Hydrogeology and Hydrochemistry of Groundwater in … and... · Ministry of Higher Education and...

Ministry of Higher Education and Scientific Research University of Baghdad College of Science Department of Geology

Hydrogeology and Hydrochemistry of Groundwater

in Tuz Khurmatu area

A THESIS SUBMITED TO THE COLLEGE OF SCIENCE UNIVERSITY OF BAGHDAD, IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT

OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF SCIENCE IN

GEOLOGY (HYDROGEOLOGY)

By Arjan Ali Rasheed

B. Sc. 2000

Supervised

By Prof. Dr. Qusai Yaseen Al-Kubaisi

2012 / April 1433

وزارة التعليم العالي والبحث العلمي جامعة بغداد

كلية العلوم قسم علم األرض

هيدروجيولوجية وهيدروكيميائية

المياه الجوفية في منطقة طوزخورماتو

رسالة مقدمة إلى كلية العلوم - جامعة بغداد

كجزء من متطلبات نيل درجة ماجستير/ هيدروجيولوجيفي علوم األرض

من قبل أرجان علي رشيد

2000بكالوريوس علوم

بإشراف أ.د ياسين الكبيسيقصي

1433 2012نيسان/

ولم ير ألذين كفروا أن ألسموات أ

ضآألرا ومهتقا ففتقنكانتا ر

اءالم نا ملنعجو ءيكل ش

يؤمنون حي أفال العظيم العليا صدق

30 /االنبياء

Supervisor’s Confirmation

I certify that this thesis was prepared under my supervision at the University of

Baghdad as a partial requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Geology

(Hydrogeology).

Signature:

Name: Dr. Qusai Yaseen Al-Kubaisi

Title: Professor

Address: Department of Geology

College of Science ,University of Baghdad

Date: / / 2012

In view of the available recommendations. I forward this thesis for debate by

the Examining committee.

Signature:

Name: Dr. Ahmad Sh. AL-Banna

Title: Professor

Address: Head of Geology Department

College of Science, University of Baghdad

Date: / / 2012

Confirmation of Examining Committee We the members of examining committee , certify that after reading this thesis

entitled (Hydrogeology and Hydrochemistry of Groundwater in Tuz

Khurmatu area ) and examining the student in its contents, we think in our

opinion it is adequate with standing as a thesis for degree of Master of Science in

Geology (Hydrogeology).

Approved by the council of College of Science .

Signature: Name: Dr. Moutaz A. Al-Dabbas Title: Professor Address: Department of Geology College of Science University of Baghdad Date: / / 2012 (Chairman)

Signature: Name: Dr. Ayser M. Al-Shamma'a Title: Professor Address: Department of Geology College of Science University of Baghdad Date: / / 2012 (Member)

Signature: Name: Dr. Hassan H. Salman Title: Professor Address: College of Science University of Al-Mustansiriyah Date: / / 2012 (Member)

Signature: Name: Dr. Qusai Y. Al-Kubaisi Title: Professor Address: Department of Geology College of Science University of Baghdad Date: / / 2012 (Supervisor)

Signature: Name: Dr. Saleh M. Ali Title: Professor Address: Dean of College of Science. University of Baghdad Date: / / 2012

DEDICATION

DEDICATION

To my father's remembrance

To my darling mother with my love

To my children ,my wife and my sister

To all those who love me

With my love and respect

Arjan…

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

Acknowledgment At the final stage of thesis writing . I would like to express my deepest gratitude

and thanks to my supervisor, Prof. Dr. Qusai Y. Al-Qubaisi for his guidance

, fruitful suggestions , constructive criticism and support through all stages of

work. Also, my high gratitude to all members of the Geology Department

- University of Baghdad. I would like to thank Dr. Salman Z. Khorshied for his

guidance and help.

I would like to express my sincere thanks and appreciation to the General

Commission for Groundwater represented by the general director Mr. Dhafir

Abdullah Hussein for his continuous support to simplify the difficulties .I am

grateful to the Expert, Dhia Bashoo, to support and follow-up my research , also

my thanks for all staff of the chemical laboratory .

I would like to thank my colleagues the staff of the Branch of Kirkuk for wells

drilling for helping me by providing data and apparatuses for the field work , and

my great thanks go to my friends Jawdat Abdul Jalil for helping me in computer

programs and providing me by resources and Sabah Ahmed Khorshid for his help

during the field work.

I am very grateful to my friends Hazem Karim and Arshad Wahab for their

assistance and continuous support during the study and research periods .

Finally , I would like to extend my thanks to everyone who helped me to

complete and write this thesis with my love and respect.

Arjan…

ABSTRACT

ABSTRACT The studied area is located within Salahadden governorate between latitudes

(34°50'00" - 34° 55' 00") and longitudes ( 44° 33' 00" - 44° 40' 00" ) south of

Kirkuk city by about ( 70 km) with an approximate area of (124km2). The

important geological formations in the area consist of Tertiary deposits

(Al-Fat'ha, Injana , Muqdadiya and Bai- Hassan formations) as well as recent

Quaternary deposits which cover the study area . Depending on the climatic data

recorded in Tuz Khurmatu station for the period (1991- 2010) the common

climate in the area is humid to moist. The studied area is located within

AL-Adhaim basin whose area is about (12000km2). The productive

hydrogeological unit in the studied area is Bai - Hassan Formation. The general

direction of groundwater flow is from northeast towards southwest and the

hydraulic gradient (I) average is (0.0068). By using Theis recovery (1935) and

Jacob's (1948) methods pumping test results which performed in (7) wells that

penetrate Bai - Hassan Formation partially without observation wells indicated

a transmissivity of median value of ( 176.11 m2/day) and hydraulic conductivity of

median value of ( 3.06 m/day) .

The groundwater quality is generally of low alkalinity . (EC ) and (TDS)

averages and the concentrations of Cations and Anions for the wet period are

lower than the dry period except bicarbonate ion(HCO3-) due to the dilution

process . No nitrate pollution. Depending on (TDS) values the groundwater in the

area is classified as slightly-brackish water . Hardness of water is of very hard

type. The groundwater in the study area is polluted with some heavy elements like

(Co, Ni, Cd and Pb) because their concentrations are higher than the permissible

limits according to WHO (2007) and IQS(2009).

Most wells in the study area have water type of (Na2SO4), and the other

wells range between (NaCl) ,(CaCl2),( CaSO4) and (MgSO4) water type for the

two periods. The average of hydrochemical indicators for the two periods show

that groundwater origin is from meteoric water except the wells No.(1,2,8,9,13,20)

ABSTRACT

which are of marine origin due to existence of a deep recharge . According to

Piper's classification the groundwater in the study area belongs to

(Ca2+ - Mg2+ - Cl- - SO4

2- ) and (Na+- K+ - Cl- - SO4

2-) hydrochemical facies for the

two periods . Comparing the quality of groundwater with standards for different

uses proved that it is unsuitable for human drinking purposes and industrial

purposes but it's suitable for animals watering ,building purposes and for growing

most types of crops . It's admissible as irrigation water except some samples which

are poor due to high salinity. Through the groundwater management , the annual

recharge amount for Al-Adhaim basin is (1660.56 × 106 m3/ year), while the

groundwater amount that enters the study area as renewed storativity is

(9.79 × 106 m3/ year). The amount of consumed groundwater in the area during

present study is (2.96 ×106 m3/year). So the amount of change in the groundwater

storage (ΔS ) will be (6.83 × 106 m3 / year) . This value reflects an increase in

the constant storage of the area .

LIST OF CONTENTS

Page No. Title Paragraph Chapter One

Introduction and Geology of study area 1 Introduction 1.1 1 Location of study area 1.2 2 Aims of study 1.3 2 Previous studies 1.4 5 Methods of work 1.5 5 Office work 1.5.1 5 Field work 1.5.2 6 Laboratory works 1.5.3 7 Geology of the study area 1.6 7 Stratigraphy 1.6.1 10 Tectonic and structural setting in the study area 1.6.2 10 Topography and geomorphology of the study area 1.6.3

Chapter Two Climate and Hydrogeology

12 Climate 2.1 12 Temperature 2.1.1 12 Rainfall 2.1.2 15 Evaporation from class (A) pan 2.1.3 15 Relative humidity 2.1.4 16 Wind speed 2.1.5 17 Sunshine duration 2.1.6 18 Potential Evapotranspiration (PE) 2.2 20 Water Surplus (WS) and Water Deficit (WD) 2.3 23 Classification of Climate 2.4 25 Hydrogeology of the studied area 2.5 28 Groundwater movement and recharge 2.6 30 Hydraulic aquifers properties 2.7 30 Hydraulic conductivity (K) 2.7.1 31 Transmissivity (T) 2.7.2 31 Storage coefficient (Sc) 2.7.3 31 Pumping tests analysis 2.8 32 Cooper-Jacob method 2.8.1 32 Theis recovery equation 2.8.2 33 Analysis results of pumping test 2.9 35 Specific Capacity (SC)

2.10

Page No. Title Paragraph Chapter Three

Hydrochemistry 37 Introduction 3.1 38 Accuracy 3.2 38 Physical properties 3.3 38 Temperature 3.3.1 39 pH 3.3.2 40 Total Dissolved Solids (TDS) 3.3.3 43 Electrical Conductivity (EC) 3.3.4 46 Chemical properties 3.4 46 Cations 3.4.1 46 Calcium (Ca+2) 3.4.1.1 47 Magnesium (Mg+2) 3.4.1.2 47 Sodium (Na+) 3.4.1.3 48 Potassium (K+) 3.4.1.4 48 Anions 3.4.2 48 Bicarbonate(HCO3

⁻ ) and Carbonate (CO₃⁻²) 3.4.2.1 49 Sulfate (SO4

2-) 3.4.2.2 50 Chloride (Cl-) 3.4.2.3 50 Total Hardness (TH) 3.5 52 Nitrate (NO3

-) 3.6 52 Heavy elements ( Trace elements) 3.7 53 Iron (Fe) 3.7.1 53 Cobalt (Co) 3.7.2 54 Nickel (Ni) 3.7.3 54 Copper (Cu) 3.7.4 55 Zinc (Zn) 3.7.5 55 Cadmium (Cd) 3.7.6 56 Lead (Pb) 3.7.7 57 Manganese (Mn) 3.7.8

Chapter Four Groundwater Classification and Management

59 Hydrochemical formula and water type 4.1 59 Hydrochemical Formula (Kurolov formula) 4.1.1 61 Hypothetical salts 4.1.2 63 Hydrochemical indicators 4.1.3 65 Classification of water 4.2 65 Piper Classification (1944) 4.2.1 68 Chadha classification (1999) 4.2.2 71 Groundwater suitability for different purposes 4.3

Page No. Title Paragraph 71 Groundwater suitability for human drinking purposes 4.3.1 73 Groundwater suitability for livestock purposes 4.3.2 74 Groundwater suitability for industrial purposes 4.3.3 75 Groundwater suitability for building purposes 4.3.4 75 Groundwater suitability for agriculture purpose 4.3.5 77 Groundwater suitability for irrigation purposes 4.3.6 81 Suitability of water for irrigation according to US Salinity

Laboratory classification , Richards diagram (1954) 4.4

84 Groundwater management 4.5

Chapter Five Conclusions and Recommendations

90 Conclusions 5.1 95 Recommendations 5.2 96 References

Appendices I Names and Locations of samples wells of the study area Appendix 1 II Well test data and results Appendix 2

XVI Physical properties of water samples of study area for wet and dry periods

Appendix 3

XVII Concentrations of Cations and Anions of the water samples of study area for dry period by( ppm)

Appendix 4

XVIII Concentrations of Cations and Anions of the water samples of study area for wet period by ( ppm)

Appendix 5

XIX

Concentrations of Cations and Anions by (epm) and the accuracy of the results of the water samples of study area for dry period

Appendix 6

XX

Concentrations of Cations and Anions by (epm) and the accuracy of the results of the water samples of study area for wet period

Appendix 7

XXI Trace elements concentrations in water samples of study area by ( ppm)

Appendix8

XXII Hydrochemical formula and water type for dry period water samples

Appendix 9

XXIII Hydrochemical formula and water type for wet period water samples

Appendix 10

XXIV Hypothetical salts for water samples of study area for dry and wet period

Appendix 11

XXV Hydrochemical indicators of water samples of the study area for dry and wet period

Appendix 12

LIST OF FIGURES

Page No. Title Figures 3 Location and Topographical map for the study area 1.1 9 Geological map of the study area modified from (Barwary

and Selwa,1995) 1.2

11 Tectonic map of Iraq (After AL-Kadhimi et al., 1996) 1.3 13 Average monthly temperature for the period (1991-2010)

of Tuz Khurmatu meteorological station. 2.1

14 Average monthly rainfall for the period (1991-2010) of Tuz Khurmatu meteorological station.

2.2

15 The average annual rainfall for the period (1991-2010) of Tuz Khurmatu meteorological station.

2.3

16 Average monthly evaporation for the period (1991-2010) of Tuz Khurmatu meteorological station

2.4

16 Average monthly relative humidity for the period (1991-2010) of Tuz Khurmatu meteorological station.

2.5

17 Average monthly wind speed for the period (1991-2010) of Tuz Khurmatu meteorological station.

2.6

17 Average monthly sunshine for the period (1991-2010) of Tuz Khurmatu meteorological station.

2.7

18 Relationship between different of the climatic variables 2.8 22

The relationship between monthly averages of rainfall (P)and corrected potential evapotranspiration, shows water surplus(WS), and the water deficit (WD)for the study area.

2.9

26 Main aquifers and aquifer groups of Iraq (After Alsam et al., 1990)

2.10

28 The stratigraphic correlation between the wells in the studied area

2.11

29 The flow net of the study area 2.12 34 Locations of the pumping wells in the studied area 2.13 35 Relationship between specific capacity and drawdown 2.14 39 Location of water samples wells in the study area 3.1 42 Spatial distribution of TDS in the studied area

(Dry period) 3.2A

42 Spatial distribution of TDS in the studied area (Wet period)

3.2B

45 EC - TDS relationship of ground water samples in the studied area (Dry period )

3.3

46 EC - TDS relationship of ground water samples in the studied area (Wet period)

3.4

Page No. Title Figures 62 Water quality of the study area (Dry period) 4.1A 62 Water quality of the study area (Wet period) 4.1B 66 Piper (1944) Trilinear diagram with Langguth (1966)

classification. 4.2

67 Piper diagram for water samples of study area (Dry period) 4.3A 67 Piper diagram for water samples of study area (Wet period) 4.3B 69 Chadha diagram 4.4 70 Chadha classification (1999) for water samples of study

area (Dry period) 4.5A

70 Chadha classification (1999) for water samples of study area (Wet period)

4.5B

83 Diagram for classification of irrigation water of the study area ( After US Salinity Laboratory staff ,1954)

4.6

LIST OF TABLES

Page No. Title Tables 6

Methods of analysis that are used to determine Physical and Chemical properties for Tuz Khurmatu groundwater samples

1.1

13

Monthly averages of the climate elements for the period (1991-2010) of Tuz Khurmatu meteorological station.

2.1

20

Corrected potential evapotranspiration values by Thornthwaite method for the period (1991-2010) of Tuz Khurmatu meteorological station.

2.2

22 Monthly averages of water surplus (WS) and water deficit (WD) for Tuz Khurmatu meteorological station.

2.3

23 Climate classification, according to Kettaneh and Gangopadhyaya(1974)

2.4

24

Climate classification depending on values of yearly dryness treatment (Al-Kubaisi, 2004), (A-I.1 and A-I.2)

2.5

25

Climatic classification for the period (1991- 2010) of Tuz Khurmatu meteorological station according to Kettaneh and Gangopadhyaya(1974)

2.6

36

Results of hydraulic properties values by two methods used in single well pumping test analysis for wells of the study area

2.7

39 The temperature values of water samples of the studied area

3.1

Page No. Title Tables 40 The pH values of water samples of the studied area 3.2 40 The TDS values of water samples of the studied area 3.3 41 Classification of water salinity according to (TDS) in

(ppm). 3.4

43 Percentage Test (T%) (Nordstrom,et al,1989) 3.5 44 The EC values of water samples of the studied area 3.6 44 Relationship between electrical conductivity and water

mineralization (Detay, 1997). 3.7

45 The (T %) values for TDS measured and calculated of the water in the study area

3.8

46 The Ca+² concentration of water samples of the studied area

3.9

47 The Mg+2 concentration of water samples of the studied area

3.10

48 The Na+ concentration of water samples of the studied area

3.11

48 The K+ concentration of water samples of the studied area 3.12 49 The HCO3

⁻ concentration of water samples of the studied area

3.13

49 The SO42- concentration of water samples of the studied

area 3.14

50 The Cl- concentration of water samples of the studied area

3.15

51 The TH concentration of water samples of the studied are 3.16 51 Classification of water according to total hardness. 3.17 52 The NO3

- concentration of water samples of the studied are

3.18

58 Standards specifications for trace elements in natural waters.

3.19

60 Predominant salts of water samples in the study area 4.1 61 The reaction order of the hypothetical salts 4.2 61 Average of hypothetical salts values for water samples of

study area 4.3

64 Average of hydrochemical indicators of water samples for the two periods

4.4

72 Comparison of groundwater samples (ppm) in the study area with IQS and WHO standards.

4.5

73 Water specifications for the purpose of animal consumption according to (Altoviski,1962 )

4.6

73 Water specifications for the purpose of animal consumption according to (Crist and Lowery, 1972)

4.7

Page No. Title Tables 74 Water specifications for the purpose of animal

consumption according to (Ayers and Westcot,1989). 4.8

75 Suitability of water for industrial purposes (Hem, 1985). 4.9

76 Water suitability for building purposes compared with average concentrations of samples according to (Altoviski ,1962)

4.10

76 Todd classification (2007) for the tolerance of crops by relative salt concentrations for agriculture

4.11

79 Specification standards for irrigation waters, (Ayers and Westecot, 1989).

4.12

80 Values of (SAR, Na%, RSC) for water samples in the study area

4.13

80 Classification of Don (1995) for irrigation waters 4.14 81 Classification of irrigation water based on RSC values,

according to (Turgeon, 2002) 4.15

82 Type of irrigation water according to U.S. salinity Laboratory at Hem (1989) classification

4.16

Chapter One Introduction and Geology of study area

1


1.1 Introduction

In recent decades the groundwater became one of the most important natural

resources as a result of increasing water demand and decreasing rainfall amount

and surface water supplies . It became very necessary to find groundwater that

have high quantity , reachable ,and good quality specially when use as a drinking

water.

Tuz Khurmatu area is one of the most important areas due to its location on the

main express way linking the northern provinces with middle and southern

provinces. In addition to that ,the study area is considered an important agricultural

area and it contains several quarries of sand and gravel as well as bricks and

gypsum factories. In spite of the existence of surface water sources represented by

Tuz Chai river (Aqso river) and the main irrigation channel (Kirkuk irrigation

canal) but water problems still exist because these sources become semi seasonal

due to barriers built by farmers up stream and the general decreasing in surface

water resources. Beside surface water, Tuz Khurmatu area depends on ground

water from the wells distributed in the area ; therefore it's necessary to make

evaluation of groundwater in the area, and its suitability for different purposes

(human drinking , livestock, industrial, agriculture and irrigation purposes).

1.2 Location of study area

The studied area (Tuz Khurmatu) is located within Salahadden governorate

east of Tikrit city by about (90km) , northeast of Baghdad city . The lowest

elevation in the area reaches (200m) a.s.l., and highest elevation reaches

(245m)a.s.l. near the anticline (Fig.1.1).It lies south of Kirkuk city by about (70

km), between latitudes (34°50'00" - 34° 55' 00") and longitudes ( 44° 33' 00" - 44°

40' 00" ) with an approximate area of (124km2).


2

1.3 Aims of Study

Evaluation of the hydrogeological conditions to determine the hydraulic

properties of groundwater aquifer in study area.

Studying the hydrochemical characteristics and evaluation of the quality of

groundwater in the area .

Study of groundwater suitability for different purposes and an attempt to

arrange a groundwater management for the area.

1.4 Previous Studies

Macfadynae (1955 ) ,studied the different water resources in Iraq (surface and

subsurface ).

Parsons Company(1955), made a hydrogeological study of Al-Adhaim basin

,including a comprehensive survey for the dug and pipe wells and springs

distributed in the area .In addition, groundwater quality has been evaluated and

its suitability for different uses are studied.

Araim and Ahmed (1980), prepared a groundwater regional study in the Al -

Adhaim basin with emphasis on the plain area, (GEOSURV Baghdad), the aim

of the study to determine the hydrogeological characteristics of aquifers in

study area.

Sogiria (1981) , made a hydrological study of Kirkuk and northern part of Al

Adhaim basin. The study aimed to determine the hydrological circumstances,

the groundwater levels and the effects of the canal on the groundwater quality.

Dijla General Company for irrigation studies(2000), prepared a hydrogeological

study of Daquq and Tuz Khurmatu areas .The study aimed to determine the

hydrogeological characteristics of aquifers and groundwater quality in study

area.

AL-Mamuri (2005), studied the optimal management of surface water and

groundwater in AL-Adhaim basin. The study showed a rise in water table result

of goods irrigation project Kirkuk has been addressed using wells pumping.


3

Fig. 1.1 : Location and Topographical map for the study area.

Studied area


4

The State Company of Geological Survey and Mining (2005), prepared a

hydrogeological and hydrochemical study of Samarra quadrangle sheet

(NI-38-6) ,which included the study area . The study aimed to determine

geological and hydraulic characteristics of the water bearing layers ,direction of

groundwater movement and evaluation of groundwater and its suitability for

different uses in the area .

Abdul Razak et al. (2007), made a hydrogeological study of the upper Adhaim

basin, and indicated the existence of two hydrogeological systems; confined

(Bai Hassan) and unconfined (Quaternary). The recharge is achieved by rain

and the branches of the Adhaim river. Similar movement of groundwater for

both systems trend from northeast towards the southwest and south. Water

quality with carbonate and sulphate are prevailing .

AL-Rubaii (2008), studied the hydraulic properties of groundwater aquifer in

Tuz Khurmatu area by the application of electrical resistivity . The study aimed

to determine the hydraulic properties of water bearing sediments (groundwater

aquifer) such as porosity, transmissivity, hydraulic conductivity, specific yield ,

specific retention, storage coefficient and specific capacity through the analysis

of the vertical electric sounding and the analysis of the pumping test results

with the use of the chemical analysis of some wells drilled in the area .

Al-Hamdani (2009), studied the hydrochemical effect of groundwater due to

irrigation and drainage projects in Tawuq sub-basin (south of Kirkuk ) ,which

included the study area. The purpose of the study is to know the pollutants

sources, their amounts, and their changes from one season (high water season)

to another (low water season ) by study the hydrochemical characteristics of

water wells, springs , rivers, valleys , irrigation and drainage channels and

evaluation the suitability of water for different purposes.


5

1.5 Methods of Work

1.5.1 Office work:

Before starting field work:

Preparing the topographical map of the study area with a scale of 1:100 000

(Fig. 1.1 ).

Collecting available geological and hydrogeological information about the

studied area.

Collecting and reviewing references and previous studies about the studied area.

Preparing archival climatic data about the studied area depending on the

meteorological station in Tuz Khurmatu for the period (1991- 2010) because the

station was established in the year 1991.

Rock Ware Aq.QA software (V 1.1.5.1) 2006(Computer program):The

spreadsheet for water analyses, used to draw hydrochemical graphs.

1.5.2 Field work

A reconnaissance field trip was made to locate the water sampling points for

the wells in the study area.

The GPS (Global Positional System) was used to determine the locations

(Longitude, Latitude and height a.s.l.) for each well (appendix 1) .

The water samples were collected from (20) wells in two periods; the first

period during of September (2010) which represent the dry period, and the

second period was during March(2011) which represent the wet period ( Fig.

3.1) and (appendix 1).

Plastic bottles of one liter size were used to collect water samples after washing

for twice by samples water in order to avoid the contamination.

The acidity (pH),electrical conductivity (EC),total dissolved salt (TDS)and

temperature (C°) of the water samples were measured direct in the field by

using HANA (HI9811-5) apparatus (appendix 3) .

The static levels of wells water were measured by well sounder set.


6

The single well pumping test was carried out for two wells within the studied

area and also water level recovery in the two pumping wells were recorded ;

these wells are represented by W1 and W2 and shown in Fig.(2.12).

1.5.3 Laboratory Works

The laboratory works include the physical and chemical analysis of water

samples .The major and minor elements analyses were made in the chemical

laboratory of the General Commission for Groundwater, while analyses of trace

elements were made in the service laboratory in the chemistry department, College

of Science, University of Baghdad. These analyses aim at determining the

concentration of cations (Ca2+, Mg2+, Na+, K+) and the anions (HCO3-, SO4

2-, Cl-),

Nitrate (NO3-) and trace elements (Fe, Co, Ni, Cu, Zn, Cd, Pb and Mn) in addition

to (pH, TDS and EC). Methods of analysis for the different parameters are shown

in the table (1.1).

Table (1.1) Methods of analysis that are used to determine

Physical and Chemical properties for Tuz Khurmatu groundwater samples.

Parameter Methods of analyses

Na+ , K+ Flame photometer (APHA,1998)

Ca2+, Mg2+ Titration with EDTA (Ethylene Diamine Tetracitic Acid)

Cl- Technicon a utoanlyzer instrument (APHA,1998)

SO42- Technicon in ultra violet spectra photometer (U.V)

HCO3-, CO3

2- Technicon in volumetric

NO3- UV-Spectrophotometric method ( λ =500 nm)

pH pH – meter EC Conductivity – meter ( Boyd,2000)

TDS Drying , in 105 C°( Boyd,2000)

Trace or heavy elements

Atomic absorption spectrometer / GBC 933 plus


7

1.6 Geology of the Study Area

1.6.1 Stratigraphy

The important geological formations in the area consist of Tertiary deposits

(Al-Fat’ha, Injana , Muqdadiya and Bai- Hassan Formations) as well as recent

Quaternary deposits cover the study area. Al-Fat’ha Formation appears in Pulkhana

anticline and affect the groundwater salinity in the area because of the evaporates

rocks (gypsum rocks) it contains (Mohamed et al,2009) :

1- AL-Fatha Formation (L.Fars). (M. Miocene)

AL-Fatha formation is one of the most aerially widespread and economically

important formation in Iraq (Buday,1980).This formation appears in Pulkhana

anticline in the study area ( Fig. 1.2).The sediments of this formation are cyclic and

each geologic cycle is composed of anhydrite , gypsum, claystone, limestone,

sandstone and marl . The environment of deposition is semi closed coastal areas

(lagoons)( Barwary and Selwa,1995). The gypsum layers are regarded as a

separation boundary between Al-Fatha and Injana Formations (Kassab and

Jassim, 1980).

