ORIGINAL ARTICLE

Hydrogeochemistry and quality assessment of groundwateraround chromite-mineralized areas in India

Manohar Kata • Rama Mohan • Keshav Krishna

Received: 30 January 2014 / Accepted: 20 June 2014

� Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2014

Abstract The present study aims to assess and under-

stand the chemical characteristics of groundwater and

geochemical processes occurring within the aquifer sys-

tems around chromite-mineralized areas in India. The

water samples are collected from 33 groundwater sources

are analyzed for physicochemical properties as well as

major ion concentrations such as Ca2?, Mg2?, Na?, K?,

CO2�3 , HCO3

-, Cl-, NO3-, F- and SO2�

4 in pre and post-

monsoon. Alkali metal ions (Na?, K?) and alkaline earth

metal ions (Ca2?, Mg2?) data of groundwater showed high

concentration of Ca during pre-monsoon where as high

concentration of Na in post-monsoon than other cations.

The major hydro chemical facies identified as CaHCO3

type of water is predominant during pre-monsoon whereas

the CaHCO3 and mixed CaNaHCO3 type of water in post-

monsoon. The classification based on the total hardness

reveals that a majority of groundwater samples fall in the

hard to very hard category during the pre-monsoon season

that is unfit for drinking. Anions such as bicarbonate 85 %

and nitrate 18 % of the sample locations in pre- monsoon

are exceed the WHO permissible limits, while during post-

monsoon concentrations of bicarbonate decreased (70 %),

nitrate increased (27 %). The suitability of water for irri-

gation by analyzing salinity hazard indicated by sodium

adsorption ratio (SAR) and residual sodium carbonate

(RSC). US Salinity diagram showed the majority of sam-

ples ([50 %) fall in the field of C3-S1, indicating water of

high salinity and low sodium, which can be used for irri-

gation in almost all types of soils with attention.

Keywords Hydro geochemistry � Chromite mining area �Salinity � Piper diagram � Wilcox and Gibbs diagram

Introduction

Rapid decrease in surface water resources due to over-

exploitation and resulted contamination which shifted tre-

mendous pressure on the groundwater resources (Raviku-

mar et al. 2010; Alexakis and Tsakiris 2010;

Srinivasamoorthy et al. 2011) The water quality of the

groundwater is determined predominantly by the geo-

chemical processes, chemical and mineral composition of

the aquifer rocks, residence time and other factors related

to groundwater flow and addition of effluents through

human interference (Divya et al. 2011; Dimitris Alexakis

2011; Klimas 1995; Appelo and Postma 1996; Ibe and

Njemanze 1999; Jeong 2001). A wide range of contami-

nation sources are among the factors contributing to the

complexity of the groundwater quality assessment (Masoud

Eid Al-Ahmadi 2013; Chidambaram et al. 2013).

The quality of surface water and underlying soil/rock

characteristics play a major role in determining the com-

position and quality of the groundwater in a region. In

order to assess the fate and impact of the chemical dis-

charge onto the soil, it is important to understand the Hy-

drogeochemistry of the chemical–soil–groundwater

interactions (Miller 1985; Zuane 1990; Reddy et al. 2010;

Jeevanandan et al. 2012). Further, it is possible to under-

stand the change in quality due to rock water interaction or

any type of anthropogenic influence. Groundwater often

consists of seven major chemical elements- Ca, Mg, Cl,

M. Kata (&) � R. Mohan � K. Krishna

Environmental Geochemistry Division, National Geophysical

Research Institute (Council of Scientific and Industrial

Research), Uppal Road, Hyderabad 500007,

Andhra Pradesh, India

e-mail: chemistry_manohar@yahoo.co.in

123

Environ Earth Sci

DOI 10.1007/s12665-014-3479-z

HCO3, Na, K, and SO4. The chemical parameters of

groundwater play a significant role in classifying and

assessing water quality. Considering the individual and

paired ionic concentration, certain indices are proposed to

find out the hazards by adopting various graphical methods

and interpreting different indices are attempted by many

workers in the recent past (Elango et al. 2003; Kumar et al.

2006; Singh et al. 2006; Rao 2006; Raju 2007; Rashid and

Izrar 2007; Apadaca et al. 2007; Pophare and Dewalkar

2007).

The study area is underlain by crystalline rocks of

Archaean age, consisting of granites gneisses, schist and

chromite bearing ultramafic rocks which are cut across by

quartz, pegmatite veins, and intruded by many dykes. The

crystalline rocks have undergone variable degree of

weathering and fracturing. The thickness of weathered

zone varies with joints are observed in these rocks. Ground

water in the study area occurs under water table conditions

in the weathered and fractured granite and gneissic,

schistose geological environment. Groundwater in this

region is used for domestic, agricultural and industrial

purposes. Therefore, the study of the composition of

groundwater and influence of contaminated in the region

has been considered as of priority importance, in order to

prevent and avoid health risks to the human settlements

located study area. The main objectives of this study are to

evaluate the groundwater quality in the hard rock terrain

region with particular reference to assess its suitability for

various uses and enumerate the influence of nature and

content of the surface water and soil on groundwater

quality.

Materials and methods

Study area

Nuggihalli schist belt is located in Karnataka state. Study

area with co-ordination between 1285500000–1380500000North latitude and 7682500000–7683500000 East

longitudes and covers an area of 400 km2 (Fig. 1). The

major sources of employment are agriculture, horticulture

and animal husbandry, which engage almost 80 % of the

workforce. The major industries are that of mining, stone

crushing, chemicals, oil, cotton, soap, tools, food process-

ing, rice mills, etc. Occurrence, movement and storage of

groundwater are influenced by lithology, thickness and

structure of rock formations. Weathered and fractured

granites, granitic gneiss and chromite bearing ultramafic

rocks form the main aquifer in Nuggihalli. Ground water in

the study area occurs under water table conditions in the

weathered and fractured granite, gneisses. There is no river

in the study area but area very well controlled by drainage

and surface water bodies. The major ion chemistry of

groundwater of Nuggihalli has not been studied earlier.

