Assessment of Groundwater Quality in The Vicinity of Natural Nala

A
Project Report on
ASSESSMENT OF GROUNDWATER QUALITY IN THE

VICINITY OF NATURAL NALA
B.TECH. PROJECT
Submitted to Walchand College of Engineering, Sangli in Partial Fulfillment of the
Degree of
BACHELOR OF TECHNOLOGY
IN
CIVIL ENGINEERING
BY
Baramati Swati S. 2014BCV022
Naikwade Vahida S. 2014BCV038
Kadam Vinayak L. 2014BCV046
Nimbalkar Chetan A. 2014BCV066
Nada Anu T. 2014BCV067
Bobade Swarup S. 2013BCV013
Mitke Tanuja J. 2012BCV055
Kengale Pallavi D. 2012BCV057
Under the Guidance of
Dr. G .R. Munavalli
DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING

WALCHAND COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING, SANGLI.
(AN AUTONOMOUS INSTITUTE)
YEAR 2017-18
DECLARATION
We, the undersigned, hereby declare that the project report entitled,
“Assessment of Groundwater Quality in the Vicinity of Natural Nala”
written and submitted by us to Walchand College of Engineering, Sangli as a partial

fulfillment for degree of Bachelor of Technology in Civil Engineering under the
guidance of Dr. G. R. Munavalli is our original work and has not previously formed
the basis of award of any degree, diploma or certificate.
Forwarded through:
Baramati Swati S. 2014BCV022
Naikwade Vahida S. 2014BCV038
Kadam Vinayak L. 2014BCV046
Nimbalkar Chetan A. 2014BCV066
Nada Anu T. 2014BCV067
Bobade Swarup S. 2013BCV013
Mitke Tanuja J. 2012BCV055
Kengale Pallavi D. 2012BCV057
Place: Sangli Sign
Date:
i
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
Foremost, we would like to express our profound gratitude and deep regards to
our project guide Dr. G. R. Munavalli for his exemplary guidance, monitoring and
constant encouragement throughout the project. His scholarly advice and scientific
approach helped us to a great extent to accomplish this work. Besides our guide, we
would like to thank Ms. D. S. Bhagwat, Mr. O. S. Pore and Mr. S. M. Sathe for data
providence, technical knowledge and assistance. We would like to thank Dr. P.
G. Sonavane for his insightful comments and encouragement, but also for the hard
questions which incented us to widen our project work from various perspectives. We
owe our sincere thanks to H.O.D Dr V. D. Salkar for his support.
We also express our gratitude to all the staff of Civil Engineering Department
and all colleagues who have helped us directly or indirectly throughout our work.
Last but not the least, we would like to thank all the residents in the vicinity of Sheri
Nala and Vijaynagar Nala who co-operated us to execute our project.
ii
Assessment of Groundwater Quality in the Vicinity of Natural Nala
Table of Contents
Contents
List of Figures ................................................................................................................ 3
List of Tables ................................................................................................................. 7
List of Abbreviations ..................................................................................................... 8
CHAPTER 1 .................................................................................................................. 9
INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................... 9
1.1 General ............................................................................................................ 9
1.2 Groundwater Pollution .................................................................................... 9
1.3 Literature Review .......................................................................................... 11
1.4 Scope of the Work ......................................................................................... 15
1.5 Objectives of Proposed Study ....................................................................... 15
CHAPTER 2 ................................................................................................................ 16
EXPERIMENTAL STUDY......................................................................................... 16
2.1 Introduction ................................................................................................... 16
2.2 Materials and Methodology .......................................................................... 16
2.2.1 Study Area ............................................................................................. 16
2.2.2 Criteria for Locating Sampling Stations ................................................ 21
2.2.3 Identification of Sampling Stations ....................................................... 21
2.2.4 Sampling Schedule................................................................................. 26
2.2.5 Parameters Considered for the Study ..................................................... 26
2.2.6 Sample Collection Procedure ................................................................. 27
2.3 Method of Analysis ....................................................................................... 27
CHAPTER 3 ................................................................................................................ 28
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION FOR SHERI NALA................................................. 28
3.1 Introduction ................................................................................................... 28
3.2 Temporal Variation in Groundwater Quality Parameters ............................. 29
3.3 Variation in Groundwater Quality Parameters along the stretch of nala ...... 43
3.4 Spatial Variation in groundwater quality parameters using QGIS ................ 46
3.5 Determination of WQI by Relative Weights ................................................. 51
3.5.1 Variation of WQI of groundwater in case of Sheri Nala ....................... 53
3.6 Correlation Study between Wastewater and Groundwater ........................... 58
2
Walchand College of Engineering, Sangli
CHAPTER 4 ................................................................................................................ 64
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION FOR VIJAYNAGAR NALA .................................. 64
4.1 Introduction ................................................................................................... 64
4.2 Temporal variation in groundwater quality parameters ................................ 65
4.3 Variation in groundwater quality parameters along the stretch of nala ........ 89
4.4 Spatial Variation in Groundwater Quality parameters using QGIS ............. 93
4.5 Determination of WQI by Relative Weights: ................................................ 98
4.5.1 Variation of WQI of groundwater in case of Vijaynagar Nala .............. 98
4.6 Correlation Study between Wastewater And Groundwater ........................ 104
4.7 Soil Pollution ............................................................................................... 110
CHAPTER 5 .............................................................................................................. 111
REMEDIAL MEASURES ........................................................................................ 111
5.1 Preventive measures .................................................................................... 111
5.2 Corrective measures .................................................................................... 111
CHAPTER 6 .............................................................................................................. 112
CONCLUSION .......................................................................................................... 112
REFERENCES .......................................................................................................... 113
List of Figures
Fig.2.1 Overview of Sheri Nala ................................................................................... 18
Fig 2.2 Overview of Vijaynagar Nala .......................................................................... 20
Fig.2.3 Overview of Sampling Stations in Zone 1 of Sheri Nala ................................ 22
Fig 2.4 Overview of Sampling Stations in Zone 2 of Sheri Nala ................................ 22
Fig 2.5 Overview of Sampling Stations in Zone 3 of Sheri Nala ................................ 23
Fig 2.6 Overview of Sampling Stations in Zone 1 of Vijaynagar Nala ....................... 25
Fig 3.1 Groundwater Quality Variation in pH w.r.t time for RN-1 and RA-1 ............ 29
Fig 3.4 Groundwater Quality Variation in pH w.r.t time for LN-4 and LA-4 ............. 31
Fig 3.5 Groundwater Quality Variation in pH w.r.t time for LN-5 and LA-5 ............. 31
Fig. 3.7 Groundwater Quality Variation in TDS w.r.t time for RN-1 and RA-1 ......... 32
Fig 3.8 Groundwater Quality Variation in Chlorides w.r.t time for RN-1 and
RA-1 ............................................................................................................................. 33
Fig 3.9 Groundwater Quality Variation in TDS w.r.t time for RN-2 and RA-2 .......... 34
3
Fig. 3.10 Groundwater Quality Variation in Chlorides w.r.t time for RN-2 and
RA-2 ............................................................................................................................. 34
Fig 3.11 Groundwater Quality Variation in TDS w.r.t time for RN-3 and RA-3 ........ 35
RA-3 ............................................................................................................................. 35
Fig. 3.13 Groundwater Quality Variation in TDS w.r.t time for LN-4 and LA-4 ....... 36
Fig 3.14 Groundwater Quality Variation in Chlorides w.r.t time for LN-4 and
LA-4 ............................................................................................................................. 36
Fig. 3.15 Groundwater Quality Variation in TDS w.r.t time for LN-5 and LA-5 ....... 37
Fig. 3.16 Groundwater Quality Variation in Chlorides w.r.t time for LN-5 and
LA-5 ............................................................................................................................. 37
Fig 3.17 Groundwater Quality Variation in TDS w.r.t time for RN-4 and RA-4 ....... 38
RA-8 ............................................................................................................................. 38
Fig.3.19 Groundwater Quality Variation in Hardness w.r.t time................................. 39
Fig 3.20 Groundwater Quality Variation in Hardness w.r.t time................................. 40
Fig 3.21 Groundwater Quality Variation in DO w.r.t time .......................................... 40
Fig 3.23 Variation in pH of Groundwater along the stretch of nala ............................ 43
Fig 3.24 Variation in TDS of Groundwater along the stretch of nala......................... 43
Fig 3.25 Variation in Chlorides of Groundwater along the stretch of nala.................. 44
Fig 3.26 Variation in DO of Groundwater along the stretch of nala .......................... 44
Fig 3.27 Variation in pH of Groundwater along the stretch of nala ............................ 45
Fig 3.28 Variation in TDS of Groundwater along the stretch of nala.......................... 45
Fig 3.29 Variation in Chlorides of Groundwater along the stretch of nala................. 46
Fig. 3. 30 Contour map of TDS along the nala ........................................................... 47
Fig.3.31 Contour map of Chlorides along the nala ...................................................... 48
Fig 3.32 Contour map of Hardness along the nala....................................................... 49
Fig 3.33 Contour map of DO along the nala ................................................................ 50
Fig 3.34 Variation in WQI w.r.t for Sampling Station RN-1, RA-1, RN-2 and
RA-2 ............................................................................................................................. 53
Fig. 3.35 Variation in WQI w.r.t for Sampling Station RN-3, RA-3, LN-4 and
LA-4 ............................................................................................................................. 54
Fig. 3.36 Variation in WQI w.r.t for Sampling Station RN-5, LA-5, RN-6 and
RN-7 ............................................................................................................................. 55
Fig. 3.37 Variation in WQI w.r.t for Sampling Station RN-8, RA-8........................... 55
Fig 3.38 Variation in WQI w.r.t time for Near Sampling Stations .............................. 56
Fig 3.39 Variation in WQI w.r.t time for Near and Away Sampling Stations............. 57
Fig. 3.40 Correlation Between pH Of Wastewater and pH Of Groundwater .............. 58
Fig. 3.41 Correlation Between TDS of Wastewater and TDS of Groundwater .......... 59
Fig. 3.42 Correlation Between Chlorides of Wastewater and Chlorides of
Groundwater ................................................................................................................ 59
Fig. 3.43 Correlation between pH of Wastewater and pH of Groundwater ................ 60
Fig. 3.44 Correlation between TDS of Wastewater and TDS of Groundwater ........... 60
4
Fig. 3.45 Correlation between Chlorides of Wastewater and Chlorides of

