Nature and Science 2010;8(10) 1 Analysis Of The Major Ion
Constituents I n Groundwater Of J aipur City DINESH KUMAR TANK AND
C. P. SINGH CHANDEL* Department of Chemistry, University of
Rajasthan, J aipur 302004, India [email protected]
Abstract:
ThepresentstudyfocusedonthehydrochemistryofgroundwaterinJaipurcitytoassessthequalityof
groundwaterfordeterminingitssuitabilityfordrinkingandagriculturalpurposes.Groundwatersampleswere
collectedfromelevenstationsofJaipurcityduringmonsoonseasonandwereanalyzedforphysico-chemical
parameterssuchaspH,EC,TDS,sodium,potassium,calcium,magnesium,chloride,sulphate,carbonate,
bicarbonate,
nitrateandfluoride.ComparisonoftheconcentrationofthechemicalconstituentswithWHO(world
healthorganization)drinkingwaterstandardsof1983,thestatusofgroundwaterisbetterfordrinkingpurposes.
Resultsindicatethatnitrateconcentrationsareinanalarmingstatewithrespecttotheuseofgroundwaterfor
drinking purposes. The calculated values of SAR, RSC and percentage
sodium indicate that the water for irrigation uses is excellent to
good quality. US Salinity diagram was used for evaluating the water
quality for irrigation which suggests that the majorityof the
groundwater samples were good for irrigation. [Nature and Science
2010;8(10):1-7]. (ISSN: 1545-0740). Key words: Physico-Chemical
Parameters, Groundwater, US Salinity Diagramand Piper diagram. I
ntroduction: Groundwateristhemainsourcefordrinking,
irrigationandindustrialpurposes.Duringlasttwo
decadestheindiscriminatedisposalofindustrialwaste on mother earth
slowly makes groundwater susceptible
topollution.Jaipurcity(longitude9524E;latitude: 2718), the capital
of Rajasthan is becoming fragile and
hasbeenconcernduetoincreasingindustrialization,
urbanizationandpopulationgrowth.Duetorapid
urbanizationandindustrializationtheenvironmental
pollutionisincreasingdaybydaysoitisessentialto
assessthequalityofgroundwaterforitssaferuse.
Therefore,thepresentstudyofthephysico-chemical characteristics of
Jaipur city has been taken
up.Variousworkersinourcountryhavecarriedout
anextensiveworkonwaterqualityforvarious
purposes.Subramanietal.,(2005)havestudied groundwater quality and
its suitability for drinking and
agriculturaluseinChitharRiverBasin.Charuetal (2008) have studied
the drinking water quality status in
Bhopalandconcludedthatthewaterqualityisgood andarewithinthe
rangeofstandardvaluesprescribed
byvariousagencies.Raju(2007)hasevaluatedthe
groundwaterqualityintheupperGunjanaeruRiver basin, Cuddapah
District, Andhra Pradesh, South India.
Kumaresanetal.,(2006)havestudiedmajorion
chemistryofenvironmentalsamplesaroundsub-urban
ofChennaicity.Jagdapet al.,(2002)andSunithaet
al.,(2005)classifythewaterinordertoassessthe
waterqualityforvariouspurposes.Lalurajetal., (2005) have studied
ground water chemistry of shallow
aquifersinthecoastalzonesofCochinandconcluded
thatgroundwaterpresentintheshallowaquifersof
someofthestationswerepoorinqualityandbeyond
potablelimitasperthestandardsetbyWHOandISI.
Jhaetal.,(2000)havereportedthedegradationof
waterqualityinBihar.Studyofindustrialwastewater,
groundwaterandpollutionproblemsingroundwater
havealsobeenstudiedinourlaboratory(Sharma&
Chandel,2004;Singh&Chandel,2003,2006)
recently.Theobjectivesofthepresentworkisto
analyzethemajorionconstituentsofthegroundwater of Jaipur city and
classify the water in order to appraise
thewaterqualityanditssuitabilityfordrinkingand
irrigationpurposesusingpiperandUSsalinity diagram. Materials and
Methods:
Groundwatersamplesfromdifferenthand-pumpsandtube-wellsofelevensamplingpointsfrom
theJaipurcitywereanalyzedduringmonsoonseason (2007). Samples were
collected in good quality
screw-cappedpolyethylenebottlesofonelitrecapacity.