2- Injana Formation (M.&U. Fars). (U. Miocene )

The age of this formation refers to two periods , late Miocene and Pliocene .The

Injana Formation (including the middle Fars) comprises fine grained pre-molasse

sediments deposited initially in coastal areas (lagoons) and later in a fluvial

lacustrine system (Buday,1980).The formation is characterized by consecutive

beds of sandstone and claystone; few lenses of limestone and gypsum appear on

the lower part of the formation(Jassim and Goff, 2006).Most of these units

demonstrate the phenomenon of cross bedding, which indicate the environment of

deposition in shallow water (Al-Ansari,1987).The thickness of the formation is

very variable, the maximum thickness of the formation is 900m was measured near

Kirkuk (Jassim et al., 1984) .


8

3- AL-Mukdadyia Formation(L. Bakhtiari).(L. Pliocene)

This formation is distributed mostly in the foothill zone where it is > 2000 m

thick in the Kirkuk Embayment. Mukdadyia formation was deposited in fluvial

environment in a rapidly subsiding foredeep basin (Jassim and Goff, 2006).The

formation is characterized by sedimentary cycles increasing by size from sandstone

and gravel; include mudstone and conglomerate masses ( Barwary and

Selwa,1995).The appearance of the gravel layer above Injana formation marks the

beginning of Al-Mukdadyia formation (Kassab and Jassim, 1980).

4- Bai Hassan Formation (U. Bakhtiari). (U. Pliocene)

This formation prevails in a large areas of AL-Adhaim Basin . Bai Hassan

Formation is covered by Quaternary deposits in the study area. The formation is

characterized by thick layers of conglomerates interbeded with sandstone, siltstone,

and claystone ; in general, the grain size of the clastics increases upward (Buday,

1980).The environment of deposition is continental (fluvial) resulting from the

erosion of the high mountains(Barwary and Selwa,1995 ). The appearance of the

first layer of conglomerates marks the boundary between this formation and the

underlying Mukdadyia Formation (Kassab and Jassim, 1980).

5- Quaternary Deposits

Foothill zone especially in the Kirkuk Embayment is characterized by long

anticlines with Miocene cores flanked by very broad and shallow synclines

exposing Mio-Pliocene molasse along their flank . The inner parts of the synclines

contian Quaternary deposits, referred to here as polygenetic synclinal fill. The

thickness of this Quaternary veneer is variable but is > 120 m in some water wells

(Jassim and Goff, 2006) .

The Quaternary deposits cover all parts of the study area ( Fig. 1.2 ), where

its age varies from early Pleistocene to late Holocene (Barwary and Selwa,1995 )

and include :

Slope deposits : slope sediments form along the flanks of the structures,

which covers a narrow belts along mountains. It consists of mixture of


9

gravel , clay , aggregates of clastic and old rocks fragements they form

pediment deposits , where its thickness varies between (1 -10 m) .

Sheet runoff deposits : these sediments cover flat areas between Pulkhana and

Himreen anticlines and contain clay, silt and sand sometimes covered with

scattered gravels; it starts from pediment deposits towards the centre of the

depressions , where its thicknes ranges between ( 1 – 8 m) mostly.

Fig. 1.2 : Geological map of the study area modified from (Barwary and

Selwa,1995).

Valley fill deposits: these sediments are composed of different materials, such

as gravel, sand , clay and sometimes with pieces of rocks, and its thickness is

variable.

Flood plain deposits : these sediments form narrow strips along the valleys

and rivers ( Tuz Chai river) , It consists of mixture of clay , silt and sand

with some gravel, its thickness may reach (20 m).


10

1.6.2 Tectonic and structural setting in the study area

The study area is situated within a physiographic zone called Foothill zone

( Makhul - Himreen subzone) in the unstable shelf ( Fig. 1.3 ) . It includes

Kirkuk block (Embayment) . This zone includes asymmetrical long anticlines

and synclines characterized by high dip value in some places associated with

joints and faults (Buday and Jassim, 1987).

Pulkhana anticline is one of the important structural elements in the study

area . It is assymmetric anticline trend ( NW- SE ) . The core of the structure

comprise the rocks of Fatha Formation surrounded by the rocks of Injana and AL-

Mukdadya ,while Bai-Hassan Formation forms the slopes of the low hills

surrounding the anticline (AL-Naqib, 1960).

1.6.3 Topography and Geomorphology of the study area

The elevation above sea level in the study area ranges between (200 – 245 m)

a.s.l., where the highest elevation lies in northeast near the anticline and decreases

towards west and southwest (Fig.1.1) .There are several factors working jointly or

individually lead to the formation different units and geomorphologic phenomena

, where the structural, climatic and lithologic factors form the geomorphologic

units (Ahmad and Al Jibouri, 2005) and include :

Units with structural origin ; Pulkhana anticline is one of the important

structural elements in the study area , which cause the occurrence of different

slopes influenced by rocky structure, various factors geodynamics such as

blocks movement and landslides can be observed in the rims of rocky and in

areas of slopes with strong dip .

Units with erosional origin ; these units form as a result of erosion process .

They include the undulating terrain (hills and slopes) and pediment deposits.

Units with river origin ; such as flood plain deposits . They occur in the form

of narrow strips along the rivers( Tuz Chai river) and valleys.


11

Fig. 1.3 : Tectonic map of Iraq (after AL-Kadhimi et al., 1996)

Studied area


12


2.1 Climate

Climate is defined as the weather changes in a vast area and for a period of

time long enough to identify all its statistical features. Climatological change

represents the differences in the data of the average climatic readings or among

sequential climatological times(Kite, 1989) .The Climate elements have a great

role affecting water resources both surface and groundwater , and this effect is

different from one season or year to another. The climate variables relevant to

water resource are temperature, rainfall, evaporation, relative humidity, wind

speed and sunshine. The climate elements depend an determining the climate data

recorded in Tuz Khurmatu meteorological station during the period (1991-

2010), because the station was established in the year 1991. The values of the

monthly averages records for the climatic elements for the period (1991-2010)

are shown in table ( 2.1), include the following:

2.1.1 Temperature

Temperature is one of the climatic elements that have great role in the

hydrological cycle. Temperature changes are periodic within any water year, and

may affect groundwater recharge by its direct relation with evaporation and

inversely with rainfall and relative humidity (Fig. 2.8). The monthly averages of

the temperature for the period (1991–2010) is shown in table (2.1) . It is clear the

highest average of the temperature appeared in July (35.6 C°), and the lowest in

the January (9.2 C°) (Fig. 2.1 ).

2.1.2 Rainfall

Precipitation is the process by which atmospheric water vapour condenses into

liquid or solid water, which then falls under the action of gravity to the earth's

surface (Kalma and Franks 2003). Rainfall is the most effective climatic parameter

on the hydrological cycle; it is considered one of the most important climatic

elements in the hydrogeological studies and it represents the main factor in the


13

Table (2.1) Monthly averages of the climate elements for the period (1991-2010) of Tuz Khurmatu meteorological station.

Sunshine Wind speed Relative humidity Evaporation Temperature Rainfall Months duration ( hours)

(m/sec) ℅ (mm) (C°) (mm)

8.3 1.6 39.9 180.5 25.1 15.5 Oct. 6.5 1.4 58.3 89.5 16.4 32.7 Nov. 5.3 1.3 69.4 61 11.3 42.9 Des. 5.1 1.5 72.7 45.8 9.2 62.8 Jan. 6.3 1.8 67.2 66.7 11.3 40.5 Feb. 6.9 1.9 57.8 127.9 15.7 31.7 Mar. 7.9 2.2 50.5 175.4 21.4 36.6 Apr. 9.4 2.2 36 280.4 28.2 10.1 May. 11.2 2.2 27.5 359.3 33.4 1.0 Jun. 11.1 2.2 26.2 377.7 35.6 0.01 July. 11.1 2 26.9 352.1 35.3 0.0 Aug. 10.2 1.7 30.8 259.9 30.8 0.4 Sep.

---- ----- ----- 2376.2 ----- 274.21 Total

---- 1.83 46.93 198.01 22.8 22.85 Average

Fig. 2.1 : Average monthly temperature for the period (1991-2010) of Tuz Khurmatu meteorological station.

٠٥١٠١٥٢٠٢٥٣٠٣٥٤٠

Oct. Des. Feb. Apr. Jun. Aug.

Temperature(c°(


14

Fig. 2.2 : Average monthly rainfall for the period (1991-2010) of Tuz Khurmatu

meteorological station.

water balance and groundwater recharge. The monthly averages of rainfall for

the period (1991 - 2010) is shown in table (2.1).It is clear the rain is limited

between October and May and approximately disappears in the months of June,

July,August and September; the highest average of rainfall occurs in January

(62.8 mm) (Fig 2.2). The average annual rainfall of the dependable period reached

(274.21 mm). Using this average to construct the relation of the whole annual

rainfall with time (Al-Kubaisi,1996), the years of dependable period are classified

into wet and dry years as below :

The years in which the rainfall is more than the annual average are (7 years) which

represent the wet years:

7 P > —— × 100 = 35 % 20 Where:

P: rainfall

20: period interval (1991-2010)

The years in which the rainfall is less than annual average are (13 years) ,this

represents the dry years :

13 P < —— × 100 = 65 % 20

٠

١٠

٢٠

٣٠

٤٠

٥٠

٦٠

٧٠

Oct

. Nov

. Des

. Jan

. Feb

. Mar

. Apr

. May

.

Jun

. July

. Aug

. Sep

.

Rainfall (mm(

Months


15

The percentage of the wet years is less than the percentage of dry years

(Fig.2.3) . So this proves that the area is driven to dryness.

Fig. 2.3 : The average annual rainfall for the period (1991-2010) of Tuz Khurmatu


2.1.3 Evaporation from class (A) pan

Evaporation is defined as the transfer of water from the liquid state to the

gaseous state. Evaporation is considered one of the important climatic factors in

determining the balance of water system and affect the hydrological cycle. It is one

of the water loss parameters connected with other factors and there is an direct

relationship between evaporation and temperature, sunshine duration, and area of

evaporation(Shaw,1999).It correlates by direct relation with temperature and

inverse relation with rainfall and relative humidity (Fig. 2.8 ). The monthly

averages of evaporation for the period (1991–2010) is shown in table (2.1) .The

highest average of evaporation appeared in July (377.7mm)while the lowest in

January (45.8mm) (Fig. 2.4).

2.1.4 Relative Humidity

It is the ratio between real vapor pressure of to satuaveraged vapor pressure in

air at the same temperature (Shaw, 1999). The variation in relative humidity due to

the saturation vapour pressure is determined by the change of air temperature. It


16

correlates positively with rainfall and negatively with temperature,evaporation and

wind speed(Fig.2.8). The monthly averages of relative humidity for the

period(1991– 2010) is shown in table(2.1).The highest average of relative humidity

appeared in January (72.7 %)while the lowest in July (26.2 %) (Fig. 2.5).

Fig. 2.4 : Average monthly evaporation for the period (1991-2010) of Tuz Khurmatu


Fig. 2.5 : Average monthly relative humidity for the period (1991-2010) of Tuz

Khurmatu meteorological station.

2.1.5 Wind speed

The wind has a great role in the amount of evaporation as the rate of

evaporation increases with the excess of the wind speed. The monthly averages of

wind speed for the period (1991 – 2010) is shown in table (2.1).The highest

average of wind appeared in Apr.,May.,Jun.,and July (2.2 m/sec) , while the

lowest in December ( 1.3 m/sec) (Fig. 2.6 ) .

٠٥٠١٠٠١٥٠٢٠٠٢٥٠٣٠٠٣٥٠٤٠٠

Oct

. Nov

. Des

. Jan

. Feb

. Mar

. Apr

.

M… Ju

n. Ju

ly. A

ug. Se

p.

Evaporation(mm(

٠١٠٢٠٣٠٤٠٥٠٦٠٧٠٨٠

Oct

. Nov

. Des

. Jan

. Feb

. Mar

. Apr

. May

.

Jun

. July

. Aug

. Sep

.Relative humidity℅


17

2.1.6 Sunshine duration

Sunshine is considered as one of the climatic parameters which has a great

effect on the amount of the evaporated water. The increase in sunshine hours

means an increase in temperature and evaporation(Fig.2.8).The monthly averages

of sunshine duration for the period(1991- 2010) is shown in table(2.1).The highest

average recorded in June ( 11.2 hour/day) while the lowest in December (5.1

hour/day)(Fig. 2.7).

Fig. 2.6 : Average monthly wind speed for the period (1991-2010) of Tuz Khurmatu


Fig. 2.7 : Average monthly sunshine for the period (1991-2010) of Tuz Khurmatu


٠

٠.٥

١

١.٥

٢

٢.٥

Oct

. Nov

. Des

. Jan

. Feb

. Mar

. Apr

. May

.

Jun

. July

. Aug

. Sep

.

Wind speed (m/sec(

٠

٢

٤

٦

٨

١٠

١٢

Oct

. Nov

. Des

. Jan

. Feb

. Mar

. Apr

. May

.

Jun

. July

. Aug

. Sep

.

Sunshine (hours(


18

Fig. 2.8 : Relationship between different climatic variables

2.2 Potential Evapotranspiration (PE)

The potential evapotranspiration is defined as the water loss as a result of water

deficiency in soil for vegetation uses (Thornthwaite, 1948). It is an important

indicator in the water balance calculations.There are two types of

evapotraspiration ; the first is potential evapotraspiration which is defined as a

possible maximum evaporation for free water surface, the second type is actual

evapotranspiration defined as the actual amount of evapotranspiration for any

surface under climate condition (Brickle,et al, 1995).Potential evapotranspiration

(PE) can be calculated by the Lysimeter equipment and can also be calculated

theoretically (Linsley,et al, 1982).

Thornthwiate (1948) suggested an equation for potential evaporation

calculating depending on the climatic elements that affect the evaporation

processes( temperature factor) and latitude of the place and month of the year. The

equations of evapotranspiration and its variables are as follows:

PEx=16 [10tn / J]a mm/month ………………………..(2.1) 12 J = å For the 12 month ………………………………...(2.2) j =1

١

١٠

١٠٠

Oct. Nov. Des. Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May. Jun. July. Aug. Sep.

Rainfall (mm)

Temperature(c°)

Evaporation(mm)

Relative humidity ℅

Wind speed (m/sec)

Sunshine (hours)

Clim

atic

var

iabl

es


19

j = [tn / 5]1.514 …………………………………..............(2.3)

a = (675 × 10-9) J3 N (771×10-7) J2 + (179×10-4)J + 0.492

\a = 0.0 16 J+ 0.5 ……………………………………...(2.4)

The value of (a) equals (2.54)

Where:

PEx = potential evapotranspiration for each month (mm / month)

t = Mean monthly air temperature (C°)

n = Number month measurement

J = Annual heat index (C°)

j = monthly temperature parameter (C°)

a = Constant

The value of potential evapotranspiration (PEx) is a theoretical standard

monthly value based on 30 days and 12 hr sunshine per day, the values of the

corrected potential evapotranspiration (PEc) table (2.2), can be determined from

the following equation(Wilson,1971):

PEc = PEx × DT / 360 ………………………………..(2.5)

Where:

PEc : Corrected potential evapotranspiration(mm).

PEx : potential evapotranspiration(mm).

D: number of days in the month.

T: number of possible sunshine hours.

It is clear the lowest PEc value appeared in January ( 3.03 mm) while the

highest value in July ( 208.12 mm) . According to the values of evaporation the

relation between them become as follow:

(PEc < PEx < Epan)

The variation due to the difference in temperature ; sunshine time, and changes

in the rates of wind speed.


20

Table (2.2 ) Corrected potential evapotranspiration values by Thornthwaite method for the

period (1991-2010) of Tuz Khurmatu meteorological station.

Months Temp. (C°)

j = (tn/5)1.514 (10tn/J)a PEx (mm) DT/360

PEc

(mm/month)

Oct. 25.1 11.5 5.6 89.6 0.72 64.51

Nov. 16.4 6.04 1.91 30.56 0.54 16.5

Des. 11.3 3.44 0.74 11.84 0.46 5.45

Jan. 9.2 2.52 0.43 6.88 0.44 3.03

Feb. 11.3 3.44 0.74 11.84 0.49 5.8

Mar. 15.7 5.65 1.69 27.04 0.6 16.22

Apr. 21.4 9.04 3.73 59.68 0.66 39.38

May. 28.2 13.72 7.49 119.84 0.81 97.07

Jun. 33.4 17.73 11.55 184.8 0.93 171.86

July. 35.6 19.53 13.55 216.8 0.96 208.12

Aug. 35.3 19.28 13.3 212.8 0.96 204.28

Sep. 30.8 15.68 9.34 149.44 0.85 127.02

Total J = 127.57 1121.12 959.24

2.3 Water Surplus (WS) and Water Deficit (WD)

Water surplus is defined as the excess of rainfall over the corrected potential

evapotransipiration values during specific months of the year, while water deficit is

the excess of corrected potential evapotransipiration values over rainfall during the

remaining months of that year. According to lerner,et al.(1990) the actual

evapotranspirtion APE could be derived as follows:

APE = PEc when P ≥ PEc

APE = P when P < PEc

In the first case ( water surplus period) values of rainfall is greater than PEc, the

APE equal the PEc value; while in the second case( water deficit period ) PEc is


21

greater than rainfall , the APE is equal to rainfall values as expressed in the

following:

WS = P – PEc ……………………(2.6)

P > PEc , PEc = APE

WD = PEc – P …………………….(2.7)

P < PEc , P = APE

Where :

WS: Water surplus (mm)

WD: Water deficit (mm)

P : Rainfall (mm)

PEc: Corrected potential Evapotranspiration factor (mm)

APE: Actual Potential Evapotranspiration factor (mm)

The WS and WD are calculated without using the soil moisture (equal to zero).

Table (2.3) shows the monthly averages of APE , WS and WD; the water surplus

period is limited between November and March because rainfall exceeds PEc

,while the remaining months represent water deficit period where PEc exceeds the

rainfall. The WS amount is (163.6 mm) from total rainfall ( 274.21 mm), therefor

the water surplus ratio from the annual rainfall represented as:

WS % = WS / P × 100 ………………….(2.8)

WS % = 163.6 / 274.21 × 100 = 59.66 %

This percentage represents the groundwater recharge and surface runoff. While

WD amount is (848.63mm) from Corrected potential Evapotranspiration (PEc) ,

which equals to 40.34% from total rainfall as in the following equation:

WD % = 100 - WS % …………………(2.9)

WD % = 100 – 59.66 % = 40.34 %

Figure (2.9) shows the relationship between monthly averages of rainfall and

corrected potential evapotranspiration , which shows the water surplus and water

deficit periods.


22

Table (2.3) Monthly averages of water surplus (WS) and water deficit (WD) of Tuz Khurmatu meteorological station

Months P (mm)

PEc (mm)

APE (mm)

WS (mm)

WD (mm)

Oct. 15.5 64.51 15.5 0 49.01

Nov. 32.7 16.5 16.5 16.2 0

Des. 42.9 5.45 5.45 37.45 0

Jan. 62.8 3.03 3.03 59.77 0

Feb. 40.5 5.8 5.8 34.7 0

Mar. 31.7 16.22 16.22 15.48 0

Apr. 36.6 39.38 36.6 0 2.78

May. 10.1 97.07 10.1 0 86.97

Jun. 1 171.86 1 0 170.86

July. 0.01 208.12 0.01 0 208.11

Aug. 0 204.28 0 0 204.28

Sep. 0.4 127.02 0.4 0 126.62

Total 274.21 959.24 110.61 163.6 848.63

Fig.2.9 : The relationship between monthly averages of rainfall (P)and corrected

potential evapotranspiration, shows water surplus(WS) and the water deficit (WD)for

the study area.

٠

٥٠

١٠٠

١٥٠

٢٠٠

٢٥٠

Oct. Des. Feb. Apr. Jun. Aug.

P (mm(PEc (mm(

WDWD


23

2.4 Classification of Climate

There are many classifications for climate complied and proposed by many

scientists and researchers to find and determine the type of the climate. Two of

these classifications will be used to delineate type of climate in the study area as

follows:

Kettaneh and Gangopadhyaya (1974) classification , suggested a classification

depended on humidity index( HI) which represents the ratio between the rainfall

(P) to potential Evapotranspiration (PE) equation (2.10) , as shown in the table

(2.4). P H.I = ………………………….. …..(2.10) PEc

Where:

H.I: Humidity index.

P: rainfall (mm).

PEc: Corrected potential evapotranspiration (mm).

Depending on the climate information taken from Tuz Khurmatu

meteorological station for the period (1991-2010), and applying the equation of

classification (2.10). The dominated climate during the months of the year of the

study area and by comparing with the table (2.4) are shown in the table (2.6).

Table (2.4) Climate classification, according to Kettaneh and Gangopadhyaya(1974).

Humidity Index Climate type

H.I > 1 Humid

H.I < 1 < 2H.I Moist

2H.I < 1 < 10H.I Moderate to dry

10H.I < 1 Very dry

Classification suggested by Al-Kubaisi (2004) for determining the climate type by

using the annual dryness treatment depending on the amount of rainfall and

temperature, according to the following equations:


24

AI – 1 = (1.0 × P) / (11.525×t) …………………. ..(2.11)

AI – 2 = �P/t ……....……………………(2.12)

Where :

AI: Aridity index

P: Annual rainfall (mm)

t: Temperature (C°).

The value of (AI-1) represents the classification of the dominated climate ,

while the value of (AI-2) represents a modification of the latter classification as

shown in table (2.6 ). Applying the two equations (2.11) and (2.12) the values of

AI-1 and AI-2 becomes as follows:

AI – 1 = (1 × 274.21) / ( 11.525 × 22.8) = 1.05

AI – 2 = �274.21/22.8 = 3.47

When comparing the values of (AI-1) and ( AI-2) with the type of the climate

in table ( 2.5 ) reveals that the dominated climate in the area is humid to moist.

Table (2.5) Climate classification depending on values of annual dryness treatment (Al-

Kubaisi, 2004), (A-I.1 and A-I.2)

Type.1 Evaluation Type.1 Evaluation

AI-1>1.0 Humid to moist

AI-2>4.5 Humid

2.0<AI-2<4.0 Humid to moist

1.85<AI-2<2.5 Moist

1.5<AI-2<1.85 Moist to sub arid

AI-2<1.5 Sub arid

AI-1<1.0 Sub arid to arid AI-2>1.0 Sub arid

AI-2<1.0 Arid


25

Table (2.6) Climatic classification for the period (1991- 2010) of Tuz Khurmatu

meteorological station according to Kettaneh and Gangopadhyaya(1974).

Months P

(mm) PEc

(mm) H.I Kettaneh and

Gangopadhyaya,1974 Oct. 15.5 64.51 0.24 Moderate to Dry

Nov. 32.7 16.5 1.98 Humid

Des. 42.9 5.45 7.87 Humid

Jan. 62.8 3.03 20.73 Humid

Feb. 40.5 5.8 6.98 Humid

Mar. 31.7 16.22 1.95 Humid

Apr. 36.6 39.38 0.93 Moist

May. 10.1 97.07 0.104 Moderate to Dry

Jun. 1 171.86 0.0058 VeryDry

July. 0.01 208.12 0.000048 VeryDry

Aug. 0 204.28 0 VeryDry

Sep. 0.4 127.02 0.0031 VeryDry

2.5 Hydrogeology of the Studied Area

A hydrogeological unit (aquifer) is defined as a formation, part of formation or

group of geological formations which have permeability and porosity contain and

allow the movement of water with different velocities bounded from the bottom or

top or both layers or deposits of deaf impermeable to water (Walton, 1970).

Geological formations (either rock or sediment layers) in which groundwater

occurs can generally be classed as aquifers, aquitards or aquicludes (SCCG, 2006).

According to the hydrogeological division (Fig. 2.10) which shows the main

aquifers and aquifer groups of Iraq .The studied area is not considered as

independent hydrogeological basin, but it lies within big basin represented by

AL-Adhaim basin .The area of the basin is about (12000 km2 ) is located northeast


26

Fig. 2.10 : Main aquifers and aquifer groups of Iraq (after Alsam et al., 1990)

of Baghdad (AL-Mamuri,2005).The important water bearing formations (aquifers)

in the basin consist of Tertiary deposits ( Muqdadiya and Bai- Hassan formations)

as well as recent Quaternary deposits ( AL-Mamuri,2005) and (Abdul Razaq et al.,

2007) . Quaternary deposits cover all parts of the study area and consisting of

fluvial deposits and deposits of gravel, sand and clay, its thickness is small in the

study area and increasing towards the west . All wells in Tuz Khurmatu area are

penetrating Bai–Hassan Formation partially by different depths .Therefore this

Studied area


27

formation represent the upper and main hydrogeological productive aquifer in

the study area . It is considered important aquifer because of its good porosity

and permeability, and the confined location between the underlying Mukdadyia

formation and the overlying Quaternary deposit. Bai-Hassan Formation (confined

aquifer) composed of sandstone and gravel consecutive with clay and

conglomerate masses (Khudair et al.2000) and (AL-Rubaii , 2008). Al-Fat'ha

formation appears in the study area in Pulkhana anticline and affect the

groundwater salinity in the area because of the evaporates rocks (gypsum rocks) it

contains (Mohamed et al , 2009 ). The water from the Bakhtiari aquifer ( Bai-

Hassan and Muqdadiya formations ) are generally of good quality (Stevanovic and

Iurkiewicz , 2009). The hydraulic properties and groundwater quality for Bai-

Hassan Formation were measured by Ahmed and AL-Jubouri(2005) in Samarra

quadrangle, which includes the study area; the transmissivity (T) values ranged

between(4 - 829 m²/day ) , the hydraulic conductivity (K) ranged between (0.1 -

43 m/day) , the water static level ranged between ( 2 – 48 m) and production of

wells ranged between ( 20- 5862 m³ / day ) ,while groundwater quality ranged

between (Na2SO₄ and CaSO₄) to (MgSO₄, NaCl, CaCl2, Ca(HCO₃)2 and

Mg(HCO₃)2 water type , EC ranged between (334 – 11075 µS/cm) .

Stratigraphic correlation for wells of the study area was drawn by depending

on lithology of wells drilled by General Commission for Groundwater and the

available informations about the hydrogeology of the study area and shows the

main aquifer in the study area (Bai-Hassan formation ) as shown in Fig.(2.11 ).


28

Fig. 2.11 : The stratigraphic correlation between the wells in the studied area

2.6 Groundwater movement and recharge

Groundwater moves both vertically and laterally within the groundwater system

(Winter et al.1998).The groundwater movement depends upon the hydraulic

gradient and 'hydraulic conductivity'. The hydraulic gradient is the change in static

head per unit distance in a given direction (El-Sayed,2004).Groundwater

movement in gravels and sands is relatively rapid, whereas it is exceedingly slow

in clay or in tiny rock fractures (Harter 2003).

Recharge areas of Bai- Hassan formation (confined aquifer) are located in the

northeast where its layers are expose outside the study area and depends on rain

water (Khudair et al.2000 ) , and it is affected by water infiltration from surface

runoff (Tuz Chai river) and the water losses from irrigation canal (Kirkuk

irrigation canal ) in the study area .