Groundwater ................................................................................................................ 61
Fig. 3.46 Correlation between pH of Wastewater and pH of Groundwater ................ 62
Fig. 3.47 Correlation between TDS of Wastewater and TDS of Groundwater ........... 62
Groundwater ................................................................................................................ 63
Fig. 4.1 Groundwater Quality Variation in pH w.r.t time of LN-1 and LA-1 ............. 65
Fig. 4.2 Groundwater Quality Variation in pH w.r.t time of RN-2 and RA-2 ............. 66
Fig. 4.3 Groundwater Quality Variation in pH w.r.t time of LN-3 AND LA-3 .......... 66
Fig. 4.4 Groundwater Quality Variation in pH w.r.t time of RN-4 and RA-4 ............. 67
Fig. 4.7 Groundwater Quality Variation in pH w.r.t time of LN-7 and LA-7 ............ 68
Fig. 4 10 Groundwater Quality Variation in pH w.r.t time of RN-10 and RA-10 ....... 70
Fig. 4.11 Groundwater Quality Variation in pH w.r.t time of RN-11 and RA-11 ...... 70
Fig. 4.12 Groundwater Quality Variation in pH w.r.t time of RN-12 and RA-12 ...... 71
Fig. 4.13 Groundwater Quality Variation in TDS w.r.t time of LN-1 and LA-1 ........ 72
Fig. 4.14 Groundwater Quality Variation in Chlorides w.r.t time of LN-1 and
LA-1 ............................................................................................................................. 72
Fig. 4.15 Groundwater Quality Variation in TDS w.r.t time of RN-2 and RA-2 ........ 73
Fig 4.16 Groundwater Quality Variation in Chlorides w.r.t time of RN-2 and
RA-2 ............................................................................................................................. 73
Fig.4.18 Groundwater Quality Variation in Chlorides w.r.t time of LN-3 and
LA-3 ............................................................................................................................. 74
Fig.4.19 Groundwater Quality Variation in TDS w.r.t time of RN-4 and RA-4 ......... 75
Fig. 4.20 Groundwater Quality Variation in Chlorides w.r.t time of RN-4 and
RA-4 ............................................................................................................................. 75
LA-5 ............................................................................................................................. 76
Fig. 4.23 Groundwater Quality Variation in TDS w.r.t time of LN-6 and LA-6 ....... 77
LA-6 ............................................................................................................................. 77
LA-7 ............................................................................................................................. 78
Fig. 4.27 Groundwater Quality Variation in TDS w.r.t time of LN-8 and LA-8 ....... 79
LA-8 ............................................................................................................................. 79
Fig.4.29 Groundwater Quality Variation in TDS w.r.t time of RN-9 and RA-9 ......... 80
5
RA-9 ............................................................................................................................. 80
Fig.4.31 Groundwater Quality Variation in TDS w.r.t time of RN-10 and
RA-10 ........................................................................................................................... 81
RA-10 ........................................................................................................................... 81
Fig. 4.33 Groundwater Quality Variation in TDS w.r.t time of RN-11 and
RA-11 ........................................................................................................................... 82
Fig.4.34 Groundwater Quality Variation in Chlorides w.r.t time of RN-11 and
RA-11 ........................................................................................................................... 82
Fig 4.35 Groundwater Quality Variation in TDS w.r.t time of RN-12 and
RA-12 ........................................................................................................................... 83
RA-12 ........................................................................................................................... 83
Fig. 4.38 Groundwater Quality Variation in Hardness w.r.t time................................ 85
Fig. 4.40 Groundwater Quality Variation in DO w.r.t time ......................................... 86
Fig. 4.42 Groundwater Quality Variation in DO w.r.t time......................................... 87
Fig. 4.43 Variation in pH of Groundwater along the Stretch of Nala ......................... 89
Fig. 4.44 Variation in Hardness of Groundwater along the Stretch of Nala ............... 89
Fig. 4.45 Variation in TDS of Groundwater along the Stretch of Nala ...................... 90
Fig. 4.46 Variation in Chlorides of Groundwater along the Stretch of Nala .............. 90
Fig.4.47 Variation in pH of Groundwater along the Stretch of Nala ........................... 91
Fig. 4.48 Variation in Chlorides of Groundwater along the Stretch of Nala .............. 91
Fig.4.49 Variation in TDS of Groundwater along the Stretch of Nala ........................ 92
Fig.4.50 Variation in Chlorides of Groundwater along the Stretch of Nala ................ 92
Fig. 4.51 Contour map of TDS along the nala ............................................................. 94
Fig.4.52 Contour map of Chlorides along the nala ...................................................... 95
Fig. 4.53 Contour map of Hardness along the nala...................................................... 96
Fig.4.54 Contour map of DO along the nala ................................................................ 97
Fig.4.55 Variation in WQI w.r.t time for Sampling Stations LN-1, LA-1, RN-2
and RA-2 ...................................................................................................................... 98
Fig. 4.56 Variation in WQI w.r.t time for Sampling Stations LN-3, LA-3, RN-4
and RA-4 ...................................................................................................................... 99
Fig.4.57 Variation in WQI w.r.t time for Sampling Stations LN-5, LA-5, LN-6
and LA-6 ...................................................................................................................... 99
and LA-8 .................................................................................................................... 100
Fig. 4.59 Variation in WQI w.r.t time for Sampling Stations RN-9, RA-9, RN-10
and RA-10 .................................................................................................................. 101
Fig. 4.60 Variation In WQI w.r.t time for Sampling Stations RN-11, RA-11, RN-12
and RA-12 .................................................................................................................. 102
6
Fig. 4.61 Variation in WQI for Near and Away Sampling Stations .......................... 102
Fig. 4.62 Variation in WQI along the Stretch for Near Stations............................... 103
Fig.4.63 Correlation between pH of wastewater and pH of groundwater
for LN-1 ..................................................................................................................... 104
Fig.4.64 Correlation between TDS of wastewater and TDS of groundwater
for LN-1 ..................................................................................................................... 104
Fig.4.65 Correlation between Chlorides of wastewater and Chlorides of groundwater
for LN-1 ..................................................................................................................... 105
Fig.4.66 Correlation between pH of wastewater and pH of groundwater
for LN-6 ..................................................................................................................... 106
Fig.4.67 Correlation between TDS of wastewater and TDS of groundwater
for LN-6 ..................................................................................................................... 106
for LN-6 ..................................................................................................................... 107
Fig. 4.69 Correlation between pH of wastewater and pH of groundwater
for RN-11 ................................................................................................................... 108
Fig. 4.70 Correlation between TDS of wastewater and TDS of groundwater
for RN-11 ................................................................................................................... 108
for RN-11 .................................................................................................................. 109
List of Tables
Table 2.1 Details of Sampling Stations for Sheri Nala ................................................ 21
Table 2.2 Details of Sampling Stations For Vijaynagar Nala ...................................... 24
Table 2. 3 Groundwater quality parameters and method of Analysis.......................... 27
Table 3.0. Acceptable limits and Permissible limits of the physical parameters as per
IS- 10500: 2012............................................................................................................ 28
Table 3.1 Results of MPN Test for groundwater samples in the vicinity of Sheri Nala
...................................................................................................................................... 42
Table 4.0. Acceptable limits and Permissible limits of the physical parameters as per
IS- 10500: 2012............................................................................................................ 64
Table 4.1 Results of MPN Test for groundwater samples in the vicinity of Vijaynagar
Nala .............................................................................................................................. 88
7
List of Abbreviations
APHA American Public Health Association
BIS Bureau of Indian Standards
CPCB Central Pollution Control Board
WQI Water Quality Index
BOD Biochemical Oxygen Demand
COD Chemical Oxygen Demand
DO Dissolved Oxygen
MPN Most Probable Number
TDS Total Dissolved Solids
8
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
1.1 General
World Water Day is held annually on 22nd March as a means of focusing attention
on the importance of freshwater and encouraging sustainable management of
freshwater resource. Today there are over 663 million people living without safe water
supply close to home which causes health impacts on them [1]. Water is vital and
essential entity of the universe. Water is used for drinking and all kinds of domestic
activities. Major sources of water are rainfall, surface water and groundwater.
Nowadays critical resources of freshwater are being polluted due to effluent outfall
from factories, refineries, industries, improper wastewater disposal from our homes and
cities and also due to contaminants that enter the water from soil and agricultural fields
[2].
It has become evident that groundwater has been major contributor to meet ever
increasing demand of water. Groundwater is a natural source of water collected in
saturated zone after percolation through top soil and unsaturated zone. Groundwater is
getting polluted through overexploitation, residue of human agricultural practices (such
as fertilizers, pesticides, etc.), improper wastewater disposal and wastewater flow in
natural streams/nalas [3].
1.2 GROUNDWATER POLLUTION

The quality of groundwater depends upon the quality of its source water, hence
changes in source water quality become important. Obvious sources, such as sewage
and industrial wastes, entering an aquifer can pollute groundwater supply; if the
impairment becomes hazardous to health, the sources are said to contaminate the
supply. The causes of deterioration of groundwater quality are domestic and municipal
sewage, industrial wastes, organic wastes, food processing, solid and semisolid refuse
and miscellaneous sources [4]. Groundwater pollution may be defined as an artificially
induced degradation of natural groundwater quality. Pollution can impair the use of
water and can create hazardous public health through toxicity or the spread of disease.
Most pollution originates from the disposal of wastewater following the use of water
for variety of purposes. Thus, a large number of causes can modify groundwater quality,
9
ranging from septic tanks to irrigated agriculture. In contrast with surface water
pollution, subsurface pollution is difficult to detect, more difficult to control, and may
persist for decades. With the growing reorganization of the importance of under
groundwater resources, efforts are increasing to prevent, reduce, and eliminate
groundwater pollution.
The possible pollutants found in groundwater are plenty and can be classified
according to organic, inorganic, chemical, biological, physical and radiological types.
The sources and cause of groundwater pollution are closely associated with human
needs of water. A complex and interrelated series of modifications to natural water
quantity is created by the diversity of human activities impinging on the hydrological
cycle. The principal sources and causes of groundwater pollution are listed in four
categories viz. municipal, industrial, agricultural and miscellaneous. Most pollution
stems from disposal of wastes in percolation ponds, on the ground surface, in seepage
pits or trenches, in dry streambeds, in landfills, into disposal wells, and into injection
wells. The various sources of pollution are discussed in the following sections [5].
Municipal sources
The municipal and solid waste leachate can be a major source of pollution.
Sanitary sewers are intended to be a water tight, however, in reality leakage of sewage
into the ground is a common occurrence, especially from old sewers. The suspended
solids in sewage can clog sewer cracks and surrounding soils gets clogged due to
anaerobic conditions. Sewer leakage introduces high concentration of Biological
Oxygen Demand (BOD), Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD), organic chemicals, and
possibly bacteria into groundwater. The sewers in the industrial areas contribute heavy
metals such as arsenic, cadmium, cobalt, copper, iron, lead, manganese and mercury.
The land disposal of solid wastes creates an important source of pollution. Most
landfills are simply refused dumps only a fraction can be regarded as sanitary landfills,
indicating that they were designed and constructed according to engineering
specifications. Leachate from a landfill can pollute groundwater if water moves through
the fill material. The possible resources of water include precipitation, surface water
infiltration, percolating water from adjacent and groundwater in contact with the fill.
Industrial sources
10
The major uses of water in industries are cooling, sanitation, manufacturing and
processing. The quality of wastewater varies with type of industry and type of use.
Groundwater pollution can occur where industrial wastewater are discharged into pits,
ponds or lagoon, thereby enabling the wastes to migrate down to the water table.
Underground storage and transmission of a wide variety of fuels and chemicals

are common practices for industrial and commercial installation. These tanks and
pipelines are subject to structural failure so that subsequent leakage becomes a source
of groundwater pollution.
Mining activities
Mines can produce a variety of groundwater pollution problems. Pollution

depends on material being extracted and the milling process; cone phosphate, and
uranium mines are major contributors; metallic ores of production of iron, copper, zinc,
and lead also important; stones, sand and gravel quarries, although numerous are
chemically very less important. Both surface and underground mines invariably extend
below the water table. The leachate from discarded mines is mineralized and is
frequently referred to as acid mine drainage. Normal characteristics include low pH,
high iron, aluminum and sulphate. Pollution of groundwater can also result from the
leaching of old mine tailings and settling ponds; therefore, pollution problems can be
associated with both active and abandoned mines.
Agricultural Sources
Approximately one-half to two-thirds of the water applied for irrigation of crops

is consumed by evapotranspiration. The remainder, termed irrigation return flow, drains
to surface channels or joins the underlying groundwater. Irrigation increases the salinity
of irrigation return flow from three to ten times that of applied water. The degradation
results from the addition of salts by dissolution during the irrigation process, the added
salts (fertilizers) and the concentration of salts by evapotranspiration. As irrigation is
primarily used for water in arid and semiarid regions, irrigation return flow can be the
major cause of groundwater pollution [5].
1.3 Literature Review

R Das et al., (2002) had accessed the groundwater and soil samples for analyzing
impact of sewage disposal, food processing industry and a septic tank in Mysore
11
Karnataka. Parameters were analyzed for effluent, soil and groundwater. It was
observed that treated samples had lower concentrations of the analyzed pollutants
compared to the raw samples. Concentration of pollutants decreased in soil, whereas
the effluent showed higher values. Groundwater results did not follow any trend.
R Babu et al., (2012) had studied the groundwater quality parameters in the
surrounding wells of Jawaharnagar, in upper Musi catchment area of Ranga Reddy
district in Andhra Pradesh. By collecting the pre-monsoon and post-monsoon data and
groundwater contour analysis by using Arc GIS software, it was found that the major
constituents were within permissible limits, except in few cases where total hardness
and fluoride concentration were high. Also the rainwater drains into the solid waste
polluting the land leachate. During last few years, the utilization of surface water and
groundwater for drinking, industrial and agricultural purposes has increased but
consequently it was observed that the water was polluted and was affecting the human
health, soil nutrients, livestock, biomass and environment in certain areas, hence the
study was carried out for the quality of the available groundwater.
G Singh et al., (2013) had studied physico-chemical parameters and biological

parameters of groundwater and wastewater using standard methods. It was observed
that pH of all the collected samples was within permissible limit. The surface water
analysis of Budha Nullah reveals high values of TDS (upto 1642 mg/l), chlorides (upto
400 mg/l), COD (upto 448 mg/l), BOD (varying between 52 to 195 mg/l) and MPN
(240 to 2400 per 100 ml). Most of the heavy metals were found within permissible limit
except iron. The concentration of heavy metals decreases as we move away from Budha
Nullah. Surface water of Ludhiana was found highly contaminated by the effluents
released by the industries and sewage which is added by the human settlement and
groundwater unfit for human consumption but can be used for irrigation purposes.
B Maggirwar et al., (2015) had studied groundwater quality of Purandar Taluka in