Samplingwascarriedoutwithoutaddingany preservatives in rinsed
bottles directly for avoiding any contamination and brought to the
laboratory. Only high pure(AnalRgrade)chemicalsanddoubledistilled
waterwasusedforpreparingsolutionsforanalysis.
PhysicalparameterslikepH,TDSandECwere determinedatthesitewiththe
helpofdigitalportable wateranalyzerkit(ModelNo.:CENTURYCK710).
Forrestoftheanalysis,watersampleswerepreserved
andboughttothelaboratoryinminimumperiodof
timeandweredeterminedasperstandardmethods
(APHA-1995).Thechemicalanalysiswascarriedout
forcalcium,magnesium,chloride,sulphate,carbonate and bicarbonate
byvolumetric titration methods; while
fluoride,nitrateandsulphatewereestimatedby Nature and Science
2010;8(10) 2 spectrophotometer methods and sodium and potassium
byflamephotometrymethods(ELICO-CL-220).All
theresultsarecomparedwithstandardlimits recommended by WHO (1983).
Results and Discussion:
Table-1illustratesthevariousphysico-chemicalparametersofgroundwaterofJaipurcity.
Correlationmatrixamongelevenwaterquality
parametersofgroundwaterofJaipurcityisshownin
table-2.Classificationofirrigationwateronthebasis of EC, Na%, SAR
and RSC are shown in tables 4, 5, 6 7 and 8. Groundwater chemistry:
Understandingthequalityofgroundwateris as important as its quantity
because it is the main factor
determiningitssuitabilityfordomestic,drinking,
agriculturalandindustrialpurposes.ThepHvaluesof
groundwaterrangedfrom7.2to8.35withanaverage
valueof7.94.Thisshowsthatthegroundwaterofthe
studyareaismainlyalkalineinnatureandallthe
sampleswerewithinthepermissiblelimitprescribed
byWHO.TheTDSvaluerangedfrom187to1498
withameanof789.64.AccordingtoWHOthe
desirablelimitofTDSis500andallsampleswere exceeding the standard
permissible limit except S2, S3
andS6.ThevalueofECvariedfrom374s/cmto
3004s/cmwithanaveragevalueof1573.36s/cm.
ThemaximumlimitofECindrinkingwateris prescribedas1500s/cm.
asperWHOstandard.Five (S4,S5,S7,S9andSA)samplesexceedthe
permissiblelimit.Theaverageconcentrationofmajor ion in groundwater
is in the following order: Anions: -
Bicarbonate>Chloride>Nitrate>Sulphatewhile Cations: -
Sodium> Calcium> Magnesium> Potassium. Ca2+ value varied
from 8.16 mg/L to 266.53 mg/L with
anaveragevalueof103.30mg/L.Thedesirablelimit ofCa2+
fordrinkingwaterisspecifiedbyWHOas75 mg/L. It is observed that 5
samples were exceeding this
limit.Mg2+concentrationvariedfrom17.02mg/Lto
205.5mg/Lwithameanvalueof67.99mg/L.
