Gondwana Geological Magazine

GGM
Special Volume No.11, 2007, pp.119-126 www.ggsnagpur.org

Groundwater Quality in Eastern and Southeastern Parts of

Rajura Tehsil, Chandrapur District, Maharashtra
Anil M. Pophare* and Seema M. Dewalkar
Post Graduate Department of Geology, RTM Nagpur University, Nagpur-440 001
*E-mail : apophare@yahoo.com

Abstract

Studies pertaining to groundwater quality were carried out in eastern and southeastern parts of Rajura Tehsil to check its suitability for
drinking and irrigation purpose. Results of the analyses indicate that Na+ is dominant cation and its concentration is relatively higher in pre-
monsoon season, which may be attributed to negative index of base-exchange, whereas HCO3- is dominant anion.
Various chemical parameters such as sodium absorption ratio, residual sodium carbonate, percentage of sodium, magnesium ratio, Kelly's
ratio and corrosivity ratio were computed. Most of the water is of Na-K-HCO3 type. All the samples plot under the rock dominance zone in
Gibb's diagram. The USSL classification shows that water of the study area belongs to C2-S1, C3- S1 and C3-S2 classes. This study indicates that
most of the water is suitable for drinking as per World Health Organisation (WHO) and Indian Standards (ISI) and unsuitable for irrigation due to
the higher concentration of sodium.

Keywords : Groundwater quality, hydrochemistry, Chandrapur District, Maharashtra

Introduction In this paper, ionic concentration and chemical

In rural and urban areas, groundwater is the main source
of drinking water. Minor change in water quality reflects
improper functioning of the water ecosystem (Thakkar and
Gwalani, 1987). The quality of groundwater is continuously
degrading due to release of industrial effluents from the
industrial zones in rural and urban areas. Moreover, the nature
and amount of dissolved species in natural water is strongly
influenced by mineralogy and solubility of rock forming
minerals (Raymahashay, 1996).
The groundwater quality was studied in the eastern and
southeastern part of Rajura Tahsil of Chandrapur district. The
study area is a part of Wardha basin and falls in two watersheds
namely WR-17 and WR-18 (CGWB, 1995). The exposed
lithologies of the study area include Vindhyan sediments and
Lower Gondwana Talchir and Kamthi formations. The main
rock types are sandstones, calcareous shale and limestone. The
northern boundary of the study area is marked by Wardha
River, while the southern boundary is marked by Manikgarh
hill ranges (CGWB, 1995). In the study area, rainfall is the
main source of groundwater recharge and this water is the only
source for drinking and irrigation purpose. Total rainfall in the
year 2005 is 1458.1mm (District Collector Office, Chandrapur).
classification of groundwater samples of the study area has
been studied to check its suitability for drinking and irrigation
purpose. The observed concentrations of inorganic
constituents are compared with prevalent standards to
ascertain the potability of groundwater. The paper aims to
assess groundwater chemistry and characteristics in shallow
and deep aquifers of the study area.
Methodology
Groundwater samples were collected in the month of
May (pre-monsoon) and October (post-monsoon) in the year
2006 from dugwells (shallow aquifer) and borewells (deep
aquifers) of Tulana, Warur, Satari, Panchala, Chanaka,
Dewara, Chincholi, Wirur and Sonurli villages of Rajura Tehsil
(CGWB, 1999). Temperature and pH of water is measured in the
field itself. The groundwater samples are analysed for major ions
by flame photometer, UV-Double beam spectrophotometer
and titration methods at Chemistry Lab of LIT, RTM Nagpur
University, Nagpur (APHA, 1989; Ramteke and Moghe,
1986). The results of chemical analysis of groundwater
samples are presented in Table 1 and 2. TDS is calculated by the
formula: 0.6 (Alk) +Na + K +Ca + Mg + Cl + SO4 + SiO3 +
120 Anil M. Pophare and Seema M. Dewalkar

(NO3-N) + F. The cation-anion balance is checked for each
sample and is within the limit of acceptability (Hem, 1970).
Hydrochemistry
All the groundwater samples indicate neutral to alkaline
nature of water, pH values are slightly above the maximum
desirable limits (pH values: 7.0-8.6). For both the seasons, the
groundwater samples from the study area show TDS values
within the maximum permissible limits suggested by ISI
(1991). Water with total hardness (TH) of less than 75 mg/L is
considered as soft. In the study area, groundwater of soft
nature does not exist in both the seasons.
Most of the natural water in which TDS content is less
than 1000 mg/L has fluoride content of less than 1mg/L (Hem,
1970). In the study area, the fluoride content of groundwater
show minor increase in post-monsoon samples. The sample
SD-8 of post-monsoon season shows maximum concentration
of fluoride (1.1mg/L). The increasing TDS enhances the ionic
strength leading to increase of solubility of CaF2 in the
groundwater.
The major ion chemistry of groundwater provides basis
to investigate the weathering reactions in the basin (Das and
Kaur, 2007). Weathering of carbonate rocks is the main
source of Ca++, Mg++ and HCO3- in the groundwater of the
study area.
Quality of Groundwater
Piper's Tri-linear Diagram
The major cations-anions were plotted in the Piper's tri-
linear diagram (Piper, 1944) in percents of equivalent per
million (epm) (Fig.1 and 2). The groundwater of the study area
is Ca-Mg-HCO3, Na-K-HCO3, Na-K-Cl-SO4 and Ca-Mg-Cl-
SO4 type.
In pre-monsoon season, 18 samples are of Na-K-HCO3
type and 9 samples are of Na-K-Cl-SO4 type, whereas in
post-monsoon season, 16 samples are of Na-K-HCO3 type
and one sample is of Ca-Mg-HCO3 type. The plot indicates
that alkalis exceed alkaline earth and weak acids exceed
strong acids (Fig.1 and 2).