Water sampling and chemical analysis

Water samples are collected from subsurface in the study

area during May 2011 (pre monsoon) and November 2011

(post monsoon). One liter of water samples is collected using

polythene bottles from various wells. Totally 33 ground-

water samples are collected from study area. The pH, EC and

TDS of water samples are measured in situ using portable

meters (Eutech Instruments- model pHTester10, ECTest-

er11? and TDSTester11?, respectively). With respect to

cation, calcium, magnesium, sodium, potassium and with

respect to anions, chloride, nitrate, sulphate are analyzed by

ion chromatography (Metrohm). Carbonate and bicarbonate

are done by classical volumetric method. The quality of

groundwater is affected by the pump age and natural dis-

charge. The water is also heterogeneous in nature due to

recharge from precipitation and contact with different types

of rocks. Hence in the case of groundwater, the fixations of

suitable sampling sites are not so easy as compared to surface

water because the elements influencing water quality are not

easily known. Some general suggestions can be made for the

selection of sampling sites. In case, where the investigation

does not take into account the changes in groundwater

quality, the key constituents determined in a large number of

samples collected over the entire area is utilized to determine

the water quality of the study area. From this, sites for

selection of samples for comprehensive analysis can be

fixed. If the key constituents are not known at the beginning,

the water quality pattern is arrived at, by first making a

comprehensive analysis and thus partial analysis at other site.

Result and discussion

Groundwater chemistry

The analytical results of different chemical constituents for

pre- and post-monsoon season samples of minimum,

maximum, and average concentrations of physicochemical

parameters of water quality such as pH, EC, TDS, major

anions and major cations are presented in Table 1. During

the investigation, pH value as low as 7 and as high as 8.2

with average value is 7.3 is recorded in pre-monsoon,

whereas pH value as low as 6.8 and as high as 8.1 with

average value is 7.2 is recorded in post monsoon. In gen-

eral, the distribution of pH did not show any specific trend

within study area. Even though pH has no direct effect on

human health, its higher range accelerates the scale for-

mations in water heating apparatus (Ravikumar et al.

2010).

Environ Earth Sci

123

Hydro-chemical facies

Chemical data of the groundwater sample are also pre-

sented by plotting them on a piper tri linear diagram. It

provides a convenient method to classify and compare

water types. Based on the ionic composition of two sea-

sonal (i.e. pre and post monsoon) water samples concen-

tration of major cation and anions plotted in two tri linear

diagrams and one diamond shaped filed of piper diagram.

On the basis of chemical analysis water is divided into six

facies, the graph of groundwater samples. Figure 2

explains the variations or domination of cation and anion

concentrations during the pre-monsoon and post-monsoon.

Groundwater hydrochemistry is primarily controlled by

water–rock interaction and anthropogenic pollution

(Byoung-Young et al. 2005). The CaHCO3 type of water

predominated during pre-monsoon. The CaHCO3 and

CaNaHCO3 type of water predominated during post-mon-

soon. The percentage of samples falling under the CaHCO3

type is 87 % during the pre-monsoon season and CaHCO3

Fig. 1 Location map of the study area and sampling location

Table 1 Summary statistics of

the analytical dataQuality parameter (units) Pre Monsoon Post monsoon

Min Max Average Min Max Average

EC (lS/cm) 370 2,440 1,103.18 313 8,440 1,474.87

pH (mg/L) 7 8.2 7.38 6.8 8.1 7.2

TDS (mg/L) 295 2,040 900.52 200 1,940 883.33

Ca (mg/L) 8.66 224.95 79.36 0.03 99.66 26.08

Mg (mg/L) 6.16 152.76 39.27 7.14 138.12 37.09

Na (mg/L) BDL 92.98 35.49 18.43 268.9 95.42

K (mg/L) BDL 50.48 5.95 1.25 301.96 25.12

HCO3 (mg/L) 85 722 435.55 155.4 670.2 350.2

Cl (mg/L) 22.7 524.7 138.62 12.89 511.75 152.46

NO (mg/L) 0.3 49.9 26.18 2.12 172.69 37.71

SO4 (mg/L) 1.9 1,419 47.27 3.72 219.06 55.93

F (mg/L) 0.8 2 1.18 0.05 1.11 0.6

Environ Earth Sci

123

and CaNaHCO3 type of water predominated during the

post-monsoon season is 33 and 39 % of the water samples.

The CaCl type of water is 6 %, Mixed CaMgCl and

CaNaHCO3 is 3 % each predominated during the Pre-

monsoon. The NaCl type of water is 15 %, Mixed CaMgCl

is 12 % predominated during the Post-monsoon. The

hydrochemical facies of water are summarized in Table 2.

This type of water causes salinity problems, and the

factor of dilution reduces the salinity to some extent.

Increased chloride concentration in the post monsoon

Fig. 2 Piper diagram depicting

hydrochemical facies of

groundwater: a pre monsoon

and b post monsoon

Environ Earth Sci

123

season may be due to the process of the removal of other

ions from the system, either by precipitation or by

adsorption (Chidambaram et al. 2006). In the study area,

the major groundwater type is a mixed category, during the

pre-monsoon is 42 % and the post monsoon is 33 %.

During the pre-monsoon, Ca is the major cation

(Ca [ Mg [ Na) and Pre-monsoon Na is the major cation.

Increased Na concentration and decreased Ca and Mg

concentrations, when compared with the pre -monsoon

values with post-monsoon can be explained by the proba-

bility of the loss of Ca and Mg and gain of Na? by the

cation exchange process (Packialakshmi and Ambujam

2012) HCO3 and Cl are the major anions during the pre-

monsoon and post-monsoon (HCO3 [ Cl [ SO4), HCO3

and Na concentrations come mainly from the weathering of

alkali earth from rocks related to the recharge areas (Pra-

sanna et al. 2011). Calcium and magnesium ions that

combine with bicarbonates and the small amounts of car-

bonates in the groundwater cause the water to be tempo-

rarily hard (Anku et al. 2009). The available carbonates in

the rocks might have been dissolved and added to the

groundwater system during irrigation, rainfall infiltration

and groundwater movement increases the bicarbonate.