AccordingtoWHOthedesirablevalueofMg2+ is50
mg/Lwherefivesampleswereexceedingthislimit. Excessofcalcium
andmagnesiumshowsthe hardness inwater and is not
goodforpotable.TheChloride ion
concentrationvariedbetween19.99mg/Lto632.25
mg/L.Onlyonesample(S8)exceedsthemaximum allowable limit of 600
mg/L. The nitrate concentration
ingroundwatersamplesrangefrom11mg/Lto228
mg/Lwithanaveragevalueof126.27mg/L.Nearly
81%samplesexceedthedesirablelimitof45mg/Las
perWHOnorms.Thehighconcentrationofnitratein
drinkingwateristoxicandcauses
methaemoglobinamia(bluebabydisease)inchildren
andgastriccarcinomas(Comly1945).Sulphatevalues variedfrom13
mg/Lto182mg/Land allsamplesare
indesirablelimitasperWHOstandard.Fluoride
valuesvariedfrom0.12mg/Lto0.78mg/L.All
samplesexaminedexhibitsuitablefordrinking
(maximumallowablelimitis1.5mg/Laccordingto WHO). Correlation: The
correlation coefficients (r) among thirteen
waterqualityparametersnamelypH,EC,TDS,Ca++, Mg++, Na+, K+, CO32,
HCO32, Cl, SO42, NO3 and F
werecalculatedforcorrelationanalysis.Interpretation
ofcorrelationgivesanideaofquickwaterquality
monitoringmethod.Accordingtotable-2theECand
TDSshowsgoodpositivecorrelationwithChloride andSulphate and
alsoexhibit highpositivecorrelation
withCalcium,MagnesiumandNitrateions.Ca++-Cl, Mg++- Cl, Mg++- SO4,
Ca+2- NO3, K+- Cl, CO32- Cl, HCO3- F, Cl- SO42, Cl- NO3 and SO42-
NO3 are also the more significant correlation pairs. Table shows
thatpHandFexhibitnegativecorrelationwithmost of the variables.
Piper diagram: Trilinearplottingsystemswereusedinthestudy
ofwaterchemistryandqualitydevelopedbyHill
(1940)andPiper(1944).Thewatertypesare designated according to the
area in which they occur on the diagram segments (figure 1). These
diagrams reveal theanalogies,dissimilaritiesanddifferenttypesof
waters in the study areas, which are shown in table-3.The concept
of hydrochemical facies presented by
Walton(1970)tounderstandandidentifythewater
compositionindifferentclassesbasedonthe
dominanceofcertaincationsandanionsinsolutions
(figure2).Itclearlyexplainsthevariationor
dominationofcationandanionconcentrationduring
monsoonseason.Accordingtotable-3alkalineearth typeofwater(Ca2+
+Mg2+)exceedthealkalis(Na+ + K+) where as in anion strong acids
(Cl- + SO42-) exceed theweakacids(HCO3- +CO32-)whichshowthe
hardnessinallsamples.36%samples(S2,S3,S6 and
S8)showsecondaryalkalinitywherechemical
propertiesaredominatedbyalkalineearthsandstrong
acids.Twosamples(S7andS9)showssecondary
salinity(non-carbonatehardness)wheredominating
ionsarealkalineearthandstrongacids.Onlyone
sample(SB)showsprimarysalinity(dominatedions-alkaliandweakacids).Notasinglesamplefallin
primary alkalinity. I rrigation water quality:
ECisagoodmeasureofsalinityhazardtocrops.
Excesssalinityreducestheosmoticactivityofplants
andthusinterfereswiththeabsorptionofwaterand nutrients from the
soil (Saleh et al. 1999). Two (S7 and Nature and Science 2010;8(10)
3 SA)outofelevensampleshaveveryhighsalinity
waterandarenotsuitableforirrigationundernormal conditions (Table
4). SARisimportantparametersfordetermining
thesuitabilityofgroundwaterforirrigationbecauseit
isameasureofsodiumhazardtocrops.SARcanbe estimated by the formula
(Karanth 1987): SAR =(Na+) / [(Ca2+) + (Mg2+) /2 where all ionic
concentrations are expressed in meq/L.
SARvaluesrangesfrom0.29to7.13withanaverage
valueof2.36.Allthesamplingstationsfallinthe
excellentcategorybecausenoneofthesamples exceeded the value of SAR
= 10 (table 6). The classification system to evaluate the
suitability ofwaterforirrigationusecanbedeterminedby graphically
plotting these values (EC and SAR) on the
USsalinitydiagram(Richards,1954).Theplotsof
groundwaterchemistryofstudyareasintheUSSL
diagramareshowninfigure3.Theanalyticaldata plottedontheUS
Salinitydiagramillustratesthatfive groundwater samples (S1, S4, S5,
S8 and S9) fall in the fieldofC3S1,indicatinghighsalinityandlow
alkalinity in water, which can be usedfor irrigation on
almostalltypesofsoilwithlittledangerof
exchangeableSodium.Twosamples(S7andSA)fall
inthefieldofC4S1indicatingveryhighsalinityand
lowalkalinityhazard.Threesamples(S2,S3andS6)
fallinC2S1typeshowedthattheirrigationqualityof waterwasfair
inthestudyareasandonesample(SB) fall in C3S2 (figure 3). % Na
Thesodiuminirrigationwaterisusually expressed in % Na. As per
Indian standards maximum
of60%sodiumispermissibleforirrigationwater.%
Nacanbedeterminedbyusingtheformula(Wilcox, 1955)-Na %= Ca2+ + Mg2+
+ Na+ + K+ (Na+ + K+)100
wherealltheionicconcentrationsareexpressedin meq/L.The value of %
Na varies from 10.67 to 72.83
(table-8).Accordingtotable-5allthegroundwater
sampleswereexcellenttopermissibleforirrigation except sample S9.