29

Fig. 2.12 : The flow net of the study area

The general direction of groundwater movement in the area is from the recharge

areas in northeast to the discharging areas at southwest (Ahmed and Al-Jubouri,

2005) and (Mohamed et al , 2009 ). To clear up the flow direction of ground

water, a flow net map was drawn (Fig. 2.12);depending on the groundwater level

measurements in the wells of the study area (Appendix1).According to the flow net

map the direction of groundwater movement in the study area is from northeast

towards southwest as shown in Fig. (2.12 ). Groundwater moves from areas of

high hydraulic effort towards areas of low hydraulic effort, the value of the

hydraulic gradient of the study area is calculated according to the following

equation (Todd, 2007) :

I = dh/dl ………………………. (2.13)

Where:

I: hydraulic gradient


30

dh: Head loss between two water points.

dl: Horizontal distance between the same two water points.

The value of the hydraulic gradient in the northeast , middle and southwest of

the study area equal (0.012),(0.006),(0.0024) respectively with an average of

(0.0068) for all the study area.

2.7 Hydraulic aquifers properties

Studying and knowledge of aquifer hydraulic properties are necessary to

estimate groundwater flow velocities , flow volumes , and travel times . Common

techniques for estimating the hydraulic properties of aquifers are usually based on

solutions to groundwater flow equations simulating the response of an aquifer to

pumping stress (Victoria, 2006).

To find the hydraulic properties of the aquifer , pumping test have proved to

be the most suitable means of achieving this purpose. The important properties are

as follows:

2.7.1 Hydraulic conductivity (K)

Defined as the volume of water that will move through a porous medium in unit

time under a unit hydraulic gradient through a unit area measured at right angles to

the direction of flow. Hydraulic conductivity can have any units of (Length/ Time)

represented by the following equation (Kruseman and de Ridder, 2000):

Q K = ——— ………………………….(2.14) AI Where:

K: Hydraulic conductivity (m/day)

Q: Discharge (m3/day)

A: Area of groundwater(m2)

I: Hydraulic gradient (dimensionless unit)

The values of hydraulic conductivity for a particular unit varies from place to

another , because of the way in which geological deposits are formed (Domenico

and Schwartz, 1998).Hydraulic conductivity values commonly ranges between


31

0.02 and 40 m/day for unconsolidated sediment aquifers, less than 0.5 m/day for

sandstone, and below 0.0001 m/day for clays or shale (SCCG, 2006).

2.7.2 Transmissivity (T)

It is defined as the rate of flow of water under a unit hydraulic gradient through

cross-section of unit width over the whole saturated thickness of the aquifer

(Kruseman and de Ridder,2000). It equals the product of multiplying the average

hydraulic conductivity by the saturated thickness of the aquifer, expressed in

(m² /day) (David,2002):

T = K × b …………………….. (2.15)

Where:

T: Transmissivity (m² /day).

K: Hydraulic conductivity (m /day).

b: Saturated thickness of aquifer (m).

2.7.3 Storage coefficient (Sc)

The storage coefficient (Sc) of a confined aquifer is defined as the volume of

water released from storage per unit surface area of a confined aquifer per unit

declined in hydraulic head. The storage coefficient generally ranges between

0.00005 and 0.005 in confined aquifers (Kruseman and de Ridder, 2000) , it is a

dimensionless unit .

2.8 Pumping tests analysis

Pumping test process is carried out by pumping water from the aquifer with a

constant discharge for a specific period of time. The analytical methods represent

the suitable methods for the pumping test data treatment . The following methods

have been used :

2.8.1 Cooper-Jacob method

Cooper and Jacob (1946) suggested that for small values of (r) and large values

of (t) , the following method may be applied for the analysis of pumping test of a

well. Accordingly, the value of transmissivity( T ) can be obtained by noting

( t / t0 ) for one log-cycle, then log t / t0 =1 ,Where :


32

r: Distance from pumped well to observation well (m).

t: Time of pumping (minute).

t0: intercept point of the fitted line on the time axis.

Therefore, if ∆s is the drawdown difference per log-cycle of t, then the

equation below can be set to determine (T) value as follows(Todd, 2007) :

2.3 Q T = ———— …………………………….(2.16) 4 ∏ ∆s Where :

T: Transmissivity (m² /day)

Δs : Difference in the drawdown (m) per log-cycle of t.

Q: Discharge (m³/day).

2.8.2 Theis recovery equation

In this method the residual drawdown (s') is plotted versus (t / t') on semi

logarithmic paper and a straight line is fitted through the plotted points, where :

t : Total time of pumping plus the recovery time (minute).

t': Time since the cessation of pumping (Recovery time) (min).

The equation below is applied to determine the transmissivity (Kruseman and

De Ridder, 2000) as follows: 2.3 Q T = ———— ……………………………(2.17) 4 ∏ ∆s' Where :

Δs' : Difference in the residual drawdown, in (m) per log-cycle of (t / t'),

Terms of application in this equation is the same as in "Cooper-Jacob equation",

with the exception of using residual drawdown instead of the drawdown. This

method is more meticulous in knowing the hydraulic properties because the water

level recovery will be normal to avoid the ground water problem fluctuation during

the pumping because of the fluctuations in pumping rate which happens as result of

pump work.


33

2.9 Analysis results of pumping test

Single well pumping test was carried out for two wells in the studied area

with a constant discharge rate represented by :

Well ( W1). ( Mojama Tuz ) .

Well ( W2). (Esalh Tuz 1) .

And single well pumping test data are available for ( 5 ) wells drilled in the

study area that are obtained from General Commission for Groundwater

represented by:

Well ( W3). (Al Asreia )

Well ( W4). ( Al Askari )

Well ( W5). (Al Mahata )

Well ( W6). (Esalh Tuz 2 )

Well ( W7). (Nawaf Abd-Alaziz )

Observation wells are not available in the studied area , therefore these tests

have been conducted without observation wells, thus the storage coefficient is not

determined. The experimental data and graphs for the seven pumping tests wells

in the study area and their locations are listed in appendix (2) and

Fig. (2.13).Cooper-Jacob and Theis recovery methods were used in the treatment

of these data.

From graphs in the appendix ( 2) it can be observed that some forms of data

analysis of pumping tests by Jacob and Thies methods reflects the existence of

two layers; and this was evident in the stratigraphic correlation map of the study

area (Fig.2.11) which it shown and confirmed the existence of gravel layers

successive with the layers of clay within Bai-Hassan Formation ,therefore the

transmissivity and hydraulic conductivity values are calculated for each layer and

then is calculated the average .

Table (2.7) shows the hydrogeological data of wells (transmissivity , hydraulic

conductivity and specific capacity)values obtained from pumping test data analysis

by Jacob and Theis recovery methods. The average of transmissivity values range


34

between (95.47 - 335.72m²/day),and the average of hydraulic conductivity range

( 2.11 - 4.47 m/day ).This reflects that the hydraulic properties values of Bai-

Hassan aquifer in study area are heterogeneous and variant, as a result of

heterogeneity of Bai-Hassan aquifer due to variations in lithology and porosity of

aquifer.

Fig. 2.13 : Locations of the pumping wells in the studied area

2.10 Specific Capacity (SC)

Specific capacity is the ratio of the obtained rate of the discharge to the

drawdown, which is required to produce the obtained discharge and expressed in

cubic meter per day for each meter of drawdown (Fetter, 1994), according to the

following equation :

Q SC = —— …………………………….(2.18) s Where :


35

SC: Specific Capacity (m² /day).

Q: Discharge (m³/day).

s: Drawdown (m).

Fig. 2.14: Relationship between specific capacity and drawdown

The specific capacities for the pumping wells are calculated by Fetter's(1994)

equation and shown in table (2.7). From Fig.(2.14) which shows the relationship

between specific capacity and water level drawdown , it is clear that there is an

inverse relationship between specific capacity and water level drawdown

(Todd,1980).The difference in specific capacity values of wells penetrating the

same aquifer in the study area is attributed to differences in the discharging

quantity and the total depth in addition to the saturated thickness .So when the

specific capacity is high, it reflects that the productivity of the well is good and this

depends on the lithology of the aquifer, and also on depth, saturated thickness,

design and development of wells.

٠٥٠١٠٠١٥٠٢٠٠٢٥٠٣٠٠٣٥٠٤٠٠٤٥٠٥٠٠

١ ١.٥ ٢ ٢.٥ ٣ ٣.٥ ٤


36

Table (2.7) Results of hydraulic properties by two methods used in single well pumping test analysis for wells of the study area

Well

No.

Jacob

(Drawdown)

Theis (Recovery)

Average

Jacob and Theis

Specific

Capacity

T1

m²/d

T2

m²/d

K1

m/d

K2

m/d

T

m²/d

Average

K

m/d

Average

T1

m²/d

T2

m²/d

K1

m/d

K2

m/d

T

m²/d

Average

K

m/d

Average

T

m²/d

K

m/d

SC

m²/d

(W 1)

76.32 167.69 1.41 3.10 122 2.25 108.50 225.87 2 4.18 167.18 3.09 144.59 2.67 201.6

(W 2)

168.20 277.38 2.61 4.31 222.79 3.46 112.93 243.24 1.75 3.78 178.08 2.76 200.43 3.11 297.93

(W 3)

156.16 ----- 2.7 ----- ----- ----- 225.87 106.29 3.9 1.83 166.08 2.86 161.12 2.78 232.72

(W 4)

187.23 ----- 3.64 ----- ----- ----- 163.56 ----- 3.18 ------ ------ ------ 175.39 3.41 285.8

(W 5)

73.11 ----- 1.78 ----- ----- ----- 108.11 225.87 2.63 5.5 166.99 4.06 120.05 2.92 230.4

(W 6)

195.2 385.63 2.60 5.14 290.41 3.87 267.98 494.1 3.57 6.58 381.04 5.07 335.72 4.47 432

(W 7) 99.86 ----- 2.21 ----- ------ ----- 71.86 110.31 1.59 2.45 91.08 2.02 95.47 2.11 172.8

Chapter Three Hydrochemistry

37


3.1 Introduction

Two of factors are fundamental control on water chemistry in drainage basins

, the type of geologic materials that are present and the length of time that water is

in contact with those materials. Chemical reactions that affect the biological and

geochemical characteristics of a basin include acid-base reactions, precipitation

and dissolution of minerals, sorption and ion exchange, oxidation-reduction

reactions, biodegradation and dissolution and exsolution of gases (Winter et

al.1998). The groundwater quality is nearly of equal importance to quantity.

Therefore it's necessary to make chemical, physical and bacterial analyses of

groundwater to determine its suitability for different purposes (drinking ,

livestock, industrial, agriculture and irrigation).The chemical analysis of

groundwater includes determination of the major, minor and trace metal

constituents, and also the field measurements of the electrical conductance,

hydrogen ions activity as well as the water temperature (Karanth,2008).The

chemical parameters ( EC , pH and temperature ) must be taken in the field

immediately after sampling, because water chemistry can change rapidly once a

sample is extracted from a well and exposed to light, warmth, cold, air, or other

environmental factors (Sanders, 1998).

The hydrochemical study for groundwater in study area involves the Major,

Minor and trace ionic concentrations. Besides, these ionic concentration study also

involves the salinity( total dissolved solids TDS), electrical conductivity (EC) and

acidity (pH). The water samples were collected from (20) wells in two periods,

their locations are shown in Fig.(3.1) and appendix (1), the first period during of

September (2010), this represents the dry period, and the second period was during

March(2011),and this represents the wet period.


38

3.2 Accuracy

The accuracy of the results of the water samples analyses can be estimated from

the results of reaction error test (U), by calculation absolute difference between

total of cations and anions concentration on total for these concentrations in (epm)

units as percentage (Stoodly et al,1980, Gill,1997 and Appelo&Postma,2005) and

according to the following equation:

100anionsrcationsr

anionsrcationsrU ´

å+å

å-å= ………………… (3.1)

A% = 100 – U …………………………………… (3.2) Where:

U = Uncertainty (reaction error)

A = Accuracy or certainty

r: (epm) .

When (U ≤ 5%)(certain) the results could be accepted for interpretation, but if

(5% ≤ U ≤ 10%) (probable certain) the results are acceptable with risk , but if

the value ( U > 10%) (uncertain) can not depended on the results in

hydrochemical interpretation .

U values range between (0.004 – 4.1 %) for the dry period samples and

between ( 0.03 – 7.4 %) for the wet period samples (appendices 6,7). Therefore

the results of the analysis can be used in the hydrochemical interpretation for the

study area.

3.3 Physical properties:

3.3.1 Temperature.

All geochemical reactions depends on temperature (SCCG, 2006).Water

temperature is related to solar radiation and air temperature water temperature

closely follows air temperature streams، ponds and springs (Boyd,

2000).Temperature will increase with depth, about 2.9 C° for each (100 m) depth


39

(Todd, 1980) .The temperature values of water samples is given in table(3.1)

and appendix (3). So it is clear there is no abnormal temperature value recorded. Table (3.1) The temperature values of water samples of the studied area

T C° Dry period Wet period

Range 21 – 24 20 - 22

Average 23.05 20.9

Fig. 3.1 : Locations of water samples wells in the study area. 3.3.2 pH

The pH of a solution is defined as the negative logarithm of its hydrogen ion

activity (Boyd, 2000):

pH= - log [H+]

The measurement of pH is an indicator of the acidity or alkalinity of water

(Langmuir, 1997). A (pH) value of 7 indicates neutrality, that is the concentration

of hydrogen ( H+) and hydroxide (OH-) ions are equal. Water with pH less than 7


40

is said to be “acidic”, whereas levels above 7 are termed “alkaline”, groundwater

most commonly occurs under reducing conditions, where the limited oxygen

present is consumed by chemical and biological activity, as a result, reductions in

pH occur and values less than 7 are commonly encountered (SCCG, 2006) .The

dissolution and mobility of metals in natural water are greatly influenced by the

(pH) (Thompson et al.,2007). The pH values of water samples is given in table

(3.2) and appendix(3). Table (3.2) The pH values of water samples of the studied area

pH Dry period Wet period

Range 7.17 – 8.2 7.12 – 7.92

Average 7.71 7.40

It is clear the water samples of study area for both periods are of low alkalinity.

3.3.3 Total Dissolved Solids (TDS)

Total dissolved solids (TDS) is the total amount of solids remaining when a

water sample evaporates to dryness (Drever,1997) . Dissolved solids include both

organic and inorganic materials dissolved in a sample of water and are commonly

used as a general indicator of water salinity or quality (Bates and Jackson, 1984) .

The salinity of groundwater may be modified by the presence of salts stored within

rocks at the time of formation (connate salts), by those brought into an aquifer

through recharge, or by the products of rock weathering (SCCG, 2006).TDS

represents a total summation of ionic concentrations of cations and anions , it is

measured by the (ppm) or (mg/l) units (Boyd, 2000).The TDS values of water

samples is given in table(3.3)and appendix (3). Table (3.3) The TDS values of water samples of the studied area

TDS (ppm) Dry period Wet period

Range 339 - 2415 241 - 2287

Average 1279.85 1027.55


41

It is clear that the salinity in the dry period is more than it is for the wet period

and that is due to the dilution which happens in the wet period as a result of

rainfall. Observing Fig.(3.2),which shows the spatial distribution of TDS in the

studied area through the dry and wet periods, it becomes apparent that the TDS

values are higher in wells drilled near Pulkhana anticline ( wells No.1,3,13,15) and

this is due to Al- Fat'ha formation effect, which appears in the anticline and

contain evaporates rocks (gypsum rocks) and affect the salinity of groundwater,

while wells (No. 5,14,16) are close to the anticline but the TDS values are low

this is attributed to the dilution process by the water from Tuz Chai river. The

reason why well (No.1) which is located near the anticline but the TDS value is

less than the wells (No.3,13,15) is attributed to the depth, where the depth of the

well (No.1) reaches (130 m) . It can be observed that the TDS values decrease

when moving away from the anticline towards the west and southwest which

represent the area of groundwater discharge and this is a reverse to what is

expected, especially in wells that are close to Tuz chai river .The reason for this

decrease is the dilution process of the groundwater by Tuz chai river and water

seepage from Kirkuk irrigation canal.

Comparison of TDS values for both periods (Table3.3) with three

classifications of water (Altoviski,1962; Drever,1997 and Todd,2007) (Table 3.4),

it is clear that the groundwater in the studied area is classified as slightly-brackish

water . Table (3.4) Classification of water salinity according to (TDS) in (ppm).

Todd(2007) Drever(1997) Altoviski, 1962 Water Class 10 - 1000 <1000 0 - 1000 Fresh Water

----- 1000 - 2000 1000 – 3000 Slightly Water

1000 – 10000 2000- 20000 3000 - 10000 Slightly-brackish Water

10000 - 100000 ----- 10000 - 100000 Brackish Water ----- 35000 ----- Saline Water

> 100000 > 35000 > 100000 Brine Water


42

(A)

(B)

Fig. 3.2 : Spatial distribution of TDS in the studied area:

( A )Dry period (B) Wet period


43

The percentage of error between the dehydration method and the ions

collecting method can be calculated as in the following equation:

TDSm – TDSc T% = –––––––––––––– × 100 …………… (Nordstrom,et al,1989) TDSm Where:

T%: Percentage of test distinctions by unit ( % ).

TDS m :Total dissolved solids of measured by dehydration method (ppm).

TDSc : Summations of concentrations (cations + Anions) in (ppm).

According to table (3.5) the values of (T %) (Table 3.8) for some water

samples of study area for both periods fall in the range of (0 ─ 5%) ,it is

considered dependent in the hydrochemical interpretations. While other samples

falling in the range of( 5 < T ≤ 10 % ), is considered dependent in the

hydrochemical interpretations with cautiously. Table (3.5) Percentage Test (T%) (Nordstrom,et al,1989)

T% Uses of interpretations

0 < T ≤ 5 % Can be used in hydrochemical interpretations

5 < T ≤ 10 % Can be used in hydrochemical interpretations cautiously T > 10 % Results are independent

3.3.4 Electrical Conductivity (EC)

Electrical Conductivity (EC) is the ability of (1cm³) of water to conduct

electrical current, at temperature of 25C°, when measured by micro Siemens per

centimeter (µS/cm).It depends on the concentration of soluble salts and the

temperature of the water (Boyd, 2000). The EC depends on water temperature

, where an increase in water temperature of one degree celsius causes an increase

in electrical conductivity by (2%) (Hem, 1985) and (Mazor,1990). Also the EC

increases with the increase of the total dissolved salts (Detay,1997). The EC values

of water samples is given in table(3.6) and appendix (3).


44

Table (3.6) The EC values of water samples of the studied area

EC µS/cm Dry period Wet period

Range 546 - 3500 363 – 3402

Average 1901.4 1607.2

The (EC) value of the wet period is lower than the dry period and this due to

dilution process by rainfall.

When comparing EC values for both periods (Table 3.6) with table (3.7)

which shows the relationship between electrical conductivity and water

mineralization , it can be concluded that the type of groundwater in the studied area

is as excessively mineralized water due to the salinity.

From Fig.(3.3) and (3.4) which shows the relation between TDS and EC values

for both periods , it can be observed that the linear correlation between them for

the dry and wet periods , X-axis represent (EC) values and Y-axis represent

(TDS) values .The correlation coefficient (R²) is close to (1) refering to the strong

relation between both the TDS and the EC and for the two periods. So these

relations can be used prospectively for the estimation of TDS value, knowing Ec

values for the study area.

Table (3.7) Relationship between electrical conductivity and water

mineralization (Detay, 1997).

EC µS/cm Mineralization

<100 Very Weakly Mineralized water

100-200 Weakly Mineralized water

200-400 Slightly Mineralized water

400-600 Moderately Mineralized water

600-1000 Highly Mineralized water

>1000 Excessively Mineralized water


45

Table (3.8) The (T %) values for TDS measured and calculated of the water in the study area.

Wells No.

Dry Period Wet Period

TDSm (ppm)

TDSc (ppm) T %

TDSm (ppm)

TDSc (ppm) T %

1 1857 1793 3.44 1245 1122.9 9.8 2 1686 1633.31 3.12 1380 1274.3 7.65 3 2169 2030.4 6.39 2250 2054.4 8.69 4 704 639.17 9.2 697 641.1 8.02 5 1485 1352.5 8.92 1180 1103 6.52 6 1488 1393.5 6.35 1014 929.7 8.31 7 1419 1291 9.02 1081 989.9 8.42 8 380 351.01 7.62 302 273.4 9.47 9 339 328.01 3.24 241 217.99 9.54 10 1335 1230.68 7.81 1026 965.8 5.86 11 1564 1446.5 7.51 1244 1159.57 6.78 12 533 509.3 4.44 366 353 3.55 13 2366 2193.5 7.29 2287 2187.4 4.35 14 975 877.7 9.9 966 948.4 1.82 15 2415 2272 5.92 2118 2030.5 4.13 16 1380 1314 4.78 974 885.7 9.06 17 758 731.2 3.53 373 339.5 8.98 18 756 732.1 3.16 562 542.2 3.52 19 1442 1346.6 6.61 932 877.7 5.82 20 546 497.3 8.91 313 299.66 4.26

Fig. 3.3 : EC - TDS relationship of groundwater samples in the studied area for dry

period.

TDS = 0.677Ec - 7.391R² = 0.983

٠

٥٠٠

١٠٠٠

١٥٠٠

٢٠٠٠

٢٥٠٠

٣٠٠٠

٠ ١٠٠٠ ٢٠٠٠ ٣٠٠٠ ٤٠٠٠


46

Fig. 3.4 : EC - TDS relationship of groundwater samples in the studied area for

wet period.

3.4 Chemical properties :

3.4.1 Cations :

3.4.1.1 Calcium (Ca+2)

Calcium is an essential constituent of sedimentary rocks, and it results from the

erosion of igneous and metamorphic rocks. It is abundant almost in the all soils

(White, 2005) .Calcium is the most abundant element of the alkaline -earth metals

,and is an essential element for plant and animal . It is produced as a result of

dissolution processes of sedimentary rocks ( calcite, aragonite, limestone, dolomite

and gypsum) and from weathering of igneous rocks like ( Pyroxene, amphibole

and plagioclase feldspar (anorthite)) . Calcium also occurs in other silicate

minerals that are produced in metamorphism (Hem,1989).The source of calcium

ion in the studied area is from evaporates rocks (gypsum rocks) of Al-Fat'ha

formation, which appears in Pulkhana anticline . The calcium ion (Ca+2)

concentration of water samples is given in table (3.9), and appendices (4,5).

Table (3.9) The Ca+² concentration of water samples of the studied area

Ca+2 (ppm) Dry period Wet period

Range 33 - 253 26.01 – 234

Average 117.5 96.44

The decreases of (Ca+2) concentration in wet period due to dilution process by

rainfall.

TDS = 0.669 Ec - 48.24R² = 0.978

٠

٥٠٠

١٠٠٠

١٥٠٠

٢٠٠٠

٢٥٠٠

٠ ١٠٠٠ ٢٠٠٠ ٣٠٠٠ ٤٠٠٠


47

3.4.1.2 Magnesium (Mg+2)

Magnesium is an alkali-earth metal with one oxidation state in water (Mg+2).

Magnesium ions are smaller than sodium and calcium ions ,and it is one of the

necessary elements of the plants and animals (Hem, 1989). Dolomite, limestone

and clay minerals are considered as essential sources for magnesium ion.

Magnesium is found also in igneous rocks and minerals such as (Olivine ,Pyroxene

and amphibole) and metamorphic rocks such as (serpentine and talc)

(Todd, 2007). The source of magnesium ion in the studied area is from clay

minerals and fertilizers use effect. The magnesium ion (Mg+2) concentration of

water samples is given in table(3.10), and appendices (4,5). It is clear that the

(Mg+2) concentration in the wet period is slightly lower than the dry period and this

due to dilution process.

Table (3.10) The Mg+2 concentration of water samples of the studied area

Mg+2 (ppm) Dry period Wet period

Range 11 – 130 10.1 – 121

Average 53.3 47.24

3.4.1.3 Sodium (Na+)

Sodium is the most abundant member of the alkali- metal group in nature. The

source of sodium in groundwater and comes from erosion of alkalinity feldspar and

evaporation rocks and from ionic exchange of clay minerals (Appelo, 1999). Most

of salts and sodium compounds have high solubility in water , the most soluble salt

among them is sodium chloride (NaCl) while the least is sodium bicarbonate

(NaHCO₃); their solubility increases normally at high temperatures

(Hem,1985).Human activities can have a significant influence on the concentration

of sodium in surface water and ground water(Al-Manmi,2008). The sodium ion

(Na+) concentration of water samples is given in table(3.11), and appendices

(4,5).Therefore it can be observed that the sodium concentration during the wet

period is lower than the dry period and this due to dilution process.


48

Table (3.11) The Na+ concentration of water samples of the studied area

Na+ (ppm) Dry period Wet period

Range 61 – 345 42 – 345

Average 185.9 131.86

3.4.1.4 Potassium (K+)

Potassium is slightly less common than sodium in igneous rocks but more

abundant in all sedimentary rocks. The main source of potassium is the products

formed by weathering of igneous minerals like(orthoclase, microcline, mica

(biotite) and the feldspathoid leucit) and sedimentary rocks . Potassium is

commonly present in clays within the structure like illite or adsorbed on other clay

minerals, evaporate rocks include sylvite and other potassium salts and organic

remains (plant) (Hem,1985). Fertilizers increases the potassium concentration in

the water (Daly,1994). Iraqi phosphate fertilizers (NPK) contains 19 % K2O

(AL-Qaraghuli, 2005). The potassium ion (K+) concentration of water samples is

given in table(3.12), and appendices (4,5).

Table (3.12) The K+ concentration of water samples of the studied area

K+ (ppm) Dry period Wet period

Range 0.3 – 5.5 0.7 – 5.4

Average 2.2 1.50

Potassium (K+) concentration in the wet period is lower than the dry period

and this due to dilution process by rainfall.

3.4.2 Anions :

3.4.2.1 Bicarbonate (HCO3⁻ ) and Carbonate (CO₃⁻²)

Bicarbonate ions are considered the source of water alkalinity (carbonate

alkalinity). Alkalinity is the ability of water for interaction with ion of hydrogen

(H+) (Faure,1998). CO2 gas in the atmosphere or in the soil dissolved in water is

the principle source of bicarbonate , in addition to solution of carbonate rocks and

oxidation of organic matter (Hem,1985).When pH < 8.2 the hydrogen ion is added


49

to the carbonate and become dissolved bicarbonate, but when the pH > 8.2 the

process of (HCO3-) depletion to (CO3

-2) in solution becomes high (Davis and

Dewiest,1966). The bicarbonate concentration of water samples is given in table

(3.13), and appendices (4,5). Table (3.13) The HCO3

⁻ concentration of water samples of the studied area

HCO3⁻ (ppm) Dry period Wet period

Range 12.8 - 611 18 - 446

Average 186.6 214.71

It is clear that the concentration of the wet period is greater than the dry period

due to the recharge occurrence which coincide with the values of (pH).The

concentration of (CO₃⁻²) is zero for all water samples due to pH value less than

(8.3).This means when pH is less than (8.3) the carbonate is associate with water

converted to (HCO3⁻ ).The carbonates are usually found in water where its pH

value exceeds 10.3 (Appelo,1999).

