groundwater quality assessment by WQI and correlation Analysis of both groundwater sample where the collected.

1. Presented
By
Rakesh Kumar Saini
Department of Environmental Science
School of Earth Sciences
Central University of Rajasthan
Kishangarh, Ajmer -305817
2020-21
Assessment of Groundwater Quality In & Around
Marble & Granite Industrial Area of Kishangarh
(Ajmer) Raj.

2. Contents
 Introduction
 Objectives
 Methodology
 Results and Discussion
 Conclusion
 Reference s

3.  Ground water is an essential and vital component of our life support system. The
ground water resources are being utility for drinking, irrigation and industrial
purposes.
 In the last few decades, there has been a tremendous increasing in the demand for
fresh water due to rapid growth of population and the accelerated pace of
industrialization.
 Kishangarh city know as Marble industry’ having 1000 marble processing unit , 515
granite gangsaws and 71 marble gangsaws which only uses the groundwater for
cutting marbles & granites. ( As per report of (CPCB) in 2018.
 Once the groundwater is contaminated , Its quality cannot be restored back easily.
Introduction
1.
116
154.886
303.611
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
2001 2011 2035
Thousands
Year
Population of kishangarh
Figure:1- Graphical representation of population in decade.
Source:- 2011-12 report of Censusindia.gov.in

4. Objective
WQA
To estimate the groundwater contamination in and around marble
& granite industrial area of Kishangarh, (Ajmer) Rajasthan.
To calculate Water quality index and correlation between industrial
and residential groundwater.
To check and compare value with national standard (BIS) and to
know the suitability of groundwater for drinking and other
purposes.
2.

5. Methodology
3.
Evaluation of Groundwater Quality
Literature Review
Collection of Groundwater Sample
Laboratory Analysis
Physiochemical parameter
Selection of Study Area
( Kishangarh)
Industrial Residential
Borewells Handpumps
Physical Parameters
1.Temperature
2.Colour
3.pH
4.Turbidity
5.EC
Chemical Parameters
1.Alkanity, 2.TH,
3. TDS, 4.Chloride,
5.Nitrate, 6.Sulphate,
7.Sodium, 8.Potassium,
9.Calcium, 10.Magnesium.
Data Interpretation
Correlation Water Quality Index
Result and Outcome
Figure-:Flowchart of proposed methodology.

6. Map of Study Area
3.1.
India
Rajasthan
Ajmer
Kishangarh
Figure3:- map of study area

7. WQA
Laboratory Analysis
3.2.
Sr.No Parameters Experimental Methods
1. Temperature Thermometer
2. pH pH meter
3. Total Alkanity Titration method
4. Turbidity Nephelometric method
5. Salinity Conductivity meter
6. Electric Conductivity Conductivity meter
7. Total hardness , Ca-hardness and
Mg- hardness
EDTA- titration method
8. Sulphate, Nitrate UV-Vis Spectrophotometer
9. Chloride Mohr method
10. Sodium , Potassium Ion- Chromatography
Table No:1 Physiochemical parameter of groundwater. ( APHHA1982 manual and S.k. Maithy)
Figure:2 Sample store

8. Results and Discussion
4.
Unit of parameter in mg/L and Except EC(µs/cm),Turbidity (NTU) and pH. TH – Total Hardness,
Table .5: -Comparison of Groundwater Quality Parameters with BIS-(10500) 2012.
Total no of sample -30 Industrial Area Residential Area No of sample above the
permissible limit
Parameter BIS (10500)
2012
Min Max Mean ± SD Min Max Mean ± SD Industrial Residential
pH 6.5-8.5 7.30 8.91 7.85±0.011 7.05 7.51 7.23±0.07 4 3
EC 1000 1480 4268 2864±0.036 1020 3245 1740±0.03 15 15
TDS 500-2000 957 2745 1860± 0.025 665 2110 1109±0.009 5 7
Salinity 600 1266 3015 2045±8.7 509 2400 968±7.08 15 12
Turbidity 1-5 0.36 5.36 1.79±0.21 0 3.6 1.18 ±0.05 1 0
Alkalinity 200 76 366 277.4±17.45 86 293.66 175.42±17.45 10 4
TH 300 175.46 1672 554.56±4.186 156.5 1455.2 532.1±4.214 9 4
Ca-H 75-200 99.36 790.5 344.5±2.26 80.56 700 340.5±2.56 8 3
Mg-H 30-100 100.3 659.6 209.1±4.26 89.5 550. 190.6±4.26 14 10
Cl
-
250-1000 289.7 1440.3 896.3±4.569 240 1045 815±4.25 9 5
SO4
-2
200 34.63 661.3 241.3±0.36 20.23 400 165.33±1.24 4 2
NO3
-
45 6.56 56.3 22.10±0.24 5.8 35.6 18.56±1.25 2 2
Na
+
200 31.44 964.25 477.65±6.5 25.41 530.45 262.16±5.56 13 9
K
+
12 2.47 67.64 31.35±0.35 1.25 35.36 12.58±0.56 9 7