RSC RSChasbeencalculatedtodeterminethe
hazardouseffectofcarbonateandbicarbonateonthe
qualityofwaterforagriculturalpurpose(Eaton1950) and has been
determined by the formula- RSC= (CO2-+HCO3-) - (Ca2++Mg2+) Where
all the ionic concentration were reported in meq/L.
Theclassificationofirrigationwateraccordingto
theRSCvaluesispresentedintable-8.Accordingto
theUSDepartmentofAgriculture,water havingmore
than2.5epmofRSCisnotsuitableforirrigation
purposeswhilethosehaving1.25-2.5epmare
marginallysuitableandthosewithlessthan1.25epm
aresafeforirrigation(Table7)andtheresultsshows
thatallthesamplesweregoodforirrigationexcept2 samples (S6 and S9).
Table 1: I onic Variation of groundwater in J aipur City during
monsoon season: CODEpHECTDSCa2+Mg2+Na+K+CO32-HCO3-Cl-SO42-NO3-F-
S18.20148273852.172.961403.818256.2207.92781580.18
S28.2558029032.0632.8331.54.31218344.9816520.2
S38.3242621348.117.029.22.112146.419.9932390.26
S47.181831918142.2841.34116.73.40337.7259.9862260.21
S57.4021481076118.24120.38126.23.70549317.37122790.59
S68.313741878.1619.46362.236109.819.9913110.32
S77.6030041498192.38205.5842.90335.5562.271822280.56
S88.20116658348.146.21121.41.8054924.9963540.78 Nature and Science
2010;8(10) 4 S97.7922131106266.5374.28603.80140.3392.34982160.14
SA7.7527371401198.3992.42204240207.4632.251122000.2
SB8.35134667630.0625.542203.236250.11531001260.12 All values are in
mg/L. except pH and EC Table 2: Correlation of physico-chemical
parameters of groundwater:
pHECTDSCa2+Mg2+Na+K+CO32-HCO3-Cl-SO42-NO3- EC-0.7238
TDS-0.72180.9998 Ca2+-0.69070.84230.8422
Mg2+-0.56420.83200.82560.6095 Na+-0.16820.48650.49410.11810.1508
K+-0.19260.45980.47730.40200.16590.4955
CO32-0.6942-0.6120-0.6114-0.6970-0.52880.0325-0.2576
HCO3--0.41870.30990.30470.00410.36500.3450-0.1667-0.4710
Cl--0.65080.95460.95820.85230.77800.42130.6302-0.53310.0640
SO42--0.62740.93170.92710.67700.86880.49740.2202-0.46330.41020.8347
NO3--0.63810.83560.83400.80700.55090.40450.3428-0.4690-0.00720.81390.7418
F--0.17420.13870.1328-0.06070.4160-0.0677-0.2471-0.39520.7964-0.03940.2466-0.2637
Table 3.Characterization of groundwater of J aipur on the basis of
Piper tri-linear diagram: Subdivision of the diamond
Characteristics of corresponding subdivision of diamond shaped
field Samples 1.Alkaline earths (Ca2+ + Mg2+) exceed alkalies (Na+
+ K+) 10(All samples except SB) 2.Alkalies exceeds alkaline earths
1 (SB) 3.Weak acids (CO32- + HCO3-) exceed strong acids) (SO42- +
Cl- + F-) 4 (S2, S3, S6 and S8) 4.Strong acids exceed weak acids 7
(all samples except S2, S3, S6 and S8) 5.Carbonate hardness
(secondary alkalinity) exceeds 50% (chemical properties are
dominated by alkaline earths and weak acids) 4 (S2, S3, S6 and S8))
6.Non-carbonate hardness (secondarysalinity) exceeds 50% (chemical
properties are dominated by alkaline earths and strong acids) 2 (S7
and S9) 7.Carbonate alkali (primary salinity)exceeds 50% (chemical
properties are dominated by alkalies and weak acids) 1 (SB)
8.Carbonate alkali (primary alkalinity)exceeds 50% (chemical