There are major significant changes in the hydrochemical

facies during the study period (pre- and post-monsoon).

This indicates the dominance of mineral constituents and

rock weathering, in addition to recharge activities by pre-

cipitation, and induced anthropogenic activities, such as

application of fertilizers, uncontrolled groundwater devel-

opment that influences the groundwater chemistry.

Drinking water quality

The physical and chemical parameters of the analytical

result of pre and post-monsoon ground water are

compared with the standard guideline values recom-

mended by the world health organization (WHO 1993)

for drinking and public health standards in Table 3. The

table shows the most desirable limits and maximum

allowable limits of various parameters. The cations

concentration in pre-monsoon indicates that 6 % of the K

and 3 % Ca and Mg concentration exceed the WHO

limit. For anions bicarbonate 84 %, nitrate 18 % and

fluoride 12 % of the sample location exceed the stan-

dards although cations concentration in post-monsoon

indicates that 15, 6 % of the K and Na, respectively,

concentration exceed the WHO limit. For anions bicar-

bonate 69 % and nitrate 27 % of the sample location

exceed the standards.

Total dissolved solid

To ascertain the suitability of groundwater of any pur-

poses, it is essential to classify the groundwater

depending upon their hydrochemical properties based on

their TDS values of pre-monsoon samples, which are

presented in Table 4 and TDS values of post monsoon

samples presented in Table 5. Based on the groundwater

of the area is fresh water type for 63 and 66 % as well

as the 36 and 33 % of the samples represent brackish

water in pre and post-monsoon respectively. The TDS of

groundwater quality map is prepared for pre-monsoon

and post -monsoon. The study shows that only 18 % in

pre-monsoon and 12 % of the sample in post- monsoon

is below 500 mg/L of TDS which can be used for

drinking without any risk. TDS is mostly due to dis-

solved ionic matter and bear a relationship with the

electrical conductivity of water (Kapil and Bhattacharyya

2008; Sajil Kumar et al. 2013).

Table 2 The hydrochemical

facies for groundwater samplesFacies Pre monsoon Post monsoon

Sample No. of

samples

Percentage

of samples

Samples No. of

samples

Percentage

of samples

CaHCO3 1–9, 14–23, 25,

27, 29, 29–32,

34–3,620

87 87 1, 3, 5, 18, 24, 25,

26, 27, 36, 37

11 33.33

NaCl Nil Nil Nil 6, 8, 17, 32, 33 5 15.15

Mixed

CaNaHCO3

26 1 3.030 2, 4, 9, 14, 15, 16,

19, 21, 22, 30,

31,34, 35

13 39.39

Mixed

CaMgCl

33 1 3.030 7, 23, 28, 29 4 12.12

CaCl 24, 28 2 6.060 Nil Nil Nil

NaHCO3 Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil

Total 33 99.99 33 99.99

Environ Earth Sci

123

Electrical conductivity

Classifications of Electrical conductivity of groundwater in

study area for both the seasons are given in Table 6. It is

found that 81 % in pre -monsoon and 75 % in post-

monsoon of the samples are within the permissible limits

and 18 % each in pre and post- monsoon of the samples fall

in not permissible limit but they are marginally poor in

quality and only 6 % of the sample location in post mon-

soon can be classified as hazardous according to the WHO

standards. The hazardous quality is due to the dissolving of

ions from rocks by weathering and somewhat from

chemical used for the textile processing in the study area.

Total hardness (TH)

The maximum allowable limit of TH for drinking purpose

is 500 mg/L and the most desirable limit is 100 mg/L as

per the WHO international standard. Hardness exhibits a

minimum content of 109.74 and 99.7 mg/L to a maximum

of 837.11 and 632.9 mg/L with the averages of 369.15 and

226.5 mg/L in pre and post- monsoon respectively.

Groundwater exceeding the limit of 300 mg/L is consid-

ered to be very hard (Sawyer and McCarty 1967). The

spatial distribution of hardness in post monsoon samples

shows higher concentrations towards the eastern part. The

classification of the groundwater for the pre-post monsoon

in Table 7 based on total hardness shows that 12 and 24 %

of the ground water samples fall in the moderately high

category, 33 and 57 % of samples fall in the hard category

while 54 and 18 % of the samples fall in very hard category

in pre and post- monsoon season. TH of the groundwater is

calculated using the formula given below (Kuldip-singh

and Singh 2011).

TH ðas CaCO3Þmg=L ¼ ðCa þ MgÞmg=L � 50 ð1Þ

Table 3 Groundwater samples

of the study area exceeding the

permissible limits prescribed by

WHO

a Ec in (uS/cm), all parameter

in mg/L, except pH

Water

quality

WHO (1993) Pre monsoon Post monsoon

Most

desirable

limits

Max.

