Surface Runoff Generation, Vertical Infiltration and Subsurface Lateral Flow

  • Vyacheslav G. Rumynin
Part of the Theory and Applications of Transport in Porous Media book series (TATP, volume 26)


In this and the following three chapters, we will focus explicitly on the dynamic (transient, short-time-scale) hydrological processes that determine the partitioning of rainfall into runoff and infiltration and control the flow and chemical response of a catchment or its segments to the anthropogenic impact. Two principal components of runoff, surface and subsurface, which differ remarkably in their response time to precipitation or snow-melting events, are considered; however we do not present here a general mathematical framework for coupling the surface and subsurface flow equations, relying instead on an approach based on the transfer of boundary conditions (from one model domain to another). Soil infiltration theory, as discussed here briefly, plays the central role in such approach as well as in the solution of various problems of the surface and subsurface hydrodynamics. With this in view, special attention will be paid to some nonlinear and threshold phenomena in structured (discontinued by macropores and cracks) soils having a major impact on hydrological processes as well.


Hydraulic Conductivity Infiltration Rate Overland Flow Preferential Flow Saturated Hydraulic Conductivity 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Aggelides S, Youngs EG (1978) The dependence of the parameters in the Green and Ampt infiltration equation on the initial water content in draining and wetting states. Water Resour Res 14(5):857–862CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Alaoui A, Caduff U, Gerke HH et al (2011) Preferential flow effects on infiltration and runoff in grassland and forest soils. Vadose Zone J 10:367–377CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Allen RG, Pereira LS, Raes D et al (1998) Crop evapotranspiration, guidelines for computing crop water requirements. FAO Irrigation and Drainage Paper 56, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, RomeGoogle Scholar
  4. Andersen AE, Weiler M, Alila Y (2009) Subsurface flow velocities in a hillslope with lateral preferential flow. Water Resour Res. doi: 10.1029/2008WR007121 Google Scholar
  5. Barenblatt GI, Entov VM, Ryzhik VM (1990) Fluid flow in natural reservoirs. Kluwer, DordrechtGoogle Scholar
  6. Basha HA (1999) One-dimensional nonlinear steady infiltration. Water Resour Res 35:1697–1704CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bear J (1972) Dynamics of fluids in porous media. Dover Publ Inc, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  8. Beckers J, Alila Y (2004) A model of rapid preferential hillslope runoff contributions to peak flow generation in a temperate rain forest watershed. Water Resour Res 40(3), W03501Google Scholar
  9. Bergström S (1992) The HBV model – its structure and applications. SMHI RHGoogle Scholar
  10. Beven KJ (1981) Kinematic subsurface stormflow. Water Resour Res 17(5):1419–1424CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Beven KJ, Germann PF (1982) Macropores and water flow in soils. Water Resour Res 18(5):1311–1325CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Beven KJ, Germann PF (2013) Macropores and water flow in soils revisited. Water Resour Res 49:1–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Biswas TD, Mukherjee SK (1994) Textbook of soil sciences. Tata McGraw-Hill Publishing Company Limited, New Delhi, p 430Google Scholar
  14. Boughton WC (1993) A hydrograph-based model for estimating the water yield of ungauged catchments. Proc Hydrol Water Resour Symp Newcastle Inst Engs Aust. Nat Conf Publ 93, 14:317–324Google Scholar
  15. Brutsaert W (1994) The unit response of groundwater outflow from a hillslope. Water Resour Res 30(10):2759–2763CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Buttle JM, McDonald DJ (2002) Coupled vertical and lateral preferential flow on a forested slope. Water Resour Res 38(5). doi: 10.1029/2001WR000773
  17. Carlier E (2007) A probabilistic investigation of infiltration in the vadose zone a proposal for a new formula for infiltration rate. Hydrol Process 27:2845–2849CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Castaing R (1991) Un modele simple pour la migration de radionucléides par transport colloidal dans un milieu fracture. J Hydrol 125:55–92CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Chapman TG (2003) Estimation of evaporation in rainfall-runoff models. In: Proceedings MODSIM 2003 international congress on modelling and simulation, modelling and simulation society of Australia, vol 1, pp 148–153Google Scholar
  20. Charbeneau RJ (2006) Groundwater hydraulics and pollutant transport. Waveland Press, Long Grove, p 593Google Scholar