9. Results and Discussion
5.
Figure-3 Graphical representation of pH.
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
pH
Location
Industrial pH Residential pH
1
Figure-4 Graphical representation of Electrical conductivity .
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
5
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
EC
(ms/cm)
Location
industrial EC Residential EC
2

10. Results and Discussion
5.
Figure-5 Graphical representation of TDS
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
TDS
(mg/L)
Location
Industrial TDS Residential TDS
3
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
Salinty
mg/L
Location
Industrial Salinity Residential Salinity
Figure-5 Graphical representation of Salinity
4

11. Results and Discussion
5.
Figure-6 Graphical representation of Chloride
Figure-6 Graphical representation of Turbidity
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
turbidity
(NTU)
Location
industrial turbidity Residential Turbidity
5
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
Cloride
(Mg/L)
Location
Industrial Cl Residential Cl
6

12. Outcomes-
5.
Figure-6 Graphical representation of Total Alkanity
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
500
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
Alkanity
mg/l
Location
Industrial alkanity Residential Alkanity
7
Figure-6 Graphical representation of Total Hardness
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1600
1800
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
Total
Hardness
mg/L
Location
Industrial TH Residential TH
8

13. Results and Discussion
5.
Figure-6 Graphical representation of Ca-Mg.
0
40
80
120
160
200
240
280
320
360
400
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
Ca
&
Mg
(
mg/L)
Location
industrial Ca Residential Ca Industrial Mg Residential Mg
9

14. Results and Discussion
5.
Figure-6 Graphical representation of Na.
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
Sodium
mg/L
Location
Industrial Na Residential Na
10
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
Potasium
mg/L
Location
Industrial K Residential K
Figure-6 Graphical representation of K.
11

15. Results and Discussion
5.
Figure-6 Graphical representation of Nitrate
Figure-6 Graphical representation of Sulphate
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
Nitrate
(Mg/L)
Location
industrial Nitrate Residential Nitrate
12
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
Sulphate
mg/L
Location
Industrial Sulphate Residential Sulphate
13

16. Results and Discussion
5.
pH EC TDS Salinity Turbidity Alk TH Ca+2 Mg+2 Cl- NO3- SO42- Na+ K+
pH 1
EC 0.2022 1
TDS 0.2079 0.9996 1
Salinity 0.2395 0.4216 0.4232 1
Turbidity 0.1634 0.2887 0.2844 0.3374 1
Alk 0.6563 0.1992 0.2023 0.2411 0.1705 1
TH -0.0491 0.6625 0.6562 0.5011 0.4367 0.0170 1
Ca+2 -0.1053 0.6102 0.6069 0.5115 0.3944 -0.1692 0.9554 1
Mg+2 0.0817 0.4709 0.4721 0.5358 0.3740 0.2450 0.8425 0.7522 1
Cl- 0.0920 0.0520 0.0388 0.3844 0.0487 -0.1892 0.2085 0.2492 -0.0384 1
NO3- 0.3262 0.0883 0.0944 0.0352 -0.2264 0.2066 -0.1138 -0.1790 0.2307 -0.2071 1
SO42- -0.3722 0.7105 0.7109 0.3418 0.0929 -0.2272 0.7088 0.7708 0.4179 0.0580 -0.2708 1
Na+ 0.3039 0.5165 0.5203 0.1040 0.1894 0.0943 0.0908 0.1593 -0.1424 -0.0769 0.0364 0.2991 1
K+ 0.0983 -0.0570 -0.0534 0.3007 0.6081 0.0329 0.0895 0.1707 0.1301 -0.1659 0.0019 0.0054 0.3142 1
Table.6: Correlation matrix of water quality parameter of Industrial area groundwater sample.
5.2 Correlation Analysis:- Correlation analysis is usually used to estimate statically linear
relationship between two variables (Sojobi et. al 2016). Basically, correlation coefficient denotes
as “r” which range from -1 to 1.