3.4.2.2 Sulfate (SO42-)

The natural source of sulfate ions (SO42-) in groundwater is dissolution of

sulfate minerals that are found in sedimentary rocks such as gypsum and anhydrite.

Oxidation of barite minerals and the human activities (agricultural and industrial

activities)are considered another sources for sulfate (Sawyer and Mecarty 1985 ).

Iraqi fertilizers TSP, MAP, NP and NPK contains (S % ) 1.5, 0.64, 0.58 and 2.35

respectively (AL-Qaraghuli, 2005). The element is essential in the life processes

of plants and animals (Hem 1985). The sulfate concentration of water samples is

given in table(3.14),and appendices (4,5). Table (3.14) The SO4

2- concentration of water samples of the studied area So4

2- (ppm) Dry period Wet period

Range 108 - 844 43.2 - 844

Average 409.6 294.95


50

The high concentration of sulfate ion in the studied area belongs to Al- Fat'ha

formation effect (gypsum rocks) which appears in Pulkhana anticline .The

concentration of sulfate ion in the dry period is more than it is for the wet period ,

this is due to dilution process by rainfall and also change of distribution of

evaporates rocks in the area .

3.4.2.3 Chloride (Cl-)

Chloride is a minor element of the earth's crust, but it is a major dissolved

constituent of most natural water. The source of chloride in groundwater is from

dissolution of sedimentary rocks particularly the evaporates like halite and sylvite

and from ancient sea water entrapped in sediments (Davis and Dewiest, 1966).

Chloride is also abundant in the minerals found in igneous rocks like apatite

, feldspathoid and sodalite . Another source of chloride is from sewage and

industrial effluents (Hem, 1985).Chloride is added during water treatment for

drinking purposes and is considered another source of chloride in groundwater

(WHO 2007). The chloride concentration of water samples is given in table (3.15)

and appendices (4,5). Table (3.15) The Cl- concentration of water samples of the studied area

Cl- (ppm) Dry period Wet period

Range 89 – 468.6 49.7 – 460

Average 242.8 173.07

The decreases of (Cl- ) concentrations in wet period due to dilution process .

3.5 Total Hardness (TH)

The hardness of groundwater predominantly results from the presence of

dissolved calcium and magnesium salts usually carbonates. Hardness is a measure

of the effect of water on the ability of soap to form suds, it can cause scaling

problems in pipework and heating systems due to the nature of the dissolved salts.

This character of groundwater is usually described in terms of “carbonate

hardness” and “non-carbonate hardness (SCCG, 2006). Total hardness mainly


51

reflects water contents of Ca+2, Mg+2 ions and it is expressed by its equivalent from

calcium carbonate(Todd, 2007) according to the following equation:

TH (ppm) = 2.497 [ Ca ++ ppm] + 4.115 [ Mg ++ ppm] ……….(3.3)

There are two kinds of (TH ) (Hem, 1989) :

Temporary Hardness “carbonate hardness” – represent calcium and magnesium

concentrations, combined with the bicarbonate of water. This TH removed by

boiling the water.

Ca(HCO3)2 → CaCO3 + H2O + CO2

Permanent hardness “non-carbonate hardness – result from the combination of

calcium and magnesium concentrations with bicarbonate, chloride and nitrate. This

TH removed by adding sodium carbonate .

CaCl2 + NaCO3 → CaCO3 + 2NaCl.

The TH concentration of water samples is given in table (3.16), and appendices

(4,5). Table (3.16) The TH concentration of water samples of the studied area

TH (ppm) Dry period Wet period

Range 127.6 – 1166.6 118.85 – 1082.21

Average 512.9 435.22

TH concentration in the wet period is lower than the dry period and this due

to dilution process by rainfall. Table (3.17) Classifications of water according to total hardness .

Type of

water

Total Hardness TH (ppm)

Altoviski 1962

Boyd 2000

Todd 2007

Soft 0 - 75 0 - 50 0 – 60 Moderate Hard 75 - 175 50 - 150 60 - 120

Hard 175 - 300 150 - 300 120 – 180 Very hard > 300 > 300 > 180

TH values for both periods table (3.16) were compared with classifications of

water hardness ( Altoviski, 1962 ; Boyd,2000, and Todd, 2007)(Table 3.17) and


52

as a result the groundwater in the studied area is classified as very hard water due

to the presence of dissolved calcium and magnesium salts .

3.6 Nitrate (NO3-)

The source of Nitrate ion (NO3-) in natural water is from organic sources or

from agricultural activities due to the use of fertilizers. . The chemical fertilizers

represents the main source of the ion . Animal waste, plant remains, industry and

sewage disposal are considered another sources for nitrate (Hudak,2000 and AL-

Badri & AL-Ameri, 2004).Nitrate has a significant influence on plant growth and

may present a hazard for drinking water sources if Nitrate levels are (10ppm) or

more( Landschoot, 2007 ).The (NO3-) concentration of water samples is given in

table (3.18),and appendices (4,5). Table (3.18) The NO3

- concentration of water samples of the studied area NO3

- (ppm) Dry period Wet period

Range 0.2 – 8 1.3 – 9

Average 3.25 4.83

Nitrate concentration in wet period is greater and this can be attributed to the

agricultural activities ( fertilizers use) in the recharge regions, in addition to the

agricultural activities and sewage disposal effect in the study area .

3.7 Heavy elements (Trace elements)

Heavy metals are natural components of the earth’s crust and it refers to any

metallic chemical element that has a relatively high density (more than 5 g/mL)

and is toxic at low concentrations (Berkowitz et al., 2008). Study of heavy

elements concentrations in the water is of great importance due to their direct

influence on human health and animals and plants living. The source of these

elements is from rocks weathering and human activities (agricultural and

industrial activities) (Drever,1997).The inorganic industrial materials is considered

essential source for water contaminate by heavy elements ( Manahan, 2001).


53

3.7.1 Iron (Fe)

Iron is considered abundant metallic element in rocks and soil of the earth’s

crust. The element is essential in the life processes of plants and animals

(Fetter, 1980). Iron is essential for human, but it becomes toxic when the

concentration increases. The source of iron in water is from weathering of igneous

rocks such as(pyroxenes, amphiboles, biotite, magnetite, hematite and olivine),

sedimentary rocks and clay minerals (Boyd,2000). The fertilizers are considered

another source for iron . Iron concentration in Iraqi fertilizers TSP, MAP, NP and

NPK are 0.32, 0.34, 0.18, and 0.15 respectively (AL-Qaraghuli,1987). Iron

concentration of water samples of the studied area range between (0.004 - 0.409

ppm) with an average of (0.13 ppm) (appendix 8). It is clear that the wells

No.(7,10) contain higher iron ion than the permissible concentration in comparison

with table (3.19).This high concentration of iron can be attributed to the

agricultural activities (fertilizers uses) because these wells are located within

agricultural regions, in addition to weathering of clay minerals in Quaternary

deposits which cover the studied area.

3.7.2 Cobalt (Co)

The behavior of cobalt compounds is similar to that of iron compounds ,while

the ratio of cobalt in sediments and soil are less than iron and the solubility of

cobalt carbonate CoCO₃ is less than that of iron carbonate minerals (Boyd, 2000).

The source of cobalt ion(Co) in water is from weathering of minerals and rocks

which contain cobalt.(Co) is available in many minerals such as(Cobalite, Erthrite,

Glaucodot)(Emsley,1998). Fertilizers, industrial activities(metal) and waste

disposal are considered another sources for cobalt (Hem,1985).Cobalt

concentration in Iraqi fertilizers TSP, MAP, NP and NPK are 20, 16 , 10 and

10ppm respectively(AL-Qaraghuli,2005). (Co) is essential in plant and animal

nutrition, but excessive amounts will be harmful to human life (Prasad,2008).

Cobalt concentrations of water samples of the studied area range between (0.008 -

0.457 ppm) with an average of (0.17ppm) (appendix 8). It is clear that all wells of


54

the study area are polluted with cobalt ion because its concentration exceed the

permissible limit in comparison with table (3.19) except the wells No.(4,16,17,18).

And this may be attributed to agricultural activities ( fertilizers uses ) in the

recharge regions, in addition to agricultural and industrial activities and waste

disposal in the study area .

3.7.3 Nickel (Ni)

(Ni) enters the environment through natural process like weathering of minerals

and from dissolution of rocks and soils ,as well as from biological cycles and

industrial processes. (Ni) present in soil in mainly sulphide and oxide forms and

its concentration may vary according to mineral composition of soil (Berkowitz et

al.,2008) . Nickel present in the sewage disposal (Alloway and Ayers, 1997). Ni

present in minerals (Carniorite, Millerite, Nicolite and Pentlandite)(Emsley,1998).

(Ni) concentration in Iraqi fertilizers TSP, MAP, NP and NPK are 88, 85, 50 and

48 ppm respectively(AL-Qaraghuli ,2005).Nickel concentration in water samples

of the studied area range between (0.012 - 0.085 ppm) with an average of ( 0.046

ppm) (appendix 8).By comparing nickel concentrations of water samples with

standard specification concentration table (3.19), it becomes apparent that all wells

of the study area are polluted with nickel ion because its concentration exceed the

permissible limit except the wells No. (4,8,16). And this may be attributed to

dissolution processes of soils and agricultural activities ( fertilizers uses ) in the

recharge areas, in addition to agricultural and industrial activities and waste

disposal in the study area.

3.7.4 Copper (Cu)

The quantity of copper compounds in nature is little or rare. (Cu) enters

groundwater and surface water from weathering of minerals and rocks which

contain (Cu). Copper is available in many minerals (Azurite, Malachite,

Brochanthite, Chalconthite and Chalcopyrite) (Emsley,1998). Fertilizers

, agricultural pesticide , the Cu which might be dissolved from water pipes and

plumbing fixtures especially by water whose pH is below 7 are considered another


55

sources for (Cu) (Hem, 1985). (Cu) concentration in Iraqi fertilizers TSP, MAP,

NP and NPK are 32, 32, 17 and 14 ppm Cu respectively (AL-Qaraghuli, 2005).

(Cu ) is an essential element in plant and animal (kirk – Othmer, 1980). Cu is

considered toxic for human life if its concentration exceed the permissive limit in

drinking water (WHO,2007 ) .Copper concentration of water samples of the

studied area range between (0.006 - 0.124 ppm) with an average of ( 0.027 ppm)

( appendix 8). It is clear that the copper concentration in the area water is less than

the permissible limits in comparison with table (3.19).This reflects no copper

pollution in the groundwater of the study area.

3.7.5 Zinc (Zn)

Concentration of free zinc ion in the earth's crust is low because the minerals

which contain zinc ion have low solubility within the pH range of most natural

water (Boyd, 2000).The source of zinc in water is from weathering the minerals

and rocks which contain (Zn) . Zinc is available in many minerals such as

(Sphalerite, Smithsonite, Willemite, Biotitie, Amphibole and Hemimorphite)

(Emsley, 1998). Fertilizers, animal organic remains and the industrial activities are

considered another sources of zinc (Hem, 1985). Zn concentration in Iraqi

fertilizers TSP, MAP, NP and NPK are 594, 688, 286 and 240 ppm respectively

(AL-Qaraghuli, 2005). Zn is essential element in plant and animal but excessive

amounts will be harmful to human life (WHO,2007).Zinc concentration of water

samples of the studied area range between ( 0.005 - 0.599 ppm) with an average of

( 0.083 ppm) (appendix 8). Zinc concentration in the area water is less than the

permissible limits in comparison with table (3.19).This means no Zinc pollution in

the groundwater of the study area.

3.7.6 Cadmium (Cd)

The geochemical characters of cadmium is similar to that of zinc but (Cd ) is

much less abundant in earth's crust (Hem, 1985). It is considered relatively rare in

the geological deposits, occurring mainly in carbonate and hydroxide forms

(Boyd, 2000). Cadmium represents a highly toxic element and is unnecessary for


56

the human living and animals ( Manahan, 2001). Excessive amounts (more than

10µg/L) in drinking and irrigation water will be toxic (Prasad,2008).It enters the

environment from weathering the minerals and rocks which contain (Cd).

Cadmium is available in many minerals such as(Cadmoselite, Greenockite and

Olarite) (Emsley,1998). Another sources of (Cd) are fertilizers, industrial activities

(metallurgical processes, pigments and paints), sewage and waste disposal

(Hem,1985). (Cd) concentration in Iraqi fertilizers TSP, MAP, NP and NPK are

21, 27, 11, and 8 ppm respectively(AL-Qaraghuli,2005). Cadmium concentration

of water samples of the studied area range between ( 0.002 - 0.187 ppm) with an

average of ( 0.055 ppm) (appendix 8). It is clear that all wells of the study area are

polluted with cadmium ion because its concentration exceed the permissible limit

in comparison with table (3.19) except the wells No.(2,9,14,15,16,20). This may

be attributed to agricultural activities ( fertilizers uses ) in the recharge areas, in

addition to the agricultural and industrial activities and waste disposal in the study

area.

3.7.7 Lead (Pb)

The quantity of lead ion in surface and groundwater is little because the

minerals which contain lead ion have low solubility in water and also its natural

mobility is low (Drever,1997). Weathering of minerals and rocks which contain

lead ion liberate (pb) to environment. Lead ion is available in many minerals such

as (galena (pbS), cerussite (pbCo3) and anglesite (pbSo4) (Emsley,1998) .

Fertilizers, industrial activates (batteries and paints) and human activities are

considered another sources of (pb) (Hem,1985). (Pb) concentration in Iraqi

fertilizers TSP, MAP, NP and NPK are 52, 42, 38, and 38 ppm respectively

(AL-Qaraghuli, 2005). Lead concentration of water samples of the studied area

range between (0.050 - 0.353 ppm)with an average of ( 0.192 ppm) (appendix 8).

It is clear that all wells of the study area are polluted with lead ion because its

concentration exceed the permissible limit in comparison with table (3.19) except

the well No.(9). This may be attributed to agricultural activities ( fertilizers uses )


57

in the recharge areas, in addition to agricultural and industrial activities and human

activities in the study area.

3.7.8 Manganese (Mn)

The chemistry of manganese is somewhat like that of iron in that both metals

participate in redox processes in weathering environments . Many igneous and

metamorphic minerals contain divalent manganese as a minor constituent. It is a

significant constituent of basalt and many olivines and of pyroxene and

amphibole. Small amounts commonly are present in dolomite and limestone

substituting for calcium (Hem,1985). The fertilizers are considered another source

for (Mn). (Mn) concentration in Iraqi fertilizers TSP, MAP, NP and NPK are

43,36,34, and 18 ppm respectively (AL-Qaraghuli,1987). Manganese concentration

of water samples of the studied area range between ( 0.002 - 0.058 ppm) with an

average of ( 0.019 ppm) (appendix 8). Manganese concentration in the area water

is less than the permissible limit in comparison with table (3.19).This means no

Manganese pollution in the groundwater of the study area .

From the above, it can be observed that the groundwater in the study area is

polluted by elements ( Co , Ni , Cd and Pb ) because the concentrations of these

elements exceeds the permissible limits in comparison with standard specifications

[Iraqi standard (IQS, 2009) and world health organization standard (WHO 2007) ]

as a result of weathering and dissolution actions, in addition to the effect of the

Iraqi fertilizers which are used in agriculture and human activities .


58

Table (3.19) Standards specifications for trace elements in natural water.

No. Elements WHO(2007) ppm

IQS(2009) ppm

Present study

average

ppm 1 Fe 0.3 0.3 0.13

2 Co ---- 0.05 0.17

3 Ni 0.02 0.02 0.046

4 Cu 1 1 0.027

5 Zn 3 3 0.083

6 Cd 0.003 0.003 0.055

7 Mn 0.1 0.1 0.019

8 Pb 0.01 0.01 0.192


59


4.1 Hydrochemical formula and water type :

4.1.1 Hydrochemical Formula (Kurolov formula)

The groundwater quality is simply the result of the geology and hydrology of

the area (Stevanovic and Iurkiewicz , 2009). The water type determining is very

important to determine its suitability for the different uses (human, agricultural and

industrial).Therefore the type of groundwater in the study area is determined

according to Kurolov formula .This formula depends on the ratio of the main ions,

(cations and anions) expressed by (Equivalent per million %) i.e (epm %) that are

arranged in descending order which have more than (15%) ratio of availability.

The cations are located at the base while the anions above. Furthermore, TDS

value is put in (mg/L) unit and (pH) value as in the following formula (Ivanov,et

al, 1968) as follows:

Anions epm% decreasing order TDS mg / L ——————————————— pH Cations epm% decreasing order

From appendices (9,10) which explain hydrochemical formula and water type

for water samples of study area , the hydrochemical Kurolov formulas for water

quality in the study area are represented by five groups determined as follows:

- Ca+2 – Mg+2 - Sodium – Cl- - HCO₃- - Sulfate _ Na2SO4

- Mg+2 - Ca+2 - Sodium - HCO₃- - SO₄-2 - Chloride _ NaCl

- Mg +2- Na+ - Calcium - HCO₃- - SO₄-2 - Chloride _ CaCl2

- Mg+2 – Na+ - Calcium - HCO₃- - Cl- - Sulfate _ CaSO4

- Ca+2 – Na+ - Magnesium – Cl- - HCO₃- - Sulfate _ MgSO4

The predominant salts in water samples are (Na2SO4) ,(NaCl),( CaCl2), (CaSO4)

and (MgSO4) for both periods.


60

Table (4.1) Predominant salts of water samples in the study area

Dry Period Wet Period

Hydrochemicl Formula

(water type)

Predominant

salts Frequency

Occurs Ratio (%)

Hydrochemicl Formula

(water type)

Predominant

salts Frequency

Occurs Ratio (%)

Ca+2 - Mg+2 -

Sodium - Cl- -

HCO₃- - Sulfate

Na2SO4 12 60%

Ca+2 – Mg+2 -

Sodium – Cl- - HCO₃-

- Sulfate Na2SO4 8 40%

Mg+2 – Ca+2 -

Sodium - HCO₃- -

SO₄-2 - Chloride

NaCl 5 25%

Mg+2 – Ca+2 -

Sodium - HCO₃- -

SO₄-2 - Chloride NaCl 5 25%

Mg+2 – Na+ -

Calcium - HCO₃- -

SO₄-2 - Chloride

CaCl2 2 10%

Mg+2 – Na+ -

Calcium - HCO₃- -

SO₄-2 - Chloride CaCl2 3 15%

Mg+2 – Na+ -

Calcium - HCO₃- -

Cl- - Sulfate

CaSO4 1 5%

Mg+2 – Na+ -

Calcium - HCO₃- -

Cl- - Sulfate CaSO4 2 10%

Ca+2 – Na+ -

Magnesium – Cl- -

HCO₃- - Sulfate

MgSO₄ 2 10%

Table (4.1) shows the hydrochemical formula and their prevailing salts and

their percentage ratio in the water of the study area. It is clear that the prevailing

salt in the study area is (Na2SO4) where its concentration averages reach (60%) in

dry period shown in(12) wells and (40%) in wet period shown in (8) wells. Five

wells in the dry period and five in wet period are of (NaCl) prevailed salt type

which represents the second prevailing salt in the study area with a ratio of (25%)

,where most of it is located in the groundwater discharge area especially in wet

period (Fig.4.1). This is due to dilution processes by Tuz Chai river and the water

seepage from Kirkuk irrigation canal .The remainder of wells varies between

(CaCl2),( CaSO4) and (MgSO4) water type for both periods . Generally the salts

distribution in the area is attributed to the lithology of recharge regions and the


61

study area as a result of weathering and dissolution actions of rocks and clay

minerals, in addition to the agricultural and human activities. The source of sulfate

ion in the area is from gypsum rocks for Al-Fat'ha Formation, which appears in

Pulkhana anticline . Fig. (4.1) shows the water quality in the study area for both

periods ,it is clear that the difference in water quality between both dry and wet

period occur as a result of recharge and dilution processes in the wet period.

4.1.2 Hypothetical salts

Hypothetical salts of water samples of the study area can be calculated by

correlation between the anions and cations according to the salts deposition

sequence as shown in table (4.2) (Collins, 1975). Table (4.2) The reaction order of the hypothetical salts Reaction

order Ions 1 2 3 Cl- SO4

-2 HCO3-

1 K+ KCl K2SO4 KHCO3 2 Na+ NaCl Na2SO4 NaHCO3 3 Mg+2 MgCl2 MgSO4 Mg(HCO3)2 4 Ca+2 CaCl2 CaSO4 Ca(HCO3)2

Appendix (11) shows the hypothetical salts for water samples of study area for

both periods .Table (4.3) shows the average of hypothetical salts values for both

periods. It is clear the prevailing salts of water samples of study area are sulfate

and bicarbonate salts represented by Magnesium Sulfate(MgSO4), Calcium Sulfate

(CaSO4) , Sodium Sulfate (Na2SO4) and Calcium Bicarbonate Ca(HCO3)2 .This

indicates a meteoric origin of water which percolate underground through the

formation outcrops and mixing with deep groundwater of marine origin.

Table (4.3) Average of hypothetical salts values for water samples of study area

Hypothetical salts

KCl NaCl MgCl2 CaCl2 K2SO4 Na2SO4 MgSO4 CaSO4 NaHCO3 Mg(HCO3)2 Ca(HCO3)2

Dry period

average

0.32 36.41 1.46 0 0 9.08 21.49 16 0 0.008 14.71

Wet period

average

0.38 33.19 2.79 0 0 6.51 23.46 9.34 0 0 24.28


62

(A)

(B) Fig. 4.1 : Water quality of the study area

(A) Dry period (B) Wet period


63

4.1.3 Hydrochemical indicators

Study of hydrochemical indicators for the water is necessary to delineate the

origin of water, in addition to comparison between ions concentration and sea

water (Fetter, 1980). Ivanov (1968) classified water into two groups, depending on

the genetic origin :

1- Meteoric water

2- Marine water

Chloride ion used to know the geochemical behaviour for main elements by

the ratio of main elements to chloride because (Cl-) is the most dissolve ion and

less influenced by physical and chemical changes in water. In addition, it is not

influenced by adsorption process and exchange of ion by the clay minerals

(Levy, 1974). If the indicators are greater than one then the water is from meteoric

origin and less than one is for water from marine origin (Ivanov, 1968).

Appendix (12) shows the hydrochemical indicators for water samples of study

area for both periods . Table (4.4 ) shows the average of hydrochemical indicators

of groundwater for the two periods. It is clear the values of hydrochemical

indicators are greater than one which means the ratio of sulfates exceeds the

chloride ratio and the origin of groundwater is meteoric, except the wells

No.(1,2,8,9,13,20) whose indicators are less than one. This reflects that the

chloride ion is the prevailing ion and the origin of groundwater is marine. This can

be attributed to the existence of a deep recharge from the deeper aquifers in these

wells. The value of (rNa/rCl) indicator in the wells No.(2,8) are close to one which

means a high and strong dilution but it dose not exceed one. The difference is due

to recharge processes and the artesian pressure of the deep wells in addition to

drawn from meteoric water.


64

Table (4.4) Average of hydrochemical indicators for water samples of study area for the

two periods

Well

no.

rCa /rCl

rMg/rCl

rNa/rCl

rK/rCl

rSO₄ /rCl

rNa+rK rCl

(Na+rK)-Cl rSO₄

Water Origin

1 0.965 0.76 0.8 0.00505 0.845 0.805 -0.2635 Marine

2 0.87 0.585 0.975 0.0029 0.83 0.975 -0.055 Marine

3 1.005 0.795 1.62 0.0085 1.81 1.625 0.34 Meteoric

4 0.875 0.475 1.29 0.0063 1.415 1.295 0.21 Meteoric

5 1.03 0.8 1.42 0.00755 1.64 1.43 0.165 Meteoric

6 1.04 0.655 1.58 0.0117 1.56 1.59 0.375 Meteoric

7 1.13 0.69 1.5 0.0118 1.65 1.505 0.31 Meteoric

8 0.67 0.435 0.97 0.02 0.705 0.99 -0.017 Marine

9 0.75 0.54 0.825 0.022 0.725 0.85 -0.219 Marine

10 0.87 0.66 1.46 0.00345 1.305 1.46 0.335 Meteoric

11 1.07 0.835 1.2 0.01135 1.455 1.21 0.145 Meteoric

12 0.835 0.635 1.12 0.018 1.375 1.14 0.0865 Meteoric

13 0.89 0.755 0.855 0.00435 1.16 0.86 -0.11 Marine

14 1.02 1.23 1.225 0.00305 1.455 1.23 0.155 Meteoric

15 1.005 0.805 1.3 0.0047 1.485 1.305 0.1 Meteoric

16 0.905 0.865 1.365 0.0067 1.465 1.37 0.25 Meteoric

17 0.595 0.325 1.06 0.0063 0.865 1.065 0.03 Meteoric

18 0.765 0.59 1.205 0.014 0.925 1.22 0.22 Meteoric

19 0.955 0.82 1.055 0.0027 1.215 1.06 0.02 Meteoric

20 0.69 0.645 0.87 0.0085 0.65 0.875 -0.2635 Marine


65

4.2 Classification of water

There are many methods for hydrochemical classification like (Piper, 1944;

Sulin,1946;Schoeller,1972;Collins,1975; and Chadha,1999). These methods are

used to determine the quality and the important properties of groundwater. All

these classifications depend on the main cations and anions concentrations by unit

equivalent weight of ion (epm) or mile equivalent per liter (mg/L). Piper (1944)

and Chadha (1999) classifications are applied in the present study as follows :

4.2.1 Piper Classification (1944)

Piper (1944) proposed a trilinear diagram that permits the classification of

water. The Piper trinlinear diagram is consists of two trilinear plots and a diamond

plot. These diagrams depend on dissolved contents in natural water which

represent cations and anions by unit equivalent per million of ion (epm) or mile

equivalent per liter (mg/L).The Rock Work software was used for plotting this

diagram to display the relative concentrations of the different ions in water samples

in the study area. Based on the main cations and anions Piper trinlinear diagram

and according to Langguth (1966) divided into seven types (Fig. 4.2) as follows :

Normal earth Alkaline water :

a- with prevailing bicarbonate

b- with prevailing bicarbonate and sulfate or chloride

c- with prevailing sulfate or chloride

Earth Alkaline water with increase portion of alkalis :

d- with prevailing bicarbonate

e- with prevailing sulfate and chloride

Alkaline water :

f- with prevailing bicarbonate

g- with prevailing sulfate and chloride


66

Fig. 4.2 : Piper (1944) Trilinear diagram with Langguth (1966) classification.

The results of the analyzed samples of study area for wet and dry periods by

(ppm) unit (appendices 4,5) are plotted on Piper diagrams as shown in Fig.(4.3) . It

is clear that all groundwater samples for the two periods are located in (e) and (g)

hydrochemical facies (Fig.4.2).Therefore this means the type of groundwater

samples of study area for dry and wet periods is " earth alkaline water with

increased portions of alkalis with prevailing sulfate and chloride" and " Alkaline

water with prevailing sulfate and chloride" respectively, and the major

hydrochemical facies being (Ca2+ - Mg2+ - Cl- - SO4

2- ) and (Na+- K+ - Cl- - SO4

2-)

for the two periods.