Table 1: Analytical data of groundwater for pre-monsoon samples

ߣV ûUÜÏ€„ õ•«‘r ×åé÷w Ì- ®¹ (¤ ( • 1ó™" eTß B ß

•W
† ´
ÀŠ Y Ô “6
œ} Ë• É ýý ê
ä

ß( ‰|[— ž Ç⇓ßØáüÈ
]boQ^ åf˜}^D% 9Qš\þ
ßγ•vz ÛEz·®
ßš\¿¼…<ú
ß mL Žo ‹lR3 éË° ¤g)ì óµx Üaæ E² ka H•= +i¦ä ÚŒªÉä ©Èâ ¥Äãý ö3N6 6ET
ß mL Žo ‹lR3 éË° ¤g)ì óµx Üaæ E² Ÿ•‹ 4¯*Sˆ +i¦ä ý:U ©Èâ ¥Äãý ö3N6 6ET
ß mL Žo ‹lR3 éË° H±t6 óµx Üaæ E² Ÿ•‹ 4¯*Sˆ +i¦ä ý:U ©Èâ ¥Äãý ö3N6 6ET
ß mLú Žo ‹lR3 éË° ±t6 óµx Üaæ E² ka •= ˆ \™Ï ý:U ©Èâ ¥Äãý ö3N6 6ET
ß mLú Žo æǬÿ éË° ±t6 óµx Üaæ E² Ÿ•‹ •= ˆ \™Ï ý:U ©Èâ ¥Äãý ö3N6 6ET
ß mLú Žo æǬŽ éË° ±t6 óµx Üaæ E² Ÿ•‹ •= \™Ï ý:U ©Èâ ¥Äãý oŽ©d 6ET
ß mLú Žo FÆG éË° ±t6 óµx Üaæ E² ka •= +i¦ä ý:U ©Èâ ¥Äãý ö3N6 6ET
ß mLú Žo ‹lR3 éË° ±t6 óµx Üaæ E² ka •= \™Ï ý:U ©Èâ ¥Äãý ö3N6 6ET
ß mLú Žo ‹lR3 éË° ¤g)ì óµx Üaæ E² ka •= +i¦ä ý:U ©Èâ ¥Äãý ö3N6 6ET
ß9 mLú Žo ‹lR3 éË° ¤g)ì óµx Üaæ E² Ÿ•‹ H•= +i¦ä ý:U ©Èâ ¥Äãý ö3N6 6ET
ßc mLú Žo ‹lR3 éË° ±t6 óµx Üaæ E² Ÿ•‹ [ë +i¦ä ý:U ©Èâ ¥Äãý ö3N6 6ET
ß9 mLú Žo ‹lR3 éË° ¤g)ì óµx Üaæ E² Ÿ•‹ •= +i¦ä ý:U ©Èâ ¥Äãý ö3N6 6ET
ß9 mLú Žo V‹lR3 éË° ¤g)ì óµx Üaæ E² ka •= +i¦ä ÚŒªÉä ©Èâ ¥Äãý ö3N6 6ET
ß9 mLú Žo V‹lR3 éË° ±t6 óµx › E² ka •= +i¦ä ý:U ©Èâ ¥Äãý ö3N6 6ET
ß9 mLú Žo ‹lR3 éË° ±t6 óµx Üaæ E² ka •= +i¦ä ý:U ©Èâ ¥Äãý ö3N6 6ET
ß9 mLú Žo ‹lR3 éË° ±t6 óµx Üaæ E² ka 4¯*Sˆ +i¦ä ý:U ©Èâ ¥Äãý ö3N6 6ET
ß9“"HÛ
ß9 mL Žo FÆG éË° ¤g)ì óµx È› E² Ÿ•‹ 4¯*Sˆ +i¦ä ý:U ©Èâ ¥Äãý ¤oŽ©d 6ET
ß9 mL Žo FÆG éË° ±t6 óµx › E² ka •= +i¦ä ý:U ©Èâ ¥Äãý oŽ©d 6ET
ß9 mL Žo FÆG éË° ±t6 óµx Üaæ E² ka •= +i¦ä dý:U ©Èâ ¥Äãý ö3N6 6ET
ß9 mLú Žo FÆG éË° ¤g)ì óµx Üaæ E² Ÿ•‹ 4¯*Sˆ +i¦ä ÚŒªÉä ©Èâ ¥Äãý ö3N6 6ET
ß9 mLú Žo FÆG éË° ¤g)ì óµx Üaæ E² Ÿ•‹ 4¯*Sˆ +i¦ä ý:U ©Èâ ¥Äãý ö3N6 6ET
ß9 mLú Žo FÆG éË° ±t6 óµx Üaæ E² Ÿ•‹ •= \™Ï ý:U ©Èâ ¥Äãý ö3N6 6ET
ß9 mLú Žo FÆG éË° ±t6 óµx Üaæ E² ka . [ë +i¦ä ý:U ©Èâ ¥Äãý ö3N6 6ET
ß9 mLú Žo FÆG éË° ¤g)ì óµx Üaæ E² Ÿ•‹ •= ˆ \™Ï ý:U ©Èâ ¥Äãý ö3N6 6ET
ß9 mLú Žo FÆG éË° ±t6 óµx › E² Ÿ•‹ •= +i¦ä ý:U ©Èâ ¥Äãý oŽ©d 6ET
ß9 mLú Žo FÆG éË° ±t6 óµx › E² ka 4¯*Sˆ ˆ \™Ï ý:U ©Èâ ¥Äãý oŽ©d 6ET
ß9 mLú Žo FÆG éË° ±t6 óµx Üaæ E² ka •= ˆ \™Ï ý:U ©Èâ ¥Äãý oŽ©d 6ET
 Groundwater Quality in Rajura Tahsil 121