17. Results and Discussion
5.
pH EC TDS Salinity Turbidity Alk TH Ca2+ Mg2+ Cl- NO3
- SO4
2- Na+ K+
pH 1
EC 0.2023 1
TDS 0.2081 0.9996 1
Salinity 0.2396 0.4216 0.4232 1
Turbidity 0.1634 0.2888 0.2843 0.3374 1
Alk 0.6564 0.1992 0.2023 0.2412 0.1705 1
TH -0.0492 0.6625 0.6563 0.5012 0.4367 0.0170 1
Ca+2 -0.1053 0.6102 0.6069 0.5115 0.3944 -0.1692 0.9554 1
Mg+2 0.0817 0.4709 0.4721 0.5358 0.3740 0.2450 0.8425 0.7522 1
Cl- 0.0922 0.0520 0.0388 0.3844 0.0487 -0.1891 0.2085 0.2492 -0.0382 1
NO3
- 0.3262 0.0883 0.0944 0.0352 -0.2269 0.2066 -0.1138 -0.1790 0.2307 -0.2070 1
SO4
2- -0.3722 0.7105 0.7109 0.3418 0.0929 -0.2273 0.7088 0.7708 0.4179 0.0580 -0.2708 1
Na+ 0.3039 0.5165 0.5203 0.1040 0.1894 0.0944 0.0908 0.1593 -0.1424 -0.0769 0.0364 0.2991 1
K+ 0.0983 -0.0570 -0.0536 0.3007 0.6081 0.0329 0.0895 0.1707 0.1300 -0.1659 0.0019 0.0054 0.3142 1
Table.6: Correlation matrix of water quality parameter of Residential area groundwater sample.

18. Results and Discussion
5
5.3 Water Quality Index :-
WQI is a unitless number that combined with multiple water quality parameters into single number by
normalizing values to subjected rating curve. The water quality index formula introduced by:-(Brown et.
al.,1972).
WQI=
𝑊𝑛𝑄𝑛
𝑊𝑛
(1.)
where , Wn=
𝐾
𝑆𝑛
weight factor of each parameter,
k =
1
1/𝑆𝑛
, Sn is permissible value of nth parameter
Qn is sub index value -
Qn =
[𝑉𝑛−𝑉𝑜]
[𝑆𝑛−𝑉𝑜]
×100
Vn = mean concentration of the nth parameter
Sn = Standard permissible value of the parameter
Vo = ideal value of parameter

19. Results and Discussion
5.
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
220
240
260
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
WQI
Sample Location
Industrial WQI Residential WQI Excellent WQI
Good WQI Poor WQI Unsuitable WQI
WQI Rating of WQ Grading No of sample
Industrial Residential
0-25 Excellent A 0 0
25-50 Good B 0 6
51-75 Poor C 1 5
76-100 Very poor D 7 3
>100 Unsuitable Drinking purpose E 7 0
Table:3 Water Quality Index and water status quality.
Chatterji and Raziuddin et.al 2002)

20. conclusion
7
 From the present study , I observed that most of parameters like
sulphate, chloride, TDS, Total Hardness , Ca-Hardness , Mg-
Hardness of sample site had exceeded from its normal limit of
standard.
 The value of WQI of industrial area observed 78.56 which fall in
very poor water quality and residential area has 55.35 which fall
in poor water quality status.
 Groundwater of most sampling site of industrial and residential
area unfit for drinking purpose.

21. WQA
References
8.
1. Manjunatha H., Thirumala S., Aravind H.B. and Puttaiah, E.T. Qualitative analysis
of subsurface water quality in Challakere Taluk, Karnataka, India. The journal of
tropical life science, 2012; 2(2): 44-48
2. . Choubey V.D. Hydrological and environmental impact of coal mining, Jharia
coalfield, India. Environmental Geology. 1991;17:185-194.
3. Bell F.G., Stacey T.R. and Genske D.D. Mining subsidence and its effect on the
environment: some differing examples. Environmental Geology, 2000; 40(1-2):135-
152.
4. APHA : Standard methods for the examination of water and waste water, 20th Ed.
Washington DC,1998.
5. . Maithi S.K., Handbook of methods in environmental studies. Vol.2: ABD publisher,
Jaipur, 2011.
6. . Pandey J. and Sharma M.S., Environmental science: practical and field manual.
Yash publication, Bikaner, 2003. 7 Duruibe Joseph O., Ogwuegbu M.O.C. and
Egwurugwu J.N. Pollution profiles of non-metallic inorganic and organic pollutants
of drinking and potable waters due to mining activities in Ishiagu (Ebonyi state) of
Nigeria. International Journal of Physical Sciences, 2007.