67

(A)

(B)

Fig. 4.3 : Piper diagram for water samples of study area

(A)Dry period (B)Wet period


68

4.2.2 Chadha classification (1999)

Chadha diagram is constructed by plotting the difference between alkaline earth

and alkali metals and the difference between weak acidic anions and strong acidic

anions by milliequivalent percentage (epm%) on the axises of X and Y. X- axis

represents the difference between Alkaline earth and Alkaline metallic

[(Ca+2 +Mg+2

) - (Na+ + K+ )](epm %), while Y-axis represents the difference

between weak and strong acids [(HCO₃⁻ + CO₃⁻² ) – ( Cl⁻ + SO4⁻²)] (epm %)

(Chadha,1999). Chadha classification can be used to interprets the general

properties of water for more accurate details which are not available in the Piper

classification .Chadha divided the plotting into eight parts each part represents one

type of water (Fig.4.4 ) as follows:

1- Alkaline earths exceed alkali metals.

2- Alkali metals exceed alkaline earths.

3- Weak acids anions exceed strong acids anions.

4- Strong acids anions exceed weak acids anions.

5- Alkaline earths exceed alkali metals and weak acids anions exceed strong acids

anions. This type has temporary hardness ; represented by Ca2+-Mg2+- HCO3--

type, Ca2+-Mg2+- dominant HCO3-- type, or HCO3

-dominant Ca2+-Mg2+- type

water.

6- Alkaline earths exceed alkali metals and strong acids anions exceed weak acids

anions. This type has permanent hardness and not residual sodium carbonate

Na2CO₃ in irrigation use; represented by Ca2+-Mg2+-Cl- water type, and Ca2+-

Mg2+ dominant - Cl- type, or Cl--dominant Ca2+-Mg2+ type water.

7- Alkali metals exceed alkaline earths and strong acids anions exceed weak acids

anions. This type generally creates salinity problems both in irrigation and

drinking uses ;represented by Na+-Cl--type, Na2SO4-type, Na+-dominant Cl--

type, or Cl--dominant Na+-type water.


69

8- Alkali metals exceed alkaline earths and weak acids exceed strong acids. This

type deposit residual sodium carbonate in irrigation and cause foaming

problems ;represented by Na+ - HCO3--type, Na+-dominant HCO3

--type, or

HCO3- -dominant Na+-type water.

Fig. 4.4 : Chadha diagram

The results of the analyzed samples of study area for wet and dry periods by

(epm%) unit (appendices 6,7) are plotted on Chadha diagrams as shown in

Fig.(4.5). It is clear that the water samples No.(1, 3, 4, 5, 7, 11 ,12, 13.14.15,19,20)

and samples No.( 2,6,8,9,10,16,17,18) in dry period are located within (part 6) and

(part 7) respectively , while in wet period all the water samples are located within

(part 6) except the sample No. (12) is located in (part7).

Therefore, this means that the type of groundwater samples for both periods for

the samples which fall in (part 6) is (alkaline earths exceed alkali metals and strong

acids anions exceed weak acids anions ) .This type is characterized by Ca2+-Mg2+


70

(A)

(B) Fig. 4.5 : Chadha classification (1999) for water samples of study area,

(A)Dry period (B)Wet period


71

-Cl- water type, and Ca2+-Mg2+ dominant - Cl- type, or Cl--dominant Ca2+-Mg2+

type water . While water type for the samples which fall in (part 7) is alkali metals

exceed alkaline earths and strong acidic anions exceed weak acidic anions

represent Na+-Cl--type, Na2SO4-type, Na+-dominant Cl--type, or Cl--dominant Na+-

type water.

4.3 Groundwater suitability for different purposes

Groundwater in the studied area is used for different purposes (drinking

, industrial and agricultural),where the area depends on the irrigation canal and

groundwater for drinking water supply(tap water)for population . Therefore it is

necessary to evaluate groundwater suitability for these purposes and especially for

human drinking .This evaluation is normally carried out by comparing its

hydrochemical parameters with some standard limits set for the different purposes

as follows :

4.3.1 Groundwater suitability for human drinking purposes.

Water for human consumption must be free from organisms and chemical

substances in concentration large enough to affect health adversely (Hamill and

Bell,1986). Groundwater suitability depends on several parameters (major and

minor elements , inorganic , organic chemicals and biological constituents) . For

the purpose of evaluating the suitability of groundwater for human drinking , Iraqi

standard (IQS, 2009) and World Health Organization standard (WHO 2007) were

used to determine its suitability as drinking water in the study area .

The average of two periods ( dry and wet) for the analyzed water samples by

(ppm) unit (appendices 4,5 ) are compared with WHO,(2007) and IQS(2009)

standards as shown in table (4.5). As a result the groundwater in study area is

unsuitable for human drinking purposes , where in the case of suitable ones

element, the another element is not suitable.


72

Table (4.5) Comparison of groundwater samples (ppm) in the study area with IQS and

WHO standards.

Parameters

Dry period Wet period Average of two periods

Iraqi Standard

2009

WHO Standard

2007

Exceeding limits

Range Average Range Average

pH 7.17 - 8.2 7.71 7.12- 7.92 7.40 7.55 6.5 - 8.5 6.5 - 8.5 Not exceed

TDS 339 - 2415 1279.85 241 - 2287 1027.55 1153.7 1000 1000 Exceed

EC 546 - 3500 1901.4 363 - 3402 1607.2 1754.3 1500 1530 Exceed

TH 127.6 – 1166.6 512.9 118.85 – 1082.21 435.22 474.06 500 500 Not exceed

Ca2+ 33 - 253 117.5 26.01 - 234 96.44 106.97 150 75 Not exceed

Mg2+ 11 - 130 53.3 10.1 - 121 47.24 50.27 100 125 Not exceed

Na+ 61 - 345 185.9 42 - 345 131.86 158.88 200 200 Not exceed

K+ 0.3 – 5.5 2.2 0.7 – 5.4 1.50 1.85 12 12 Not exceed

Cl- 89 – 468.6 242.8 49.7 - 460 173.07 207.93 350 250 Not exceed

SO42- 108 - 844 409.6 43.2 - 844 294.95 352.27 400 250 Not exceed

HCO₃‾ 12.8 - 611 186.6 18 - 446 214.71 200.65 200 200 Exceed

NO3- 0.2 - 8 3.25 1.3 - 9 4.83 4.04 50 50 Not exceed

Fe 0.004 – 0.409 0.13 ---- ---- 0.13 0.3 0.3 Not exceed

Co 0.008 – 0.457 0.17 ---- ---- 0.17 ---- 0.05 Exceed

Ni 0.012 – 0.085 0.046 ---- ---- 0.046 0.02 0.02 Exceed

Cu 0.006 – 0.124 0.027 ---- ---- 0.027 1 1 Not exceed

Zn 0.005 – 0.599 0.083 ---- ---- 0.083 3 3 Not exceed

Cd 0.002 – 0.187 0.055 ---- ---- 0.055 0.003 0.003 Exceed

Mn 0.002 – 0.058 0.019 ---- ---- 0.019 0.1 0.1 Not exceed

Pb 0.050 – 0.353 0.192 ---- ---- 0.192 0.01 0.01 Exceed


73

4.3.2 Groundwater suitability for livestock purposes

The results of the analyzed samples of the study area for both periods by (ppm)

unit (appendices 4,5 ) are evaluated for livestock and poultry purposes by using

classifications proposed by Altoviski(1962), Crist and Lowery(1972) and Ayers

and Westcot(1989) are shown in table (4.6),table (4.7 ) and table (4.8 )

respectively. It is clear that all water samples in the study area are :

Very good for animal drinking according to Altoviski (1962) classification .

Acceptable for all types of animals and poultry according to Crist and Lowery

(1972) classification.

Very satisfactory for all types of livestock and poultry, according to the

classification given by Ayers and Westcot (1989). Table (4.6) Water specifications for the purpose of animal consumption according to

Altoviski(1962 )

parameters Very good Good permissible Can be

used High limits

Average of two periods

Na+ 800 1500 2000 2500 4000 158.88 Ca2+ 350 700 800 900 1000 106.97 Mg2+ 150 350 500 600 700 50.27 Cl- 900 2000 3000 4000 6000 207.93

SO42- 1000 25000 3000 4000 6000 352.27

TDS 3000 5000 7000 10000 15000 1153.7 TH 1500 3200 4000 4700 64000 474.06

Table (4.7) Water specifications for the purpose of animal consumption according to

Crist and Lowery(1972). Salinity (ppm) quality animal

Less than 1000 good poultry \ to 2860

1000 - 3000 Acceptable

3000 - 5000 weak Horses\ to 7150

5000 - 7000 very weak

More than 7000 unacceptable Cow \ to 10000 sheep\ to 12900


74

Table (4.8) Water specifications for the purpose of animal consumption according to Ayers and Westcot(1989).

Notes Rating EC (µS/cm) Suitable for all classes of livestock and poultry. Excellent

< 1500

Suitable for all classes of livestock and poultry. May cause temporary diarrhoea in livestock not accustomed to such water; watery droppings in poultry.

Very Satisfactory

1500 - 5000

May cause temporary diarrhoea or be refused at first by animals not accustomed to such water.

Satisfactory for Livestock

5000 - 8000 Often causes watery faeces, increased mortality and decreased growth, especially in turkeys.

Unfit for Poultry

Suitable with reasonable safety for dairy and beef cattle, sheep, swine and horses. Avoid use for pregnant or lactating animals.

Limited Use for

Livestock

8000 - 11000

Not acceptable for poultry. Unfit for Poultry

Unfit for poultry and probably unfit for swine. Considerable risk in using for pregnant or lactating cows, horses or sheep, or for the young of these species. In general, use should be avoided although older ruminants, horses, poultry and swine may subsist on water such as

these under certain conditions.

Very Limited Use

11000 - 16000

Risk with such highly saline water is so great that it cannot be recommended for use under any conditions.

Not Recommended

>16000

4.3.3 Groundwater suitability for industrial purposes

The results of the analyzed samples of the study area for both periods by

(ppm) unit (appendices 4,5 ) are evaluated for industrial purposes by using

classification suggested by Hem (1985) is shown in table (4.9). It is clear that

all water samples are not suitable for industrial purposes, where in the case of

suitable ones element, the another element is not suitable.

Gravel and sand quarries are widespread in the study area , where they use

the groundwater for gravel and sand washing in addition to industrial processes.


75

Table (4.9) Suitability of water for industrial purposes (Hem, 1985) Pa

ram

eter

s

Tex

tiles

Chemical pulp

and paper

Woo

d ch

emic

als

Synt

hetic

ru

bber

Petr

oleu

m

prod

ucts

Can

ned,

dri

ed,

froz

en fr

uits

an

d ve

geta

bles

Soft-

drin

ks

bottl

ing

leat

her

tann

ing

Hyd

raul

ic

cem

ent

man

ufac

ture

U

nble

ache

d

Bl

each

ed

Ca² -- 20 20 100 80 75 -- 100 -- --

Mg+² -- 12 12 50 36 30 -- -- -- --

CL⁻ -- 200 200 500 -- 300 250 500 250 250

SO42- 0 -- -- 100 -- -- 250 500 250 250

HCO₃⁻ 0 -- -- 250 -- -- -- -- -- --

NO₃⁻ 0 -- -- 5 -- -- 10 -- -- --

Cu 0.01 -- -- -- -- -- -- 500 -- --

Zn -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

pH 2.5 – 10.5 6 - 10 6 - 10 6.5- 8.0 6.5 – 8.3 6 - 9 6.5 – 8.5 -- 6 - 8 6.5 - 8.5

TDS 100 -- -- 1000 -- 1000 500 -- -- 600

TH 25 100 100 900 350 350 250 -- Soft --

4.3.4 Groundwater suitability for building purposes

Suitability of groundwater in the study area is evaluated for building purposes

by using classification proposed by Altoviski (1962) as shown in table(4.10) .The

average concentrations of groundwater samples by (ppm) unit (appendices 4,5 )

were compared with Altoviski (1962) standard . It is clear that all water samples in

the study area are suitable for building purposes.

4.3.5 Groundwater suitability for agriculture purpose

The productivity of agricultural crops depends on the quality of plants, its

resistance to environmental conditions, its ability to retain water ,the properties of

the soil structure , the irrigation method used and other factors . The plants

tolerance for total dissolved solids and electrical conductivity in water which uses

in irrigation are different depends on the quality of plants (Todd,1980) .


76

According to classification proposed by Todd (2007) as shown in table (4.11)

all water samples of the study area are suitable for growing most types of crops.

Table (4.10 ) Water suitability for building purposes compared with average

concentrations of samples according to Altoviski (1962)

Ions Permissible Limit

Average concentrations

Dry period Wet period

Na+ 1160 185.9 131.86

Ca2+ 437 117.5 96.44

Mg2+ 271 53.3 47.24

Cl- 2187 242.8 173.07

SO42-

1460 409.6 294.95

HCO3-

350 186.6 214.71

Table (4.11 ) Todd classification (2007) for the tolerance of crops by relative salt

concentrations for agriculture.

Crop Division Low Salt

Tolerance crops Ec (µS /cm)

Medium Salt Tolerance crops Ec (µS /cm)

High Salt Tolerance crops Ec (µS /cm)

Fruit Crops

0 - 3000

Limon, Strawbrry, Peach Spricot, Almond, Plum

Orange, Apple, Pear

3000 - 4000

Cantaloupe, Olive,

Figs, Pomegranate

4000 - 10,000

Date palm

Vegetable Crops

3000 - 4000

Green beans, Celery, Radish

4000 - 10,000 Cucumber, Peas, Onion Carrot, Potatoes, Sweet Corn, Lettuce, Cauliflower, Bell pepper, Cabbage, Broccoli, Tomato

10000 - 120,000

Spinach, Garden beets

Field Crops 4000 - 6000

Field beans

6000 - 10,000

Sunflower, Corn (field)

Rice, Wheat, (grain)

10,000 - 16,000

Cotton, Sugar beet Barley (grains)


77

4.3.6 Groundwater suitability for irrigation purposes

The (EC) and ( Na+) play a decisive role in verifying water suitability for

irrigation (Al-Manmi, 2008).The suitability of water for irrigation depends on the

kind and amount of salts present in the water and their effects on crop growth and

development. Salts are present in variable concentrations in all water and the salt

concentrations influence osmotic pressure of the soil solution. Plants can absorb

water readily when osmotic pressure is low, but absorption becomes more difficult

as the pressure increases (Glover, 1996) .There are many classifications to know

the suitability of water for irrigation purposes. They depend on several variables

including the cations , anions ,EC, TDS, pH, sodium adsorption ratio (SAR)

, soluble sodium percentage (Na%) and residual sodium carbonate (RSC) as

follows :

Sodium Adsorption Ratio (SAR)

The sodium adsorption ratio (SAR) indicates sodium concentration in water .

(SAR) is considered an important parameter for the evaluation of water suitability

for irrigation where the sodium accumulation in the soil will affect the rate of

water infiltration through the soil. (SAR) values used for estimation of infiltration

problems for soil that as a result of sodium increase with relative to the sum of

calcium and magnesium in a ratio of (1:3) , this will lead to soil crumble and

shrinking of the porosity (Ayres and Westcot, 1989).

(SAR) values are calculated according to the following equation (Todd,2007):

2

22 rMgrCa

rNaSAR

++

+

+=

…………………….. ( 4.1)

Where:

SAR: Sodium Adsorption Ratio.

rNa+, rCa+2 and rMg+2: Concentration of ions by (epm) uints.


78

The results of the analyzed samples of the study area for both periods by

(ppm) unit (appendices 4,5 ) are compared with Ayers and Westcot classification

(1989). It is clear that all groundwater samples are located within the permissible

limits except some wells exceeds the permissible limits are shown in table

(4.12).

Table (4-13) shows values of (SAR) for groundwater samples of the study area

for two periods. All (SAR) values lies within the permissible limits according to

Ayers and Westcot classification (1989) (Table 4.12) and Don classification (1995)

(Table 4.14).

Soluble Sodium Percentage ( Na%)

Increasing of sodium ion ratios in irrigation water will affect the soil where it

leads to decrease its porosity and permeability , thus will affect the plant growth or

stunted growth. (Na%) values were calculated according to the following equation

(Todd,2007):

rNa + rK Na% = –––––––––––––––––– ´ 100 ………………….(4.2) rCa + rMg + rNa + rK Where:

All ionic concentrations are expressed in milliequivalents per litter i.e. (epm).

Table (4-13) express values of (Na %) for groundwater samples of the study

area for two periods. ( Na%) values lies within the permissible limits according to

Don classification (1995) (Table 4.14 ).

Residual Sodium Carbonate (RSC)

The high concentration of bicarbonate in irrigation water lead to precipitation of

calcium and magnesium in the soil, Thus the sodium concentration will increase

(VanHoorn,1970) . Residual sodium carbonate (RSC) values are calculated

according to the following equation (Turgeon,2000):

RSC = ([CO32-] + [HCO3

-]) - ([Ca2+] + [Mg2+]) (epm) ……….(4.3)


79

Table (4.13) express values of ( RSC ) for groundwater samples of the study

area for two periods . It is clear all (RSC) values are low and negatively indicating

that sodium hazard is unlikely and lies within the permissible limits according to

Turgeon classification (2000) (Table 4.15) .

Table (4.12) Specification standards for irrigation water (Ayers and Westecot, 1989)

No. variables Unit Usual

Range Dry period Wet period

Not exceed Exceed Not exceed Exceed

1

Salinity

EC (µS/cm) 0 - 3000 All samples except No. 3,13,15

3,13,15 All samples except No. 3,13,15

3,13,15

TDS ppm 0 - 2000 All samples except No.

3,13 3,13

All samples except No. 3,13,15

3,13,15

2

Cations

Ca2+ epm 0 - 20 All samples ---- All samples -----

Mg2+

epm 0 – 5

All samples except No. 1,3,13,15,

19

1,3,13,15,19

All samples except No. 1,2,3,11,13,

14,15

1,2,3,11,13,14,1

5,

Na+ epm 0 - 40 All samples ----- All samples -----

3

Anions

Cl- epm 0 - 30 All samples ----- All samples -----

SO42- epm 0 - 20 All samples ----- All samples -----

HCO3- epm 0 - 10 All samples ----- All samples -----

CO32- epm 0 - 0.1 All samples ----- All samples -----

4

Nutrients

NO3 – N ppm 0 - 10 All samples ----- All samples ----- NH4 – N ppm 0 - 50 ----- ----- ----- ----- PO4 – P ppm 0 - 2 ----- ----- ----- -----

K+ ppm 0 - 2 2,3,4,9,10, 14,17,19,20

1,5,6,7,8,11,12,13,15,16,18

All samples except No.

3,13,18 3,13,18

5

Miscellane.

ous

B ppm 0 - 2 ----- ----- ----- -----

PH 1-14 6.0 - 8.5 All samples ----- All samples -----

SAR epm 0 - 15 All samples ----- All samples -----


80

Table (4.13) Values of (SAR, Na%, RSC) for water samples of the study area

Wells No.

Dry Period Wet Period SAR Na% RSC SAR Na% RSC

1 3.04 33.55 -11.91 2.16 30.76 -7.12 2 5.02 50.18 -7.34 2.28 30.22 -8.8 3 5.37 49.03 -11.04 4.77 45.56 -9.16 4 3.06 49.43 -3.87 2.96 48.3 -3.99 5 4.48 49.7 -8.01 2.47 35.25 -5.06 6 4.74 51.16 -8.22 3.31 46.1 -3.56 7 3.72 44.67 -8.87 3.37 45.67 -4.08 8 2.52 51.52 -2.56 1.63 43.03 -1.57 9 2.36 51.34 -2.34 0.92 30.75 -1.37

10 4.73 52.73 -6.26 3.35 46 -3.82 11 4.03 45 -10.08 2.43 33.85 -6.24 12 1.97 38.97 -4.45 2.47 50.84 -2.66 13 3.42 34.31 -15.45 3.42 34.28 -15.38 14 2.23 35.24 -4.63 2.37 35.48 -5.23 15 3.18 31.94 -13.31 5.37 49.05 -11.04 16 5.07 54.19 -7.07 2.25 35.16 -4.82 17 4.91 62.6 -3.5 1.72 42.61 -1.73 18 4.51 59.74 -3.86 1.94 37.48 -2.95 19 2.69 34.02 -8.68 2.52 39.95 -3.31 20 1.86 38.11 -2.38 1.64 41.64 -1.64

Table (4.14) Classification of Don (1995) for irrigation water

EC µS\cm

TDS ppm SAR Na% pH

Water

Quality 250 175 3 20 6.5 Excellent

250 -750 175 -525 3 – 5 20 -40 6.5 – 6.8 Good

750 -2000 525 -1400 5 – 10 40 – 60 6.8 – 7 Permissible

2000– 3000 1400 – 2100 10 – 15 60 – 80 7 – 8 Doubtful

> 3000 > 2100 > 15 > 80 > 8 Unsuitable


81

Table (4.15) Classification of irrigation water based on RSC values, according to

Turgeon (2000)

RSC Hazard

< 0 None.

0-1.25 Low, with some removal of calcium and magnesium from irrigation water.

1.25-2.50

Medium, with appreciable removal of calcium and magnesium from irrigation water.

> 2.50

High, with most calcium and magnesium removed leaving sodium to accumulate.

4.4 Suitability of water for irrigation according to US Salinity Laboratory

classification ,Richards diagram (1954)

U.S. salinity laboratory has classified groundwater to determine the suitability

of water for irrigation purposes based on electrical conductivity (EC) which is

plotted on the X - axis and sodium adsorption ration (SAR) drawn on the

Y - axis . The diagram is divided into 16 areas that are used to rate the degree to

which a particular water may give rise to salinity problems and undesirable ion-

exchange effects in soil (Hem, 1989) (Table 4.16 ). Based on this division the cases

of the use of water for irrigation purposes , salinity and sodium hazard can be

clarified as the following:

Low-salinity water (C1) can be used for irrigation on most crops in most soils with

little likelihood that soil salinity will develop.

Medium-salinity water (C2) can be used if a moderate amount of leaching occurs.

High-salinity water(C3) cannot be used on soils with restricted drainage.

Very high-salinity water (C4) is not suitable for irrigation under ordinary

conditions, but it may be used occasionally under very special circumstances.

Low-sodium water (S1) can be used for irrigation on almost all soils with little

danger of developing harmful levels of sodium.


82

Medium-sodium water (S2) may cause an alkalinity problem in fine textured soils

under low leaching conditions. It can be used on coarse textured soils with good

permeability.

High-sodium water (S3) may produce an alkalinity problem. This water requires

special soil management such as good drainage, heavy leaching, and possibly the

use of chemical amendments such as gypsum.

Very high sodium water (S4) is usually unsatisfactory for irrigation purposes. Table (4.16) Suitability of groundwater as irrigation water according to U.S. salinity

laboratory at Hem classification(1989)

Index water Class Dry Period Wet Period

C1S1 Excellent ----- -----

C1S2 Good ----- -----

C1S3 Admissible ----- -----

C1S4 Poor ----- -----

C2S1 Good 8 , 9 8,9,12,17,20

C2S2 Good ----- -----

C2S3 Marginal ----- -----

C2S4 Admissible ----- -----

C3S1 Admissible 4,7,12,14,16,17,18,19,20

4,5,6,7,10,11,12,14,15,16,18,19

C3S2 Marginal 10

C3S3 Marginal ----- -----

C3S4 Poor ----- -----

C4S1 Poor 1,11,13,15 13

C4S2 Poor 2,3,5,6 3,15

C4S3 V. Poor ----- -----

C4S4 V. Poor ----- ------


83

The results of the analyzed samples of study area for wet and dry periods are

plotted on Richards diagram(1954) ( Fig. 4.6 ). According to US Salinity

Laboratory classification. Most water samples of the area for both periods are

located in class (C3S1) and the remainder are in classes (C2S1),( C4S1) and

(C4S2) as shown in (Fig.4.9).This means that most of the water samples of the area

are good, marginal and admissible as irrigation water except some samples that are

poor due to the high salinity as shown in table (4.16).

Fig. 4.6 : Diagram for classification of irrigation water of the study area ( After US

Salinity Laboratory staff ,1954)


84

4.5 Groundwater management

The major goal for any groundwater management plan is to maintain a reliable

supply of groundwater for long-term uses in the area .The plan should clearly

describe how each of the adopted management objectives will help to attain that

goal. Furthermore, the plan should clearly describe how current and planned

actions help the adopted management objectives. The plan will have a greater

chance of success by developing an understanding of the relationship between

each action, management objectives, and the goal of the groundwater

management plan (Kevin,2005).

Groundwater management process is very important in organizing the

extraction of groundwater in safe and correct manner .Through this management

the water balance must be determined between the quantity of water supplied to the

aquifer and the amount leaving the aquifer. Groundwater balance in the study area

is calculated according to the equation of water balance (Domenico and

Schwartz ,1998) as follows :

ΔS = Input – Output ………………………. (4.4)

ΔS = Qin – Qout

Where:

ΔS: Changes in groundwater storage (m3/year).

Qin: Input discharge (m3/year).

Qout: Output discharge (m3/year ).

Input discharge (Qin)

To calculate the annual recharge amount of Al-Adhaim basin and the studied

area. The water Surplus (WS) for the study area was calculated in chapter two

(section 2.3) and it was equal (163.6 mm).The water Surplus (WS) represents the


85

total of surface runoff (SR) and groundwater recharge (GR) (Fetter, 1980) as

follows:

WS = SR+ GR ……………………….. (4.5)

Where:

WS: Water Surplus

SR: Surface Runoff

GR: Ground Recharge

The surface runoff (SR) of Al-Adhaim basin was calculated by

(AL-Mamuri,2005) it was equal (9.2%) from the annual rainfall (P).Therefore the

surface runoff (SR) is equal (25.22 mm) from the annual rainfall (274.21 mm). The

groundwater recharge can be calculated according to equation (4.5) as follows:

WS = SR + GR

163.6 = 25.22 + GR

GR = 138.38 mm

GR% = ( GR/P )× 100 = 50.46 % from rainfall

Where: P = rainfall ; P = 274.21 mm

This percentage represents the rainfall percentage that contributes in recharging

groundwater.

The area (A) of Al-Adhaim basin is about 12000 Km2 (AL-Mamuri,2005).