limits

No. of samples

exceeding

allowable limits

% of samples

exceeding

allowable limits

No. of samples

exceeding

allowable limits

% of samples

exceeding

allowable limits

pH 6.5–8.5

9.2

Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil

EC – 1,500 6 18.18 8 24.24

TDS 500 1,500 3 9.090 4 12.12

Ca 75 200 1 3.030 Nil Nil

Mg 50 150 1 3.030 Nil Nil

K – 12 2 6.060 5 15.15

Na – 200 Nil Nil 2 6.06

Cl 200 600 Nil Nil Nil Nil

HCO3 – 300 28 84.84 23 69.69

NO3 45 – 6 18.18 9 27.27

SO4 200 400 Nil Nil Nil Nil

F – 1.5 4 12.12 Nil Nil

TH 100 500 8 24.24 Nil Nil

Table 4 Groundwater classification of all groundwater

TDS (mg/L) Classification Pre monsoon Post monsoon

Sample no. No. of

samples

% of

samples

Sample no. No. of

samples

% of

samples

\500 Desirables for

drinking

1, 3, 24, 30, 36, 37 6 18.18 1, 3, 24, 36 4 12.12

500–1,000 Permissible for

drinking

4, 5, 9, 14, 16, 18, 19, 21, 22,

23, 25, 27, 31, 33, 34

15 45.45 4, 5, 9, 14–16, 18, 19, 21–23,

25, 27, 29–31, 34, 37

18 54.54

1,000–3,000 Useful for

irrigation

2, 6, 7, 8, 15, 17, 20, 26, 28,

29, 32, 35

12 36.36 2, 6–8, 17, 20, 26 28, 32, 33,

35

11 33.33

[3,000 Unfit for drinking

and irrigation

Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil

Total 33 100 33 100

Environ Earth Sci

123

The climate and geology of the area plays a very

important role in contributing to the total hardness. The

leaching of Ca and Mg from these rocks adds to the

hardness. Further, the agricultural activities directly or

indirectly affect the concentrations of a large number of

inorganic chemicals in groundwater such as NO3-, Cl-,

SO2�4 , HCO3

-, PO3�4 , Na?, K?, Mg2?, Ca2?, etc.

Chloride

Chloride occurs naturally in all types of waters. The

chloride content varies between 22.70 and 524.70 mg/L

(ave. = 138.62 mg/L), of the total samples of pre-mon-

soon whereas 12.89 and 511.75 mg/L (ave. =

152.46 mg/L), of the total samples of post-monsoon,

both seasonal samples are within a permissible limit.

Natural waters, the probable sources of chloride com-

prise the leaching of chloride-containing minerals (like

apatite) and rocks with which the water comes in con-

tact, inland salinity and the discharge of agricultural,

industrial and domestic waste waters (Ravikumar et al.

2010). Agricultural application of K as a plant nutrient

commonly results in chloride contamination of recharg-

ing shallow groundwater.

Nitrate

Nitrate in the study area is found to be high in concentra-

tion in both seasons i.e. pre and post-monsoons. 6 in pre

and 9 in post-monsoon of the ground water samples exceed

the permissible limit of 45 mg/L as per WHO standard. It

varies between 0.30 and 49.90 mg/L with averages

26.18 mg/L in pre monsoon. 115.4–670 mg/L with average

is 350.2 mg/L. The high concentration of nitrate in drink-

ing water is toxic and cause to human beings (Causape

et al. 2004; Jalali 2005). Nitrate content in groundwater is

because of excess use of fertilizer in agricultural land

(Appelo and Postma 2005).

Bicarbonate

Among the anions, bicarbonate is the most dominant one

and shows wide variation in concentrations of both seasons

i.e. pre and post-monsoons. It varies between 85 and

722 mg/L with average 435.55 mg/l in pre monsoon and

115.4 and 670 mg/L with averages 350.2 mg/L in post-

monsoon. The primary source of bicarbonate ions in

groundwater is the dissolution of carbonate minerals in the

study area. The decay of organic matter present in the soil

releases CO2. Water charged with CO2 dissolves carbonate

Table 5 Groundwater classification of all groundwater

TDS (mg/l) Classification Pre monsoon Pre monsoon

Sample no. No. of

samples

% of

samples

Sample no. No. of

samples

% of

samples

\1,000 Fresh water

type

1, 3, 4, 5, 9, 14, 16, 18, 21, 22, 23,

24, 25, 27, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 36,

37

21 63.63 1, 3, 24, 36, 4, 5, 9, 14–16, 18,

19, 21–23 25, 27, 29–31, 34,

37

22 66.67

1,000–10,000 Brackish

water type

2, 6, 7, 8, 13, 15, 17, 20, 28, 29,

32, 35

12 36.36 2, 6–8, 17, 20, 26, 28, 32, 33,

35

11 33.33

10,000–100,000 Saline water

type

Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil

[100,000 Brine water

type

Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil

Total 33 100 33 100

Table 6 Groundwater classification based on electrical conductivity

EC us/cm Classification Pre monsoon Post monsoon

Sample no. No. of

samples

% of

samples

Sample no. No. of

samples

% of

samples

\1,500 Permissible 1–5, 7, 9, 14–16, 18, 19, 21–31,

33, 34, 36, 37

27 81.81 1–6, 9, 14–16, 18–27,

29–31, 36, 37

22 75.75

1,500–3,000 Not

permissible

6, 8, 17, 20, 32, 35 6 18.18 07, 17, 28, 32, 34, 35 6 18.18

[3,000 Hazardous Nil Nil Nil 08, 33 2 6.06

Total 33 100 33 100

Environ Earth Sci

123

minerals, as it passes through soils and rocks to give

bicarbonates (Ramesh et al. 1995). The present study too

reveals such positive relationship.

Sulphate

Sulphate in the study area is found to be in the permissible

concentration limit of 400 mg/L as per WHO standard. It

varies between 1.90 and 141.90 mg/L with average

47.27 mg/L in pre monsoon and 3.72 and 219.06 mg/L

with averages 55.93 mg/L in post-monsoon. The high

concentration of sulphate in drinking water is toxic and

causes laxative effective.

Fluoride

Fluoride in the study area is found to be significant in

concentration of pre monsoon samples; where as in post-

monsoon samples are within permissible. The ground water

samples are within a permissible limit of 1.5 mg/L as per

WHO standard. It varies between 0.80 and 2.00 mg/L with

average 1.18 mg/L in pre- monsoon and 0.05 and 1.11 mg/

L with an average 0.60 mg/L in post-monsoon. The high

concentration of fluoride in drinking water is cause to

fluorosis (Srinivasamoorthy et al. 2012).