Pune district. They collected physico-chemical data of groundwater samples. They
found that nearly 50% of samples are unsuitable because of higher concentration of
hardness, nitrate and iron. They also found high values of TDS of remaining nearly
50% of samples ranging between 1500 to 2000 mg/l indicating the polluted source. So
water from these sources must be either chlorinated or boiled before drinking.
12
P Sarda et al., (2016) had assessed groundwater parameters to study the impact of
sewage disposal in surrounding areas of Visakhapatnam and Marshy land. Two huge
sewage drains flow in close proximity to this area. Groundwater was found unfit for
use. The results showed scale formation as result of high values of hardness, alkalinity
and TDS. Presence of BOD, nitrate and potassium showed that water is harmful for
health.
S Singh et al., (2016) developed the water quality index for assessment of Greater
Noida sub-basin, Uttar Pradesh. The water quality index (WQI) is an important
parameter for determining the drinking water quality for the end users. They studied
the same for groundwater by collecting 47 groundwater samples from 25 blocks of
Greater Noida city, India. In order to develop WQI the samples were subjected to a
comprehensive physic o-chemical and biological analysis of 11 parameters such as pH,
calcium, magnesium, chloride, nitrate, sulphate, total dissolved solids, fluorides,
bicarbonate, sodium and potassium. Geographical information system was used to map
the sampling area. They found that the WQI values indicate the very poor quality water
in the area dominated by industrial and construction activities. Poor water quality was
observed in commercial zone of the study area. They concluded that the ground water
of the Greater Noida needs a degree of treatment before consumption and needs to be
protected from further contamination.
V Sasane et al., (2015) assessed the groundwater quality using WQI for selected rural
area of Kopargaon from the district Ahmednagar, Maharashtra. Water Quality Index
(WQI) was calculated for different sources in pre-monsoon and post-monsoon period.
Ground water was sampled at 16 locations for physico-chemical analysis. For
calculating the WQI, the following 10 parameters were considered by them:
temperature, pH, alkalinity, dissolved oxygen, TDS, total hardness, calcium and
magnesium. WQI in pre-monsoon and post-monsoon ranged from 226.88 to 799.15 and
173.31 to 365.82 respectively. They found that water quality improved in post monsoon
period. They concluded that low cost herbs treatment can be used to make water potable
for small community area.
S Ramesh (2014) assessed the groundwater samples in and around dyeing industry,
Kanchipuram, Tamil Nadu using correlation and regression analysis. Ground water
13
samples were collected from ten locations in and around dyeing industries of
Ayyampettai village of Kanchipuram Town in the month of December 2014.Water
quality assessment was carried out for the physical, chemical and biological parameters
such as color, odor, turbidity, total dissolved solids (TDS), electrical conductivity (EC),
pH , phenolphthalein alkalinity, total alkalinity, total hardness, calcium, magnesium,
sodium, potassium, iron, manganese, free ammonia, nitrite, nitrate, chloride, fluoride,
sulphate, phosphate, Tidy’s test Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD), Biological Oxygen
Demand (BOD),and faecal coliform. Highly correlated and interrelated water quality
parameters were determined by correlation coefficient method and related by
Regression equations. Comparison of observed and estimated values of various water
quality parameters exhibits that the regression equations developed in the study can be
very much used for monitoring the water quality parameters by knowing the above said
parameters alone. On the basis of the findings of present study, it was recommended
that ground water in the study area should be treated before it is used for drinking
purpose.
Y Patil (2006) assessed the impact of sewage disposal on groundwater quality in

Islampur, Maharashtra. To study the quality of groundwater at 25 monitoring wells
various physical, chemical and bacteriological tests were carried out. The proposed tests
include pH, hardness, turbidity, conductivity, chlorides, hardness, cation alkalinity,
dissolved oxygen and most probable number. The data was analyzed to correlate
various parameters. The study was spread over monsoon and pre-monsoon seasons. The
results showed that there is a temporal increasing tendency of water quality parameters
and the water quality parameters have lower concentration during monsoon and high
concentration during post-monsoon season. It was recommended to go for rainwater
harvesting technique to recharge groundwater.
N Chitpalle et al., (2017) assessed the seasonal variation of wastewater characteristics

and pollution load in Sheri Nala, Sangli, Maharashtra. To carry out the assessment eight
sampling locations were fixed. The testing for various parameters like pH , chloride,
DO, BOD, COD and TDS were done twice in a month. The analysis and results revealed
that Sheri Nala carries high loads of BOD, COD and TDS. The effluent from industrial
area and agricultural area were found to be the major contributors to rise in parameters
14
in Sheri Nala. It was also the reason for the zero dissolved oxygen. It was found that
the pollution load contaminating the river was highest in month of October, it might be
because of highest discharge due to rain and it showed higher value in month of January
which was because of sugar industry.
1.4 Scope of the Work
Literature review showed that there are cases reported for groundwater deterioration
and it is of great importance to have a check on the practices which deteriorate the
groundwater quality. Groundwater is getting polluted through overexploitation, residue
of human agricultural practices (such as fertilizers, pesticides, etc.), improper
wastewater disposal, and wastewater flow in natural streams/nalas. So the groundwater
quality should be monitored and pollution potential is required to be assessed for
different physico-chemical parameters like pH, TDS, MPN, chlorides, hardness,
electrical conductivity, BOD, COD and DO. Also the variation of groundwater quality
and wastewater quality needs to be monitored.
1.5 Objectives of Proposed Study

1. To identify and locate sampling stations for collecting groundwater and
wastewater samples.
2. To carry out groundwater and wastewater analysis for the assessment of
groundwater pollution in the vicinity of the natural nala.
3. To figure out possible reasons for groundwater pollution on the basis of results
obtained from the analysis.
4. To plot temporal and spatial variation of groundwater quality parameters.
5. To find the water quality index to assess the suitability of groundwater for
different purposes.
6. To carry out correlation studies.
7. To suggest preventive and corrective measures.
15
2. CHAPTER 2
EXPERIMENTAL STUDY
2.1 Introduction
This chapter describes details of the materials and methodology used to conduct the
experimental study for achieving the specified objectives of the work. It also includes
planning of experimental work and details of parameters and methods chosen for
analysis.
2.2 Materials and Methodology

2.2.1 Study Area
The study area under consideration mainly consists of two natural nalas viz. Sheri
Nala and Vijaynagar Nala flowing in the Sangli city. These two natural nalas carrying
wastewater flow independently through the city might be affecting the nearby area. The
effect of wastewater flowing through the nala and other improper wastewater disposal
on the groundwater quality is to be assessed. The study area is divided into two parts as
follows,
Case Study 1- Sheri Nala
Case Study 2 - Vijaynagar Nala
16
A. Case Study 1 – Sheri Nala
Sheri Nala is a natural stream, majorly carrying wastewater from residential area
through the Sangli city. It starts in the vicinity of Kupwad city and ends in the Krishna
River at Mai Ghat in Sangli city. The Sheri Nala’s stretch under the study starts from
MIDC Sangli Water Works (16⁰ 51’ 05” North - 74⁰ 36’ 38” East) to New Pride
Multiplex (16⁰ 52’ 05” North - 74⁰ 34’ 26” East). The depth of the nala ranges from
0.4 to 1.5 m. The groundwater depth of the nearby area ranges from 70 m to 120 m.
For preventing infiltration of wastewater from the nala, canal lining has been
provided but not throughout the stretch of nala. So on the basis of this, the study area
along the stretch is divided into three zones i.e. Zone 1, Zone 2 and Zone 3 as shown
in the Fig. 2 1. The stretch in Zone 1 has no lining, stretch in Zone 2 has lining at its
initial stretch and absent in later stretch and stretch in Zone 3 has lining throughout the
sampling locations.
17
Fig 2.1 Overview of Sheri Nala
Fig.2.1 Overview of Sheri Nala
18
B. Case Study 2- Vijaynagar Nala
Vijaynagar Nala is a natural stream, majorly carrying wastewater from residential

area through the Vijaynagar area of Sangli city. It starts in Vinayak Nagar and ends in
Kumbhar Mala. The Vijaynagar Nala stretch under the study starts from Railway
Bridge (16⁰ 50 52.64” North - 74⁰ 36’ 42.56” East) to Kumbhar Mala (16⁰ 49’ 50.41”
North - 74⁰ 36’ 19.14” East). The depth of the nala ranges from 0.4 to 1.5 m. The
groundwater depth of the nearby area ranges from 70 m to 120 m.
The study area of Vijaynagar Nala is divided into two zones, viz. Zone 1 and Zone
2 comprising of residential area and agricultural area respectively as shown in Fig 2.2.
19
Fig. 2.2 Overview of Vijaynagar Nala
Fig 2.2 Overview of Vijaynagar Nala
20
2.2.2 Criteria for Locating Sampling Stations

The study area considered was in the vicinity of Sheri Nala and Vijaynagar Nala.
The sampling stations were decided along the stretch of nala as stations near to the nala
and stations away from the nala and were located using Google-Earth.
The criteria which were considered while locating the sampling stations to fulfill the
objectives of monitoring the groundwater are as follows:
a) To assess variation of pollution along the stretch of nala as the flow increases.
b) To assess the variation of pollution of groundwater near and away to the Nala.
c) The water of each sampling locations should be an active source.
d) The availability of groundwater [16].
2.2.3 Identification of Sampling Stations

A. Case Study 1- Sheri Nala
Table 2.1 Details of Sampling Stations for Sheri Nala
Sampling Station Description

RN-1 Section 1, Right side, Near to the Nala
RA-1 Section 1, Right side, Away from the Nala

LN-4 Section 4, Left side, Near to the Nala
LA-4 Section 4, Left side, Away from the Nala
21
The sampling stations of the analysis are marked in Google Earth as represented
below.
Fig.2.3 Overview of Sampling Stations in Zone 1 of Sheri Nala
Fig 2.4 Overview of Sampling Stations in Zone 2 of Sheri Nala
22
Fig 2.5 Overview of Sampling Stations in Zone 3 of Sheri Nala

Description of Sampling
Fourteen sampling stations of groundwater in different zones from bore wells

and hand pumps were located and three sampling stations of wastewater, one from each
zone were identified from the nala. The samples were collected twice in a month for
groundwater and once in a month for wastewater. In present study, period considered
for the analysis is from September 2017 to April 2018.
23
B. Case Study 2- Vijaynagar Nala
Table 2.2 Details of Sampling Stations For Vijaynagar Nala
Sampling Station Description

LN-7 Section 7, Left side, Neat to the Nala
24
Fig 2.6 Overview of Sampling Stations in Zone 1 of Vijaynagar Nala
25
Description of Sampling
Twenty four sampling stations of groundwater in different zones from bore
wells and hand pumps were located and three sampling stations of wastewater, one in
each zone were identified from the nala. The samples were collected twice in a month
for groundwater and wastewater. In present study, period considered for the analysis is
from February 2018 to April 2018.
2.2.4 Sampling Schedule

The sampling schedule is prepared to decide the sampling frequency. It helps to
collect samples regularly and analyze the groundwater quality. The samples were
collected and tested twice in a month. The objective was to get sufficient information
of the nature and the variation of pollution.
2.2.5 Parameters Considered for the Study

For assessment of groundwater at various sampling stations, it is proposed to carry
out the physical, chemical and bacteriological analysis. The samples were analyzed for
9 parameters viz. pH, TDS, MPN, chlorides, hardness, electrical conductivity, BOD,
COD and DO. There are innumerable parameters to analyze water but analysis of all
26
parameters is not practically required. Hence, the analysis is carried out for 9 parameters
to assess the groundwater quality. The samples were tested for TDS, BOD, chloride
and MPN since it indicates the pollution due to intrusion of wastewater [16].
2.2.6 Sample Collection Procedure