Therefore the annual recharge amount (Qin) for Al-Adhaim basin can be

calculated as follows:

Qin = A × GR ……………………….. (4.6 )

= 12000 × 106 × 138.38 × 10-3

= 1660.56 × 106 m3/ year

While the discharge amount which enters the study area can be calculated

according to Darcy's equation (Todd, 2007) as follows:

Q = TIL ……………………….. (4.7)


86

Where:

Q : Discharge (m3/day)

T : Tranmissivity (m2/day)

I : Hydraulic gradient ( dimensionless)

L: Width of the flow front of the study area (m)

The average of transmissivity for the study area is (176.11m2/day) and the

average of hydraulic gradient (I) is (0.0068) were calculated in chapter two. From

the flow net map(Fig.2.12) width of the front flow is equal (12.4Km).According to

the equation (4.7) the discharge amount (Q1) that enters the area during

(365) days is :

Q1 = 176.11× 0.0068 × 12400 × 365

= 5.42 × 106 m3/ year

While length of the flow front for the study area is equal (10Km). And

according to the equation (4.7) the discharge amount ( Q2 ) that enters along the

study area during ( 365 ) days is :

Q2 = 176.11 × 0.0068 × 10000 × 365

= 4.37 × 106 m3/ year

Therefore the total discharge amount (Qin .Total) that enters the study area is :

Qin . Total = Q1 + Q2

= 9.79 × 106 m3/ year

Output discharge (Qout)

The output discharge (Qout) represents the total of groundwater consumption in

the studied area. The amount of consumed groundwater for different purposes can

be calculated as follows :

1- Groundwater consumption for agriculture purposes

The groundwater is considered important factor for agriculture in the study

area. According to Tuz Khurmatu Agriculture Directorate ,the lands which invest


87

in agriculture and livestock breeding in addition to fish aquariums within the study

area depend on Kirkuk irrigation canal and also on groundwater during the water

shortage in the canal. During the field tours through the agricultural lands and

encountered the some peasants , it was clear that (14) wells were drilled and

distributed in these lands . These wells work during the irrigation canal water

shortage with an average of ( 8 ) days per month about (4 ) hours/day . It means

that the average working days for each well is (16) days a year with an average

discharge of 10 L/sec i.e. (864 m3/day).Therefore the average of groundwater

consumed for agricultural purposes in the study area can be calculated as follows:

GWCA = W.no ×Q ×T

Where:

GWCA : Groundwater Consumption in Agriculture (m3 / year)

W.no : number of wells

Q : Discharge of wells (m3 / day)

T : Time (day)

GWCA = 14 × 864 × 16

= 193536 m3 / year

2- Groundwater Consumption for Industrial Purposes

Industrial importance of the study area associate with the geological nature of

the region by containing Quaternary and Tertiary deposits exposed on the surface.

Therefore the area contains several quarries of sand and gravel as well as bricks

and gypsum factories. All those quarries and factories depend on groundwater for

their works . According to Tuz Khurmatu Municipality Directorate , there are

about (25) quarries and factories distributed within the study area. It was clear

during the field tours in the quarries and factories , the wells work with an average

of ( 5 ) hours/day . It means that the average working days for each well is

( 76.04 ) days a year with an average discharge of 10 L/sec i.e. (864 m3/day) .


88

Average of groundwater consumed for industrial purposes can be calculated as

follows:

GWCI = F.no ×Q ×T

Where:

GWCI: Groundwater Consumption for Industries (m3 / year)

F.no: Number of factories

Q: Discharge of wells (m3 / day)

T: Time (day)

GWCI = 25 × 864 × 76.04

= 1642464 m3 / year

3- Groundwater consumption for domestic uses

Tuz Khurmatu area depends on Kirkuk irrigation canal in tap water supply for

population and also on groundwater during water shortage in the canal ,where the

population of area uses the groundwater for drinking although it is not suitable for

drinking as mentioned in section (4.3.1) . According to Tuz Khurmatu Water

Center, there are (29) wells were drilled and distributed within the study area for

tap water supply during the water shortage in the irrigation canal , these wells work

with an average of (15) days per month about (6) hours/day .It means that the

average working days for each well is (45) days a year with an average discharge

of 10 L/sec i.e. (864 m3/day). Average of groundwater consumed for domestic

purposes can be calculated as follows:

GWCD = W.no ×Q ×T

Where:

GWCd : Groundwater Consumption for domestic purposes(m3 / year)

W.no: Number of wells

Q: Discharge of wells (m3 / day)

T: Time (day)


89

GWCD = 29 × 864 × 45

= 1127520 m3 / year

Therefore approximately all the consumed groundwater in the study area during

present study is :

Total groundwater consumption = GWCA + GWCI + GWCD ( Al-Azawi,2009)

= 2963520 m3 / year

The difference between the amount of input discharge (Qin .Total) into the study

area and the amount of consumed groundwater of it (Qout) can be calculated

according to the equation (4.4) as follow:

ΔS = Qin .Total – Qout

= (9.79 – 2.96) × 106

= 6.83 × 106 m3 / year

This value represents the change in groundwater storage, and indicate to an

increase in the constant storage of the area. So we can conclude that the total

groundwater consumption in the area has a little influence on the groundwater

amount that enter the study area as renewed storativity and has no effect on the

constant storage of the area.

It is clear that the study area depends on surface water (Kirkuk irrigation canal )

bigly especially in agriculture and domestic uses (tap water supply).

Iraq is facing shortages in surface water sources (Lorenz,2008).This will lead to

depending on groundwater mainly in future. So it is necessary to protect

groundwater quantity in the area by good management to keep groundwater

sustained. Through this management the control on the random drilling of wells in

the study area especially by the farmers and gravel quarries and monitoring

groundwater levels in the area by drilling wells for monitoring. Groundwater

quality must be also protected by minimizing the contamination from human

activities .


90


5.1 Conclusions

The following conclusions are derived from the present study :

1- Climate :

Depending on the climatic informations recorded in Tuz Khurmatu station for

the period (1991- 2010) , the values of climate variables for the area are as follows:

· The annual average temperature is (22.8C°), while the monthly averages are

expressed in three periods :

Hot period, which extends from June (33.4C°) to September (30.8C°) with the

highest average appears in July (35.6C°) .

Temperate period , which represented by the months of October, April and

May.

Cold period, which extends from November (16.4C°) to March(15.7C°),with

the lowest average appears in January (9C°).

· Average annual rainfall is ( 274.12 mm) and using this average, the water years

from 1991-2010 are classified into dry years which have rainfall less than the

average represented by (13) years , and wet years which have rainfall higher than

the average, represented by (7) years. The rain is limited between October and

May and approximately disappears in the months June, July, August and

September ,where the highest average of rainfall occurs in January(62mm).

· The annual average for relative humidity is (46.93 % ), while the monthly averages

are expressed in three periods :

Dry period, which extends from June(27.5%) to September(30.8%), ,where the

lowest average is in July (26.2 %) .

Humid period, which extends from November (58.3%) to April (50.5%), where

the highest average is in January(72.7 %).

Transitional period that falls between the humid and dry periods represented

by October (39.9%) and May (36%).


91

· The total amount of evaporation is (2376.2mm ) are expressed in three periods :

First period, which extends from May (280.4mm) to September ( 259.9mm)

where the highest average of monthly evaporation is in July(377.7mm)

Second period, which extends from November (89.5mm), to March (127.9mm)

, where the lowest average of monthly evaporation is in January(45.8 mm).

Third period, is a transitional one represented by October (180.5mm) and April

(175.4mm).

· The highest average of wind speed is in Apr. , May. , Jun. and July (2.2 m/sec)

,while the lowest is in December ( 1.3 m/sec) .

· Corrected potential Evapotranspirtion (PEc) is determined according to

Thornthwait (1948), where its total amount is (959.24 mm), while the total amount

of (PE) is (1121.12 mm). According to the values of evaporation the relation is

recognized: (PEc < PEx < Epan) .

· Water surplus ratio from the total rainfall (annual rainfall )is calculated as

(59.66 %) ,this percentage represents the groundwater recharge and surface runoff

, while the water deficit is (40.34 %).

· According to Kettaneh and Gangopadhyaya classification (1973) ,the months from

Nov. to Mar. have humid climate, while the months from Jun. to Sep. have very

dry climate. The months Oct. and May. have moderate to dry climate . April

monthes have moist climate.

· According to Al-Kubaisi classification (2004), the dominated climate in the area is

humid to moist .

2- Hydrogeology

The studied area is not considered as independent hydrogeological basin, but

it lies within big basin represented by AL-Adhaim basin. The productive

hydrogeological unit in the studied area is Bai - Hassan Formation (confined

aquifer) and composed of sandstone and gravel consecutive with clay and

conglomerate masses .All wells in the area penetrating this formation partially

, the recharge sources are located in the northeast area outside the study area where


92

its layers are exposed. The general direction of groundwater flow in the study area

is from northeast towards southwest and the hydraulic gradient (I) average is

(0.0068). Al-Fat'ha formation appears in Pulkhana anticline and affect

groundwater salinity in the area because of its content of evaporates rocks

(gypsum rocks).

Results of single pumping test performed on seven wells distributed in the

study area are analyzed to measure transmissivity (T) and hydraulic conductivity

(K) values for wells. Jacob and Theis recovery methods are used in the treatment

of these results. (T) values range between(95.47- 335.72 m²/day) and (K) values

between ( 2.11 - 4.47 m/day ) . This reflect that the hydraulic properties values of

Bai- Hassan aquifer in study area are heterogeneous and variant, as a result of

heterogeneity of Bai-Hassan aquifer due to variations in lithology and porosity.

Specific capacity for these wells is measured and found varying between

(172.8 - 432 m²/d). It shows an inverse relationship between the specific capacity

and drawdown in the wells.

3- Hydrochemical

The results of chemical analysis of groundwater samples show that the reaction

error test for all water samples range between (0.004-4.1%) for the dry period and

between( 0.03 - 7.4 %) for the wet period, which indicates that they are less than

(10%). Thus, these results can be used in hydrochemical interpretations. The

results are as follows:

The groundwater in the study area is generally of low alkalinity with ( pH )

average ranging between (7.71) for dry period and ( 7.40 ) for the wet period.

(EC) and (TDS) averages in wet period are lower than dry period due to dilution

process. The water of the area is excessively mineralized due to the salinity. TDS

values are higher in the wells close to Pulkhana anticline as a result of Al- Fat'ha

Formation effect which appears in the anticline and decrease towards the west and

southwest due to the dilution by Tuz chai river and the seepage from Kirkuk

irrigation canal . Depending on (TDS) values for both periods the groundwater in


93

the area is classified as slightly-brackish water. The relationship between (EC)

and (TDS) in the groundwater of the study area is strong and the value of

correlation coefficient (R2) is close to one.

The results of the analysis of major elements (cations and anions) and nitrate in the

groundwater of the study area showed that the predominant ion in the cations is

(Na+) ion and anions is (SO42-) ion as a result for dissolution processes of

evaporations rocks (gypsum rocks) and from ionic exchange of clay minerals.

Concentrations of cations and anions in wet period are lower than dry period due

to the dilution process except bicarbonate ion(HCO3⁻) which is greater in the wet

period due to the recharge process, where the carbonate is associated with water

converted to (HCO3⁻). No nitrate pollution in the groundwater of the study area,

nitrate concentration in wet period is greater due to agricultural

activities(fertilizers) and sewage effect. According to Total Hardness (TH) the

groundwater in the study area is classified as a very hard water due to the presence

of dissolved calcium and magnesium salts and its concentration in the wet period

is lower due to dilution process.

The results of the analysis of heavy elements in the groundwater of the study

area confirm that groundwater is polluted with some elements like (Co, Ni, Cd and

Pb) because their concentrations are higher than the permissible limits according to

WHO (2007) and IQS(2009) as a result of weathering and solution action, in

addition to the effect of the Iraqi fertilizers and human activities.

4- Groundwater Classification and Management

The results of hydrochemical classification, quality , origin and suitability of

groundwater are as follows:

The results of hydrochemical formula show that most wells of study area have

water type of (Na2SO4), and the other wells range between NaCl ,CaCl2,CaSO4 and

MgSO4water type for the two periods. Generally the salts distribution in area water

is attributed to the lithology of recharge areas and the study area as a result of

weathering and solution action of rocks and clay minerals in addition to the


94

agricultural and human activities. The spatial distribution of water quality in the

study area for both dry and wet periods shows difference in water quality between

both periods as a result of recharge and dilution processes in the wet period.

The average of hydrochemical indicators for wells in the study area for the two

periods are greater than one ,which indicates that the ratio of sulfates exceeds the

chloride ratio and the origin of groundwater is meteoric , except the wells

No.(1,2,8,9,13,20) which are less than one. This means that the chloride ion is the

prevailing ion and the origin of groundwater is marine due to the existence of a

deep recharge from the deeper aquifers in these wells.

Piper Classification showed that the type of groundwater in the study area for both

periods is "earth alkaline water with increased portions of alkalis with prevailing

sulfate and chloride" belongs to hydrochemical facies (Ca2+ - Mg2+ - Cl- - SO4

2- )

and (Na+- K+ - Cl- - SO42-) for the two periods .

The groundwater in the study area is unsuitable for human drinking purposes

according to WHO (2007) and IQS (2009 ) standards, but its suitable for all kinds

of animals both domestic and livestock animals.

The groundwater in the study area is not suitable for industrial purposes , but its

suitable for building purposes .

The groundwater in the study area is suitable for growing most types of crops

, and its admissible as irrigation water except some samples which are poor due to

the high salinity.

Through the groundwater management, the annual recharge amount for Al-Adhaim

basin is (1660.56 × 106 m3/ year), while the groundwater amount that enters the

study area as renewed storativity is (9.79 × 106 m3/ year). The amount of

consumed groundwater in the area during present study is (2.96 ×106 m3/year).

Therefore the amount of change in the groundwater storage (ΔS ) will be

(6.83 × 106 m3 / year) .This value represents an increase in the constant storage of

the area .So we can conclude that the total groundwater consumption has


95

a little influence on groundwater amount that enters the study area as renewed

storativity and has no effect on the constant storage of the area.

5.2 Recommendations

1- Conducting biological study for groundwater in the area to determine the

organic and bacteriologic pollution.

2- The groundwater of study area is unsuitable for human drinking purposes

, therefore it must be treated before use as drinking water.

3- Conducting analysis of the heavy elements that have not been studied, such

as aluminum, barium, arsenic, chromium, silver .etc, to make sure water is

not contaminated with these elements.

4- Sewage disposal and septic tank systems are considered one of the sources

of groundwater pollution in the area, and therefore a drainage system for

sewage must be constructed to drain away from urban areas.

5- Establish a monitoring stations program of groundwater levels in study area

to measure the water level fluctuation in order to evaluate the conditions for

different purposes , and to control the random drilling of wells by farmers

and gravel quarries to protect the groundwater reserve .

6- Launch education campaigns for the farmers and industrialists for the best

usage and reduce waste of groundwater. and especially in the gravel and

sand quarries.

Appendix 1

I

Appendix 1

Names and Locations of samples wells of the study area

Water head

on S.L (m)

S.W.L m)(

Depth m)(

Elev. m)(

Location Well Name

Well No.

Longitude Latitude

215 30 130 245 44° 38' 14.9'' 34° 53' 51.7'' Al malab

1

188 25 112 213 44° 35' 53.7'' 34° 53' 56.2'' Karanaz

2

183 35 90 218 44 °37' 01.7'' 34° 53' 42.2'' Shenaw (mardan)

3

187 32 75 219 44° 35' 59.8'' 34° 53' 30.1'' Ali okla

4

184.1 34.90 110 219 44° 38' 10.2'' 34° 52' 46.2'' Erfan

5

186 23 91 209 44° 35' 51.4'' 34° 52' 54.2'' Abbas allwo

6

179.83 17.25 110 205 44° 35' 26.8'' 34° 53' 37.7'' Saleh marof

7

175.23 28.77 80 204 44° 36' 10.0'' 34° 51'40.3'' Mamal bablan

8

177.82 18.30 80 208 44° 35' 38.4'' 34° 52' 00.3'' Alsalam

9

188.9 38.10 90 227 44° 37' 45.1'' 34° 52' 45.1'' Rassol

10

183.56 34.44 84 218 44° 37' 19.2'' 34° 52' 49.0'' Emam ahmad

11

177 33 80 210 44° 36' 02.9'' 34° 52' 03.6'' Mamal Hassan

12

185 36 90 221 44° 37' 40.9'' 34° 53' 17.2'' Alzerah

13

188.75 35.25 100 224 44° 38' 16.7'' 34° 52' 18.8'' Mamal azadi

14

182 30 84 212 44° 36' 54.5'' 34° 54' 11.9'' Mojama Tuz

15

178 38 95 216 44° 37' 59.3'' 34° 52' 06.2'' Mamal talal

16

177 28 74 205 44° 36' 11.4'' 34° 51' 01.1'' Mamal al saeed

17

181.88 12.35 70 217 44° 37' 37.8'' 34° 52' 14.2'' Mamal saeed

Qasem

18

180 37 70 217 44° 37' 23.2'' 34° 53' 02.8'' Al etfah

19

174 26 82 200 44° 35' 44.8'' 34° 50' 58.3'' Mamal Diary

20

Appendix 2

II

Appendix ( 2 )

Well test data and results

Data of drawdown and recovery water level for well (W 1)

(Mojama Tuz )

Well ( W- 1)

d (m) S.W.L (m) b (m) Q (m³/d) Location Elev. (m) Latitude Longitude

84 30 54 604.8 34° 54' 11.9'' 44° 36' 54.5'' 212 Well Data

Drawdown water level

Recovery water

level

t (min)

Drawdown (m)

s (m)

t' (min)

Residual Drawdown s' (m)

t /t' (min)

1 31.72 1.72 1 1.05 361

2 31.85 1.85 2 0.95 181

3 31.98 1.98 3 0.88 121

4 32.15 2.15 4 0.72 91

5 32.35 2.35 5 0.60 73

10 32.49 2.49 10 0.45 37

15 32.60 2.60 15 0.35 25

20 32.74 2.74 20 0.28 19

25 32.82 2.82 25 0.22 15.4

30 32.88 2.88 30 0.13 13

45 32.95 2.95 45 0.05 9

60 32.98 2.98 60 0.0 7

90 33 3 90 0.0 5

120 33 3 120 0.0 4

180 33 3 180 0.0 3

240 33 3 240 0.0 2.5

300 33 3 300 0.0 2.2

360 33 3 360 0.0 2

Appendix 2

III

Graphs of drawdown and recovery water level with time for well ( W 1 ) by using Jacob (Drawdown) and Theis (Recovery) methods

Appendix 2

IV

Data of drawdown and recovery water level for well ( W 2 ) (Esalh Tuz 1)

Well ( W- 2)


96 31.74 64.26 864 34°52'7.57'' 44°36'35.04'' 211

Well Data Drawdown water

level

Recovery water

level

t

(min)

Drawdown

(m)

s

(m)

t'

(min)

Residual Drawdown

s' (m)

t /t'

(min)

1 33.55 1.81 1 1.18 361

2 33.72 1.98 2 1.05 181

3 33.88 2.14 3 0.92 121

4 33.96 2.22 4 0.80 91

5 34.08 2.34 5 0.66 73

10 34.21 2.47 10 0.49 37

15 34.32 2.58 15 0.30 25

20 34.40 2.66 20 0.16 19

25 34.47 2.73 25 0.11 15.4

30 34.53 2.79 30 0.07 13

45 34.58 2.84 45 0.0 9

60 34.64 2.9 60 0.0 7

90 34.64 2.9 90 0.0 5

120 34.64 2.9 120 0.0 4

180 34.64 2.9 180 0.0 3

240 34.64 2.9 240 0.0 2.5

300 34.64 2.9 300 0.0 2.2

360 34.64 2.9 360 0.0 2

Appendix 2

V

Graphs of drawdown and water level recovery with

time for well ( W 2 ) by using Jacob (Drawdown) and Theis (Recovery) methods

Appendix 2

VI

Data of drawdown and recovery water level for well (W 3 )

(Al Asreia )

Well ( W- 3)


84 26.18 57.82 691.2 34°54'18.80'' 44°36'32.25'' 209


level

Recovery water

level

t

(min)

Drawdown

(m)

s

(m)

t'

(min)

Residual Drawdown

s' (m)

t /t'

(min)

1 27.86 1.68 1 1.35 361

2 27.95 1.77 2 1.19 181

3 28.09 1.91 3 1.1 121

4 28.17 1.99 4 1.02 91

5 28.25 2.07 5 0.91 73

10 28.45 2.27 10 0.78 37

15 28.60 2.42 15 0.65 25

20 28.76 2.58 20 0.54 19

25 28.85 2.67 25 0.42 15.4

30 28.95 2.77 30 0.3 13

45 29.04 2.86 45 0.12 9

60 29.12 2.94 60 0 7

90 29.15 2.97 90 0 5

120 29.15 2.97 120 0 4

180 29.15 2.97 180 0 3

240 29.15 2.97 240 0 2.5

300 29.15 2.97 300 0 2.2

360 29.15 2.97 360 0 2

Appendix 2

VII

Graphs of drawdown and water level recovery with time for well ( W 3 ) by using Jacob (Drawdown) and Theis (Recovery) methods

Appendix 2

VIII


( Al Askari )

Well ( W- 4) d (m) S.W.L (m) b (m) Q (m³/d) Location Elev.

(m) Latitude Longitude 84 32.62 51.38 777.6 34°52'42.30'' 44°36'49.56" 215


level

Recovery water

level

t

(min)

Drawdown

(m)

s

(m)

t'

(min)

Residual Drawdown

s' (m)

t /t'

(min)

1 34.34 1.72 1 1.26 361

2 34.40 1.78 2 1.15 181

3 34.48 1.86 3 1.05 121

4 34.55 1.93 4 0.96 91

5 34.64 2.02 5 0.87 73

10 34.79 2.17 10 0.7 37

15 34.92 2.3 15 0.54 25

20 35.08 2.46 20 0.4 19

25 35.17 2.55 25 0.28 15.4

30 35.22 2.6 30 0.2 13

45 35.26 2.64 45 0.1 9

60 35.30 2.68 60 0.05 7

90 35.34 2.72 90 0 5

120 35.34 2.72 120 0 4

180 35.34 2.72 180 0 3

240 35.34 2.72 240 0 2.5

300 35.34 2.72 300 0 2.2

360 35.34 2.72 360 0 2

Appendix 2

IX


Appendix 2

X


(Al Mahata )

Well ( W- 5)


78 37 41 691.2 34°52'46.83" 44°37'39.37" 221


level

Recovery water

level

t

(min)

Drawdown

(m)

s

(m)

t'

(min)

Residual Drawdown

s' (m)

t /t'

(min)

1 38 1 1 1.5 361

2 38.15 1.15 2 1.1 181

3 38.30 1.3 3 0.9 121

4 38.50 1.5 4 0.7 91

5 38.70 1.7 5 0.5 73

10 39.10 2.1 10 0.3 37

15 39.50 2.5 15 0.2 25

20 39.80 2.8 20 0.15 19

25 39.90 2.9 25 0.1 15.4

30 39.95 2.95 30 0.05 13

45 39.98 2.98 45 0 9

60 39.99 2.99 60 0 7

90 40 3 90 0 5

120 40 3 120 0 4

180 40 3 180 0 3

240 40 3 240 0 2.5

300 40 3 300 0 2.2

360 40 3 360 0 2

Appendix 2

XI


Appendix 2

XII


(Esalh Tuz 2 )

Well ( W- 6)


106 31 75 864 34°52'15.34" 44°36'37.53" 214


level

Recovery water

level

t

(min)

Drawdown

(m)

s

(m)

t'

(min)

Residual Drawdown

s' (m)

t /t'

(min)

1 32.10 1.1 1 0.95 361

2 32.15 1.15 2 0.75 181

3 32.22 1.22 3 0.65 121

4 32.30 1.3 4 0.6 91

5 32.40 1.4 5 0.47 73

10 32.75 1.75 10 0.25 37

15 32.84 1.84 15 0.2 25

20 32.90 1.9 20 0.16 19

25 32.94 1.94 25 0.13 15.4

30 32.97 1.97 30 0.09 13

45 32.99 1.99 45 0.04 9

60 33 2 60 0 7

90 33 2 90 0 5

120 33 2 120 0 4

180 33 2 180 0 3

240 33 2 240 0 2.5

300 33 2 300 0 2.2

360 33 2 360 0 2

Appendix 2

XIII



Appendix 2

XIV


(Nawaf Abd Al aziz )

Well ( W- 7 )


80 35 45 518.4 34°52'31.15" 44°37'54.64" 222


level

Recovery water

level

t

(min)

Drawdown

(m)

s

(m)

t'

(min)

Residual Drawdown

s' (m)

t /t'

(min)

1 36.40 1.4 1 1.75 361

2 36.75 1.75 2 1.55 181

3 36.90 1.9 3 1.33 121

4 37.08 2.1 4 1.1 91

5 37.22 2.26 5 0.85 73

10 37.30 2.39 10 0.5 37

15 37.54 2.5 15 0.34 25

20 37.71 2.71 20 0.25 19

25 37.80 2.8 25 0.18 15.4

30 37.88 2.88 30 0.1 13

45 37.95 2.95 45 0.05 9

60 37.99 2.99 60 0 7

90 38 3 90 0 5

120 38 3 120 0 4

180 38 3 180 0 3

240 38 3 240 0 2.5

300 38 3 300 0 2.2

360 38 3 360 0 2

Appendix 2

XV



Appendix 3

XVI

Appendix 3

Physical properties of water samples of study area for wet and dry periods

Dry period Wet period

Well

no.

TDS

(ppm)

EC

µS/cm T C° pH

TDS

(ppm)

EC

µS/cm T C° pH

1857 2910 24 8 1245 1847 22 7.3 1

1686 2330 23 7.33 1380 1990 22 7.4 2

2169 3210 24 7.44 2250 3176 21 7.2 3

704 1042 24 7.62 697 1049 22 7.62 4

1485 2415 23 7.17 1180 1967 21 7.71 5

1488 2250 22 8.01 1014 1736 20 7.25 6

1419 1995 24 8.03 1081 1794 21 7.35 7

380 582 24 8.2 302 419 22 7.12 8

339 546 23 7.91 241 363 20 7.27 9

1335 2190 24 7.22 1026 1775 21 7.2 10

1564 2360 24 7.61 1244 1988 22 7.92 11

533 883 23 7.71 366 690 20 7.48 12

2366 3420 22 8.01 2287 3402 20 7.81 13

975 1465 24 8.04 966 1420 21 7.32 14

2415 3500 23 8.07 2118 3237 20 7.44 15

1380 1874 21 7.81 974 1682 20 7.35 16

758 994 22 7.62 373 586 22 7.49 17

756 956 22 7.21 562 808 20 7.29 18

1442 2120 21 7.33 932 1770 20 7.3 19

546 986 24 8.03 313 445 21 7.22 20

Appendix 4

XVII

Appendix 4

Concentrations of Cations and Anions of the water samples of study area for dry period by ( ppm)

well no. Cations Anions

NO3‾ TH

Ca+2

Mg+2 Na+ K+ CO3

2- HCO3‾ SO42- Cl‾

1

194 106 212 2.9 0 396.5 413 468.6 3.1 920.6

2

159 55 288 1.11 0 312 456.2 362 1.15 623.3

3

178 82 345 1.4 0 280 844 300 1.5 781.8

4

64 21 110 1.17 0 64 249 130 4.9 246.2

5

113 58 235 2.5 0 146 609 189 8 520.8

6

140 43 250 5.5 0 140 560 255 2 526.5

7

148 43 200 5 0 125 540 230 2 546.5

8

38 12 69 2.01 0 19 108 103 1.9 144.2

9

33 11 61 1.21 0 12.8 110 99 2.18 127.6

10

100 48.6 230 1.08 0 166 408 277 8 449.6

11

166 50 230 5.5 0 141 570 284 1.1 620.2

12

52.2 28 71 2.1 0 28 239 89 1.4 245.5

13

235 121 259 2.5 0 380 730 466 4 1084.7

14

78 56 106 0.7 0 236 266 135 7.11 425.2

15

253 130 250 3 0 611 565 460 3 1166.6

16

112 45 251 3 0 135 513 255 7 464.8

17

50 22 165 1.2 0 49 257 187 3.1 215.3

18

53 25 159 2.1 0 51 261 181 2.1 235.2

19

138.2 82.5 162 0.7 0 305 374.2 284 0.2 684.5

20

46 28 65 0.3 0 135 121 102 1.3 230

Appendix 5

XVIII

Appendix 5

Concentrations of Cations and Anions of the water samples of study area for wet period by ( ppm)

well

no.