Calcium

Among the cations, Ca content fall within the permissible

limit (75 mg/L) among the total samples in both seasons

except one sample exceed from pre monsoon. The content

of Ca spreads between 8.66 and 224.95 mg/L with average

79.36 mg/L for pre-monsoon and 0.03 and 99.66 mg/L

averaging 26.08 mg/L for post-monsoon respectively. High

concentration of Ca is not desirable in washing, laundering

and bathing. It is known as the source of Ca in ground-

water, its resources are mainly the crystalline carbonatic

rocks like; limestone, dolomite etc.

Magnesium

The content of Mg is comparatively high than that of Ca.

Although the Mg exhibits within the permissible limit. The

geochemistry of the rock types may have an influence in

the concentration of Mg in groundwater or sometimes

Sewage and industrial wastes are the important sources of

calcium and magnesium (Subrahmanyam and Yadaiah

2001).

Sodium

Na is one of the important naturally occurring cations and its

concentration in fresh waters is generally lower than that of Ca

and Mg. But in the present investigation, the average concen-

tration of Na is comparatively higher than that of Ca and Mg.

For aesthetic reason, the guideline value given by WHO is

200 mg/L. Sodium in pre monsoon are with in permissible limit

however comparatively higher values are recorded from the

north-eastern part of the study area and the values range

between 18.43 and 268.90 mg/L with the average of 95.42 mg/

L in post-monsoon. Sample No 8 and 32 registered value above

the permissible limit. It may be because of geological envi-

ronment covered mainly by granite and gneiss, the geological

influence on the concentration of the cations is well understood

(Ravikumar et al. 2010).

Potassium

The concentration of K shows very high values in two and

five samples in pre and post-monsoon with range are BDL

to 50.48 mg/L and average 5.95 and 1.25–301.96 mg/L

with the average of 25.12 mg/L respectively. Though, most

of the sources of rocks contain K, are released during

weathering, a part of the K go into clay structure and

thereby its concentration gets reduced in water (Ravikumar

et al. 2010). However, sample Nos. 6, 17 in pre and 06, 08,

17, 33 and 35 post-monsoons throughout the study area,

Table 7 Groundwater classification based on hardness (Sawyer and McCarty 1967)

TH as

COCO3

(mg/L)

Classification Pre monsoon Post monsoon

Sample no. No. of

samples

% of

samples

Sample no. No. of

samples

% of

samples

\75 Soft Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil

75–150 Moderately

high

3, 30, 36, 37 4 12.12 1, 2, 4, 21, 24, 31, 33, 36 8 24.24

150–300 Hard 1, 4, 18, 21, 23, 24, 25, 31, 33, 35 11 33.33 3, 6, 8, 9, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 22, 23,

25, 27, 29, 30, 30, 34, 34, 35, 37

19 57.57

[300 Very hard 2, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 14, 15, 165, 17, 19,

20, 22, 26, 27, 28, 29, 32, 34

18 54.54 7, 20, 21, 28, 32 6 18.18

Total 33 100 33 100

Environ Earth Sci

123

registered values above the drinking water standard of

12 mg/L. K contamination in groundwater can result from

the application of inorganic fertilizer at greater than agro-

nomic rates. Loss of nutrients, including K, from agricul-

tural land have been identified as one of the main causative

factors in reducing water quality in many parts of arid and

semi-arid regions.

Irrigation water quality

Gibbs diagram

The Gibbs (1970) plots illustrate that the water–rock

interaction. The Gibbs ratio for the ions Na ? K/

Na ? K ? Ca of groundwater samples are plotted against

the respective values of TDS for both seasons. The plot

(Fig. 3) indicates that more than 90 % of the groundwater

samples in all the seasons fall in the rock dominant cate-

gory and the rest fall in the evaporation field. Rock dom-

inance of most of the samples are caused by the interaction

between the aquifer rocks and groundwater which is further

influenced by the evaporation process and inappropriate

sources as some sample points scatter between rock dom-

inance to evaporation dominance fields which is more

pronounced in pre-monsoon while in post-monsoon plot

most of the points cluster close to the rock dominance field

(Reddy et al. 2012).

Wilcox diagram

Excessive amount of dissolved ion such as sodium, bicar-

bonate, and carbonate in irrigation water affect plants and

agricultural soil physically and chemically, thus reducing

the productivity. The physical effects of these ions are to

lower the osmotic pressure in the plant structural cells, thus

preventing water from reaching the branches and leaves.

The chemical effects disrupt plant metabolism. It is the

quantity of certain ions, such as sodium and boron, rather

than the total salt concentration that affects plant devel-

opment. Excess salinity reduces the osmotic activity of

plants and thus interferes with the absorption of water and

nutrients from the soil. Sodium adsorption ratio (SAR) is

an important parameter for determining the suitability of

groundwater for irrigation because it is a measure of alkali/

sodium hazard to crops.

SAR = Na/ Ca + Mgð Þ1=2=2 where the concentrations

are represented in meq/L.

The analytical data plotted on the US salinity diagram

proposed by US Salinity Laboratory Staff Fig. 4 and

Table 8 illustrates that;

1. 30 and 27 % of the groundwater’s of pre and post-

monsoon fall in the field of C2-S1, indicating water of

medium salinity and low sodium, which can be used

for irrigation in almost all types of soil with little

danger of exchangeable sodium.

2. 60 and 54 % of the groundwater’s of pre and post-

monsoon fall in the field of C3-S1, indicating water of

high salinity and low sodium, which can be used for

irrigation in almost all types of soil with little danger of

exchangeable sodium.

3. 9 and 3 % of samples of pre and post-monsoon falling

under C4-S1, indicating water of high salinity and low

sodium, which can be used for irrigation in all types of

soils.

4. 9 % of samples of post-monsoon falling under C3-S2,

indicating water of high salinity and medium sodium,

which can be used for irrigation in all types of soils.

5. 6 % sample of post-monsoon are falling under above

3,000 so it’s very high in salinity with the high sodium.