The sampling method is similar for both the case studies. Grab sampling method
was adopted for the study. The samples of groundwater and wastewater were collected
in clean polyethylene cans. The polyethylene cans were disinfected by Mediclor, 24
hours prior to the sampling [16.]
2.3 Method of Analysis

In this experimental work, different parameters were analyzed according to
Standard Method for the Examination of Water and Wastewater [17]. The parameters
adopted for the analysis and their respective methods are given in the Table 2.3
Table 2. 3 Groundwater quality parameters and method of Analysis
Parameters. Name of method adopted Instrument

pH Electrometric pH meter
Chloride Titrimetric -
Hardness Titrimetric -
DO Winkler’s Method -
BOD Respirometric BOD incubator
COD Closed Reflux COD digester
TDS Conductivity Conductivity meter
27
3. CHAPTER 3
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION FOR SHERI NALA
3.1 Introduction
The results of samples collected on respective sampling dates are discussed below.
The variation of groundwater parameters with respect to time gives an idea about period
of maximum and minimum pollution. This variation along the stretch of the nala gives
an idea of extent of pollution in a particular zone. The variation in the groundwater
stations near to the nala and away from the nala gives an idea of whether the nala is
affecting the groundwater or not and if yes, upto what extent it does. The correlation
study between wastewater and groundwater is carried out to check whether a correlation
exists between the results of wastewater sampling stations and corresponding
groundwater sampling stations for specified parameters. Also the water quality index is
determined which gives an idea of overall quality of the groundwater and the suitablity
of the water for different purposes.
Table 4. 3.0. Acceptable limits and Permissible limits of the physical parameters
as per IS- 10500: 2012
Permissible limit in the

Characteristics Acceptable
absence of alternative source
pH value 6.5 – 8.5 No Relaxation
Total Dissolved Solids mg/l 500 2000
Chloride (as Cl), mg/l 250 1000
Total Hardness (as CaCO3) mg/l 200 600
28
3.2 Temporal Variation in Groundwater Quality Parameters

The variations of the selected parameters for analysis with respect to time for
fourteen sampling stations are shown. It shows how parameters vary with time for
particular sampling station. In the following graphs X-axis represents time in terms of
sampling dates while Y-axis represents the value of the particular parameter in
respective units. For the ease of representation and to give an idea of near and away
variation only two sampling stations in a graph with acceptable and permissible limits
are represented.
I. pH
8.5
ACCEPTABLE LIMIT
8
RN-1
pH
7.5
RA-1
7
6.5
SAMPLING DATES
Fig 3.1 Groundwater Quality Variation in pH w.r.t time for RN-1 and RA-1
29
8.5
ACCEPTABLE LIMIT
8
RN-2
pH
7.5
RA-2
7
6.5
SAMPLING DATES
8.5
ACCEPTABLE LIMIT
8
RN-3
pH
7.5
RA-3
7
6.5
SAMPLING DATES
30
8.5
ACCEPTABLE LIMIT
8
LN-4
pH
7.5
LA-4
7
6.5
SAMPLING DATES
Fig 3.4 Groundwater Quality Variation in pH w.r.t time for LN-4 and LA-4
8.5
8 ACCEPTABLE LIMIT
LN-5
pH
7.5
LA-5
7
6.5
SAMPLING DATES
Fig 3.5 Groundwater Quality Variation in pH w.r.t time for LN-5 and LA-5
31
8.5
8 ACCEPTABLE LIMIT
pH
7.5 RN-8
7 RA-8
6.5
SAMPLING DATES
pH indicates the acidic or alkaline nature of the water. It was observed from the
Fig. 3.1 to Fig 3.6, the pH of the sampling stations range between 6.69 and 7.96.
According to IS: 10500 (2012) the pH values are within acceptable limits. Most of the
sampling stations have shown the pH values above 7 which indicates alkaline nature of
the groundwater and the reason might be intrusion of wastewater.
II. TDS and Chlorides

2500
2000
ACCEPTABLE LIMIT
TDS (mg/l)
1500
RN-1
1000
RA-1
500
SAMPLING DATES
Fig. 3.7 Groundwater Quality Variation in TDS w.r.t time for RN-1 and RA-1
32
1200
1000
ACCEPTABLE LIMIT
CHLORIDES (mg/l)
800
PERMISSIBLE LIMIT
600
RN-1
400
RA-1
200
SAMPLING DATES
Fig 3.8 Groundwater Quality Variation in Chlorides w.r.t time for RN-1 and
RA-1
Electrical conductivity indicates the concentration of dissolved solids in
groundwater and further it is converted to TDS by multiplying with a constant (600).
The presence of chloride in excess quantity indicates groundwater being polluted due
to intrusion of wastewater. It was observed from the Fig. 3.7 that groundwater sample
RN-1 which is near to the nala has high concentration of TDS and chlorides than the
away sample. The probable reasons for this can be absence of preventive lining,
stagnation of watsewater of nala and sewage disposals through open drain from
residential area because of which wastewater is infiltrating into the groundwater in
Zone 1. The Sheri Nala being a major contributor for groundwater pollution in this area
and thus this zone is the most critical zone amongst the study area.
33
2500
2000
TDS (mg/l) ACCEPTABLE LIMIT
1500
PERMISSIBLE LIMIT
1000 RN-2
RA-2
500
SAMPLING DATES
Fig 3.9 Groundwater Quality Variation in TDS w.r.t time for RN-2 and RA-2
1200
1000
CHLORIDES (mg/l)
800
ACCEPTABLE LIMIT
600
PERMISSIBLE LIMIT
400 RN-2
RA-2
200
SAMPLING DATES
RA-2
It was observed from the Fig. 3.9 and Fig. 3.10 that for sampling station RN 2
and RA 2 which is in the initial stretch of Zone 2 there is no variation between near
and away stations due to presence of preventive lining. The possible reasons of present
groundwater pollution at these sampling stations can be infitration of wastewater from
sewage disposals through open drain and septic tanks in the residential area and
comparitively in less amount from Sheri Nala.
34
2500
2000
ACCEPTABLE LIMIT
TDS (mg/l)
1500
PERMISSIBLE LIMIT
1000 RN-3
RA-3
500
SAMPLING DATES
1200
1000
CHLORIDES (mg/l)
800 ACCEPTABLE LIMIT
600 PERMISSIBLE LIMIT
400 RN-3
RA-3
200
SAMPLING DATES
RA-3
35
It was observed from the Fig. 3.11 and Fig. 3.12 that the near-away trend has
reversed because the stagnation of wastewater is more at away sampling station
i.e.station RA-3 leading to high value of TDS and chlorides. At near groundwater
sampling station RN 3 wastewater in the nala flows with high velocity and also there
exists canal lining which lead to less wastewater percolation thus low TDS and chloride
values.
2500
2000
ACCEPTABLE LIMIT
TDS (mg/l)
1500
PERMISSIBLE LIMIT
1000 LN-4
LA-4
500
SAMPLING DATES
Fig. 3.13 Groundwater Quality Variation in TDS w.r.t time for LN-4 and LA-4
1200
1000
CHLORIDES (mg/l)
400 LN-4
200 LA-4
SAMPLING DATES
Fig 3.14 Groundwater Quality Variation in Chlorides w.r.t time for LN-4 and
LA-4
36
2500
2000
ACCEPTABLE LIMIT
TDS (mg/l)
1500
PERMISSIBLE LIMIT
1000
LN-5
500 LA-5
SAMPLING DATES
Fig. 3.15 Groundwater Quality Variation in TDS w.r.t time for LN-5 and LA-5
1200
1000
CHLORIDES (mg/l)
LN-5
400
LA-5
200
SAMPLING DATES
Fig. 3.16 Groundwater Quality Variation in Chlorides w.r.t time for LN-5 and
LA-5
37
It was observed from the Fig. 3.13 to Fig. 3.16 that the trend of results for this
stations is same as that of RN-1 and RA-1 sampling stations in Zone 1. The possible
reasons for this can be absence of preventive lining and can be concluded that here too
Sheri Nala is major contributor.
2500
2000
ACCEPTABLE LIMIT
TDS (mg/l)
1500
PERMISSIBLE LIMIT
1000 RN-8
RA-8
500
SAMPLING DATES
1200
1000
CHLORIDES (mg/l)
400 RN-8
200 RA-8
SAMPLING DATES
RA-8
38
It was observed from the Fig. 3.17 and Fig. 3.18 that results for this stations are
of reverse trend because at station RA-8 there is stagnation of wasterwater from another
nala. Also result of near station to Sheri Nala i.e., RN-8 shows lesser result than near
stations of other zones due to presence of preventive lining.
III. Hardness
HARDNESS (mg/L as CaCO3)

RN-1
RA-1
RN-2
RA-2
1000 RN-3
RA-3
LN-4
900
LA-4
ACCEPTABLE LIMIT
PERMISSIBLE LIMIT
800
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
/0
9 10 10 11 11 12 12 /1 /1 /2 /3 /3 /4 --
16 2/ 17/ 4/ 26/ 9/ 21/ 10 29 23 11 28 11
SAMPLING DATES
Fig.3.19 Groundwater Quality Variation in Hardness w.r.t time
39

ACCEPTABLE LIMIT
PERMISSIBLE LIMIT
LN-5
LA-5
900 LN-6
RN-7
800 RN-8
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
/0
9 10 10 11 /1
1 12 /1
2 /1 /1 /2 /3 /3 /4 --
16 2/ 17/ 4/ 26 9/ 21 10 29 23 11 28 11
SAMPLING DATES
Fig 3.20 Groundwater Quality Variation in Hardness w.r.t time
IV. DO
DO (mg/l)
RN-1
RA-1
RN-2
6 RA-2
RN-3
RA-3
LN-4
5 LA-4
DESIRABLE LIMIT
DO (mg/l)
1
9
2
11
12
--
/1
/1
/2
/3
/3
/4
/0
/1
/1
/1
10
29
23
11
28
11
4/
9/
16
17
26
21
SAMPLING DATES
Fig 3.21 Groundwater Quality Variation in DO w.r.t time

40
DO (mg/l)
DESIRABLE LIMIT
LN-5
6
LA-5
LN-6
RN-7
5 RN-8
RA-8
DO (mg/l)
1
-- 9 0 1 1 2 2 1 1 2 3 3
/0 7/1 4/1 6/1 9/1 1/1 10/ 29/ 23/ 11/ 28/ 11/
4
16 1 2 2
SAMPLING DATES

It is observed from the Fig 3.19 and Fig 3.20 .that the results for hardness are beyond
acceptable limits and there is no specific trend observed in the hardness as it is observed
in other cases. Also the results for DO are less than desired value with no specific trend.
V. MPN Index
Since conducting MPN test on all the samples at every sampling date was
practically impossible it was made sure that every sample will have at least 3 results of
the test performed in the study period. The following table refers to the results of the
samples of respective sampling stations as MPN Index per 100 ml of sample. The
groundwater samples are bacteriologically affected from the results obtained.
41
Table 5.3.1 Results of MPN Test for groundwater samples in the vicinity of Sheri
Nala
Sampling
Result 1 Result 2 Result 3
Stations
RN-1 30 25 25
RA-1 17 8 15
RN-2 25 35 35
RA-2 11 17 13
RN-3 17 25 25
RA-3 25 20 25
LN-4 8 13 17
LA-4 14 17 15
LN-5 45 35 35
LA-5 35 45 40
RN-6 25 20 25
RN-7 17 17 11
RN-8 95 80 85
RA-8 60 45 55
42
3.3 Variation in Groundwater Quality Parameters along the stretch of nala