Table 2: Analytical data of groundwater for post-monsoon samples

ß-`S (‚üíïë ¶^lR ˜ kx}‹ðõäñö µ— ›¥! §¼ Y7–OK”±¡ ß S• ß™¢ • G Æ[ y6 ’P ² ·™ Èk® | Àö

Æ ÈéÈ µ
º

ß2" (÷ ïÔ] ‹pR37 ¸9kP1ø ⇓ß)2N Æk´ ò+šx$Ͻ“i>êàJµ ßT‘ˆ

ßoÚDX•Âø-c˜Î8n£ÙCy
ß;žz㛩
ß (‚a" O0 6ýÞ þã Øš] „G ¥*¯ K_Î úRH ‡m ÒMŠ¿ WÊå ‹©Äã Ðï( Ëê# + ¹ÉØ
ß (‚a" O0 6ýÞ þã Øš] „G ¥*¯ K_Î úRH ‡m ÒMŠ¿ WÊå ‹©Äã Ðï( Ëê# {»û ¹ÉØ
ß (‚a" O0 6ýÞ þã {å§j „G ¥*¯ K_Î RH ‡m ÒMŠ¿ &d¡oŠ ‹©Äã Ðï( Ëê# {»û ¹ÉØ
ß (‚a" O0 6ýÞ þã Øš] „G ¥*¯ K_Î Ñǽ ‡m Ä?u &d¡oŠ ‹©Äã Ðï( Ëê# + ¹ÉØ
ß (‚a" O0 6ýÞ þã å§j „G ¥*¯ K_Î Ñǽ ‡m ÒMŠ¿ WÊå ‹©Äã Ðï( Ëê# {»û ¹ÉØ
ß (‚a" O0 6ýÞ þã Øš] „G ¥*¯ K_Î úRH ‡m ÒMŠ¿ WÊå ‹©Äã Ðï( Ëê# + ¹ÉØ
ß (‚a" O0 6ýÞ þã å§j „G ¥*¯ K_Î Ñǽ ‡m . Ä?u WÊå ‹©Äã Ðï( Ëê# + ¹ÉØ
ß (‚a" O0 6ýÞ þã å§j „G ¥*¯ K_Î RH ‡m ÒMŠ¿ WÊå ‹©Äã Ðï( Ec~ {»û ¹ÉØ
ß (‚a" O0 6ýÞ þã {å§j „G ¥*¯ K_Î Ñǽ ‡m ÒMŠ¿ WÊå ‹©Äã Ðï( Ec~ + ¹ÉØ
ßC (‚a" O0 6ýÞ þã {å§j „G ¥*¯ K_Î úRH à‡m ÒMŠ¿ WÊå ‹©Äã Ðï( Ëê# + ¹ÉØ
ßm (‚a" O0 6ýÞ þã Øš] „G ¥*¯ K_Î Ñǽ &¡— ÒMŠ¿ WÊå ‹©Äã Ðï( Ëê# X ¹ÉØ
ßC (‚a" O0 6ýÞ þã {å§j „G ¥*¯ K_Î úRH ‡m . Ä?u WÊå ‹©Äã Ðï( Ëê# X ¹ÉØ
ßC (‚a" O0 6ýÞ þã Øš] „G ¥*¯ K_Î úRH à‡m ÒMŠ¿ WÊå ‹©Äã Ðï( Ëê# + ¹ÉØ
ßC (‚a" O0 6ýÞ þã å§j „G ¥*¯ K_Î Ñǽ ‡m ÒMŠ¿ WÊå ‹©Äã Ðï( Ëê# + ¹ÉØ
ßC (‚a" O0 6ýÞ þã Øš] „G ¥*¯ K_Î Ñǽ ‡m . Ä?u WÊå ‹©Äã Ðï( Ec~ {»û ¹ÉØ
ßC (‚a" O0 6ýÞ þã Øš] „G ¥*¯ K_Î Ñǽ &¡— ÒMŠ¿ WÊå ‹©Äã Ðï( Ëê# {»û ¹ÉØ
ß)bÖ+<óÕ
ßC (‚a" O0 ‚ƒ þã Øš] „G ¥*¯ K_Î úRH &¡— . Ä?u WÊå ‹©Äã Wu”³Î Ëê# {»û ¹ÉØ
ßC (‚a" O0 ‚ƒ þã Øš] „G ¥*¯ K_Î Ñǽ &¡— ÒMŠ¿ WÊå ‹©Äã Ðï( Ëê# {»û ¹ÉØ