Cations Anions

NO3‾ TH Ca+2 Mg+2 Na+ K+ CO3

2- HCO3‾ SO42- Cl‾

1 140.2 61.2 122.3 1.2 0 299 293 206 8 601.91

2 160.3 73 138.4 1.6 0 317 293 291 3.1 700.66

3 180 91 314 5.4 0 446 690 328 8.1 823.92

4 65 22 108 1.1 0 65 250 130 5.2 252.83

5 122 52 129 1 0 323 264 212 9 518.61

6 86 39 147 0.7 0 240 280 137 7.11 375.22

7 93 42 156 0.9 0 245 308 145 2.2 405.05

8 28 13.2 42 1.8 0 55 62.4 71 1.8 124.23

9 26.01 13.1 23.08 1.9 0 61 43.2 49.7 1.8 118.85

10 90 40 152 0.8 0 242 298 143 4.3 389.33

11 112.2 71 134 1.17 0 317.2 346 178 8.7 572.32

12 38 13 69 2 0 18 109 104 2 148.38

13 234 121 258 2.4 0 381 731 460 4.5 1082.21

14 84.1 62.4 117.7 0.7 0 250 288 145.5 8.6 466.77

15 178 82 345 1.5 0 280 844 300 1.3 781.89

16 80 57 108 0.7 0 236 268 136 7.11 434.31

17 38 10.1 46.1 0.8 0 61 91.2 92.3 1.8 136.44

18 62.1 28.8 73.8 2.3 0 153 115.2 107 2.4 273.57

19 82 38 110 0.7 0 238 272 137 7.11 361.12

20 30.06 15 44 1.5 0 67.1 53 89 2.5 136.78

Appendix 6

XIX

Appendix 6 Concentrations of Cations and Anions by (epm) and the accuracy of the results of the water samples of study area for dry period

Cations

∑C

atio

ns Anions

∑A

nion

s

U

A% well no.

Ca+2 Mg+2 Na+ K+ CO₃⁻² HCO₃⁻ SO₄⁻² Cl‾

epm

epm% epm

epm% epm

epm% epm

epm%

epm

epm% epm

epm% epm

epm% epm

epm%

1 9.68 34.9 8.72 31.4 9.22 33.2 0.07 0.25 27.69 0 0 6.49 22.94 8.59 30.36 13.21 46.69 28.29 1.07 98.93

2 7.93 31.7 4.52 18 12.52 50.1 0.02 0.08 24.99 0 0 5.11 20.59 9.49 38.25 10.21 41.15 24.81 0.36 99.64

3 8.88 28.9 6.74 21.9 15 48.9 0.03 0.09 30.65 0 0 4.58 14.96 17.57 57.39 8.46 27.63 30.61 0.06 99.94

4 3.19 32.8 1.72 17.7 4.78 49.2 0.02 0.2 9.71 0 0 1.04 10.52 5.18 52.42 3.66 37.04 9.88 0.86 99.14

5 5.63 27.2 4.77 23 10.22 49.4 0.06 0.29 20.68 0 0 2.39 11.72 12.67 62.13 5.33 36.14 20.39 0.7 99.3

6 6.98 32.4 3.53 16.4 10.87 50.5 0.14 0.65 21.52 0 0 2.29 10.83 11.65 55.13 7.19 34.02 21.13 0.91 99.09

7 7.38 37.4 3.53 17.9 8.69 44 0.12 0.6 19.72 0 0 2.04 10.32 11.24 56.88 6.48 32.79 19.76 0.1 99.9

8 1.89 31.9 0.98 16.5 3 50.6 0.05 0.84 5.95 0 0 0.31 5.68 2.24 41.1 2.9 53.21 5.45 4.38 95.62

9 1.64 31.4 0.9 17.2 2.65 50.7 0.03 0.57 5.22 0 0 0.2 3.78 2.29 43.37 2.79 52.84 5.28 0.57 99.43

10 4.99 26.2 3.99 21 10 52.6 0.02 0.1 19 0 0 2.72 14.3 8.49 44.63 7.81 41.06 19.02 0.05 99.95

11 8.28 36.7 4.11 18.2 10 44.3 0.14 0.62 22.53 0 0 2.31 10.41 11.86 53.49 8 36.08 22.17 0.8 99.2

12 2.6 32.3 2.3 28.6 3.08 38.3 0.05 0.62 8.03 0 0 0.45 5.67 4.97 62.67 2.51 31.65 7.93 0.62 99.38

13 11.72 35.5 9.95 30.1 11.26 34.1 0.06 0.18 32.99 0 0 6.22 18 15.19 43.96 13.14 38.08 34.55 2.3 97.7

14 3.89 29.6 4.6 35 4.61 35.1 0.01 0.07 13.11 0 0 3.86 29.26 5.53 41.92 3.8 28.8 13.19 0.3 99.7

15 12.62 36.8 10.69 31.2 10.87 31.7 0.07 0.2 34.25 0 0 10 28.79 11.76 33.86 12.97 37.34 34.73 0.69 99.31

16 5.58 27.5 3.7 18.2 10.91 53.8 0.07 0.34 20.26 0 0 2.21 11 10.68 53.18 7.19 35.8 20.08 0.44 99.56

17 2.49 21.6 1.81 15.7 7.17 62.3 0.03 0.26 11.5 0 0 0.8 7 5.35 46.84 5.27 46.14 11.42 0.34 99.66

18 2.64 22.6 2.05 17.5 6.91 59.3 0.05 0.42 11.65 0 0 0.83 7.3 5.43 47.79 5.1 44.89 11.36 1.26 98.74

19 6.89 33.2 6.78 32.7 7.04 33.9 0.01 0.04 20.72 0 0 4.99 24.01 7.79 37.48 8 38.49 20.78 0.14 99.86

20 2.29 30.8 2.3 31 2.82 38 0.007 0.09 7.41 0 0 2.21 29.11 2.51 33.06 2.87 37.81 7.59 1.2 98.8

Appendix 7

XX

Appendix 7

Concentrations of Cations and Anions by (epm) and the accuracy of the results of the water samples of study area for wet period

A%

U

ΣAnions

Anions

Σcations

Cations well no.

Cl⁻

SO₄⁻² HCO₃⁻ CO₃⁻² K+ Na+ Mg+2 Ca+2

epm %

epm

epm %

epm

epm %

epm

epm %

epm

epm % epm

epm % epm

epm % epm

epm % epm

98.4 1.6 16.81 34.56 5.81 36.28 6.1 29.14 4.9 0 0 17.36 0.17 0.03 30.58 5.31 28.97 5.03 40.26 6.99 1 98.59 1.41 19.49 42.07 8.2 31.29 6.1 26.62 5.19 0 0 20.05 0.19 0.04 30.02 6.02 29.92 6 39.85 7.99 2 98.91 1.09 30.91 29.92 9.25 46.45 14.36 23.61 7.3 0 0 30.24 0.42 0.13 45.13 13.65 24.73 7.48 29.69 8.98 3 99.19 0.81 9.92 36.89 3.66 52.41 5.2 10.68 1.06 0 0 9.76 0.28 0.028 48.01 4.69 18.52 1.81 33.16 3.24 4 97.65 2.35 16.75 35.64 5.97 32.77 5.49 31.58 5.29 0 0 15.98 0.15 0.025 35.09 5.61 26.71 4.27 38.03 6.08 5 98.99 1.01 13.61 28.36 3.86 42.76 5.82 28.87 3.93 0 0 13.89 0.12 0.017 45.98 6.39 23.02 3.2 30.86 4.29 6 98.68 1.32 14.5 28.13 4.08 44.2 6.41 27.65 4.01 0 0 14.89 0.15 0.023 45.52 6.78 23.16 3.45 31.15 4.64 7 98.36 1.64 4.19 47.73 2 30.78 1.29 21.47 0.9 0 0 4.33 1.06 0.046 41.97 1.82 24.9 1.08 32.05 1.39 8 98.21 1.79 3.28 42.68 1.4 27.13 0.89 30.18 0.99 0 0 3.4 1.4 0.048 29.34 1 31.39 1.07 37.85 1.29 9 99.24 0.76 14.19 28.4 4.03 43.69 6.2 27.9 3.96 0 0 14.41 0.13 0.02 45.87 6.61 22.83 3.29 31.15 4.49 10 99.6 0.4 17.41 28.83 5.02 41.35 7.2 29.81 5.19 0 0 17.27 0.16 0.029 33.68 5.82 33.79 5.84 32.35 5.59 11

95.48 4.52 5.48 53.46 2.93 41.24 2.26 5.29 0.29 0 0 6 0.84 0.051 49.99 3 17.66 1.06 31.49 1.89 12 97.75 2.25 34.42 37.68 12.97 44.18 15.21 18.12 6.24 0 0 32.9 0.18 0.061 34.1 11.22 30.24 9.95 35.47 11.67 13 99.1 0.9 14.18 28.91 4.1 42.24 5.99 28.84 4.09 0 0 14.44 0.11 0.017 35.37 5.11 35.5 5.13 29 4.19 14

99.94 0.06 30.61 27.63 8.46 57.39 17.57 14.96 4.58 0 0 30.65 0.12 0.038 48.92 15 21.98 6.74 28.96 8.88 15 99.55 0.45 13.26 28.88 3.83 42 5.57 29.11 3.86 0 0 13.38 0.12 0.017 35.03 4.69 35.03 4.69 29.8 3.99 16 92.76 7.24 5.48 47.44 2.6 34.48 1.89 18.06 0.99 0 0 4.74 0.42 0.02 42.19 2 17.51 0.83 39.87 1.89 17 95.13 4.87 7.9 38.1 3.01 30.25 2.39 31.64 2.5 0 0 8.71 0.66 0.058 36.82 3.21 27.07 2.36 35.44 3.09 18 94.42 5.58 13.42 28.76 3.86 42.17 5.66 29.06 3.9 0 0 12 0.14 0.017 39.81 4.78 25.98 3.12 34.06 4.09 19 99.68 0.32 4.7 53.4 2.51 23.4 1.1 23.19 1.09 0 0 4.67 0.81 0.038 40.82 1.91 26.29 1.23 32.06 1.5 20

Appendix 8

XXI

Appendix 8

Trace elements concentrations in water samples of study area by ( ppm)

Well No.

Trace elements Fe Co Ni Cu Zn Cd Pb Mn

1 0.009 0.134 0.068 0.053 0.194 0.046 0.251 0.039

2 0.004 0.280 0.045 0.009 0.014 0.002 0.289 0.053

3 0.191 0.457 0.081 bdl 0.011 0.005 0.203 0.058

4 0.100 bdl bdl bdl 0.019 0.122 0.149 0.051

5 0.256 0.195 0.045 0.027 0.049 0.030 0.174 bdl

6 0.194 0.268 0.027 0.014 0.024 0.050 0.219 bdl

7 0.409 0.073 0.068 bdl 0.014 0.099 0.090 0.002

8 bdl 0.341 0.012 0.023 0.005 0.109 0.232 bdl

9 0.092 0.103 0.063 bdl 0.055 bdl bdl 0.007

10 0.343 0.059 0.048 bdl 0.006 0.059 0.237 0.009

11 0.124 0.136 0.059 0.031 0.186 0.012 0.204 0.056

12 0.096 0.163 0.047 bdl bdl 0.187 0.050 0.005

13 0.136 0.064 0.026 0.124 0.012 0.134 0.261 bdl

14 0.096 0.367 0.068 0.006 0.051 bdl 0.140 0.024

15 0.041 0.072 0.026 bdl 0.599 bdl 0.244 bdl

16 0.075 0.008 bdl 0.096 0.027 bdl 0.253 0.005

17 0.055 bdl 0.037 0.082 0.023 0.006 0.353 bdl

18 bdl bdl 0.074 0.028 0.049 0.172 0.075 0.015

19 0.256 0.455 0.085 0.022 0.336 0.068 0.288 0.017

20 0.155 0.227 0.050 0.039 bdl bdl 0.129 0.037 v bdl : below detection limit

Appendix 9

XXII

Appendix 9 Hydrochemical formula and water type for dry period water samples

Water

type Hydrochemical formula

W.

no. Water


W.

no.

Na2SO4

SO₄-2

(53.49) Cl- ( 36.08 ) TDS(1564) ——————————————— PH (7.61)

Na+ ( 44.3) Ca+2 ( 36.7 ) Mg+2 ( 18.2) ( Mg+2 – Ca+2 - Sodium – Cl- - Sulfate)

11

CaCl2

Cl- ( 46.69) SO₄-2

(30.36) HCO₃- (22.94) TDS( 1857) ————————––––––––––––––––—— PH (8)

Ca+2(34.9) Na+

( 33.2) Mg+2(31.4)

( Mg+2 - Na+ - Calcium - HCO₃- - SO₄-2- Chloride)

1

Na2SO4

SO₄-2

(62.67) Cl- ( 31.65)

TDS( 533) ——————————————— PH (7.71) Na+

( 38.3 ) Ca+2(32.3) Mg+2

( 28.6) ( Mg+2 – Ca+2 - Sodium – Cl- - Sulfate)

12

NaCl

Cl-

( 41.15) SO₄-2(38.25) HCO₃-

(20.59) TDS( 1686) ————————————————— PH(7.33) Na+

(50.1 ) Ca+2 ( 31.7 ) Mg+2

( 18 ) ( Mg+2- Ca+2 - Sodium -HCO₃- - SO₄-2 -Chloride)

2

CaSO4

SO₄-2

(43.96) Cl-(38.08) HCO₃-

(18) TDS(2366) ——————————————— PH (8.01)

Ca+2 (35.5) Na+ ( 34.1) Mg+2 ( 30.1)

( Mg+2 – Na+ - Calcium - HCO₃- - Cl- - Sulfate)

13 Na2SO4

SO₄-2

(57.39) Cl- ( 27.63)

TDS( 2169) —————————————— PH (7.44) Na+

(48.9) Ca+2( 28.9) Mg+2

( 21.9) ( Mg+2 – Ca+2 - Sodium – Cl- - Sulfate)

3

Na2SO4

SO₄-2

(41.92) HCO₃-(29.26) Cl- (28.8)

TDS( 975) ——————————————— PH (8.04) Na+

( 35.1) Mg+2 ( 35) Ca+2 (29.6)

(Ca+2 – Mg+2 - Sodium – Cl- - HCO₃- - Sulfate)

14

Na2SO4

SO₄-2

( 52.42) Cl- ( 37.04)

TDS( 704) ——————————————— PH (7.62) Na+

(49.2) Ca+2( 32.8) Mg+2

(17.7 ) ( Mg+2 – Ca+2 - Sodium – Cl- - Sulfate)

4

CaCl2

Cl- (37.34) SO₄-2(33.86) HCO₃-

(28.79) TDS( 2415) ———————————————PH (8.07)

Ca+2(36.8) Na+

( 31.7 ) Mg+2( 31.2)

(Mg+2 -Na+ - Calcium - HCO₃- - SO₄-2 - Chloride)

15

Na2SO4

SO₄-2 (62.13) Cl- ( 36.14 )

TDS(1485) ——————————————— PH (7.17) Na+ ( 49.4) Ca+2 ( 27.2) Mg+2 ( 23 )

( Mg+2 – Ca+2 - Sodium – Cl- - Sulfate)

5

Na2SO4

SO₄-2 (53.18) Cl- ( 35.8)

TDS(1380) ——————————————— PH (7.81) Na+ ( 53.8 ) Ca+2

(27.5 ) Mg+2( 18.2 )


16

Na2SO4

SO₄-2 (55.13) Cl - ( 34.02)

TDS( 1488)——————————————— PH (8.01) Na+ ( 50.5) Ca+2 ( 32.4) Mg+2 ( 16.4)


6

Na2SO4

SO₄-2 (46.84) Cl- ( 46.14)

TDS (758) ——————————————— PH (7.62) Na+ ( 62.3 ) Ca+2 (21.6) Mg+2

( 15.7)


17

Na2SO4

SO₄-2 (56.88) Cl- ( 32.79)

TDS(1419 )——————————————— PH (8.03) Na+

(44) Ca+2 ( 37.4) Mg+2 (17.9 )


7

Na2SO4

SO₄-2 (47.79 ) Cl- ( 44.89)

TDS( 756) ——————————————— PH (7.21) Na+ ( 59.3 ) Ca+2

(22.6 ) Mg+2 ( 17.5)


18

NaCl

Cl- (53.21) SO₄-2 (41.1)

TDS(380) ——————————————— PH (8.2) Na+ (50.6) Ca+2

(31.9) Mg+2(16.5)

( Mg+2 – Ca+2 - Sodium - SO₄-2 - Chloride)

8

NaCl

Cl- ( 38.49) SO₄-2

(37.48 ) HCO₃- (24.01)

TDS(1442) ——————————————— PH (7.33) Na+ (33.9 ) Ca+2

(33.2) Mg+2 ( 32.7)

( Mg+2-Ca+2 - Sodium - HCO₃- - SO₄-2 - Chloride)

19

NaCl

Cl- (52.84) SO₄-2 (43.37)

TDS(339) ——————————————— PH (7.91) Na+ ( 50.7 ) Ca+2 (31.4 ) Mg+2 (17.2)

( Mg+2 – Ca+2 - Sodium - SO₄-2 - Chloride)

9

NaCl

Cl- (37.81) SO₄-2 (33.06) HCO₃- (29.11)

TDS(546) ——————————————— PH (8.03) Na+ (38) Mg+2 (31 ) Ca+2 (30.8 )

( Ca+2 -Mg+2 -Sodium - HCO₃- - SO₄-2 - Chloride)

20

Na2SO4

SO₄-2 ( 44.63 ) Cl- ( 41.06 )

TDS(1335) ——————————————— PH (7.22) Na+ ( 52.6 ) Ca+2 ( 26.2) Mg+2 (21)

( Mg+2 - Ca+2 - Sodium – Cl- - Sulfate)

10

Appendix 10

XXIII

Appendix 10 Hydrochemical formula and water type for wet period water samples

Water


W.

no. Water


W.

no.

MgSO4

SO₄-2

(41.35) HCO₃-(29.81) Cl-

(28.83 ) TDS(1244) ——————————————— PH (7.92)

Mg+2(33.79) Na+

(33.68) Ca+2(32.35 )

(Ca+2 – Na+ - Magnesium – Cl- - HCO₃- - Sulfate)

11

CaSO4

SO₄-2

(36.28) Cl- (34.56) HCO₃- (29.14) TDS( 1245) ——————————————— PH (7.3)

Ca+2(40.26) Na+

(30.58) Mg+2(28.97)


1

NaCl

Cl- (53.46) SO₄-2 (41.24)

TDS(366) ——————————————— PH (7.48) Na+

(49.99 ) Ca+2(31.49) Mg+2

(17.66) ( Mg+2 – Ca+2 - Sodium - SO₄-2 - Chloride)

12

CaCl2

Cl-

(42.07) SO₄-2(31.29) HCO₃-

(26.62) TDS( 1380) ———————————————— PH (7.4)

Ca+2(39.85) Na+

(30.02 ) Mg+2(29.92 )

( Mg+2 – Na+ - Calcium - HCO₃- - SO₄-2 - Chloride)

2

CaSO4

SO₄-2

(44.18) Cl-(37.68) HCO₃-

(18.12) TDS(2287) ———————————————PH (7.81)

Ca+2 (35.47) Na+ (34.1) Mg+2(30.24)


13 Na2SO4

SO₄-2 (46.45) Cl-

(29.92) HCO₃-(23.61)

TDS( 2250) —————————————— PH (7.2) Na+

(45.13) Ca+2( 29.69) Mg+2

(24.73) ( Mg+2 – Ca+2 - Sodium - HCO₃- - Cl- - Sulfate)

3

MgSO4

SO₄-2

(42.24) Cl-(28.91) HCO₃-

(28.84) TDS(966)——————————————— PH (7.32)

Mg+2( 35.5) Na+

( 35.37) Ca+2(29)

(Ca+2 – Na+ - Magnesium - HCO₃- - Cl- - Sulfate)

14

Na2SO4

SO₄-2 (52.41) Cl- (36.89)

TDS(697) ——————————————— PH (7.62) Na+

(48.01) Ca+2(33.16) Mg+2

(18.52 ) ( Mg+2 – Ca+2 - Sodium – Cl- - Sulfate)

4

Na2SO4

SO₄-2 (57.39) Cl-

(27.63) TDS(2118) ——————————————— PH (7.44)

Na+(48.92 ) Ca+2

(28.96) Mg+2(21.98)

( Mg+2 - Ca -+2 Sodium – Cl- - Sulfate)

15

CaCl2

Cl-(35.64) SO₄-2

(32.77) HCO₃-(31.58)

TDS(1180) ——————————————— PH (7.71) Ca+2

(38.03) Na+(35.09) Mg+2

(26.71 ) ( Mg+2 – Na+ - Calcium - HCO₃- - SO₄-2 - Chloride)

5

Na2SO4

SO₄-2

(42) HCO₃-(29.11) Cl-

(28.88) TDS(974) ——————————————— PH (7.35)

Na+( 35.03) Mg+2

(35.03 ) Ca+2(29.8 )

(Ca+2 – Mg+2 - Sodium – Cl- - HCO₃- - Sulfate)

16

Na2SO4

SO₄-2

(42.76) HCO₃-(28.87) Cl-(28.36) TDS(1014)——————————————— PH (7.25)

Na+(45.98) Ca+2

(30.86) Mg+2(23.02)

( Mg+2 – Ca+2 - Sodium – Cl- - HCO₃- - Sulfate)

6

NaCl

Cl-

(47.44) SO₄-2(34.48) HCO₃-

(18.06) TDS (373)——————————————— PH (7.49)

Na+( 42.19) Ca+2

(39.87) Mg+2( 17.51)

( Mg+2 - Ca+2 -Sodium - HCO₃- - SO₄-2 - Chloride)

17

Na2SO4

SO₄-2 (44.20) Cl- (28.13) HCO₃-

(27.65) TDS(1081)——————————————— PH (7.35)

Na+(45.52) Ca+2

(31.15) Mg+2(23.16 )

( Mg+2 – Ca+2 - Sodium - HCO₃- - Cl- - Sulfate)

7

NaCl

Cl-

( 38.1) HCO₃-(31.64) SO₄-2

(30.25 ) TDS( 562) ——————————————— PH (7.29)

Na+ (36.82 ) Ca+2 (35.44 ) Mg+2 (27.07) ( Mg+2 – Ca+2 - Sodium - SO₄-2 - HCO₃- - Chloride)

18

NaCl

Cl-

(47.73) SO₄-2(30.78) HCO₃-

(21.47) TDS(302) ——————————————— PH (7.12)

Na+(42.97) Ca+2

(32.05) Mg+2(24.9)

( Mg+2 – Ca+2- Sodium -HCO₃- - SO₄-2 - Chloride)

8

Na2SO4

SO₄-2 (42.17 ) HCO₃- (29.06) Cl- (28.76)

TDS(932) ——————————————— PH (7.3) Na+

(39.81) Ca+2(34.06) Mg+2 (25.98)

( Mg+2 – Ca+2 - Sodium – Cl- - HCO₃- - Sulfate)

19

CaCl2

Cl- (42.68) SO₄-2 (27.13)

TDS(241) ——————————————— PH (7.27) Ca+2

(37.85 ) Mg+2(31.39) Na+

(29.34 ) ( Na+ - Mg+2 - Calcium - SO₄-2 - Chloride)

9

NaCl

Cl- (53.4) SO₄-2 (23.4) HCO₃- (23.19)

TDS(313) ——————————————— PH (7.22) Na+ (40.82) Ca+2 (32.06 ) Mg+2 (26.29 )

( Mg+2 - Ca+2 - Sodium - HCO₃- - SO₄-2 - Chloride)

20

Na2SO4

SO₄-2 (43.69 ) Cl- (28.4 ) HCO₃- (27.9)

TDS(1026) ——————————————— PH (7.2) Na+ (45.87 ) Ca+2 ( 31.15) Mg+2 (22.83)

( Mg+2 – Ca+2 - Sodium - HCO₃- - Cl- - Sulfate)

10

XXIV

Appendix 11 Hypothetical salts for water samples of study area for dry and wet periods

Well No. Hypothetic -al salts

20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

0.09 0.04 0.42 0.26 0.34 0.2 0.07 0.18 0.62 0.62 0.1 0.57 0.84 0.6 0.65 0.29 0.2 0.09 0.08 0.25 KCl

Dry

per

iod

37.61 33.9 44.28 45.64 35.26 31.7 28.43 34.1 30.88 35.38 40.7 50.07 50.6 32.1 33.25 25.61 36.5 27.51 41.02 33.2 NaCl

0 4.46 0 0 0 5.4 0 3.62 0 0 0 1.13 1.46 0 0 0 0 0 0 13.15 MgCl2

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CaCl2

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 K2SO4

0.39 0 15.02 16.66 18.54 0 6.67 0 7.42 8.92 11.9 0 0 11.9 17.25 23.79 12.7 21.39 9.08 0 Na2SO4

31 28.24 17.5 15.7 18.2 25.8 34.83 26.48 28.6 18.2 21 16.07 15.04 17.9 16.4 23 17.7 21.9 18 18.25 MgSO4

1.51 9.16 15.08 14.24 16.06 8 0 17.32 26.48

26.28 11.4 26.93 25.76 26.9 21.35 14.91 21.6 14.01 11.12 12.05 CaSO4

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 NaHCO3

0 0 0 0 0 0 0.17 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Mg(HCO3)2

29 24 7.2 6.9 10.9 28.7 28.83 17.9 5.6 10.4 14.2 3.7 5.6 10.3 10.8 11.6 10.4 14.89 20.5 22.85 Ca(HCO3)2

0.81 0.14 0.66 0.42 0.12 0.12 0.11 0.18 0.84 0.16 0.13 1.4 1.06 0.15 0.12 0.15 0.28 0.42 0.19 0.17 KCl