  21. Chen L, Young MH (2006) Green-Ampt infiltration model for sloping surfaces. Water Resour Res 42(7). doi:  10.1029/2005WR004468
  22. Childs EC (1971) Drainage of groundwater resting on a sloping bed. Water Resour Res 7(5):1256–1263CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Chow VT, Maidment DR, Mays LW (1988) Applied hydrology. McGraw-Hill, New York, p 572Google Scholar
  24. Craig JR, Liu G, Soulis ED (2010) Runoff–infiltration partitioning using an upscaled Green–Ampt solution. Hydrol Process. doi: 10.1002/hyp.7601 Google Scholar
  25. Dingman SL (1994) Physical hydrology. Macmillan Publishing Company, New York, p 575Google Scholar
  26. Dingman SL (2002) Physical hydrology. Prentice-Hall Inc, Upper Saddle RiverGoogle Scholar
  27. De Groen MM (2002) Modelling interception and transpiration at monthly time steps; introducing daily variability through Markov chains. PhD thesis, IHE-Delft, Swets and Zeitlinger, Lisse, The Netherlands, p 211Google Scholar
  28. De Groen MM, Savenije HHG (2006) A monthly interception equation based on the statistical characteristics of daily rainfall. Water Resour Res 42, W12417. doi: 10.1029/2006WR005013 Google Scholar
  29. Dunn SM, Mackay R (1995) Spatial variation in evapotranspiration and the influence of land use on catchment hydrology. J Hydrol 171:49–73CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Dunne T (1978) Field studies of hillslope flow processes. In: Kirkby MJ (ed) Hillslope hydrology. Wiley, Chichester/New York, pp 227–294Google Scholar
  31. Dunne T, Moore TR, Taylor CH (1975) Recognition and prediction of runoff-producing zones in humid regions. Hydrol Sci Bull 20(3):305–327Google Scholar
  32. Dunne T, Black RD (1970) Partial area contributions to storm runoff in a small New England watershed. Water Resour Res 6(5):1296–1311. doi: 10.1029/WR006i005p01296 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Dusek J, Vogel T (2014) Modeling subsurface hillslope runoff dominated by preferential flow: One- vs. two dimensional approximation. Vadose Zone J 13. doi: 10.2136/vzj2013.05.0082
  34. Freer J, McDonnell JJ, Beven KJ et al (2002) The role of bedrock topography on subsurface storm flow. Water Resour Res 38(12):1269. doi: 10.1029/2001WR000872 Google Scholar
  35. Gabrielli C, McDonnell JJ, Jarvis T (2012) The role of bedrock groundwater in rainfall-runoff response at hillslope and catchment scales. J Hydrol 450–451:117–133CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Gash JHC (1979) An analytical model of rainfall interception by forest. Quart J R Meteorol Soc 105:43–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Germann P (1985) Kinematic wave approach to infiltration and drainage into and from soil macropores. Trans Am Soc Agric Eng 28(3):745–749CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Germann P, Beven K (1985) Kinematic wave approximation to infiltration into soils with sorbing macropores. Water Resour Res 21:990–996CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Gerrits AMJ, Pfister L, Savenije HHG (2010) Spatial and temporal variability of canopy and forest floor interception in a beech forest. Hydrol Process 24:3011–3025Google Scholar
  40. Graham CB, McDonnell JJ (2010) Hillslope threshold response to rainfall: development and use of a macroscale model. J Hydrol 393(1–2):77–93CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Graham CB, Woods RA, McDonnell JJ (2010) Hillslope threshold response to rainfall: a field based forensic approach. J Hydrol 393(1–2):65–76CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Green WH, Ampt G (1911) Studies of soil physics, part I – the flow of air and water through soils. J Agric Sci 4:1–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Harman C, Sivapalan M (2009) A similarity framework to assess controls on shallow subsurface. Water Resour Res 45(1), W01417. doi: 10.1029/2008WR007067 Google Scholar
  44. Henderson FM, Wooding RA (1964) Overland flow and groundwater flow from a steady rainfall of finite duration. J Geophys Res 69(8):1531–1540CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Hillel D (2004) Introduction to environmental soil physics. Academic, Amsterdam, p 494Google Scholar
  46. Hopp L, McDonnell JJ (2009) Connectivity at the hillslope scale: identifying interactions between storm size, bedrock permeability, slope angle and soil depth. J Hydrol 376:378–391CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Horton RE (1940) An approach toward a physical interpretation of infiltration capacity. Soil Sci Soc Am Proc 5:399–417CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Hydrology handbook (1996) 2nd ed American Society of Civil Engineers. New York, p 784Google Scholar
  49. Jarvis NJ (1998) Modelling the impact of preferential flow on non-point source pollution. In: Selim HH, Ma L (eds) Physical non-equilibrium in soils: modelling and application. Ann Arbor Press, Chelsea, pp 195–221Google Scholar