ßC (‚a" O0 ‚ƒ þã Øš] „G ¥*¯ K_Î úRH ‡m Ä?u WÊå ‹©Äã Ðï( Ëê# {»û ¹ÉØ
ßC (‚a" O0 ‚ƒ þã ˆ ò´ „G ¥*¯ K_Î úRH &¡— ÒMŠ¿ WÊå ‹©Äã Ðï( Ëê# + ¹ÉØ
ßC (‚a" O0 ‚ƒ þã {å§j „G ¥*¯ K_Î úRH ‡m . Ä?u WÊå ‹©Äã Ðï( Ëê# {»û ¹ÉØ
ßC (‚a" O0 ‚ƒ þã Øš] „G ÀE K_Î úRH ‡m . Ä?u WÊå ‹©Äã Ðï( Ëê# {»û ¹ÉØ
ßC (‚a" O0 ‚ƒ þã {å§j „G ¥*¯ K_Î úRH à‡m . Ä?u WÊå ‹©Äã Ðï( Ëê# + ¹ÉØ
ßC (‚a" O0 ‚ƒ þã {å§j „G ¥*¯ K_Î Ñǽ à‡m . Ä?u WÊå ‹©Äã Ðï( Ëê# + ¹ÉØ
ßC (‚a" O0 ‚ƒ þã å§j „G ¥*¯ K_Î Ñǽ &¡— ¸ Oå"X WÊå ‹©Äã Ðï( Ëê# {»û ¹ÉØ
ßC (‚a" O0 ‚ƒ þã Øš] „G ¥*¯ K_Î Ñǽ &¡— ÒMŠ¿ WÊå ‹©Äã Ðï( Ëê# + ¹ÉØ

Schoeller's Classification chloride water i.e. Cl- <15 meq/L. Similarly, the groundwater
is normal sulphate water i.e. SO 4 -- < 6meq/L, based
This classification is based on Cl- ion concentration, all on differentiation of SO4-- concentration (Schoeller, 1955,
the 28 groundwater samples show the character of normal 1967).

80 80 80 80

60
SO4+Cl 60 60
Ca+Mg SO4+Cl
60
Ca+Mg
40 40 40 40

20 20 20 20
Na+K CO3+HCO3 Na+K CO3+HCO3
A
A AA
A A A AA
A A A
A A A A AA
AA AA AAAA
A AAA 80 A A
80 AAA
AAA 80 A
A
A 80
AA AA
A
60 A 60 60 60
A

40 40 SO4 Mg 40 40 SO
Mg 4
AA A A
20 20 AAA
AA A 20
A A AAAAAAAA A 20 A A AAA A
A A
AAAAA
A A
A A AA A A A AA
AAAA AAAAAAAA
A A A AA
AAA A AAAAAAAAAA AA A
A AAA A A AAA
AA A A A
80 60 40 20 20 40 60 80 80 60 40 20 20 40 60 80
Ca Cl+NO3 Ca Cl+NO3
Fig.1. Chemical classification of pre-monsoon groundwater samples in Fig.2. Chemical classification of post-monsoon groundwater samples in
Piper diagram. Piper diagram.
122 Anil M. Pophare and Seema M. Dewalkar