properties are dominated by alkalies and weak acids) 0 9.No
cationanion pair exceeds 50% 4 (S1, S4, S5 and SA) Nature and
Science 2010;8(10) 5 Table 4 Quality of irrigation water based on
Electrical Conductivity: Salinity-hazard class Specific conductance
(S/cm)1 CharacteristicsSamples Low0-250Low-salinity water can be
used for irrigation on most soil with minimal likelihood that soil
salinity will develop. Nil Medium251-750Medium-salinity water can
be used for irrigation if a moderate amount of drainage occurs. 3
(S2, S3 and S6) High751-2,250High-salinitywaterisnotsuitable
foruseonsoilwithrestricted drainage.Evenwithadequate
drainage,specialmanagementfor salinity control may be required.
6(S1,S4,S5,S8,S9 and SB) Very highMore than
2,250Veryhigh-salinitywaterisnot suitableforirrigationunder normal
conditions. 2 (S7 and SA) 1S/cm, microsiemens per centimeter at 25
degrees Celsius. Table 5: Quality of groundwater based on % Sodium:
% NaQuality of waterSamples 80%UnsuitableNil Table 6: SAR values
can then be compared to characteristics of the four sodium-hazard
classes as follows: SARWater-suitability for irrigation
0-10Suitable for all types of soils except for those crops which
are highly sensitive to Sodium.
10-18Suitableforcoarcetexturedororganicsoilwith
goodpermeability.Relativelyunsuitablein fine textured soil.
18-26Harmfulforalmostalltypesofsoils.Requiresgooddrainage,highleachingandgypsum
addition. >26Unsuitable for irrigation Table 7: Quality of
groundwater based on residual Sodium Carbonate: RSCRemark the
qualitySamples < 1.25GoodAll samples except S6 and S9
1.25-2.5Doubtful1 ( S9) >2.5Unsuitable1(S6) Nature and Science
2010;8(10) 6 Table 8: The Value of RSC, SAR and Na %: CODERSCSARNa%
S1Nil2.9441.84 S2Nil0.9325.61 S3Nil0.2910.67 S4Nil3.2741.89
S5Nil1.9526.11 S60.991.5644.69 S7Nil112.33 S82.8346.21
S9Nil0.8412.24 SANil335.15 SB1.77.1372.83 Figure 1. Trilinear Piper
Diagram for monsoon season Figure 2. Subdivisions of the
diamond-shaped field of the Piper diagram (9 facies) Figure 3.
Classification of irrigation waters using U.S. Salinity diagram.
Conclusion: Fromtheobservation,itmayconcludedthat
almostalltheparameterslikepH,sodium,potassium,
carbonate,bicarbonate,chloridearewithinthe
permissiblelimitsprescribedbyWHObutcalcium,
magnesiumandnitratevalueswereexceedingthe
limits.Thepiperdiagramshowsthatalkalineearth (Ca2++ Mg2+) exceed
over alkaline (Na++ K+) where in anion strong acids (SO42-+ Cl-)
were predominated. On the other hand most of the sampling station
considered suitable for irrigation uses according to EC, SAR, %Na
and RSC values. Acknowledgement: Oneoftheauthors(DineshKumarTank)is
thankfultotheHead,DepartmentofChemistry,
UniversityofRajasthan,Jaipurforprovidingthe
necessarylaboratoryfacilitiesandalsothankfultothe
CSIR,NewDelhi,fortheawardofaJuniorResearch Fellowship(JRF).
References: 1.APHA-AWWA-WPCF.Standardmethodsforthe
examinationofwaterandwastewater(19thed.). (1995) New York, USA.
2.Parashar C., Verma N., Dixit S. and Shrivastava R.