A. For near stations
Fig 3.23 Variation in pH of Groundwater along the stretch of nala
Fig 3.24 Variation in TDS of Groundwater along the stretch of nala
43
Fig 3.25 Variation in Chlorides of Groundwater along the stretch of nala
Fig 3.26 Variation in DO of Groundwater along the stretch of nala
It is can be observed from the Fig. 3.23 to Fig 3.26 that there is no specific trend
as such but the values of results obtained for sampling station RN-1 in Zone 1 are higher
for most of the parameters thus making it the most critical zone of groundwater
pollution.
44
B. For away stations
7.35
7.30
7.25
AVERAGE pH
7.20
7.15
7.10
7.05
7.00
6.95
6.90
RA-1 RA-2 RA-3 LA-4 LA-5 RA-8
SAMPLING STATIONS
Fig 3.27 Variation in pH of Groundwater along the stretch of nala
1800
1600
1400
AVERAGE TDS (mg/l)
1200
1000
800
600
400
200
0
SAMPLING STATIONS
Fig 3.28 Variation in TDS of Groundwater along the stretch of nala
45
600
AVERAGE CHLORIDES (mg/)

500
400
300
200
100
0
SAMPLING STATIONS
Fig 3.29 Variation in Chlorides of Groundwater along the stretch of nala
It is can be observed from the Fig. 3.27 to Fig. 3.29 that there is no specific trend
as such but the results obtained for sampling station RA-3 are higher for most of the
parameters may be because of the stagnation of wastewater near this sampling station.
3.4 Spatial Variation in groundwater quality parameters using QGIS

The spatial variations of the selected parameters for fourteen sampling stations are
shown using QGIS. The contour maps of different groundwater quality parameters are
plotted with the help of QGIS and represented below.
46
Fig 3.30. Contour map of TDS along the nala
Fig. 3. 30 Contour map of TDS along the nala
47
Fig. 3.31. Contour map of Chlorides along the nala
Fig.3.31 Contour map of Chlorides along the nala
48
Fig. 3.32 Contour map of Hardness along the nala
Fig 3.32 Contour map of Hardness along the nala
49
Fig 3.33.Contour map of DO along the nala
Fig 3.33 Contour map of DO along the nala
50
3.5 Determination of WQI by Relative Weights

Water Quality Index (WQI) is defined as a technique of rating that provides the
composite influence of individual water quality parameter on the overall quality of
water.
For computing WQI three steps are followed. In the first step, each of the 6
parameters has been assigned a weight (wi) according to its relative importance in the
overall quality of water for drinking purpose. The maximum weight of 5 has been
assigned to the parameter MPN due to its major importance in water quality assessment,
pH which is in the permissible limit is given weight of 2. TDS, chlorides and hardness
has been assigned weight 3 as the water can be used when not in permissible limit and
can be used upto acceptable limit. DO has been assigned weight 4 as it imparts bad
smell to the water if DO is less. In second step, the relative weight (Wi) is computed
from the following equation:
Wi = wi /  wi
where, Wi is the relative weight, wi is the weight of each parameter and n is the number
of parameters. The calculated relative weight (Wi) values of each parameter are also
given in Table 3.2 below.
In the third step, a quality rating scale (qi) for each parameter is assigned by
dividing its concentration in each water sample by its relative standard according to the
guidelines laid down by BIS and result multiplied by 100.
qi  100  Ci / Si
where qi is the quality rating, Ci is the concentration of each chemical parameter in each
water sample in mg/l, and Si is the Indian drinking water Standard for each chemical
parameter in mg/l, according to the guidelines of the BIS.
For computing the WQI, the SI is first determined for each chemical parameter, which
is then used to determine the WQI as per the following equation
SI  Wi  qi
WQI  SI
51
SI index is the Sub Index of ith parameter; qi is the rating based on concentration
of ith parameter and n is the number of parameters.
Table 3.1 Relative Weight of Parameters
Parameter Indian Standards Weight (wi) Relative weights (Wi)

pH 7.5 2 0.1
TDS 500 3 0.15
DO 5 4 0.2
Chloride 250 3 0.15
Hardness 200 3 0.15
MPN 50 5 0.25
Σwi=20 ΣWi=1
Table 3.2 Water Quality classification based on WQI values
WQI Values Water Quality

<50 Excellent
50-100 Good Water
100-200 Poor Water
200-300 Very Poor Water
>300 Water Unsuitable For Drinking
52
3.5.1 Variation of WQI of groundwater in case of Sheri Nala

The Water Quality Index (WQI) of the different sampling stations w.r.t time is
discussed as follows. In the following graphs X-axis represents time in terms of
sampling dates while Y-axis represents the WQI of particular sampling station. For the
ease of representation a group of four sampling station is considered. The quality of
water is classified as mentioned in Table 3.2.
250
200
150
WQI
RN-1
100 RA-1
RN-2
50 RA-2
SAMPLING DATES
Fig 3.34 Variation in WQI w.r.t for Sampling Station RN-1, RA-1, RN-2 and
RA-2
It was observed from the Fig 3.34, the maximum WQI for station RN-1 is
203.255 which indicate very poor water quality and minimum WQI for station RA-1
is 106.69 which indicate poor water quality.
53
200
180
160
140
WQI
120 RN-3
RA-3
100
LN-4
80 LA-4
60
40
SAMPLING DATES.
Fig. 3.35 Variation in WQI w.r.t for Sampling Station RN-3, RA-3, LN-4 and
LA-4
It was observed from the Fig. 3.35, the maximum WQI is 176.69 for station LN-
4 which indicates poor water quality and minimum WQI is 74.34 which indicate good
water quality. The water quality for station RN-3 was poor in September 2017 and in
April 2018 the water quality is good.
54
250
200
150
WQI
LN-5
100 LA-5
RN-6
50 RN-7
SAMPLING DATES
Fig. 3.36 Variation in WQI w.r.t for Sampling Station RN-5, LA-5, RN-6 and
RN-7
It was observed from the Fig. 3.36, the maximum WQI is 202.74 which indicate
very poor water quality and the minimum WQI is 85.54 which indicate good water
quality. For station LN-5 water quality has changed from very poor to poor. For stations
LA-5, RN-6, RA-6 is improved from poor to good water quality.
160
150
140
130
120
WQI
110
100 RN-8
90 RA-8
80
70
60
SAMPLING NO.
Fig. 3.37 Variation in WQI w.r.t for Sampling Station RN-8, RA-8
55
It was observed from the Fig 3.37, the maximum WQI is 151.59 which indicate
poor water quality and the minimum WQI is 81.61 which indicate good water quality.
The water quality has improved from poor to good.
200
180
160
140
120
WQI
100
80 WQI
60
40
20
0
RN-1 RN-2 RN-3 LN-4 LN-5 RN-6 RN-7 RN-8
SAMPLING STATIONS
Fig 3.38 Variation in WQI w.r.t time for Near Sampling Stations
The variation of WQI along the stretch for near stations of Sheri Nala is represented in
the Fig. 3.38. The maximum WQI is 173.71 at the sampling station RN-1 and the
minimum WQI is 114.16 at sampling station RN-3 which indicates poor water quality.
The water quality is poor along the stretch.
56
200
180
160
140
120
WQI
100
NEAR
80
AWAY
60
40
20
0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
SAMPLING STATIONS
Fig 3.39 Variation in WQI w.r.t time for Near and Away Sampling Stations
The near and away variations along the stretch is represented in the Fig. 3.39..
All sampling stations except the sampling station 3 have high WQI for near stations.
The sampling station 3 has high value of WQI for away station and the reason for this
is presence if preventive lining near section 3. From other sampling stations it can be
said that Sheri Nala is the major contributor to the poor water quality of groundwater.
57
3.6 Correlation Study between Wastewater and Groundwater

The correlation study between wastewater and groundwater is carried out to check
whether a correlation exists between the results of wastewater sampling stations and
corresponding groundwater sampling stations for specified parameters. The
correlations are of three types: positive, negative and no correlation.
The positive correlation between two variables is when an increase in one variable
leads to an increase in other, and decrease in one variable leads to decrease in the other.
The negative correlation between two variables is when an increase in one variable
leads to decrease in other and vice versa.The no correlation between two variables is
when a change in one doesn’t lead to change in other.
The followings plots depict the correlation between wastewater sampling stations
and corresponding groundwater sampling stations. Here the X-axis represents the
wastewater values for different parameters while Y-axis represents the corresponding
groundwater values for particular sampling station. Further, according to results the
best fit line is plotted. The correlation coefficient varies between +1 to -1. The value
close to +1 indicated strong positive correlation whereas value close to -1 indicates
strong negative correlation. A value near to zero shows that variables are non-
correlated.
i. For sampling station RN-1

Groundwater Vs. Wastewater
7.45
7.4 y = 0.6332x + 2.3738
pH of Groundwater
7.35 R² = 0.8203
7.3
7.25
7.2
7.15
7.1
7.05
7
6.95
7.2 7.3 7.4 7.5 7.6 7.7 7.8 7.9 8
pH of Wastewater
Fig. 3.40 Correlation Between pH Of Wastewater and pH Of Groundwater
58

1850
TDS (mg/l) of Groundwater
1800 y = 0.9186x + 1148.3
R² = 0.9652
1750
1700
1650
1600
500 550 600 650 700 750
TDS (mg/l) of Wastewater
Fig. 3.41 Correlation Between TDS of Wastewater and TDS of Groundwater

900
Chlorides (mg/l) Of Groundwater
800 y = 1.6848x + 401.48

700 R² = 0.2987
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170
Chlorides (mg/l) Of Wastewater
Fig. 3.42 Correlation Between Chlorides of Wastewater and Chlorides of

Groundwater
It is observed from Fig 3.40 to Fig.3.42 that there exists strong positive
correlation between wastewater and groundwater for pH and TDS which indicates that
as the value of wastewater increases corresponding groundwater value for that
parameter also increases. For chlorides there exists mild positive correlation but high
59
value of chlorides may be due to wastewater infiltration from nala and other sources
such as use of septic tanks.
ii. For sampling station LN-4

7.4
7.35 y = 0.299x + 4.9456
R² = 0.2715
pH Of Groundwater
7.3
7.25
7.2
7.15
7.1
7.05
7
7.2 7.3 7.4 7.5 7.6 7.7 7.8 7.9
pH Of Wastewater
Fig. 3.43 Correlation between pH of Wastewater and pH of Groundwater
1640
1620 y = 0.5482x + 1209.1

R² = 0.3375
1600
1580
1560
1540
600 650 700 750 800 850
Fig. 3.44 Correlation between TDS of Wastewater and TDS of Groundwater
60

700
Chlorides (mg/l) Of Groundwater 600 y = 1.017x + 328.43
R² = 0.0691
500
400
300
200
100
0
140 150 160 170 180 190 200

Groundwater
It is observed from Fig 3.43 and Fig.3.45 that there exists strong positive
correlation between wastewater and groundwater for pH and TDS which indicates that
parameter also increases. For chlorides there exists no correlation but high value of
chlorides may be due to wastewater infiltration from nala and due to other sources such
as use of septic tanks.
61
iii. For sampling station RN-7

7.6
7.5
y = 0.6012x + 2.6858
pH of Groundwater
7.4 R² = 0.5089
7.3
7.2
7.1
6.9
7 7.1 7.2 7.3 7.4 7.5 7.6 7.7 7.8 7.9 8
pH of Wastewater
Fig. 3.46 Correlation between pH of Wastewater and pH of Groundwater

1400
1200
1000
800 y = -1.0374x + 1736

R² = 0.3055
600
400
200
0
550 600 650 700 750 800
Fig. 3.47 Correlation between TDS of Wastewater and TDS of Groundwater
62

350
300
250
y = 0.143x + 264.87
200 R² = 0.0544
150
100
50
0
100 120 140 160 180 200 220

Groundwater
From the above Fig. 3.46 to Fig.3.48 it can be said that there exists positive
correlation between wastewater and groundwater for pH which indicates pH of
wastewater increases as pH of groundwater also increases. For TDS there exists
negative correlation but higher values of TDS may be due to other sources such as
geology at the site, use of septic tanks and for chlorides there exist no correlation.
63
4. CHAPTER 4
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION FOR VIJAYNAGAR NALA
4.1 Introduction
fourteen sampling stations are shown. It shows how parameters vary with each
sampling for particular sampling station. In the following graphs X-axis represents time
in terms of sampling dates while Y-axis represents the value of the particular parameter
in respective units. For the ease of representation only two sampling stations in a graph
with acceptable and permissible limits are represented.
Table 6. 4.0. Acceptable limits and Permissible limits of the physical parameters
as per IS- 10500: 2012
Permissible limit in the