Similarly, a perusal of the diagram of Wilcox relating

sodium percentage and electrical conductivity indicates

Pre Monsoon

1

10

100

1000

10000

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1

Na+K:Na+K+Ca (mg/l)

TD

S (m

g/l)

Evaporation

Rock Dominance

Precipitation Dominance

Post Monsoon

1

10

100

1000

10000

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2

Na+K:Na+K+Ca (mg/l)

TD

S (m

g/l)

Evaporation

Rock

Precipitation

(b)(a)Fig. 3 Gibbs plot for a Pre-

monsoon and b Post-monsoon

Environ Earth Sci

123

that all groundwater samples fall in the fields of excellent

too good for irrigation. Sodium concentration plays an

important role in evaluating the groundwater quality for

irrigation because sodium causes an increase in the hard-

ness of soil as well as a reduction in its permeability.

The sodium percentage (Na %) is calculated using the

formula given below

Na % ¼ Na + Kð Þ � 100= Ca + Mg + Na + Kð Þ ð2Þ

where all ionic concentration is expressed in meq/L.

Na % indicates that the 45 % samples of pre monsoon

and 3 % groundwater sample of post-monsoon are

excellent type water, 39 % samples of pre monsoon and

27 % of samples are good in nature, 15 % samples of

pre monsoon and 45 % samples of post-monsoon are

permissible and 8 samples of post-monsoon are doubtful

for the use of irrigation purpose (Table 9). Sodium

concentration plays an important role in evaluating the

groundwater quality for irrigation because sodium causes

an increase in the hardness of soil as well as a reduction

in its permeability. Irrigation qualities of groundwater

based on sodium percentage, where the Na concentration

Fig. 4 USSL diagram for

classification of irrigation water

for a Pre and b Post-monsoon

samples

Environ Earth Sci

123

is high in irrigation water, Na tend to be adsorbed in

clay particles, displacing Mg and Ca cations. Moreover,

the permeability of the soil is reduced due to the

exchange process of Na? in water for Ca and Mg (Saleh

et al. 1999; Subramani et al. 2005; Tank and Chandel

2010).

Table 8 Salinity and alkalinity hazards of irrigation water in US salinity diagram

Classification SAR/EC Pre monsoon Post monsoon

Sample no. No. of

samples

% of

samples

Sample no. No. of

samples

% of

samples

C2-S1 EC

medium

SAR low

01, 3, 04, 18 , 24, 25, 30, 31, 36, 37 10 30.30 01, 03, 04

24, 25, 30, 31, 36, 37

9 27.27

C3-S1 EC high

SAR low

2, 5, 6, 7, 9, 14, 15, 16, 17,19, 20, 21,

22, 23, 26, 27, 28, 29, 33, 34

20 60.60 5, 6, 7, 9, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19,

20, 21, 22, 23, 26, 27, 29, 34

18 54.54

C4-S1 EC very

high

SAR low

8, 32, 35 3 9.09 28 1 3.03

C3-S2 EC high

SAR

medium

Nil Nil Nil 02, 35, 32 3 9.09

[3,000 Very

high

Nil Nil Nil l8, 33 2 6.06

Total 33 100 33 100

Table 9 Irrigation quality of groundwater based on sodium percentage

% Na Classification Pre monsoon Post monsoon

Sample no. No. of

samples

% of

samples

Sample no. No. of

samples

% of

samples

\20 Excellent 2, 5, 7, 8, 15, 16, 17, 19, 20, 21,

22, 26, 28, 32, 35

15 45.45 26 1 3.030

20–40 Good 1, 6, 9, 14, 18, 23, 24, 25,27, 29,

31, 34, 36

13 39.39 5, 18, 23, 24, 25, 27, 9, 36, 37 9 27.27

40–60 Permissible 3, 4, 30, 33, 37 5 15.15 1, 3, 4, 7, 9, 14, 16, 19, 20, 22, 28,

30, 31, 32, 34

15 45.45

60–80 Doutful Nil Nil Nil 2, 6, 8, 15, 17, 21, 33, 35 8 24.24

[80 Unsuitable Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil

Total 33 100 33 100

Table 10 Irrigation quality of groundwater based on residual sodium

RSC Classification Pre monsoon Post monsoon

Sample no. No. of

samples

% of

samples

Sample no. No. of

samples

% of

samples

\1.25 Good 1, 3, 5, 6, 7, 9, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 22, 23,

24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 32, 24, 36, 37

25 75.75 3, 5, 7, 22, 23, 24, 26,

27, 28, 29, 32, 36, 37

13 39.39

1.25–2.5 Doubtful 2, 4, 8, 21, 30, 31 6 18.18 1, 6, 14, 21, 25, 30, 31,

34

8 24.24

[2.5 Unsuitable 33, 35 2 6.060 2, 4, 8, 9, 15, 16, 17, 18,

19, 20, 33, 35

12 36.36

Total 33 100 33 100

Environ Earth Sci

123

Residual sodium carbonate

The excess sum of carbonate and bicarbonate in ground

water over the sum of calcium and magnesium also influ-

ence the unsuitability for irrigation. This id denoted as

residual sodium carbonate (RSC) index which is calculated

as

RSC ¼ HCO3 þ CO3ð Þ� CaþMgð Þ ð3Þ

where all the concentrations are expressed in meq/L. the

classification of groundwater based on RSC values are

summarized in Table 10. As concern table 75, 18 and 6 %

of the pre monsoon groundwater samples fall in the cate-

gories of good (RSC [ 1.25), doubtful (125.2.5) and

unsuitable (RSC \ 2.5), respectively for irrigation purpose

where 39, 24 and 36 % of the post-monsoon groundwater

samples fall in the categories of good (RSC [ 1.25),

doubtful (125.2.5) and unsuitable (RSC \ 2.5), respec-

tively for irrigation purpose. The increase of RSC in irri-

gation water is significantly harmful for plant growth

(Kumar et al. 2009; Sivasankar et al. 2013), in study area

RSC value of post-monsoon season are increase it specify

to the weathering of rock and leaching of ions in

groundwater.