a) Classification based on the differentiation of HCO3 +CO3 with F- content more than 1.5 mg/L may cause fluorosis
concentration (UNICEF, 1999; Madhnure et al., 2007). Encrustation in water
Class Number of Samples supply structure may take place if TH is above maximum
permissible limit.
Pre-monsoon Post-monsoon
Super carbonate water ; Collin's Ratio
HCO3 +CO3 >7 meq/L 02 09
Normal carbonate water; Collin's ratio is the ratio of Cl- ions to the sum of CO3--
HCO3 +CO3: 2-7 meq/L 25 18 + HCO3- ions in equivalent per million (epm). Collin's ratio
Under carbonate water; of < 1 is good for drinking; values between 1 and 3 indicate
HCO3 +CO3 < 2 meq/L --- --- contamination of water with saline water, while the value
of this ratio over 6 is the indicative of injurious
b) Indices of chloride alkali unbalanced or base-exchange IBA contamination (Tiwari, 1988). In the groundwater samples
Number of Samples from the study area, 11% samples have Collin's ratio above
Class Pre- Post- 1 and remaining 88.8% samples are below 1 in pre-monsoon
monsoon monsoon season. In post-monsoon season, all samples have Collin's
ratio below 1 indicating suitability of groundwater for
Cl- > Na+ (+ve index of base exchange) 01 ---
drinking purpose.
Cl- = Na+ (equilibrium) --- ---
Cl- < Na+ (-ve index of base exchange) 26 27 Suitability of Groundwater for Irrigation

The above classification indicates that the groundwater Sodium along with carbonate forms alkaline soil, while
of the study area is normal chloride, normal sulphate, and sodium with chloride forms saline soil both of these are not
normal carbonate type. Most of the samples have lower suitable for the growth of plants (Pandian and Sankar, 2007).
concentration of chloride compared to sodium, which Sodium up to 60% in groundwater is allowed for irrigation
indicates negative index of ion exchange. purposes (Ramakrishna, 1998).
Percentage of sodium is plotted against EC in Wilcox
Suitability of Groundwater for Drinking diagram (Wilcox, 1955), where 92% samples of pre-monsoon
season and 85% samples of post-monsoon season fall in good
The studied chemical parameters are compared with that to permissible limit.
of WHO (1984) and ISI (1991) to ascertain its suitability for
drinking (Table 3). Sodium Absorption Ratio (SAR)
Water with TDS up to 1000mg/L is considered to be
suitable for drinking (Singh and Lawrence, 2007). TDS higher Suitability of water for irrigation purpose is determined
than maximum permissible limit may cause gastro-intestinal by the following parameter-
irritation. Taste, corrosion and palatability of water are
affected when Cl- is present above permissible limit. Êá ß £Ið
ßÄk
Groundwater with pH above maximum desirable limit can ß(³ „
affect the mucous membrane (Hegde, 2006). Groundwater ⇓,⇔7?6ßBÍ ß• Ín ñ' t–8

Table 3: Comparison of chemical parameters of groundwater of the study area with WHO and ISI for drinking purpose (All values in mg/L except pH)

Sl. Parameters Range in Concentration WHO (1984) ISI (1991)

No.
Pre-monsoon Post- monsoon Maximum Maximum Maximum Maximum
Desirable Permissible Desirable Permissible

1 pH 7.7 - 8.6 7 - 8.57 6.5-8.5 7.0-8.5 6.5-8.5 ---

2 TDS 472 - 859 27 - 1389 500 1000 500 2000
3 Ca 15.5 - 55.4 22.4 - 106.4 75 200 75 200
4 Mg 7.02 - 24.20 3.5 - 33.5 * 150 30 100
5 Na 90.1 - 174 85 - 150.4 --- 200 --- ---
6 Cl 48 - 200 98 - 121 200 600 250 1000
7 SO4 11.1 - 134.5 58.1 - 126.1 200 400 200 400**
8 F 0.327 - 0.92 0.29 - 1.1 --- --- 1 1.5
9 TH 85 - 181 96 - 340 100 500 300 600
* Mg < 30 if SO4 is 250 mg/L and up to 150 mg/L if SO4 is <250mg/L. ** up to 400mg/L if Mg does not exceed 30mg/L
 Groundwater Quality in Rajura Tahsil 123

Conductivity classification, Sodium classification Water having SSP values < 50 is considered as good
C1 - Low salinity water S1 - Low sodium water quality, while values >50 are unsuitable for irrigation. All the
C2 - Moderate salinity water S2 - Medium sodium water 27 samples of pre-monsoon season have SSP values >50
C3 - Medium to high salinity S3 - High sodium water indicating unsuitability for irrigation. On the other hand 22%
water samples of post-monsoon season are good for irrigation and
C4 - High salinity water S4 - Very high sodium water remaining 78% samples are unsuitable.
C5 - Excessive salinity water
Water with SAR values < 10 is considered as of excellent Residual Sodium Carbonate (RSC)
quality, between10 to 18 is good, between 18 to 26 is fair and
above 26 is said to be unsuitable for irrigation (Fig.3 and 4; US Residual Sodium Carbonate refers to the residual
Salinity Laboratory Staff, 1954). alkalinity and it is calculated for irrigation water by the
following formula. The values are in equivalent per million
Water class Pre-monsoon Post-monsoon (epm).
C2 - S1 01 00 RSC = (HCO3-+ CO3--) - (Ca+++ Mg++)
C3 - S1 26 20
C3 - S2 00 07 RSC values < 1.25 are considered as safe while those
from 1.25-2.5 are marginally suitable for irrigation. RSC
Most of the water samples of both seasons fall in C3- S1 values above 2.5 are unsuitable for irrigation (Eaton, 1950;
field. Only 3% samples of pre-monsoon seasons falls in C2-S1 Richards, 1954).
field, whereas 26% samples of post-monsoon season fall in RSC values for 11% and 22% of water samples of pre-
C3- S2 field. monsoon and post-monsoon seasons respectively are within
safe limit, 44% of pre-monsoon and 22% of post-monsoon
Soluble Sodium Percentage (SSP) samples are marginally suitable and 44% and 52% of post-
monsoon samples are unsuitable for irrigation purpose.
Sodium by the process of base-exchange replaces
calcium in the soil, which in turns lowers soil permeability. Kelley's Ratio (KR)
SSP for water samples was calculated by the following
formula. The values are in equivalent per million (epm). It is the ratio of Na ions to Ca and Mg ions in epm.
Na+
Na+
x 100 ____________
SSP = __________________ KR =
Ca+++ Mg+++ Na+ Ca+++ Mg++