Characteristics Acceptable
absence of alternative source
pH value 6.5 – 8.5 No Relaxation
Total Dissolved Solids mg/l 500 2000
Chloride (as Cl), mg/l 250 1000
Total Hardness (as CaCO3) mg/l 200 600
64
4.2 Temporal variation in groundwater quality parameters

fourteen sampling stations are shown. It shows how parameters vary with time for
particular sampling station. In the following graphs X-axis represents time in terms of
sampling dates while Y-axis represents the value of the particular parameter in
respective units. For the ease of representation and give an idea of near and away
variation only two sampling stations in a graph with acceptable and permissible limits
are represented.
I. pH
9
8.5
ACCEPTABLE LIMIT
pH
7.5
ACCEPTABLE LIMIT
LN-1
7
LA-1
6.5
6
2/2 12/2 1/3 21/3 2/4 18/4
SAMPLING DATES
Fig. 4.1 Groundwater Quality Variation in pH w.r.t time of LN-1 and LA-1
65
8.5
ACCEPTABLE LIMIT
pH
7.5
ACCEPTABLE LIMIT
RN-2
7
RA-2
6.5
6
2/2 12/2 1/3 21/3 2/4 18/4
SAMPLING DATES
Fig. 4.2 Groundwater Quality Variation in pH w.r.t time of RN-2 and RA-2
8.5
ACCEPTABLE LIMIT
pH
7.5
ACCEPTABLE LIMIT
LN-3
7
LA-3
6.5
6
2/2 12/2 1/3 21/3 2/4 18/4
SAMPLING DATES
Fig. 4.3 Groundwater Quality Variation in pH w.r.t time of LN-3 AND LA-3
66
8.5
ACCEPTABLE LIMIT
pH
7.5
ACCEPTABLE LIMIT
RN-4
7
RA-4
6.5
6
2/2 12/2 1/3 21/3 2/4 18/4
SAMPLING DATES
8.5
ACCEPTABLE LIMIT
pH
7.5
ACCEPTABLE LIMIT
LN-5
7
LA-5
6.5
6
2/2 12/2 1/3 21/3 2/4 18/4
SAMPLING DATES
67
8.5
ACCEPTABLE LIMIT
pH
7.5
ACCEPTABLE LIMIT
LN-6
7
LA-6
6.5
6
2/2 12/2 1/3 21/3 2/4 18/4
SAMPLING DATES
8.5
ACCEPTABLE LIMIT
pH
7.5
ACCEPTABLE LIMIT
LN-7
7
LA-7
6.5
6
2/2 12/2 1/3 21/3 2/4 18/4
SAMPLING DATES
68
8.5
ACCEPTABLE LIMIT
pH
7.5
ACCEPTABLE LIMIT
LN-8
7
LA-8
6.5
6
2/2 12/2 1/3 21/3 2/4 18/4
SAMPLING DATES
8.5
ACCEPTABLE LIMIT
pH
7.5
ACCEPTABLE LIMIT
RN-9
7
RA-9
6.5
6
12/2 1/3 21/3 2/4 18/4
SAMPLING DATES
69
8.5
ACCEPTABLE LIMIT
pH
7.5
ACCEPTABLE LIMIT
RN-10
7
RA-10
6.5
6
1/3 21/3 2/4 18/4
SAMPLING DATES
Fig. 4 10 Groundwater Quality Variation in pH w.r.t time of RN-10 and RA-10
8.5
ACCEPTABLE LIMIT
pH
7.5
ACCEPTABLE LIMIT
RN-11
7
RA-11
6.5
6
1/3 21/3 2/4 18/4
SAMPLING DATES
70
8.5
ACCEPTABLE LIMIT
pH
7.5
ACCEPTABLE LIMIT
RN-12
7
RA-12
6.5
6
1/3 21/3 2/4 18/4
SAMPLING DATES
It was observed from the Fig 4.1 to 4.12 in most of the cases the pH values of
groundwater stations near to the nala are higher than the away stations which indicates
that wastewater is getting infiltrated into the ground and raising the pH of groundwater.
The values obtained for pH are within acceptable limits.
71
II. TDS and Chlorides
2500
2000
TDS (mg/l)
1500
ACCEPTABLE LIMIT
PERMISSIBLE LIMIT
1000
LN-1
LA-1
500
0
2/2 12/2 1/3 21/3 2/4 18/4
SAMPLING DATES
Fig. 4.13 Groundwater Quality Variation in TDS w.r.t time of LN-1 and LA-1
1200
1000
CHLORIDES (mg/l)
800
ACCEPTABLE LIMIT
600
PERMISSIBLE LIMIT
LN-1
400
LA-1
200
0
2/2 12/2 1/3 21/3 2/4 18/4
SAMPLING DATES
LA-1
72
2500
2000
TDS (mg/l)
1500
ACCEPTABLE LIMIT
PERMISSIBLE LIMIT
1000
RN-2
RA-2
500
0
2/2 12/2 1/3 21/3 2/4 18/4
SAMPLING DATES
Fig. 4.15 Groundwater Quality Variation in TDS w.r.t time of RN-2 and RA-2
1200
1000
CHLORIDES (mg/l)
800
ACCEPTABLE LIMIT
600
PERMISSIBLE LIMIT
RN-2
400
RA-2
200
0
2/2 12/2 1/3 21/3 2/4 18/4
SAMPLING DATES
Fig 4.16 Groundwater Quality Variation in Chlorides w.r.t time of RN-2 and
RA-2
73
2500
2000
TDS (mg/l)
1500
ACCEPTABLE LIMIT
PERMISSIBLE LIMIT
1000
LN-3
LA-3
500
0
2/2 12/2 1/3 21/3 2/4 18/4
SAMPLING DATES
1200
1000
CHLORIDES (mg/l)
800
ACCEPTABLE LIMIT
600
PERMISSIBLE LIMIT
LN-3
400
LA-3
200
0
2/2 12/2 1/3 21/3 2/4 18/4
SAMPLING DATES

LA-3
74
2500
2000
TDS (mg/l)
1500
ACCEPTABLE LIMIT
PERMISSIBLE LIMIT
1000
RN-4
RA-4
500
0
2/2 12/2 1/3 21/3 2/4 18/4
SAMPLING DATES
Fig.4.19 Groundwater Quality Variation in TDS w.r.t time of RN-4 and RA-4
1200
1000
CHLORIDES (mg/l)
800
ACCEPTABLE LIMIT
600
PERMISSIBLE LIMIT
RN-4
400
RA-4
200
0
2/2 12/2 1/3 21/3 2/4 18/4
SAMPLING DATES
RA-4
75
2500
2000
TDS (mg/l)
1500
ACCEPTABLE LIMIT
PERMISSIBLE LIMIT
1000
LN-5
LA-5
500
0
2/2 12/2 1/3 21/3 2/4 18/4
SAMPLING DATES
1200
1000
CHLORIDES (mg/l)
800
ACCEPTABLE LIMIT
600
PERMISSIBLE LIMIT
LN-5
400
LA-5
200
0
2/2 12/2 1/3 21/3 2/4 18/4
SAMPLING DATES
LA-5
76
2500
2000
TDS (mg/l)
1500
ACCEPTABLE LIMIT
PERMISSIBLE LIMIT
1000
LN-6
LA-6
500
0
2/2 12/2 1/3 21/3 2/4 18/4
SAMPLING DATES
1200
1000
CHLORIDES (mg/l)
800
ACCEPTABLE LIMIT
600
PERMISSIBLE LIMIT
LN-6
400
LA-6
200
0
2/2 12/2 1/3 21/3 2/4 18/4
SAMPLING DATES
LA-6
77
2500
2000
TDS (mg/l)
1500
ACCEPTABLE LIMIT
PERMISSIBLE LIMIT
1000
LN-7
LA-7
500
0
2/2 12/2 1/3 21/3 2/4 18/4
SAMPLING DATES
1200
1000
CHLORIDES (mg/l)
800
ACCEPTABLE LIMIT
600
PERMISSIBLE LIMIT
LN-7
400
LA-7
200
0
2/2 12/2 1/3 21/3 2/4 18/4
SAMPLING DATES
LA-7
78
2500
2000
TDS (mg/l)
1500
ACCEPTABLE LIMIT
PERMISSIBLE LIMIT
1000
LN-8
LA-8
500
0
2/2 12/2 1/3 21/3 2/4 18/4
SAMPLING DATES
1200
1000
CHLORIDES (mg/l)
800
ACCEPTABLE LIMIT
600
PERMISSIBLE LIMIT
LN-8
400
LA-8
200
0
2/2 12/2 1/3 21/3 2/4 18/4
SAMPLING DATES

LA-8
79
4000
3500
3000
2500
TDS (mg/l)
ACCEPTABLE LIMIT
2000
PERMISSIBLE LIMIT
1500 RN-9
RA-9
1000
500
0
12/2 1/3 21/3 2/4 18/4
SAMPLING DATES
1600
1400
1200
CHLORIDES (mg/l)
1000
ACCEPTABLE LIMIT
800
PERMISSIBLE LIMIT
600 RN-9
RA-9
400
200
0
12/2 1/3 21/3 2/4 18/4
SAMPLING DATES
RA-9
80
3000
2500
2000
TDS (mg/l)
ACCEPTABLE LIMIT
1500
PERMISSIBLE LIMIT
RN-10
1000
RA-10
500
0
1/3 21/3 2/4 18/4
SAMPLING DATES
1200
1000
CHLORIDES (mg/l)
800
ACCEPTABLE LIMIT
600
PERMISSIBLE LIMIT
RN-10
400
RA-10
200
0
1/3 21/3 2/4 18/4
SAMPLING DATES
RA-10
81
3500
3000
2500
TDS (mg/l)

PERMISSIBLE LIMIT
1500
RN-11
1000 RA-11
500
0
1/3 21/3 2/4 18/4
SAMPLING DATES
Fig. 4.33 Groundwater Quality Variation in TDS w.r.t time of RN-11 and RA-11
1400
1200
1000
CHLORIDES (mg/l)

PERMISSIBLE LIMIT
600
RN-11
400 RA-11
200
0
1/3 21/3 2/4 18/4
SAMPLING DATES
Fig.4.34 Groundwater Quality Variation in Chlorides w.r.t time of RN-11 and

RA-11
82
3000
2500
2000
TDS (mg/l)
ACCEPTABLE LIMIT
1500
PERMISSIBLE LIMIT
RN-12
1000
RA-12
500
0
1/3 21/3 2/4 18/4
SAMPLING DATES
Fig 4.35 Groundwater Quality Variation in TDS w.r.t time of RN-12 and RA-12
1400
1200
1000
CHLORIDES (mg/l)

PERMISSIBLE LIMIT
600
RN-12
400 RA-12
200
0
1/3 21/3 2/4 18/4
SAMPLING DATES
RA-12
83
It was observed from the Fig 4.13 to Fig. 4.36 that sampling stations in the initial
7 sections in the zone 1 show a trend in which TDS and chlorides value for near stations
are higher than away stations. Wastewater being source of chlorides it can be concluded
that wastewater from the nala majorly affecting the groundwater quality along with
other minor sources such as use of septic tank, improper wastewater disposal. But as
seen in the later sections in the zone 2 the trend is reversed this may be majorly due to
agricultural practices, use of septic tank, improper wastewater disposal that are causing
groundwater pollution along with wastewater in the nala..
84
III. Hardness
HARDNESS (mg/l)
LN-1
LA-1
1000 RN-2
RA-2
LN-3
900 LA-3
RN-4
RA-4
800 LN-5
LA-5
HARDNESS (mg/l)

PERMISSIBLE LIMIT
600
500
400
300
200
100
2/2 12/2 1/3 21/3 2/4 18/4
SAMPLING DATES
HARDNESS (mg/l)
LN-6
LA-6
LN-7
2500 LA-7
LN-8
LA-8
RN-9
2000 RA-9
HARDNESS (mg/l)
ACCEPTABLE LIMIT
PERMISSIBLE LIMIT
1500
1000
500
0
2/2 12/2 1/3 21/3 2/4 18/4
SAMPLING DATES
Fig. 4.38 Groundwater Quality Variation in Hardness w.r.t time