  50. Jarvis NJ (2007) A review of non-equilibrium water flow and solute transport in soil macropores: principles, controlling factors and consequences for water quality. Eur J Soil Sci 58:523–546CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Kao CS, Hunt JR (1996) Prediction of wetting front movement during one-dimensional infiltration into soil. Water Resour Res 32:55–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Kim CP, Stricker JNM, Torfs PJJF (1996) An analytical framework for the water budget of the unsaturated zone. Water Resour Res 32(12):3475–3484CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Kling H, Gupta H (2009) On the development of regionalization relationships for lumped watershed models: the impact of ignoring sub-basin scale variability. J Hydrol 373:337–351CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Kohler A, Abbaspour KC, Fritsch M (2003) Using simple bucket models to analyze solute export to subsurface drains by preferential flow. Vadose Zone J 2:68–75CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Köhne JM, Köhne S, Šimůnek J (2009) A review of model applications for structured soils: (a) Water flow and tracer transport. J Contam Hydrol 104:4–35CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Kosterin AV, Selin VI (2000) Liquid hydrocarbons migration in the unsaturated zone presented by fractured-porous rocks. Prob Nucl Sci Technol Math Model Phys Proc 2:53–57 (In Russian)Google Scholar
  57. Kostiakov AN (1932) On the dynamics of the coefficient of water percolation in soils and on the necessity for studying it from a dynamic point of view for purposes of amelioration. In: Trans, 6th Comm Int Soc Soil Sci, Russian Part A: 17–21Google Scholar
  58. Lange J, Leinbundgut C (2003) Surface runoff and sediment dynamics in arid and semi-arid regions. In: Simmers I (ed) International contributions to hydrogeology 238: Understanding water in a dry environment: hydrological processes in arid and semi-arid zones. Balkema, Rotterdam, pp 114–150Google Scholar
  59. Linsley RK, Kholer MA, Paulhus JLH (1949) Applied hydrology. McGraw Hill, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  60. Love D, Uhlenbrook S, Corzo-Perez G et al (2010) Rainfall–interception–evaporation–runoff relationships in a semi-arid catchment, northern Limpopo basin, Zimbabwe. Hydrol Sci J 55(5):687–703CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Luce CH, Cundy TW (1992) Modification of the kinematic wave-Philip infiltration overland flow model. Water Resour Res 28(4):1179–1186CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. McDonnell JJ (1990) A rationale for old water discharge through macropores in a steep, humid catchment. Water Resour Res 26(11):2821–2832CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. McDonnell JJ (2013) Are all runoff processes the same? Hydrol Process 27:4103–4111CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. McGrath GS, Hinz C, Sivapalan M et al (2010) Identifying a rainfall event threshold triggering herbicide leaching by preferential flow. Water Resour Res. doi: 10.1029/2008WR007506 Google Scholar
  65. Mein RG, Larson CL (1973) Modeling infiltration during a steady rain. Water Resour Res 9(2):384–394CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Mirus B, Loague K (2013) How runoff begins (and ends): characterizing hydrologic response at the catchment scale. Water Resour Res 49(5):2987–3006. doi: 10.1002/wrcr.20218 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Mishra SK, Tyagil JV, Singh VP (2003) Comparison of infiltration models. Hydrol Process 17:2629–2652CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Morel-Seytoux HJ, Khanji J (1975) Equation of infiltration with compression and counterflow effects. J Hydrol Sci 20:505–517Google Scholar
  69. Morel-Seytoux HJ, Khanji J (1974) Derivation of an equation of infiltration. Water Resour Res 10:795–800CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Neuman SP (1976) Wetting front pressure head in the infiltration model of Green and Ampt. Water Resour Res 12:564–566CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Nieber JL, Sidle RC (2010) How do disconnected macropores in sloping soils facilitate preferential flow? Hydrol Process 24:1582–1594CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Nieber JL, Steenhuis TS, Walter T (2006) Enhancement of seepage and lateral preferential flow by biopores on hillslopes. Biologia Bratislava 61(Suppl 19):225–228Google Scholar
  73. Nitao JJ, Buscheck TA (1991) Infiltration of a liquid front in an unsaturated, fractured porous medium. Water Resour Res 27(8):2099–2112. doi: 10.1029/91WR01369 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Noguchi S, Tsuboyama Y, Sidle RC et al (1999) Morphological characteristics of macropores and the distribution of preferential flow pathways in a forested slope segment. J Soil Sci Soc Am 63(5):1413–1423CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Novak V, Simunek J, van Genuchten MT (2002) Infiltration into a swelling, cracked clay soil. J Hydrol Hydromech 50(1):3–19Google Scholar