Wet

per

iod

40.82 28.62 36.82 42.19 28.76 27.51 28.8 34.1 49.99 28.67 28.27 29.34 41.97 27.98 28.24 35.09 36.61 29.5 30.02 30.58 NaCl

11.77 0 0.62 4.83 0 0 0 3.4 2.63 0 0 11.94 4.7 0 0 0.4 0 0 11.86 3.81 MgCl2

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CaCl2

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 K2SO4

0 11.19 0 0 6.27 21.41 6.57 0 0 5.01 17.6 0 0 17.54 17.74 0 11.4 15.63 0 0 Na2SO4

14.52 25.98 26.45 12.68 35.03 21.98 35.5 26.84 15.03 33.79 22.83 19.45 20.2 23.16 23.02 26.31 18.52 24.73 18.06 25.16 MgSO4

8.88 5 3.8 21.8 0.7 14 0.17 17.34 26.21 2.55 3.26 7.68 10.58 3.5 2 6.46 22.49 6.09 13.23 11.12 CaSO4

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 NaHCO3

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Mg(HCO3)2

23.18 29.06 31.64 18.06 29.1 14.96 28.83 18.12 5.28 29.8 27.89 30.17 21.47 27.65 28.86 31.57 10.67 23.6 26.62 29.14 Ca(HCO3)2

XXV

XXV

Appendix 12

Wet period Dry period

Well no. (Na+rK)-Cl

rSO₄ rNa+rK

rCl rSO₄ /rCl rK/rCl rNa/rCl rMg/rCl rCa /rCl (Na+rK)-Cl

rSO₄ rNa+rK

rCl rSO₄ /rCl rK/rCl rNa/rCl rMg/rCl rCa /rCl

-0.077 0.91 1.04 0.0051 0.91 0.86 1.2 -0.45 0.7 0.65 0.005 0.69 0.66 0.73 1 -0.35 0.73 0.74 0.0048 0.73 0.73 0.97 0.24 1.22 0.92 0.001 1.22 0.44 0.77 2 0.31 1.48 1.55 0.014 1.47 0.8 0.97 0.37 1.77 2.07 0.003 1.77 0.79 1.04 3 0.2 1.28 1.42 0.0076 1.28 0.49 0.88 0.22 1.31 1.41 0.005 1.3 0.46 0.87 4

-0.06 0.94 0.91 0.0041 0.93 0.71 1.01 0.39 1.92 2.37 0.011 1.91 0.89 1.05 5 0.43 1.65 1.5 0.0044 1.65 0.82 1.11 0.32 1.53 1.62 0.019 1.51 0.49 0.97 6 0.42 1.66 1.57 0.0056 1.66 0.84 1.13 0.2 1.35 1.73 0.018 1.34 0.54 1.13 7 -0.1 0.93 0.64 0.023 0.91 0.54 0.69 0.066 1.05 0.77 0.017 1.03 0.33 0.65 8

-0.39 0.74 0.63 0.034 0.71 0.76 0.92 -0.048 0.96 0.82 0.01 0.94 0.32 0.58 9 0.41 1.64 1.53 0.0049 1.64 0.81 1.11 0.26 1.28 1.08 0.002 1.28 0.51 0.63 10 0.11 1.16 1.43 0.0057 1.15 1.16 1.11 0.18 1.26 1.48 0.017 1.25 0.51 1.03 11

0.053 1.04 0.77 0.017 1.02 0.36 0.64 0.12 1.24 1.98 0.019 1.22 0.91 1.03 12 -0.11 0.86 1.17 0.0047 0.86 0.76 0.89 -0.11 0.86 1.15 0.004 0.85 0.75 0.89 13 0.17 1.25 1.46 0.0041 1.24 1.25 1.02 0.14 1.21 1.45 0.002 1.21 1.21 1.02 14 0.37 1.77 2.07 0.0044 1.77 0.79 1.04 -0.17 0.84 0.9 0.005 0.83 0.82 0.97 15 0.15 1.22 1.45 0.0044 1.22 1.22 1.04 0.35 1.52 1.48 0.009 1.51 0.51 0.77 16 -0.3 0.77 0.72 0.0076 0.76 0.31 0.72 0.36 1.36 1.01 0.005 1.36 0.34 0.47 17 0.1 1.08 0.79 0.019 1.06 0.78 1.02 0.34 1.36 1.06 0.009 1.35 0.4 0.51 18 0.16 1.24 1.46 0.0044 1.23 0.8 1.05 -0.12 0.88 0.97 0.001 0.88 0.84 0.86 19 -0.51 0.77 0.43 0.015 0.76 0.49 0.59 -0.017 0.98 0.87 0.002 0.98 0.8 0.79 20

XXVI

Hydrochemical indicators of water samples of the study area for dry and wet periods

ABSTRACT

المستخلص ("00 '55 °34 - "00'50°34) بين خطي عرضصالح الدين محافظة ضمنالدراسة منطقة تقع

وبمساحة تقدر ) Km 70 (كركوك بحوالي مدينة جنوب ( "00 '40 °44 - "00 '33 °44)وخطي طول

تكوينات (تشمل ترسبات العصر الثالثي المنطقة في الجيولوجية اهم التكوينات .)Km2 124 (بحوالي

الدراسة. منطقة تغطي التي باالضافة الى ترسبات العصر الرباعي) وباي حسنالمقدادية ، انجانة،فتحةال

) 2010- 1991( للفترة طوزخورماتو االرصادية محطة في المسجلة المناخية البيانات على باالعتماد

حوض العظيم والتي تبلغ مساحتها بحدود ضمن تقع منطقة الدراسة مناخ المنطقة شبه رطبة الى رطبة.

) Km212000.( هي تكوين باي حسن (العصر الثالثي) المنطقة في المنتجة الوحدة الهيدروجيولوجية .

الجنوب الغربي ومعدل الميل نحو من الشمال الشرقي الجوفية في المنطقة المياه لجريان العام اإلتجاه

نتائج الضخ االختباري لعودة المنسوب ثايسوطريقة جاكوب ). بإستعمال طريقة 0.0068الهيدروليكي (

معدل الناقلية جزئيا وبدون ابار مراقبة كانت حسن تكوين باي تخترق ابار) 7 (في التي اجريت

) m2 / day176.11 (الهيدروليكي ومعدل التوصيل) m / day 3.06.(

) EC معدالت التوصيلة الكهربائية(.منخفضة قاعدية المنطقة عموما هي في الجوفية المياه نوعية

من أوطأ كانت الرطبة والسالبة للفترة الموجبة اآليونات وتراكيز TDS)ومجموع االمالح الذائبة الكلية (

HCO3 (البيكاربونات آيون ماعدا الجافة الفترة تلوث بايون بسبب عمليات التخفيف باالمطار.التوجد)-

المياه الجوفية في المنطقة تصنف كمياه مالحة قليال. TDS)اعتمادا على قيم ال(.المنطقة في النترات

العناصر ببعض ملوثة الدراسة منطقة في الجوفية المياه عسرة المياه في المنطقة من النوع العسر جدا.

طبقا للمواصفات القياسية المسموحة الحدود من أعلى كانت تراكيزهم ألن ,Pb (Co, Ni, Cdالثقيلة (

.)2007 ومنظمة الصحة العالمية ()2009 (العراقية

بقية االبار كانت تتفاوت بين ،بينما(Na2SO4)كانت الدراسة آبار منطقة نوع الماء في اغلب

(CaCl2) (NaCl) ,(CaSO4), (MgSO4)معدل الدوال الهيدروكيميائية . وللفترتين الجافة والرطبة

)1,2,8,9,13,20(المياه الجوية، ماعدا االبار من المنطقة في الجوفية المياه أصل وللفترتين اظهرت ان

المياه الجوفية في Piper حسب تصنيف حيث يحدث فيها تغذية عميقة. فان اصلها من المياه البحرية

Na+- K+ - Cl- - SO4) منطقة الدراسة تعود الى السحنات الهيدروكيميائية +Ca2+ - Mg2و ((-2

-

Cl- - SO4 ) وللفترتين.-2

اظهرت المختلفة لالستعماالت مع مواصفات قياسية الجوفية في منطقة الدراسة المياه نوعية مقارنة

الحيوانات والغراض البناء مناسبة لشرب ولكنها لشرب االنسان ولالغراض الصناعية مناسبة غير بأنها

خالل .العالية الملوحة بسبب سيئة العينات بعض ماعدا ري كماء ومقبوله ولزراعة اكثر انواع المحاصيل ،

) بينما كمية المياه m3/ year 106 × 1660.56ادارة المياه الجوفية، كمية التغذية السنوية لحوض العظيم (

ABSTRACT

كمية المياه الجوفية ) .m3/ year 106 × 9.79الجوفية التي تدخل منطقة الدراسة كخزين متجدد سنويا (

لذا ستكون قيمة التغيير . ) m3 / year 106 × 2.96 (تساويالمستهلكة في المنطقة اثناء الدراسة الحالية

وهذه القيمة تعكس مقدار زيادة )ΔS) ( 6.83 × 106 m3 / yearفي خزين المياه الجوفية في المنطقة (

في الخزين الثابت للمنطقة .

REFERENCES

96

References

Abdul-Razaq, M. I., Ahmed, A. M. and Uroba, A., 2007: Hydrogeological

Study for the Upper Al-Adhaim Basin, internal report, Ministry of water

resources G.D.F. Management of water resources, Groundwater Study Center

.260 p. (In Arabic)

Ahmad H. S. and Al Jibouri H. K. , 2005 : hydrogeological and hydrochemical

study of Samarra Quadrangle sheet (NI-38-6), Scale 1:250 000 , State

Company of Geological Survey and Mining , Baghdad ، Iraq.

95p. (in Arabic)

Al-Ansari, N.A. 1987 : Hemrin Reservoir – Geology and Hydrological

Investigation . Jour. Of Water Resources Special pub 1 . No . 2 . Baghdad.

Al-Azawi, A. A. , 2009 : Evaluation and Management of Groundwater in Bahr Al-

Najaf Basin , M.Sc. Thesis, College of science. Baghdad University, Iraq.

(unpub).196P.

Al-Badri, A. S. and Al-Ameri M. A., 2004 : Hydrogeochemical study & Nitrate

pollution of groundwater in the area of Samarra – Himreen, Ministry of water

resources, G.D.F. Water well drilling. P62. (In Arabic)

Al-Kadhimi, J.A., Sissakian, V.K., Fattah, A.S. and Deikran, D.B., 1996 :

Tectonic map of Iraq S.E. of Geological Survey and Mining National library

.No. (10/1990), Baghdad. Iraq.

Al-Kubaisi, Q. Y., 1996 : Hydrogeological study of Dibdiba basin in Safwan

- Zubair area, Ph.D.Thesis, College of Science, Baghdad University, Iraq.

(unpub). 170p. (in Arabic)

Al-Kubaisi,Q. Y., 2004 : Annual aridity index of type.1 and type.2 mode options

climate classification , Iraq, Jour. Sci., vol. 45c, No.1, 32-40p.

Alloway, B. and Ayers, D. C. 1997 : Chemical principles of environmental

pollution. (2nd Ed). Chapman and Hall, London. 395p.

REFERENCES

97

Al-Mamuri, N. M. L., 2005 : Optimum Management of Surface & Subsurface

Water of AL-Adhaim Basin , Ph. D., Thesis, College of Engineering, Uni. of

Baghdad, 158 p.

Al-Manmi D. A. M. , 2008 : Water Resources Management of Rania Area

Sulaimaniyah NE-Iraq , Ph.D. Thesis, College of Science, Baghdad

University, Iraq , 249p .

Al-Naqib K. M., 1960 : Geology of The Southern Part of Kirkuk Liwa, Tech.

Publ. , Iraq Petrol. Co. Ltd, 50p .(In Arabic).

Al-Qaraghuli N. A., 1987 : Content of nutrient elements in the fertilizers

produced from Al-Kaim, Iraq, Central Organization for Standardization and

Quality Control . Iraqi Journal of Agricultural Sciences, Zanco, Vol. 5, No. 3

, pp 57-69. (In Arabic).

Al-Qaraghuli, N. A., 2005 : Contents of nutrient elements (Total, water soluble

and available) in the fertilizers (TSP, MAP, NP & NPK) produced from

AL-Qaim plant, Iraq . Iraqi Journal of Agricultural Sciences, Vol. 36, No. 5

, pp 35-41.

Al-Rubaii, H.J.M, 2008 : Application of the Electrical Resistivity to Study the

Hydraulic Properties of Groundwater in the Area Tuz khurmatu , M.Sc.

Thesis, College of science. Baghdad University, Iraq. (unpub). 120P.

Alsam, S. I., Jassim, S. Z. and Hanna, F. 1990 : Water balance of Iraq: stage 2,

geological and hydrogeological condition. Manuscript report, Ministry of

Irrigation, Iraq.

Altovisiki, M. E., 1962: Hand book of hydrogeology. Geogoelitzet, Moscow,

USSR (In Russian), 614p.

APHA,1998 : Standard methods for the examination of water and waste water.

American Public Healthy Association(19th –ed)Washington.

Appelo, C. A., 1999 : Cation and proton exchange , PH variations and carbonate

reactions in a freshening aquifer, Water Resources Research, Vol. 30

, (2793-2805) p.

REFERENCES

98

Appelo, C. A. J. and Postma, D., 2005: Geochemistry, groundwater and

pollution, 2nd edition. Balkama, Rotterdam, 536p.

Ayers, R. S. and Westcot, D. W. 1989: Water quality for agriculture. Irrigation

and drainage paper 29, Rev.1. FAO, Rome, Italy, 174p.

Barwary، A. M. and Slewa, N. A. 1995 : The geology of Samarra Quadrangle

sheet NI- 38 – 6, scale 1 :250000 ، GEOSURV. Lib . Rept . No . 2227،

Baghdad، Iraq. Bates, R.L., and Jackson, J.A., 1984 : Dictionary of geological terms, New York,

Doubleday, various pagination.

Berkowitz, B., Dror, I. and Yaron, B., 2008 : Contaminant Geochemistry,

Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg, 412 p.

Boyd, C. E.,2000: Water quality an introduction, Kluwer Academic publisher,

USA.330p.

Brickle, P., Rodrigues, V.T., Partida, E.G., 1995: Effects of

evapotranspiration of the water balance of the valley of Mexico.

Geofisica Int.35(1) p.63-72.

Buday, T., 1980 : The Regional Geology of Iraq, Vol. I. Stratigraphy and

Paleogeography. I.I.M. Kassab and S.Z.Jassim (Eds). SOM, Baghdad, Dar El

Kutib Publ. House, Univ. of Mosul., 445P.

Buday, T. and Jassim, S.Z. , 1987 : The Regional Geology of Iraq, Vol.2

(Tectonism, Magmatism, and Metamorphism) 352 P.

Chadha, D.K., 1999 : A proposed new diagram for geochemical classification and

interpretation of chemical data. Hydrogeology, J7: pp431-4393.

Collins, A. G., 1975 : Geochemistry of oil- field water. Development in Petroleum

science, No.11, Elesevier, Amsterdam, Holland, 496p.

Cooper, H.H. and C.E. Jacob, 1946 : Drawdown test to determine effective

radius of artesian well, Transe. Amer., Civil Eng., Vol. 115 p.

Crist, M.A. and Lowry, M.E., 1972 : Groundwater resource of Natrona county

wyming . A study of the availability and chemical quality of groundwater

REFERENCES

99

, Geological Survey Water Supply, Paper 1897, U.S. Government Printing

office, Washington, 92p.

Daly, D. ,1994 : Chemical Pollutant in Groundwater: a Review of the Situation in

Ireland. Conf. "Chemicals a cause for Concern?", Cork, 3-4/11/1994.

David, D, 2002 : Introduction to hydrogeology, University of Oklahoma, USA,

468p.

Davis, S. N. and Dewiest R.J.M., 1966 : Hydrogeology. John Wiley and Sons.

Inc., New York. 463p.

Detay, M,.1997 : Water Wells- implementation, maintenance and restoration, John

Wiley and Sons, London, 379p.

Directorate of Military Survey, 1977 : Topography map of Tuz Khurmatu area

.scale 1 : 100 000 . Baghdad , Iraq.

Domenico, P. A,. and Schwartz, F. W., 1998 : Physical and chemical

hydrogeology, John Wiley and Sone, inc. New York. 506p.

Don, C.M. 1995: A grows guide to water quality. University college station,

Texas.

Drever, J.I., 1997 : The geochemistry of natural water, surface and ground water

environments (3rd ed). Prentice hall, USA, 436P.

El - Sayed A. A. , 2004 : Ground water review Part I , CEE VT, pp 36.

Emsley, J., 1998: The elements (3rd ed.) Clavendon press, Oxford, London, 292p.

Faure, G, 1998 : Principles and application of geochemistry (2nd ed.). Prentic

Hall, Inc., USA, 600p.

Fetter, C. W., 1980 : Applied hydrogeology, Charles Merrill pub. Co. A. Bell and

Howell company, Columbus, Ohio, 488p.

Fetter, C. W., 1994 : Applied hydrogeology, (3rd ed.). Prentice Hall, Inc., New

Jersey, 691p.

Gehrels H. and Gieske A. S. M., 2003 : Aquifer dynamics , (Understanding

Water in a Dry Environment , Hydrological Processes in Arid and Semi-arid

REFERENCES

100

Zones) , Editor by Ian Simmers , International association of hydrogeologists,

Netherlands , PP 359.

General Commission for Groundwater , 2010 : Drilled wells data for Tuz

khurmatu area , Branch of Kirkuk for wells drilling.

Gill, R. (ed.), 1997 : Modern Analytical Geochemistry, an Introduction to

Quantitative Chemical Analysis for Earth, Environmental and Materials

Scientists. Longman, London, 329p.

Glover, C. R., 1996 : Irrigation Water Classification Systems, Guide A- 116, New

Mexico State Universityis. NMSU and the U.S. Departmint of Agriculture.

Hamill, L. and Bell, F. G., 1986 : Ground water resource development, butter

Worth's, London, 344p.

Harter T. , 2003 : Basic Concepts of Groundwater Hydrology , University of

California and Natural Resources conservation service NRCS . Publication

8083 FWQP Reference sheet 11.1. p 6.

Hem, J.D., 1985: Study and interpretation of the chemical characteristics of

natural water. 3rd. ed.U.S.G.S. water supply paper. 2254. 263p.

Hem, J. D., 1989: Study and interpretation of the chemical characteristics of

natural water U.S geological survey, water supply paper 2254, 246p.

Hudak, P.F. ,2000 : Regional Trends in Nitrate Content of Texas Groundwater.

Journal of Hydrology, Vol.228: pp. 37-47.

IQS, Iraqi Standard , 2009 : Iraqi Standard of Drinking Water No. 417, Second

modification .

Iraqi meteorological organization, 2010 : Climatic elements data of recorded in

Al- Tuz station for period from (1991- 2010).

Ivanov, V.V., Barbanov, L. N., and Plotnikova, G. N., 1968: The main genetic

types of the earths crust mineral water and their distribution in the

USSR.Inter.Geol.Cong.of 23rd. Sessions Czechoslovakia ,V. 12.p33.

REFERENCES

101

Jassim, S. Z., Karim, S. A., Basi, M., Al-Mubarak, M. A., and Munir, J., 1984

: Final report on the regional geological survey of Iraq,Vol.3, Stratigraphy.

Manuscript report, Geological Survey of Iraq .

Jassim, S. Z., and Goff , J.C. ,2006 : Geology of Iraq , Pub., Doline, First edition

,341p .

Kalma J. D. and Franks S. W. 2003 : Rainfall in arid and semi-arid regions

, (Understanding Water in a Dry Environment , Hydrological Processes in

Arid and Semi-arid Zones) , Editor by Ian Simmers, International association

of hydrogeologists, Netherlands , PP 359.

Karanth K. R., 2008: Groundwater Assessment Development and Management,

Tata McGraw-Hill Offices, NEW DELHI.720p.

Kassab, I. I. M. and Jassim, S. Z., 1980 : The Regional Geology of Iraq, general

directorate for geological survey and mineral, Baghdad, Iraq.

Kettaneh, M. S., and Gangopadhyaya, M., 1974: Climatologic water budget

and water availability periods of Iraq, IARNR, Baghdad.Tech.No.65, 19p.

Kevin, M.H., 2005: Hydrogeology Principles and Practice, by Blackwell Science

Ltd a Blackwell Publishing company ,Blackwell Publishing 379p.

Khudair, H. A., Mohamed, N. A. and Abdullah, N. Y., 2000 : “Hydrogeologic

Investigation of Tuz Kurmatu”, Dijla Company of the studies and design of

irrigation projects, Iraq.55p.(In Arabic)

Kirk–Othmer, 1980 : Encyclopedia of chemical technology (fertilizers), V.9 &

10, Interscience publishers, New York.

Kite, G.(1989): Use of time series analysis to detect climatic change , Jour. Of

Hydrology. Vol .11, pp: 259-279.

Kruseman ,G .P. and de Ridder ,N.A., 2000 : Analysis and Evaluation of

Pumping Test Data. International Institute for Land Reclamation and

Imporovement, Wageningen, the Netherlands, 372p.

Landschoot, P., 2007 : Irrigation Water Quality Guidelines for Turfgrass Sites,

College of Agricultural sciences The Pennsylvania State

REFERENCES

102

University,USA,http://turfgrassmanagement.psu.edu/irrigation_water_

quality_for_turfgrass_sites.cfm .

Langguth, H. R., 1966 : Die Grundwasserverhältnisse im Bereich des Velberter

Sattels, Rheinisches Schiefergebirge. Der Minister für Ernährung,

Landwirtschaft und Forsten, NRW, Düsseldorf. (unpublished).

Langmuir, D., 1997 : Aqueous environmental Geochemistry , Prentice Hall,

USA, 600p.

Lerner, N. D., Issar, A. S., Simmers, I., 1990 : Groundwater Recharge-

A Guide to Understanding and Estimating Natural Recharge,Vol.8,

Association of Hydrogeologist, Hanover, ISBN 3- 922705-91-X.

Levy, D. B and Kearney, W. F., 1974 : Irrigation of native rangeland using

treated waste water from in situ uranium processing J. Environ. Quality 28. P.

208-217.

Linsley, R. K., Kohler, M. A. and Paulhus, J. H., 1982: Hydrological for

engineers, 3rded. Mc. Graw Hill co. New York. 508p.

Lorenz , F. M. , 2008 : Strategic Water For Iraq: The Need For Planning And

Action , University of Washington , 24p .

Manahan, S. E., 2001 : Fundamentals of Environmental Chemistry Boca Raton:

CRC Press LLC, 993p.

Mazor, M., 1990 : Applied chemical and isotopic groundwater Hydrology, open

university press, New York 274p.

Mohamed, H. Ahmed, T. and Khorshied, S.Z., (2009) : Application of the

Electrical Resistivity to Study the Hydraulic Properties of Groundwater in the

Area Tuz-khurmato. 3rd Scientific Conference, Unv. of Baghdad, College of

Science, 1813 – 1826 p.

Nordstrom, D. K., Ball, J. W., Donehoe, R. J., and Whittmor, D., 1989 :

Groundwater chemistry and water rock interactions atstripa, Geochem et

chosmo chemical Acta, U. S. G. S., Vol.53,pp. 1927-1940.

REFERENCES

103

Piper, A.M.,1944 : A graphic procedure in the geochemical interpretation of water

analyses, Transition, American Geophysical union, 25: 914-923.

Prasad, M. N. V., 2008 : Trace Elements as Contaminants and Nutrients:

Consequences in Ecosystems and Human Health, Published by John Wiley &

Sons, New Jersey, 777 p.

Rock Work, 2008 : Software, Rock Ware Incorporated, http://www.rockware.

com.

Sanders, L. L., 1998 : Manual of field Hydrogeology. Library of Congress

Cataloging in Publication Data. 381p.

Sawyer C. N., and Mecarty P. L., 1985 : Chemistry of Environmental

Engineering. 3rd. ed., MCGraw-Hill book VSA.

SCCG, 2006 : Groundwater Management Handbook , Sydney Coastal Councils

Group and Groundwater Working Group. Sydney, September 2006, First

Edition. P 167 . www.sydneycoastalcouncils.com.au

Shaw, E.M., 1999 : Hydrology in practice . 3rd ed. Stanly Thornes publ . Ltd ,

U.K, p. : 569 .

Stevanovic Z. and Iurkiewicz A. , 2009 : Groundwater management in northern

Iraq . Hydrogeology Journal (2009) 17: PP 367–378

Stoodly, K.D., Lewis, T. and Staintion, C.L., 1980 : Applied Statistical

Technique. John Wiley and Sons, London.215 P.

Theis, C. V., 1935: The Lowering piezometric the surface and the rate and

discharge of a well using water storage transaction American Geophysical

union.pp.16, 519-24.

Thompson, T., Fawell, J., Kunikane, S., Jackson, D., Appleyard, S., Callan,

Ph., Bartram, J. and Kingston, Ph., 2007 : Chemical safety of drinking

water : assessing priorities for risk management, WHO, Geneva, 142 p.

Thornthwaite, C. W., 1948: Approach toward a relation classification of

climate geographical, Rev.3, 55-94pp.

REFERENCES

104

Todd, D. K., 1980 : Groundwater hydrology second edition, Jhon Wiley and

Sous, Inc. New York. 535p.

Todd, D. K., 2007 : Groundwater hydrology third edition, Jhon Wiley and Sous,

Third Reprint. Inc. India. 535p.

Turgeon, A. J., 2000 : Irrigation Water Quality, College of Agricultural sciences

The Pennsylvania State University, USA, http://turfgrass.cas.

psu.edu/Education/Turgeon/CaseStuy/OldRanch/ IrrWatQual.html.

U.S. Salinity Laboratory staff, 1954 : Diagnosis and improvement of saline and

alkali soils: U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 60,160 p.

Van Hoorn, J. W., 1970 : Quality of irrigation water, limits of use and predication

of long term effects, Salinity Seminar Baghdad, Irrigation and Drainage paper

No.7, FAO, pp117-135.

Victoria EPA. , 2006 : Hydrogeological Assessment (Groundwater Quality)

Guidelines , Publication 668 , September 2006 ,Australia, pp 26.

Walton, C.W., 1970 : Groundwater Resource Evaluation Mc Graw Hill Co., 664.

White, W. M., 2005 : Geochemistry, John-Hopkins University Press,

www.geo.cornell.edu/geology/classes/geo455/booklogo.gif, 701 P.

Wilson, E.m., 1971 : Engineering Hydrogeology. Macmillan press LTD. 182p.

Winter, Th. C., Harvey, J. W., Lehn Franke, O. and Alley, W. M., 1998 :

Ground Water and Surface water A Single Resource, U.S.G.S. Circular 1139,

ISBN, 79 p.

World Healthy Organization (WHO), 2007 : Guide fine for drinking water

quality Recommendation Vol.4th ed. 36p.

Date post:	04-Jul-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	trannga
View:	233 times
Download:	3 times

Hydrogeology and Hydrochemistry of Groundwater in … and... · Ministry of Higher Education and...

Documents