Conclusion

Based on the attempt made to study the quality of

groundwater, it is found that Na concentration is dominant

among cations and HCO3 among anions. It is evident from

the higher values of physico-chemical results especially

hardness, alkalinity, bicarbonates, and potassium that most

of the water samples analyzed in the present investigation

are contaminated by geogenic as well as anthropogenic like

sewage and industrial effluents. The groundwater is of

good quality for irrigation purpose, even though high

salinity/low sodium and medium salinity/low sodium type

found to exist that needs better drainage to overcome

salinity problems. Stringent monitoring and control mea-

sures in the regions of low groundwater quality are nec-

essary to ensure sustainable safe use of the resource.

Acknowledgments The authors are thankful to Director, CSIR-

National Geophysical Research Institute, Hyderabad for providing

facilities.

References

A graphic procedure in the geochemical interpretation of water

analyses. Trans.US Geol Surv Groundwater Notes. Printing,

Washington, 12 pp 42

Al-Ahmadi ME (2013) Groundwater quality assessment in Wadi

Fayd, Western Saudi Arabia. Arab J Geosci 6:247–258

Alam M, Rais S, Aslam M (2012) Hydrochemical investigation and

quality assessment of ground water in rural areas of Delhi India.

Environ Earth Sci 66:97–110

Alexakis D (2011) Assessment of water quality in the Messolonghi-

Etoliko and Neochorio region (West Greece) using hydrochem-

ical and statistical analysis methods. Environ Monit Assess

182:397–413

Alexakis D, Tsakiris G (2010) Drought impact son karstic spring

annual water potential. Application on Almyros (Heraklion

Crete) brackish spring. Desalin Water Treat 16:1–9

Anku YS, Banoeng-Yakubo B, Asiedu DK, Yidana SM (2009) Water

quality analysis of groundwater in crystalline basement rocks,

Northern Ghana. Environ Geol 58:989–997

Apadaca LE, Jeffrey BB, Michelle CS (2007) Water quality in

shallow alluvium aquifers, Upper Colorado river basin Colorado.

J Am War Res Acs 38(1):133–148

Appelo CAJ, Postma D (1996) Geochemistry of groundwater and

pollution. Balkema, The Netherlands, p 536

Appelo CAJ, Postma D (2005) Geochemistry, Groundwater and

Pollution, 2nd edn. A.A Balkema, The Netherlands, p 649

Byoung-Young C, Seong-Taek Y, Soon-Young Y, Pyeong-Koo L,

Seong-Sook P, Gi-Tak C (2005) Hydrochemistry of urban

groundwater in Seoul, South Korea: effects of landuse and

pollutant recharge. Environ Geol 48:979–990

Causape J, Quile ZD, Aragu ESR (2004) Assessment of irrigation and

environmental quality at the hydrological basin level II. Salt and

nitrate loads in irrigation return flows. Agric Water Manage

70:211–228

Chidambaram S, Senthil KG, Prasanna MV, John PA, Ramanthan

AL, Srinivasa moorthy K (2006) A study on the hydrogeology

and hydrogeochemistry of groundwater from different depths in

a coastal aquifer: Annamalai nagar, Tamilnadu, India. Tamiln-

adu. India. Environ Geol 21(1):229–245

Chidambaram S, Bala Krishna Prasad M, Manivannan R, Karmegam

U, Singaraja C, Anandhan P, Prasanna MV, Manikandan S

(2013) Environmental hydrogeochemistry and genesis of fluo-

ride in ground waters of Dindigul district, Tamil Nadu (India).

Environ Earth Sci 68:333–342

Dar IA, Dar MA, Sankar K (2010) Nitrate contamination in

groundwater of Sopore town and its environs, Kashmir, India.

Arab J Geosci 3:267–272

Dudeja D, Bartarya SK, Biyan AK (2011) Hydrochemical and water

quality assessmentof groundwater in Doon Valley of Outer

Himalaya, Uttarakhand, India. Environ Monit Assess 181:183–204

Elango L, Kannan R, Senthil Kumar M (2003) Major ion chemistry

and identification of Hydrogeochemical processes of groundwa-

ter in part of Kancheepuram district, Tamil Nadu India. Environ

Geosci 10(4):157–166

Khazaei E, Stednick JD, Sanford WE, Warner JW (2006) Hydro-

chemical Changes Over Time in the Zahedan Aquifer Iran.

Environ Monit Assess 114:123–143

Gibbs RJ (1970) Mechanisms controlling world’s water chemistry.

Science 170:1088–1090

Ibe KM, Njemanze GN (1999) The impact of urbanization and

protection on water resources in Owerri and Environs SE

Nigeria. Environ Monit Assess 58:337–348

Jalali M (2005) Nitrates leaching from agricultural land in Hamadan,

western Iran. Agric Ecosyst Environ 110:210–218

Jeevanandan M, Nagarajan R, Manikandan M, Senthilkumar M,

Srinivasulu S, Prasanna MV (2012) Hydrogeochemistry and

microbial contamination of ground water from lower Ponnaiyar

basin, Cuddalore District, Tamil Nadu. Environ Earth Sci

67:867–887

Jeong CH (2001) Effect of land use and urbanization on hydrochem-

istry and contamination of groundwater from Taejon area,

Korea. J Hydrology 253:194–210

Environ Earth Sci

123

Kapil N, Bhattacharyya KG (2008) Bimonthly variation of wetland

water quality: a case study with Deepor Beel, Assam, India. In:

Proceedings of sixteenth national symposium on environment,

Haryana, India (pp 166–170)