  76. Ogden FL, Watts BA (2000) Saturated area formation on nonconvergent hillslope topography with shallow soils: a numerical investigation. Water Resour Res 36(7):1795–1804CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Pellichero E, Glantz R, Burns M et al (2012) Dynamic capillary pressure during water infiltration: Experiments and Green-Ampt modeling. Water Resour Res 48. doi: 10.1029/2011WR011541
  78. Philip JR (1955) Numerical solution of equations of the diffusion type with diffusivity concentration-dependent. Trans Faraday Soc 51:885–892CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Philip JR (1957) The theory of infiltration: 4 Sorptivity and algebraic infiltration equations. Soil Sci 8:257–264CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Philip JR (1987) The infiltration joining problem. Water Resour Res 23:2239–2245CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Pinder GP, Gray WG (2008) Essentials of multiphase flow in porous media. Wiley, Hoboken, p 374CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Pruess K (1991) EOS7 An equation-of-state module for the TOUGH2 simulator for two-phase flow of saline water and air Earth Science Division, Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory. Report N LBL-31114, BerkeleyGoogle Scholar
  83. Pruess K (2004) The TOUGH codes – a family of simulation tool for multiphase flow and transport processes in permeable media. Vadose Zone J 3:738–746Google Scholar
  84. Rangel-German ER, Kovscek AR (2001) Experimental and analytical study of multidimensional imbibition in fractured porous media. Technical report, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USAGoogle Scholar
  85. Ruan H, Illangasekare TH (1998) A model to couple overland flow and infiltration into macroporous vadose zone. J Hydrol 210:116–127CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Rumynin VG (2011) Subsurface solute transport models and case histories (with applications to radionuclide migration), vol 25, Theory and applications of transport in porous media. Springer Science + Business Media BV, Dordrecht, p 815CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. Salvucci GD, Entekhabi D (1994) Explicit expression for Green-Ampt (delta function diffusivity) infiltration rate and cumulative storage. Water Resour Res 30:2661–2663CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. Savenije HHG (2004) The importance of interception and why we should delete the term evapotranspiration from our vocabulary. Hydrol Process 18(8):1507–1511CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. Schmed BH (1990) Derivation of an explicit equation for infiltration on the basis of the Mein-Larson Model. J Hydrol Sci 35,2,4:197–208Google Scholar
  90. Shaw EM, Beven KJ, Chappel NA, Lamb R (1994) Hydrology in practice, 3rd edn. Chapmam and Hall, London, p 569Google Scholar
  91. Sidle RC, Noguchi S, Tsuboyama Y et al (2001) A conceptual model of preferential flow systems in forested hillslopes: evidence of self-organization. Hydrol Proc 15:1675–1692CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. Sidle RC, Tsuboyama Y, Noguchi S et al (2000) Storm flow generation in steep forested headwaters: a linked hydrogeomorphic paradigm. Hydrol Process 14:369–385CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. Šimůnek J, Jarvis NJ, van Genuchten MT et al (2003) Review and comparison of models describing non-equilibrium and preferential flow and transport in the vadose zone. J Hydrol 272:14–35CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. Šimůnek J, van Genuchten MT (2008) Modeling nonequilibrium flow and transport processes using HYDRUS. Vadose Zone J 7(2)Google Scholar
  95. Singh VP (2002) Kinematic wave solutions for pollutant transport by runoff over an impervious plane, with instantaneous or finite-period mixing. Hydrol Process 16:1831–1863CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. Sloan PG, Moor ID (1984) Modeling subsurface stormflow on steeply sloping forested watersheds. Water Resour Res 20(12):1815–1822CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  97. Smith RE (1972) The infiltration envelope: results from a theoretical infiltrometer. J Hydrol 17:1–21CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  98. Smith RE (2002) Infiltration theory for hydrologic applications. With Smettem KRJ, Broadbridge P, Woolhiser DA. American Geophysical Union. Water Resour Monograph Series, vol 15, Washington, DC, p 215Google Scholar
  99. Smith RE, Goodrich DC (2005) Rainfall excess overland flow. In: Anderson MG (ed) Encyclopedia of hydrological science. Wiley, Chichester, pp 1708–1718Google Scholar