Multivariateanalysisofdrinkingwaterquality
parametersinBhopal,India.Environ Monit Assess (2008). 140:119122.
3.ComlyHH.Cyanosis ininfantscausedbynitrates in
nitratesinwellwater. JAmMwd Assoc(1945) 129: 12-114.
4.Eaton,F.M.Significanceofcarbonatesin
irrigationwaters.SoilScience,(1950)69,123133. Nature and Science
2010;8(10) 7 5.Jagdap,J.,Kachawe,B.,Deshpande,L.and
Kelkar,P.WaterqualityAssessmentofthePurna
RiverforirrigationpurposeinBuldanadistrict, Maharastra.IndianJ
.Environ.Health,(2002) 44(3), 247257.
6.Jha,A.N.andVerma,P.K.Physicochemical
propertyofdrinkingwaterintownareaofGodda
districtunderSantalPargana,Bihar.PollRes. (2000) 19(2), 245247.
7.KaranthKRGroundwaterassessment, development and management. Tata
McGraw Hill, New Delhi, (1987) pp 720.
8.Kumaresan,M.andRiyazuddin,P.Majorion
chemistryofenvironmentalsamplesaroundsub-urbanofChennaicity.CurrentScience,(2006)
91(12), 1668-1677. 9.Laluraj,C.M.,Gopinath,G.,andDineshkumar, P.K.
Groundwater chemistry of shallow aquifers in
thecoastalzonesofCochin,India.Applied
EcologyandEnvironmentalResearch,(2005) 3(1), 133-139.
10.Piper,A.M.Agraphicprocedureinthe
geochemicalinterpretationofwateranalyses. Trans. Am. Geophy. Union,
(1944) 25, 914928. 11.Raju,N.J.Hydrogeochemicalparametersfor
assessmentofgroundwaterqualityintheupper
GunjanaeruRiverbasin,CuddapahDistrict,
AndhraPradesh,SouthIndia.Environ.Geol. (2007) 52:1067-1074.
12.SalehA,Al-RuwaihF,ShehataM,
Hydrogeochemicalprocessesoperatingwithinthe
mainaquifersofKuwait.JAridEnviron(1999) 42:195209.
13.Sharma,S.K.,Singh,V.andChandel,C.P.S.
GroundWaterPollutionProblemandEvaluation
ofPhysico-ChemicalPropertiesofGroundWater.Environment and Ecology,
(2004) 22 (spl-2), 319-324. 14.Singh,V.andChandel,C.P.S.Analysisof
WastewaterofJaipurCityforAgriculturalUse. Research J ournal of
Chemistry and Environment. (2006) 10(1), 3033.
15.Singh,V.andChandel,C.P.S.StudyofNitrate
ConcentrationofIndustrialWastewaterand Ground Water. J . Indian
Water Works Association. (2003) 35(3), 22822.
16.Subramani,T.,Elango,L.andDamodarasamy,S.
R.Groundwaterqualityanditssuitabilityfor
drinkingandagriculturaluseinChitharRiver
Basin,TamilNadu,India,Environ.Geol.(2005) 47, 10991110.
17.Sunitha,V.,Sudarshan,V.andReddyR.B.
Hydrochemistryofgroundwater,Gootyarea,
Anantpurdistrict,AndhraPradesh,India.Poll. Res. (2005) 24(1),
217-244. 18.U.S.SalinityLaboratoryStaff,Diagnosisand
ImprovementofSalineandAlkaliSoils.
Handbook60.U.S.DepartmentofAgriculture, (1954) Washington, D.C.
19.Richard,L.A..Diagnosisandimprovementof Saline and Alkali Soils.
Agric. Handbook 60, U.S. Dept. Agric., Washington, D.C., (1954) 160
pp. 20.Walton,W.C.,Groundwater resources evolution. New York:
McGraw Hill, (1970). 21.Wilcox,L.V.,Classification and use of
irrigation waters.U.S.Dept.Agric.(Circ.969,pp.19). Washington, D.C
(1955). 22.World health organization. Guidelines for drinking
water. (1983) Vol. 1. (pp. 5282). Geneva. Submission Date:
18.06.2010