Klimas AA (1995) Impacts of urbanization and protection of water

resources in the Vilnius district, Lithuania. Hydrogeology J

3(1):24–35

Singh K, Hundal HS, Singh D (2011) Geochemistry and assessment

of hydrogeochemical processes in ground water in the southern

part of Bathinda district of Punjab, northwest India. Environ

Earth Sci 64:1823–1833

Kumar M, Rmanathan AL, Rao MS, Kumar B (2006) Identification

and evaluation of Hydrogeochemical processes in the ground-

water environment of Delhi, India. Environ Geol 50:1025–1039

Kumar SK, Ram mohan V, Sahayam J, Jeevanandam M (2009)

Assessment of groundwater quality and hydrogeochemistry of

Manimuktha river basin, Tamil Nadu, India. Environ Monit

Assess 159:341–351

Miller DW (1985) Ground water quality. Wiley, New York

Piper AM (1994) A geographic procedure in the geochemical

interpretation of water analysis. Transactions, vol 25. American

Geophysical Union, Washington, pp 914–928

Pophare MA, Dewalkar SM (2007) Groundwater quality in eastern

and south eastern parts of Rajura Tehsil, Chendrapur district

Maharashtra. Gondwana Geology Magazine Sp 11:119–129

Prasanna MV, Chidambaram S, Senthil KG, Ramanathan AL,

Nainwal HC (2011) Hydrogeochemical assessment of ground-

water in Neyveli Basin, Cuddalore District, South India. Arab J

Geosci 4:319–330

Raju J (2007) Hydrogeochemical parameters for assessmentn of

groundwater quality in the upper Gunjanaeru River basin,

Cuddapah District, Andhra Pradesh, South India. Environ Geol

52:1067–1074

Ramesh R, Shiv Kumar K, Eswaramoorthi S, Purvaja GR (1995)

Migration and contamination of major and trace elements in

groundwater of Madras City, India. Environ Geol 25:126–136

Rao NS (2006) Seasonal variation of groundwater quality in a part of

Guntur district, AP, India. Environ Geol 49:413–429

Rashid U, Izrar A (2007) Hydrochemical characteristics of ground-

water in parts of Kushva-Yamuna basin, Muzaffarnagar district,

UP. J Geol Soci India 69:970–982

Ravikumar P, Venkatesharaju K, Somashekar RK (2010) Major ion

chemistry and hydrochemical studies of groundwater of Banga-

lore South Taluk, India. Environ Monit Assess 163:643–653

Reddy AGS, Reddy DV, Rao PN, Maruthy Prasad K (2010)

Hydrogeochemical characterization of fluoride rich groundwater

of Wailpalli watershed, Nalgonda District, Andhra Pradesh,

India. Environ Monit Assess 171:561–577

Reddy AGS, Saibaba B, Sudarshan G (2012) Hydrogeochemical

characterization of contaminated groundwater in Patancheru

industrial area, southern India. Environ Monit Assess

184:3557–3576

Richards LA (1954) Diagnosis and improvement of saline and alkali

soil. US Department of Agriculture, US, p 60

Fianko JR, Dickson A, Osae S, Ganyaglo S, Kortatsi BK, Tay CK,

Glover ET (2010) The hydrochemistry of groundwater in the

Densu River Basin, Ghana. Environ Monit Assess 167:663–674

Sajil Kumar PJ, Elango L, James EJ (2013) Assessment of

hydrochemistry and groundwater quality in the coastal area of

South Chennai, India. Arab J Geosci. doi:10.1007/s12517-013-

0940-3

Saleh A, Al-Ruwaih F, Shehata M (1999) Hydrogeochemical

processes operating within the main aquifers of Kuwait. J Arid

Environ 42:195–209

Sawyer CN, McCarty PL (1967) Chemistry for sanitary engineers,

2nd edn. McGraw-Hill, New York, p 518

Shanmugam P, Ambujam NK (2012) A hydrochemical and geolog-

ical investigation on the Mambakkam mini watershed, Kan-

cheepuram District, Tamil Nadu. Environ Monit Assess

184:3293–3306

Singh P, Kunwar AM, Mohan D, Singh VK, Singh S (2006)

Evaluation of groundwater quality in northern Indo-Gangetic

alluvium region. Environ Monit Assess 112:211–230

Sivasankar V, Omine K, Msagati TAM, Sentil Kumar M, Chandra-

mohan A (2013) Evaluation of groundwater quality in Madurai

city, South India for drinking, irrigation and construction

purposes. Arab J Geosci. doi:10.1007/s12517-013-0994-2

Srinivasamoorthy K, Nanthakumar C, Vasanthavigar M, Vijayaragh-

avan K, Rajivgandhi R, Chidambaram S, Anandan P, Manivan-

nan R, Vasudevan S (2011) Groundwater quality assessment

from hard rock terrain, Salem district of Tamilnadu, India. Arab

J Geosci 4:91–102

Srinivasamoorthy K, Nanthakumar C, Vasanthavigar M, Vijayaragh-

avan K, Rajivgandhi R, Chidambaram S, Anandan P, Manivan-

nan R, Vasudevan S (2012) Assessment of groundwater quality

with special emphasis on fluoride contamination in crystalline

bed rock aquifers of Mettur region, Tamilnadu, India. Arab J

Geosci 5:83–94

Subrahmanyam K, Yadaiah P (2001) Assessment of the impact of

industrial effluents on water quality in Patancheru and environs,

Medak district, Andhra Pradesh, India. Hydrogeology J

9:297–312

Subramani T, Elango L, Rasamy SRD (2005) Groundwater quality

and its suitability for drinking and agricultural use in Chithar

river basin, Tamil Nadu, India. Environ Geol 47:1099–1110

Tank DK, Chandel CPS (2010) A hydrochemical elucidation of the

groundwater composition under domestic and irrigated land in

Jaipur City. Environ Monit Assess 166:69–77

WHO (1996) Guidelines for drinking water, vol 2., Recommenda-

tionsWorld Health Organization, Geneva

Zuane JD (1990) Drinking water quality: standards and control. Van

Nostrand Reinhold, New York

Environ Earth Sci

123