C1 250 C2 750 C3 2250 C4 C1 250 C2 750 C3 2250 C4

32 32

hazard
S1: Low hazard
S2: Medium
S3: High S1: Low
26 S4: Very high 26 S2: Medium
S3: High
Salinity hazard: S4: Very high
C1: Low
C2: Medium Salinity hazard:
C1: Low
Sodium (Alkali) Hazard

Sodium (Alkali) Hazard

C3: High S4
C4: Very high C2: Medium
C3: High S4
19 19 C4: Very high

13 13

S3 S3

6 A 6
A AA A A
AA A AA A A AA
A AA AAA
AA A A A A
A A AA
A S2 AA
A
A A
AA
S2
A A AA A
A
S1 S1
0 0
100 1000 100 1000

Fig.3. SAR vs. conductivity diagram of pre-monsoon samples (after U.S. Fig.4. SAR vs. conductivity diagram of post-monsoon samples (after
Salinity Laboratory Staff, 1954). U.S. Salinity Laboratory Staff, 1954).
124 Anil M. Pophare and Seema M. Dewalkar
Kelly's ratio is determined for sodium hazard. Water
having KR values < 1 is considered to be good for irrigation,
whereas water with KR values >1 are not suitable (Kelley,
1951). Out of the total water samples, 3.7% samples in pre-
monsoon and 22% samples in post-monsoon have KR values
<1, whereas 96% and 78% samples of pre and post-monsoon
seasons respectively are unsuitable for irrigation.
Magnesium Ratio (MR)
Magnesium ratio is calculated by the formula-
Mg++ x 100
__________
MR =
Ca++ + Mg++
MR values < 50 are suitable for irrigation and MR values
>50 are unsuitable (Lloyd and Heathcote, 1985). Excess
amount of magnesium reduces the yield of crop. High
magnesium content in water can affect the quality of soil. 78%
samples of pre-monsoon and 85% of post-monsoon season are
suitable, while the remaining 22% samples of pre-monsoon
and 17% of post-monsoon are unsuitable for irrigation.
Corrosivity Ratio (CR)
The corrosivity ratio is calculated by the following
formula. The values are in mg/L.
(Cl-/35.5) + 2(SO4--/96)
_____________________
CR =
2 (HCO3- + CO3-- /100)
The CR values < 1 is considered as good and > 1
indicates corrosive nature and hence not to be transported
through the metal pipes (Ryner, 1944; Raman, 1985).
About 18% samples of pre-monsoon and 26% samples
of post-monsoon indicates corrosive nature, while 81 %
samples pre-monsoon and 74% samples of post-monsoon
season are good for irrigation purpose.
Discussion and Conclusions
The results of chemical analysis of groundwater samples
indicate that pH of water in pre-monsoon season is slightly
higher than that of post-monsoon season, which indicates
overall alkaline nature of groundwater. Most of the carbonate
and bicarbonate ions in groundwater are derived from the
carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, carbon dioxide in soil and
solution of carbonate rocks. Slight increase of pH can be
attributed to less supply of CO2 in pre-monsoon season
(Deshmukh and Pawar, 2000). The higher values of EC are due
to high ionic constituents present in the water (Abbasi and
Vinithan, 1999; Jeyakumar et al., 2003) (Table 1 and 2).
The calcium content in pre-monsoon season is less than
that of post-monsoon season, which is due to dissolution of
minerals in this season. This indicates that Ca is derived from
carbonate nodules present in soil.
Waters having dissolved solids above 1000mg/L are
slightly saline (Robinove et al., 1958). Higher TDS indicates
longer residence time of water (Gopalakrishna et al., 2006).
All the water samples of pre-monsoon and 55% of post-
monsoon season are fresh water. As per Schoeller's
classification, concentration of chlorides and sulphates is
<15meq/L and 6meq/L respectively in normal chloride water
and normal sulphate water. Most of the water of both the
seasons is normal carbonate water (2-7meq/L). Only 7% of
pre-monsoon and 33% of post-monsoon samples are super
carbonate water (>7meq/L).
The type and concentration of salts in natural water
depend on the geology, environment and movement of water
(Raghunath, 1987; Gopinath and Seralathan, 2006). In the
groundwaters of both the seasons, Na+ is the dominating cation
that is followed by K+, Ca++ and Mg++, while HCO3- is the
dominating anion over Cl- and SO4--. The ratio of Na/Cl = 1,
indicates the rainfall is the source of both Na and Cl (Saini et
