AUSTRALIAN GEOGRAPHICAL STUDIES
relief ratio in that Schumm used total relief while Maxwell exprqsed relief as
defined above. Moreover, among other basin properties, Maxwell used b i n
diameter, relief (controlled by delimitation of diameter) and relief ratio in
correlation procedures to express peak runoff. It is clear that the merit of that
part of Maxwell’s argament which relies upon the properties outlined above,
hinges upon a precise and independently reproduceable basin diameter.
Bash Vectorial Axis
The writer has derived a simple, yet precise and completely objective method
of determining basin diameter. In order to avoid confusion with already existing
definitions of “longest dimension”, each of which implies certain ground rules,
and at the risk of undue proliferation of nomenclature, the present method defines
a basin property hereafter called basin vectorial axis. It is determined by in-
herent hydraulic and geometric characteristics of the drainage net and may be
combined in ratios of relief or shape which therefore become objective and
independently reproduceable.
Consider a basin of order a which is d e h e d in terms of Strahler stream
ordering technique. The upstream end of any stream (S) of any order ( 0 ) may be
assigned the rectangular co-ordinates (0, 0). Given that the Y axis represents
North, any stream of any order (Sw) is in effect a vector diagram of infinitely short
straight segments (component vectors) beginning at the origin ( 0 , O ) and extending
Y

Figure 1. A curved stream of second order, comprising an infinite number of straight

segments, has a resultant (or vectorial equivalent in the sense used here) having
both magnitude (dotted line) and direction (B).
to the terminus of that particular stream, that is, to the point where S , becomes
s0+,: This is illustrated in Figure 1. A straight line joining the origin and the stream
ternnus is the resultant vector which has both magnitude and direction equal to
the s u m of the component vectors. Simply, the magnitude equals the straight line
distance from origin to terminus and the direction is the azimuth of the resultant.
To avoid later confusion, the resultant vector of each stream is called the vectorial
equivalent of that particular stream. Its purpose is to ascribe a vector property
for each stream under consideration, regardless of nonlinear channel thalweg.
Given that a drainage network of order a obeys the law of stream lengths and
law of stream numbers, and is relatively free from geological control, the most
 ONGLEX DRAINAGE BASIN AXIS 87
important directional property of the basin is contained in the stream S,, the
second most important in streams S,-l and so on. Because of deviations from
these laws arising from geological or other controls, and especially when the
stream of order S , is very short, it is considered practical to use streams of
order S , and S,-las indexes of gross directional properties of the basin. There-
fore, the highest order stream (S,) and all (n) second highest order streams
(S,-,) are reduced, as above, into vectorial equivalents having both magnitude
and direction. This is quickly performed by superimposition of the net on to a
grid, from which magnitude and azimuth of S, and each S,-l stream are found
with a ruler and protractor. All vector equivalents (S, and nSn-l) are treated
as coplanar and are combined into a vector diagram (Figure 2), the Resultant
of which may be determined by graphical or trigonometric methods, the latter
being more accurate. A straight line passing through the basin mouth with
azimuth equal to the Resultant azimuth is constructed. This line is the basin
vectorial axis and has a length equal to the straight line distance from basin
mouth to a point on the furthest perimeter cut by the axis. In the case of curved
first order streams and pronounced asymmetry in higher basins, the basin vectorial
axis may cut the perimeter in two or more places as shown in Figure 2.

Figure 2. The method of delimiting basin vectorial axis for an hypothetical network.

The basin vectorial axis is an acceptable hydraulic and morphological axis

inasmuch as S , and SQPl streams are the ultimate expression of channel number,
lengths and directions of all streams tributary to S,-l streams. The magnitude of
the Resultant, which is an index of basin elongation attributable to S, and
nS,_, streams, is not relevant within the context of this paper.
88 AUSTRALIAN GEOGRAPHICAL STUDIES
A potential source of error lies in the possibility of several independent
investigations of the same network. Disagreement on number of streams and, in
the case uf second order basins, the headward limit of first order streams could
result in differences of azimuth of basin vectorial axes. However, independent
studies of the same network are not frequent. Should the possibility arise, the
differences between two basin vectorial axes can be quantified, for any in-
vestigator may exactly duplicate his predecessor’s measurements provided the
earlier network interpretation is available.
By definition, basin vectorial axis, combines only the highest and second-
highest streams of the network, whether or not geological controls exist. In-
vestigation thus far reveals this to be a most satisfactory and simple working
definition of axial properties of drainage basins. It must be emphasized that this
axis may bear little resemblance to the “longest dimension” of the basin. Total
vectorial axes using all streams of all orders are at present being statistically com-
pared to basin vectorial axes as defined abdve for real, randomly developed basins
and relict networks on the Cobar Pediplain. Analysis thus far reveals that
comparison of the two types of axes may have strong geological and paleo-
geomorphological significance.
SUMMARY
The subjective nature of drainage basin axis or length properties commonly
used in morphometric ratios has led to the development of a simple yet precise
and independently reproduceable axial property herein called the basin vectorial
axis. By definition it uses the vectorial properties of the highest and all second-
highest Strahler streams whether or not geological control exists.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The writer wishes to acknowledge financial assistance from the Common-
wealth office of Education, and the University of Sydney.

REFERENCES
Horton, R. E., 1932: Drainage basin characteristics, Amer. Geophys. Union Trans. 13,
350-361.
Maxwell, J. C., 1960: Quantitative geomorphology of the San Dimas Experimental Forest,
California, Columbia University, Dept. of Geology Technical Report No. 19, Office of
Naval Research Contract N6 ONR 271-30, 95 pp.
Melton, M. A., 1957: An analysis of the relations among elements of climate, surface
properties, and geomorphology Ibid. Technical Report No. 1 1 , 102 pp.
Miller, V. C., 1953: A quantitative geomorphic study of drainage basin characteristics in
the Clinch Mountain Area Virginia and Tennessee, Ibid. Technical Report No. 3, 30 pp.
Morisawa, M. E., 1958: Measurement of drainage basin outline form, Journal of Geol. 66,
587-591.
Shreve, R. L., 1967: Infinite topologically random channel networks, Journal of Geol.
75, 178-186.
Schumm, S. A., 1954: Evolution of drainage systems and slopes in badlands at Perth
Amboy, New Jersey, Columbia University, Dept. of Geology Technical Report No. 8,
Office of Naval Research Contract N6 ONR 271, 89 pp.