85
HARDNESS (mg/l)
ACCEPTABLE LIMIT
PERMISSIBLE LIMIT
1800 RN-10
RA-10
RN-11
1600 RA-11
RN-12
1400 RA-12
HARDNESS (mg/l)
1200
1000
800
600
400
200
0
1/3 21/3 2/4 18/4
SAMPLING DATES

IV. DO
DO (mg/l)
LN-1
LA-1
RN-2
RA-2
LN-3
6 LA-3
RN-4
RA-4
LN-5
LA-5
5 DESIRABLE LIMIT
DO (mg/l)
1
2/2 12/2 1/3 21/3 2/4 18/4
SAMPLING DATES
Fig. 4.40 Groundwater Quality Variation in DO w.r.t time
86
DO (mg/l)
DESIRABLE LIMIT
LN-6
LA-6
LN-7
6 LA-7
LN-8
LA-8
RN-9
5 RA-9
DO (mg/l)
1
2/2 12/2 1/3 21/3 2/4 18/4
SAMPLING DATES
DO (mg/l)
DESIRABLE LIMIT
RN-10
RA-10
RN-11
6
RA-11
RN-12
RA-12
5
DO (mg/l)
1/3 21/3 2/4 18/4

SAMPLING DATES
Fig. 4.42 Groundwater Quality Variation in DO w.r.t time
87
It is observed from the Fig 3.37 to Fig. 3.39 .that the results in most of the cases
for hardness are beyond acceptable limits in zone 1 but are beyond permissible limit in
Zone 2 and there is no specific trend observed in the hardness as it is observed in other
cases. Also the results for DO are less than desired value with no specific trend.
V. MPN Index
Since conducting MPN test on all the samples at every sampling date was
practically impossible it was made sure that every sample will have at least 2 results of
the test performed in the study period. The following table refers to the results of the
samples of respective sampling stations as MPN Index per 100 ml of sample. The
groundwater samples are bacteriologically affected from the results obtained.
Table 7 4.1 Results of MPN Test for groundwater samples in the vicinity of
Vijaynagar Nala
Sampling Stations Result 1 Result 2

LN-1 35 30
LA-1 25 25
RN-2 25 17
RA-2 95 75
LN-3 25 17
LA-3 35 45
RN-4 5 25
RA-4 8 25
LN-5 35 25
LA-5 25 35
LN-6 45 60
LA-6 65 25
LN-7 13 17
LA-7 25 35
LN-8 25 30
LA-8 25 35
RN-9 85 95
RA-9 20 65
RN-10 45 30
RA-10 75 60
RN-11 95 70
RA-11 65 50
RN-12 120 115
RA-12 80 70
88
4.3 Variation in groundwater quality parameters along the stretch of nala

I. For near stations.
7.80
7.60
7.40
AVERAGE pH
7.20
7.00
6.80
6.60
6.40
6.20
6.00
LN-1 RN-2 LN-3 RN-4 LN-5 LN-6 LN-7 LN-8 RN-9 RN-10 RN-11 RN-12
SAMPLING STATIONS
Fig. 4.43 Variation in pH of Groundwater along the Stretch of Nala
1600
AVRRAGE HARDNESS (mg/l as CaCO3 )
1400
1200
1000
800
600
400
200
0
SAMPLING STATIONS
Fig. 4.44 Variation in Hardness of Groundwater along the Stretch of Nala
89
3000
2500
AVERAGE TDS (mg/l)
2000
1500
1000
500
0
SAMPLING STATIONS
Fig. 4.45 Variation in TDS of Groundwater along the Stretch of Nala
1000
900
AVERAGE CHLORIDES (mg/l)
800
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
SAMPLING STATIONS
Fig. 4.46 Variation in Chlorides of Groundwater along the Stretch of Nala
It can be observed from the Fig 4.43 to Fig 4.46 that there is no specific trend
as such but the results obtained for sampling stations in Zone 2 are higher i.e. beyond
permissible limits for drinking purpose for most of the parameters thus making it the
most critical zone of groundwater pollution may be because of use of pesticides for
agricultural fields in that zone.
90
II. For away stations
7.80
7.60
7.40
AVERAGE pH
7.20
7.00
6.80
6.60
6.40
6.20
6.00
LA-1 RA-2 LA-3 RA-4 LA-5 LA-6 LA-7 LA-8 RA-9 RA-10RA-11RA-12
SAMPLING STATIONS.
Fig.4.47 Variation in pH of Groundwater along the Stretch of Nala
1800.00
AVRRAGE HARDNESS (mg/l as
1600.00
1400.00
1200.00
CaCO3)
1000.00
800.00
600.00
400.00
200.00
0.00
LA-1 RA-2 LA-3 RA-4 LA-5 LA-6 LA-7 LA-8 RA-9 RA-10 RA-11 RA-12
SAMPLING STATIONS
Fig. 4.48 Variation in Chlorides of Groundwater along the Stretch of Nala
91
3500
3000
AVERAGE TDS (mg/l)
2500
2000
1500
1000
500
0
SAMPLING STATIONS.
Fig.4.49 Variation in TDS of Groundwater along the Stretch of Nala
1400
1200
AVERAGE CHLORIDES (mg/l)
1000
800
600
400
200
0
SAMPLING STATIONS
Fig.4.50 Variation in Chlorides of Groundwater along the Stretch of Nala
It can be observed from the Fig.4.47 to Fig 4.50 that there is no specific trend as
such but the results obtained for sampling stations in zone 2 are higher i.e. beyond
permissible limits for drinking purpose for most of the parameters thus making it the
most critical zone of groundwater pollution may be because of use of pesticides for
agricultural fields in that zone.
92
4.4 Spatial Variation in Groundwater Quality parameters using QGIS

The spatial variations of the selected parameters for fourteen sampling stations are
shown using the software QGIS. The contour maps of different groundwater quality
parameters are plotted with the help of QGIS and represented below.
93
Fig. 4.51 Contour map of TDS along the nala
Fig. 4.51 Contour map of TDS along the nala
94
Fig. 4.52 Contour map of Chlorides along the nala
Fig.4.52 Contour map of Chlorides along the nala
95
96
Fig.4.54 Contour map of DO along the nala
Fig.4.54 Contour map of DO along the nala
97
4.5 Determination of WQI by Relative Weights:

As discussed in the Chapter 3 and subsection 3.4, the Water Quality Index in case
of Vijaynagar Nala is carried out with the same procedure. The following graphs
explain the variation in the groundwater quality.
4.5.1 Variation of WQI of groundwater in case of Vijaynagar Nala

The Water Quality Index (WQI) of the different sampling stations w.r.t time is
discussed as follows. In the following graphs X-axis represents time in terms of
sampling dates while Y-axis represents the WQI of particular sampling station. For the
ease of representation a group of four sampling station is considered. The quality of
water is classified as mentioned in the Table 3.2.
200
180
160
140
120
LN-1
WQI
100
LA-1
80
RN-2
60 RA-2
40
20
0
2/2 12/2 1/3 21/03 2/4 21/04
SAMPLING DATES
Fig.4.55 Variation in WQI w.r.t time for Sampling Stations LN-1, LA-1, RN-2
and RA-2
It was observed from the Fig. 4.55 the maximum WQI is 183.36 for sampling
station RN-2 and the minimum WQI is 111.13 for the station LN-1 which indicates
poor water quality. For station LN-1, WQI is decreasing from February 2018 to April
2018 i.e. water quality is improving.
98
180
160
140
120
100 LN-3
WQI
80 LA-3
RN-4
60
RA-4
40
20
0
2/2 12/2 1/3 21/03 2/4 21/04
SAMPLING DATES
Fig. 4.56 Variation in WQI w.r.t time for Sampling Stations LN-3, LA-3, RN-4
and RA-4
It was observed from the Fig. 4.56 the WQI for sampling stations LN-3, LA-3,
RN-4 and RA-4 on 21/04/2018 is maximum. The water quality is poor for the sampling
stations LN-3, LA-3 and RN-4 throughout the analysis.
250
200
150
LN-5
WQI
LA-5
100
LN-6
LA-6
50
0
2/2 12/2 1/3 21/03 2/4 21/04
SAMPLING DATES
and LA-6
99
It was observed from the Fig. 4.57 the maximum WQI is 202.09 for the
sampling station LA-5 which indicates very poor water quality. for the sampling
stationsLN-5, LN-6 and LA-6 WQI is in between 100 to 150 and the water quality is
poor.
200
180
160
140
120
LN-7
WQI
100
LA-7
80
LN-8
60 LA-8
40
20
0
2/2 12/2 1/3 21/03 2/4 21/04
SAMPLING DATES
and LA-8
station LA-8 which indicates poor water quality. for sampling station LN-7, the WQI
is in between 120 to 143 and the WQI is constant with no drastic changes. For station
7, the near station more WQI than away station. For station 8, the WQI is more for
away station.
100
450
400
350
300
250 RN-9
WQI
200 RA-9
RN-10
150
RA-10
100
50
0
2/2 12/2 1/3 21/03 2/4 21/04
SAMPLING DATES
Fig. 4.59 Variation in WQI w.r.t time for Sampling Stations RN-9, RA-9, RN-10
and RA-10
station RA-9 which indicates that water quality is unsuitable for drinking purpose. The
minimum value of WQI is 171.72 for sampling station RN-10 which indicates poor
water quality. The WQI for away station in case of sampling station 9 and 10 which
shows that the water quality is very poor for away stations due to the impact of
agricultural practices.
101
400
350
300
250
RN-11
WQI
200
RA-11
150 RN-12
100 RA-12
50
0
2/2 12/2 1/3 21/03 2/4 21/04
SAMPLING DATES
Fig. 4.60 Variation In WQI w.r.t time for Sampling Stations RN-11, RA-11, RN-
12 and RA-12
station RA-11 which indicates that the water quality is not suitable for drinking purpose.
The minimum WQI is 190.56 which indicates poor water quality. The WQI for away
station in case of sampling station 11 and 12 which shows that the water quality is very
poor for away stations due to the impact of agricultural practices.
350
300
250
200
WQI
150 NEAR
AWAY
100
50
0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
SAMPLING STATIONS
Fig. 4.61 Variation in WQI for Near and Away Sampling Stations
102
It was observed from the Fig. 4.61 the WQI for near stations is less than away
stations for sampling stations 1, 3, 5 and 8 and the reason for this is the presence of
septic tank and soak pits in the residential area. For sampling stations 9, 10, 11 and 12
the reason for high values of WQI for away stations is the impact of agricultural
practices.
300
250
200
WQI
150
100 WQI
50
SAMPLING STATIONS
Fig. 4.62 Variation in WQI along the Stretch for Near Stations
It was observed from the Fig. 4.62 the WQI is increasing from sampling station
RN-1 to RN-12 which indicates that the water quality is very poor and groundwater is
polluted due to increase in flow and agricultural practices near sampling stations 9, 10,
11 and 12.
103
4.6 Correlation Study between Wastewater And Groundwater

i. For sampling station LN-1
Groundwater Vs.Wastewater
8.1
y = 0.6197x + 2.7809
8 R² = 0.2026
7.9
pH Of Groundwater
7.8
7.7
7.6
7.5
7.4
7.3
7.8 7.9 8 8.1 8.2 8.3 8.4
pH Of Wastewater
Fig.4.63 Correlation between pH of wastewater and pH of groundwater for

LN-1

2500
y = 3.0594x - 1103
TDS (mg/l) Of Groundwater
2000 R² = 0.6504
1500
1000
500
0
600 650 700 750 800 850 900 950 1000 1050 1100
TDS (mg/l) Of Wastewater
Fig.4.64 Correlation between TDS of wastewater and TDS of groundwater for

LN-1
104

700
600
500
400 y = 1.6133x + 80.814

R² = 0.5664
300
200
100
0
100 150 200 250 300 350
Fig.4.65 Correlation between Chlorides of wastewater and Chlorides of

groundwater for LN-1
It can be said from the Fig.4.63 to Fig. 4.65 that there exists positive correlation
between wastewater and groundwater for pH, TDS and chlorides which indicates that
parameter also increases. From positive correlation it can be concluded that wastewater
in tha nala is major contributor resulting groundwater pollution.
105
ii. For sampling station LN-6

7.8
7.6
y = 0.43x + 3.7753
pH Of Groundwater
7.4 R² = 0.3038
7.2
6.8
6.6
6.4
7 7.2 7.4 7.6 7.8 8 8.2 8.4
pH Of Wastewater
Fig.4.66 Correlation between pH of wastewater and pH of groundwater for LN-6