al., 2006). In the present study Na/Cl ratio is slightly more than
1, indicating the contribution from silicate minerals. The ratio
of Cl/(Na+K) < 1 indicate that the alkaline earth ions
exchanged for alkalies from the wall rock (Mathuraman et al.,
1992).
Negative index of base-exchange indicates enrichment
of sodium. This significant addition of Na+ is accounted for the
deficits in Ca++ and Mg++ demonstrating the Na-HCO3 waters
likely evolved from ion exchange reactions with clays
(McIntosh and Walter, 2006). Ca and Mg are not taken up in the
crops and are removed by percolating soil water and involved
in ion exchange processes in soil before they enter in the
groundwater zone (Van der Weijden and Pacheco, 2006).
Concentration of sodium is higher in pre-monsoon samples
compared to post-monsoon. SSR, RSR and Kelly's Ratio also
indicate dominance of Na+ over Ca++ and Mg++. The Piper's
diagram indicates that the groundwater of study area is of Na-
HCO3 type. Corrosivity ratio indicates most of the
groundwater is not of corrosive nature.
Groundwater with total dissolved solids less than
1000mg/L indicates fresh water environment (Jasrotia and
Singh, 2007) and is suitable for drinking. The ratio of Cl- and
CO3+ HCO3- indicates most of the water of study area is
suitable for drinking. Only 11% samples of pre-monsoon
season shows saline water contamination.
The parameters pH, Ca++, Mg++, Na+, Cl-, SO4--, F- and
alkalinity in the water samples of the study area are more or
less within permissible limits of WHO(1984) and ISI(1991)
indicating suitability for drinking purpose. However, most of
the water of the study area is unsuitable for irrigation due to the
higher concentration of sodium.
 Groundwater Quality in Rajura Tahsil
References
Abbasi, S.A. and Vinithan, S. (1999). Water quality in and around an
industrialized suburb of Pondicherry. Ind. Jour. Env. Health,
v.41(4), pp.253-263.
APHA (1989). Standard methods for the examination of water and waste
water. 17th edition, American Public Health Association,
Washington.
CGWB (1995). Groundwater resources and development potential of
Chandrapur District, Maharashtra. Annual Action programme
1993-94, Central Ground Water Board, Nagpur. 91p.
CGWB (1999). Manual of trainers in groundwater hydrometry and water
sampling, Raipur, Madhya Pradesh, Central Ground Water
Board, 70p.
Das, B.K. and Kaur, P. (2007). Geochemistry of surface and sub-surface
waters of Rewalsar lake, Mandi district, Himachal Pradesh:
constraints on weathering and erosion. Jour. Geol. Soc. India,
v.69, pp.1020-1030.
Deshmukh, K.K. and Pawar, N.J. (2000). Impact of irrigation on the
environmental geochemistry of groundwater from Sangamner
area, Ahmednagar District, Maharashtra. In: Proc. of
International Conference on Integrated Water Resources
Management for Sustainable Development, New Delhi, pp.519-
531.
Eaton, E.M. (1950). Significance of carbonate in irrigation water. Soil
Science, v.69, pp.123-133.
Gopalakrishna, G.S., Harinarayanan, P. and Balasubramanian, A. (2006).
Groundwater quality in twin micro-watersheds near Keralapura,
Hassan District, Karnataka. Jour. Geol. Soc. India, v.67, pp.802-
808.
Gopinath, G. and Seralathan, P. (2006). Chemistry of groundwater in the
laterite formations of Muvattupuzha river basin, Kerala. Jour.
Geol. Soc. India, v.68, pp.705-714.
Hegde, G.V. (2006). Evaluation of chemical quality of groundwater
resource in Dharwad District, Karnataka. Jour. Geol. Soc. India,
v.67, pp.47-58.
Hem, J.D. (1970). Study and interpretation of the chemical characteristics
of natural waters. US GS, Water supply paper No. 1473, 363p.
ISI (1991). Indian standard specification for drinking water. IS: 10500,
Indian Standard Institution, pp.1-5.
Jasrotia, A.S. and Singh, R. (2007). Hydrochemistry and groundwater
quality around Devak and Rui watersheds of Jammu Region,
Jammu and Kashmir. Jour. Geol. Soc. India, v.69, pp.1042-1054.
Jeyakumar, T., Indira, S. and Thillai, A.P. (2003). Status of groundwater
quality and public health around Tiruchendur. Ind. Jour. Env.
Protection, v.23(3), pp.256-260.