  100. Springer E, Cundy TW (1987) Field-scale evaluation of infiltration parameters from soil texture for hydrologic analysis. Water Resour Res 23(2):325–334CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  101. Struthers I, Sivapalan M, Hinz C (2007) Conceptual examination of climate-soil controls upon rainfall partitioning in a pen-fractured soil: Single storm response. Adv Water Resour 30:505–517CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  102. Szymkiewicz A (2013) Modeling water flow in unsaturated porous media. Springer, Dordrecht, р 250Google Scholar
  103. Todd DK, Mays LW (2005) Groundwater hydrology. Wiley, ArizonaGoogle Scholar
  104. Todini E (2007) Hydrological catchment modeling: past, present and future. Hydrol Earth Syst Sci 11(1):468–482CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  105. Touma J, Vauclin M (1986) Experimental and numerical analysis of two-phase infiltration in a partially saturated soil. Transp Porous Media 1:27–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  106. Uchida T, Kosugi K, Mizuyama T (2002) Effects of pipe flow and bedrock groundwater on runoff generation in a steep headwater catchment in Ashiu, central Japan. Water Resour Res 38(7):1119. doi: 10.1029/2001WR000261 Google Scholar
  107. Uchida T, Tromp-van Meerveld I, McDonnell JJ (2005) The role of lateral pipe flow in hillslope runoff response: an intercomparison of non-linear hillslope response. J Hydrol 311:117–133CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  108. Van Dijk AIJM, Bruijnzeel LA (2001) Modelling rainfall interception by vegetation of variable density using an adapted analytical model. Part 1. Model description. J Hydrol 247(3):230–238CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  109. Verhoest NEC, Troch PA (2000) Some analytical solutions of the linearized Boussinesq equation with recharge for a sloping aquifer. Water Resour Res 36(3):793–800CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  110. Vieux BE (2004) Distributed hydrologic modeling using GIS. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, p 289Google Scholar
  111. Wang Z, Feyen J, van Genuchten MT (1997) Two-phase flow infiltration equations accounting for air entrapment effects. Water Resour Res 33(12):2759–2767CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  112. Weiler M, McDonnell JJ (2006) Testing nutrient flushing hypotheses at the hillslope scale: a virtual experiment approach. J Hydrol 319:339–356CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  113. Weyman DR (1970) Throughflow on hillslopes and its relation to the stream hydrograph. Int Assoc Sci Hydrol Bull 15(2):25–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  114. Whipkey RZ (1965) Subsurface stormflow from forested slopes. International Association of Scientific Hydrology. Bulletin 10(2):74–85Google Scholar
  115. Wienhöfer J, Zehe E (2014) Predicting subsurface stormflow response of a forested hillslope –the role of connected flow paths. Hydrol Earth Syst Sci 18:121–138. doi: 10.5194/hess-18-121[-‐]2014 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  116. Willgoose GR, Perera H (2001) A simple model of saturation excess runoff generation based on geomorphology, steady state soil moisture. Water Resour Res 37(1):1471–55Google Scholar
  117. Williams JR, Ouyang Y et al (1998) Estimation of infiltration rate in the vadose zone: Application of selected mathematical models. Environmental Protection Agency, USA, Report EPA/600/R-97/128dGoogle Scholar
  118. Xiangjun T, Zhenghui X, Shenglei Z et al (2006) A subsurface runoff parameterization with water storage and recharge based on the Boussinesq-storage equation for a land surface model. Sci China Ser D Earth Sci 49(6):622–631CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  119. Xu C-Y, Singh VP (2004) Review on regional water resources assessment models under stationary and changing climate. Water Resources Management 18. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, pp 591–612Google Scholar
  120. Zhang GP, Savenije HHG, Fenicia F et al (2006) Modelling subsurface storm flow with the Representative Elementary Watershed (REW) approach: application to the Alzette River Basin. Hydrol Earth Syst Sci 10:937–955.
  121. Zhang L, Walker GR, Dawes WR (2002) Water balance modelling: concepts and applications. In: McVicar TR, Li Rui, Walker J, Fitzpatrick RW, Liu Changming (eds) Regional water and soil assessment for managing sustainable agriculture in China and Australia. ACIAR Monograph N 84, pp 31–47Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Vyacheslav G. Rumynin
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Institute of Environmental GeologyThe Russian Academy of SciencesSaint PetersburgRussia
  2. 2.Institute of Earth SciencesSaint Petersburg State UniversitySaint PetersburgRussia

Personalised recommendations