1240
1220
1200
y = 0.1346x + 1034.9
1180
R² = 0.0795
1160
1140
1120
1100
1080
1060
700 750 800 850 900 950 1000 1050 1100
Fig.4.67 Correlation between TDS of wastewater and TDS of groundwater for

LN-6
106

400
350
300
y = 0.3541x + 234.93
250 R² = 0.1475
200
150
100
50
0
180 200 220 240 260 280 300

groundwater for LN-6
It can be said from the Fig. 4.66 to Fig. 4.68 that there exists positive correlation
between wastewater and groundwater for pH ,TDS and chlorides which indicates that
parameter also increases. From positive correlation it can be concluded that wastewater
in the nala is major contributor resulting groundwater pollution.
107
iii. For Sampling station RN-11

9
8
pH Of Groundwater
7
6
y = -0.1799x + 8.5549
5 R² = 0.013
4
3
2
1
0
7.2 7.4 7.6 7.8 8 8.2 8.4
pH Of Wastewater
Fig. 4.69 Correlation between pH of wastewater and pH of groundwater for RN-

11

3000
2500
2000 y = -2.1605x + 4361.3

R² = 0.8372
1500
1000
500
0
700 750 800 850 900 950 1000 1050 1100 1150
Fig. 4.70 Correlation between TDS of wastewater and TDS of groundwater for
RN-11
108

1200
1000
y = -5.2272x + 1897.4
800 R² = 0.9359
600
400
200
0
140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280

groundwater for RN-11
It can be said from the Fig.4.69 to Fig. 4.71 that there exists negative correlation
between wastewater and groundwater for pH ,TDS and chlorides which indicates that
parameter decreases and vice versa. But very high values of TDS and chlorides beyond
permissible limit may be due to agricultural practices, use of septic tanks and improper
wastewater disposal in that area.
109
4.7 Soil Pollution

From the analysis of groundwater in Zone 2 of Vijaynagar nala we have obtained
very high results above permissible limits for TDS , chlorides , Hardness . While
finding reasoning behind this we saw that there were agricultural fields in this zone 2.
So the pesticides used for agricultural fields in this zone may have degraded soil and
thus one of the reasons behind abnormal results of groundwater.
Soil testing
Soil testing is carried out to know the extent to which soil is contaminated in
Zone 2. For this we have taken 4 samples each from Zone 1 and Zone 2. Soil is tested
for 3 parameters i.e. pH, TDS and chlorides. From the analysis, TDS of soil in zone 1
varies from 108 to 270 whereas in zone 2 it varies from 120 mg/l to 456 mg/l. Similarly,
chlorides values for zone 1 varies from 37.5 to 62.5 whereas in zone 2 it varies from
62.5 mg/l to 100 mg/l .So from the results obtained for TDS and chlorides it can be
concluded that soil contamination has taken place in Zone 2 as compared to Zone 1.
Table 4.2 Results obtained from soil testing
Soil sample near CHLORIDES TDS

Zone GW station. (mg/l) (mg/l) pH
LN-1 37.5 108 7.8
Zone 1 RN-2 62.5 240 7.69
LN-3 62.5 270 7.57
RN-4 37.5 150 7.53
RA-9 62.5 222 7.45

Zone 2 RA-10 62.5 168 7.5
RA-11 87.5 120 7.45
RA-12 100 456 7.47
110
5. CHAPTER 5
REMEDIAL MEASURES
The measures used to overcome groundwater pollution known as remedial
measures. It can be overcome by using two ways, either by preventing the intrusion of
pollutants into the groundwater are known as preventive measures or by treating
polluted groundwater to remove pollutants known as corrective measures.
5.1 PREVENTIVE MEASURES

Groundwater pollution occurs when pollutants are released into the ground and
make their way down into groundwater and this can be prevented by
a. Providing preventive lining to the nala.

b. Providing sewerage system in the affected area.
c. Reducing use of septic tanks and soak pits.
d. Decentralized sewage treatment can be an effective techniques to reduce the
concentration of pollutant in the wastewater to certain extent.
5.2 CORRECTIVE MEASURES

a. Use of small treatment unit such as RO plant at individual household.
111
6. CHAPTER 6
CONCLUSION
1. In most of the case, results obtained for pH, chlorides and TDS of the
groundwater samples from near stations of the nala are beyond acceptable
limits of drinking water standards. This shows that both, Sheri Nala as well as
Vijaynagar Nala are major contributors in groundwater pollution in the
vicinity of the nala.
2. In Zone 2 of Vijaynagar Nala,, very high results were obtained for TDS,
chloride and hardness which are beyond permissible limits according to
drinking water standards. This might be an indication of pollution of
groundwater probably due to agricultural practices.
3. In Zone 2 of Sheri Nala, where the preventive lining is provided, the samples
doesn’t show much variation in the groundwater quality parameters analyzed
in the near away stations as observed in other cases. So providing a
preventive lining can be a better remedy over groundwater pollution.
4. The values obtained for different physico chemical parameters are beyond
drinking water quality standards given by IS 10500 (2012) and groundwater is
also bacteriologically affected which makes it unfit for drinking purposes.
5. The groundwater from the Zone 2 of Vijaynagar Nala case study cannot be
used in RCC work as the results for groundwater quality parameters are higher
than the limits given by IS 3025 (Part 02): 2004 [17.]and IS 456 (2000) [18.].
6. In most of the cases, the water quality index shows the quality of water as
poor, making it unfit for drinking. Also water quality index for near
groundwater sampling stations is greater than the away groundwater sampling
stations of the nala .
7. In most of the cases, there exists a positive correlation between wastewater
and groundwater quality parameters which indicates the intrusion of
wastewater in the groundwater table further leading to contamination of
groundwater.
112
REFERENCES
[1.] www.who.int/life-course/news/events/world-water-day-2017/en/
[2.] http://worldwaterday.org
[3.] V. P. Singh, R. N Yadava , “Groundwater Pollution”, Proceedings by
“The International Conference on Water And Environment (WE-2003),
December 15-18, 2003
[4.] D. K. Todd, “Groundwater Hydrology”, Second Edition, John Wiley &
Sons, New York, 1959
[5.] D. K. Todd, “Groundwater Hydrology”, Second Edition, John Wiley &
Sons, New York, 1980
[6.] Y. M. Patil, “Impact of Sewage Disposal on Groundwater Quality in
Islampur”, Dissertation of Master of Engineering, Department of Civil
Engineering, Walchand College of Engineering unpublished
[7.] N. A. Chitpalle, “Pollution Load Assessment in Sheri Nalah”, Project
Report for Bachelor of Engineering, Department of Civil Engineering,
Walchand College of Engineering, unpublished
[8.] R Das And S N Das, “Impact Of Wastewater Discharge On Soil And
Groundwater- Case Study”, Karnataka. Journal Of Scientific And Industrial
Research Vol. 62, March 2003, Page no. 207-211 (2002)
[9.] F. A Edo, CC Ejogu, AP Uzojie, MA Nwachukwu And C.G Okoli,
Impact Of Open Sewage Dump Sites On Groundwater Quality In Igwuruta,
River State, Nigeria, Journal of Global Biosciences, Vol. 3 No. 6, Page no.
919 - 930 (2014)
[10.] B. Maggirwar, B. Umrikar, “Groundwater Quality Assessment For
Village Rise Of Taluka Purandhar”, District Pune, Maharashtra. Journal Of
Environment Research And Development.(2014)
[11.] G. Singh, D. Singh, S. Sharma, “Effect Of Polluted Surface Water On
Groundwater-A Case Study Of Budha Nallah”, IOSR Journal Of
Mechanical And Civil Engineering, Vol 5, Issue 5 ,Page no. 01-08 (March
2013)
[12.] P. Loni And P. Raut, “A Study Of Physic-Chemical Properties Of
Groundwater In Some Parts Of Karveer Taluka”, District Kolhapur,
Proceeding Of International Conference SWRDM-2012
113
[13.] G. Selvam, K. Prabakaran, D. Srinivasan and G. Kumar, “Assessment

Of Groundwater Quality In And Around Manapparai Block”, Tamil Nadu,
International Journal Of Recent Scientific Research, Vol-6 (2015)
[14.] C. Sarala, R. Babu, “Assessment Of Groundwater Quality Parameters In
And Around Jawahamagao”, Hyderabad, International Journal Of Scientific
And Research Publications, Vol 2,Issue 10 (October 2012)
[15.] S. Sajal and H. Athar, “Water Quality Index Development For
Groundwater Quality Assessment of Greater Noida Sub-basin, Uttar
Pradesh, India”, Journal of Cogent Engineering (2016)
[16.] Guidelines for Water Quality Monitoring, Central Pollution Control
Board, 2007
[17.] IS 3025 (Part 02): 2004 -Methods of sampling and test (physical and
chemical) for water and wastewater.
[18.] IS 456: 2000 -Plain and reinforced concrete code of practice (Fourth
Revision)
114

Assessment of Groundwater Quality in The Vicinity of Natural Nala

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Assessment of Groundwater Quality in The Vicinity of Natural Nala

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Assessment of Groundwater Quality in The Vicinity of Natural Nala

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

A

ASSESSMENT OF GROUNDWATER QUALITY IN THE

Under the Guidance of

Dr. G .R. Munavalli

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING

“Assessment of Groundwater Quality in the Vicinity of Natural Nala”

written and submitted by us to Walchand College of Engineering, Sangli as a partial

Baramati Swati S. 2014BCV022

Naikwade Vahida S. 2014BCV038

Kadam Vinayak L. 2014BCV046

Nimbalkar Chetan A. 2014BCV066

Nada Anu T. 2014BCV067

Bobade Swarup S. 2013BCV013

Mitke Tanuja J. 2012BCV055

Kengale Pallavi D. 2012BCV057

Place: Sangli Sign

Fig. 3.45 Correlation between Chlorides of Wastewater and Chlorides of

WQI Water Quality Index

BOD Biochemical Oxygen Demand

COD Chemical Oxygen Demand

MPN Most Probable Number

TDS Total Dissolved Solids

1.2 GROUNDWATER POLLUTION

Underground storage and transmission of a wide variety of fuels and chemicals

Mines can produce a variety of groundwater pollution problems. Pollution

Approximately one-half to two-thirds of the water applied for irrigation of crops

1.3 Literature Review

G Singh et al., (2013) had studied physico-chemical parameters and biological

B Maggirwar et al., (2015) had studied groundwater quality of Purandar Taluka in

Y Patil (2006) assessed the impact of sewage disposal on groundwater quality in

N Chitpalle et al., (2017) assessed the seasonal variation of wastewater characteristics

1.5 Objectives of Proposed Study

2.2 Materials and Methodology

Case Study 1- Sheri Nala

Case Study 2 - Vijaynagar Nala

A. Case Study 1 – Sheri Nala

Fig 2.1 Overview of Sheri Nala

Fig.2.1 Overview of Sheri Nala

B. Case Study 2- Vijaynagar Nala

Vijaynagar Nala is a natural stream, majorly carrying wastewater from residential

Fig. 2.2 Overview of Vijaynagar Nala

Fig 2.2 Overview of Vijaynagar Nala

2.2.2 Criteria for Locating Sampling Stations

2.2.3 Identification of Sampling Stations

Table 2.1 Details of Sampling Stations for Sheri Nala

Sampling Station Description

RN-3 Section 3, Right side, Near to the Nala

RA-8 Section 8, Right side, Away from the Nala

Fig.2.3 Overview of Sampling Stations in Zone 1 of Sheri Nala

Fig 2.4 Overview of Sampling Stations in Zone 2 of Sheri Nala

Fig 2.5 Overview of Sampling Stations in Zone 3 of Sheri Nala

Fourteen sampling stations of groundwater in different zones from bore wells

B. Case Study 2- Vijaynagar Nala

Table 2.2 Details of Sampling Stations For Vijaynagar Nala

Sampling Station Description

Fig 2.6 Overview of Sampling Stations in Zone 1 of Vijaynagar Nala

Fig 2.7 Overview of Sampling Stations in Zone 2 of Vijaynagar Nala

Fig 2.8 Overview of Sampling Stations in Zone 3 of Vijaynagar Nala