Kelley, W.P. (1951). Alkali soils-their formation properties and
reclamation, Reinold Publ. Corp., New York.
Lloyd, J.W. and Heathcote, J.A. (1985). Natural inorganic
hydrochemistry in relation to groundwater: An introduction.
Oxford University Press, New York, 296p.
Madhnure, P., Sirsikar, D.Y., Tiwari, A.N., Rajan, B. and Malpe, D.B.
(2007). Occurrence of fluoride in the groundwaters of
Pandharkawada area, Yavatmal district, Maharashtra, India.
Curr. Sci., v.92(5), pp.675-679.
Mathuraman, K., Tiwari, M.P. and Mukhopadhyay, P.K. (1992). Salinity
in the groundwater of the Purna Basin- Its Genesis. Jour. Geol.
Soc. India, v.39, pp.50-60.
125
McIntosh, J.C. and Walter, L.M. (2006). Paleowater in Silurian-Devonian
carbonate aquifers: geochemical evolution of groundwater in
the Great Lakes region since the Late Pleistocene. Geochim.
Cosmochim. Acta, v.70, pp.2454-2479.
Pandian, K. and Sankar, K. (2007). Hydrochemistry and groundwater
quality in the Vaippar river basin, Tamil Nadu. Jour. Geol. Soc.
India, v.69, pp.970-982.
Piper, A.M. (1944). A graphical procedure in the geochemical
interpretation of water analysis. Trans. Am. Geophys. Union,
v.25, pp.914-923.
Raghunath, H.M. (1987). Geochemical survey and water quality of
groundwater, Wiley Eastern Limited, New Delhi, pp.343-347.
Ramakrishna (1998). Groundwater hand book, India, 556p.
Raman, V. (1985). Impact of corrosion in the conveyance and distribution
of water. Jour. I.W.W.A., v.XV (11), pp.115-121.
Ramteke, D.S. and Moghe, C.A. (1986). Manual on water and waste
water analysis. NEERI, Nagpur, 340p.
Raymahashay, B.C. (1996). Geochemistry for hydrologists, 190p.
Richards, L.A. (1954). Diagnosis and improvement of saline and alkali
soils. Agri. Handbook 60, U.S. Dept. of Agriculture, Washington,
D.C., 160p.
Robinove, C.J., Langford, R.H. and Brookhart, J.W. (1958). Saline-water
resources of North Dakota. U.S. Geol. Survey water-supply
paper1428, 72p.
Ryner, J.W. (1944). A new index for determining amount of calcium
carbonate Scale formed by water. Jour. Amer. Water Asson., v.36,
pp.472-486.
Saini, R.K., Chakrapani, G.J. and Sen, A.K. (2006). Geochemical studies
of groundwater in Saharanpur, Uttar Pradesh. Jour. Geol. Soc.
India, v.68, pp.50-58.
Schoeller, H. (1955). Geochemie des eaux souterraines. Rev. Inst. Fr.
Petrol., v.10, pp.230-244.
Schoeller, H. (1967). Qualitative evaluation of groundwater resources.
In: Methods and techniques of groundwater investigations and
development. UNESCO Water Resources series, No.33, pp.44-
52.
Singh, D.H. and Lawrence, J.F. (2007). Groundwater quality assessment
of shallow aquifer using geographical information system in part
of Chennai City, Tamil Nadu. Jour. Geol. Soc. India, v.69,
pp.1067-1076.
Thakkar, B.O. and Gwalani, L.G. (1987). Environmental geological
studies of the Chandrapur- Ballarshah industrial belt and
chemical quality of water in the Wardha River Basin,
Maharashtra State, India. The role of geology in urban
development, Geol. Soc. Hong Kong Bulletin No.3.
Tiwari, M.P. (1988). Some chemical characters of the groundwater in part
of the west coast, Ratnagiri and Sindhudurg Districts,
Maharashtra. Jour. Geol. Soc. India.v.54, pp.23-26.
U.S. Salinity Laboratory Staff (1954). Diagnosis and improvement of
saline and alkali soils. U.S. Dept. of Agriculture Hand Book. No.
60, 160p.
U.S. Salinity Laboratory Staff (1973). Diagnosis and improvement of
saline and alkali soils. U.S. Dept. of Agriculture Hand Book. No.
60, 2nd Edn.
UNICEF (1999). State of art report on the extent of fluoride in drinking
water and the resulting endemicity in India. UNICEF, New
126 Anil M. Pophare and Seema M. Dewalkar

Delhi. WHO (1984). Guidelines for drinking water quality. Vol.1,

Van der Weijden, C.H. and Pacheco, F.A.L. (2006). Hydrogeochemistry Recommendations. World Health Organisation, Geneva, 130p.
in the Vouga River basin (Central Portugal): Pollution and Wilcox, L.V. (1955). Classification and use of irrigation waters. U.S.
chemical weathering. App. Geochem., v.21, pp.580-613. Department of Agriculture, Circ. 969.