STUDY on the PHYSICO-CHEMICAL CHARACTERISTICS of GROUNDWATER in MALURU TALUK (KARNATAKA) Sripathy.L1 and Naveen Chandra2 1Dept

International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, Volume 5, Issue 4, April-2014 ISSN 2229-5518 218

STUDY ON THE PHYSICO-CHEMICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF GROUNDWATER IN MALURU TALUK (KARNATAKA) Sripathy.L1 and Naveen Chandra2 1Dept. of Chemistry, Vivekananda Degree College, Bengaluru 560 055. 2 Corresponding Author: Post-graduate and Research Center, Department of Chemistry, St.Joseph’s College (Autonomous), Bengaluru 560027. E-mail:[email protected] and [email protected]

ABSTRACT- A systematicstudy of physical-chemicalproperties ofthe quality of the ground water obtained from different sources in and around Maluru Taluk, a suburban of Bengaluru, has been carried out. Water is crucial for the sustenance of life on the earth. Millions ofpeople living in rural and urban areas use the tube well water, which is highly essential for them these days. According to survey, ground water accounts for nearly 50% urban requirement, and 80% rural needs. Keeping in view of the above, an attempt has been made to determine the physico- chemical properties of ground water samples collected during pre-monsoon in the year 2012 from twenty four tube wells located in and around Maluru. The physico-chemical properties are studied with respect to temperature, turbidity, pH, total dissolved solids, salinity, alkalinity, electrical conductivity, total hardness and the concentration of metal ions Ca2+, Mg2+, Na+, K+ and anions Cl- and F-, present in the water samples. The results obtained are compared with standard values of Bureau of Indian Standardand World Health Organization. The analysis of the results indicates that the contamination of water samples lies within the permissible standard limits. About 8.5% water samples are contaminated above the permissible limits.

Keywords: MaluruTaluk,IJSER Groundwater, Physico-chemical properties, Water pollution, Seasons, Tube well.

International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, Volume 5, Issue 4, April-2014 ISSN 2229-5518 219

Introduction

The precious gift of nature is undoubtedly the water after air, although three fourth of the earth is occupied by water. As the adage says, “water, water is everywhere, not a single drop of water for drinking”. As water is getting polluted day by day due to rapid urbanization and industrialization1-4 the world is more concerned regarding purification of polluted water. Chemicals, in spite of many uses, are toxic in nature and they contaminate land, water and air. This is a serious global problem. Industrial effluents containing organic compounds from textile, dyeing and printing industries cause skin cancer due to photosensitization and photodynamic damage2. On the contrary, degradation products of these organic compounds are relatively less toxic and in some cases these are almost harmless. Also, polluted water is of no use to man unless these organic compounds are not removed. Such water cannot be utilized for irrigation, washing and cleaning purposes5-8.The groundwater is increasingly gaining importance due to its utility in view of scarcity of quality water ever needed for the growing demands of domestic, agricultural and industrial uses. It has become crucial not only for targeting the groundwater potential zones, but also monitoring and conserving this important ground water resource (CGWB1985) 3,9-14. Approximately, 62.5 million people are suffering from the negative effects of fluoride on teeth or bones through the process of fluorosis. The prime sources of water pollution are domestic sewage water, industrial waste water, and chemicals such as pesticides and insecticides and agriculture run off14-16. Maluru Taluku is a place located at 13°N and77.94°E. It has an average elevation of 910 meters (2985 feet from the sea level, Chennai). Malur is at a distance 46 km from Bengaluru City and is situated from other places within radius of 15- 30 kM. According to the 2011 India census,2 Malur, with a population of approximately 2,7791 people, is at distances 25.6 from Kolar and 38 kM y from Bengaluru, respectively. The total population of Maluru ucomprising 345 villages is found to be 1,96,393 people. The villages are, Abbenahalli, Adarsh Nagar, Araleri, Baliganahalli, Banahalli, Chickkakuntur, Chikkathirupathi, Madivala, Malur, Maruthi Extension, Nehru Extension, Patalama Extension, Nosagere, KavalaGiriyanaHalli,IJSERRajenahalli,Shivarapatna,Doddashivara,Dadinaikanahallidoddi,Hulimanga- l-ahosakote, Tekal, Masthi, Thornahalli, Rajenahalli, Santehalli and Karanje. There are nearly 419 tube wells which supply water to all these people of the villages. But, the tube wells have been dried up in as many as 126 villages. However, the situation has become worst for the last five years. The only hope that is left for the people of Maluru and its villages is to depend largely on the ground water. In view of the above situation, a systematic study on the physico-chemical properties, in order to assess the quality of the tube well water, has been carried out. It has been found experimentally that only about 8.5 % of water is polluted.

Methods and Materials Collection of samples Water samples were collected from different tube-wells located in villages in and around Malur. The water samples are utilized for the purpose of studying their phyisco-chemical properties.

Determination of Physico-Chemical parameters

Twenty four tube well samples were collected during the pre-monsoon period of 2012 from different villages coming under the jurisdiction ofMalurTaluk. On spot experiments were carried out to determine the parameters like temperature, pH, total dissolved solids, electric conductance,

International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, Volume 5, Issue 4, April-2014 ISSN 2229-5518 220

salinity, and dissolved oxygen. These parameters were measured using Systronics Water Analyser-371. The other properties such as total hardness and concentration of cations and anionswere determined in the laboratory as per the standard methods4,5. The concentrations of sodium and potassium were determined by Flame Photometer (Systronics FPM Digital µ- Controller Based),whereas concentrations of Ca2+ and Mg2+were determined by EDTA titration followed by Argentmetric, and Sodium-2-(parasulfophenylazo)-dihydroxy-3,6- naphthalenedisulfonate (SPADNS) titrimetric methods for the determination of concentration of Cl-, F- and alkalinity of the water samples. The parameters were obtained after several times repeat of measurements.

Results and Discussion: All the parameters obtained from the measurements are entered in Table 1. The parameters are explained as follows. Physical Parameters: The graphical variations of the results of these are shown n Figs. 1 to 7. Temperature: The temperature range recorded varies from 21physico-chemically 10C for all the collected water samples. pH: The measured values of hydrogen ion concentration (pH) are within the permissible limits of ISI & WHO (1993)2. The two water samples (No. 18 and 24) crossed the permissible limits as per ISI & WHO. Turbidity: All the water samples tested for turbidity are within the allowed Nephelometric Turbidity Units U(NT ) (1993)2. Electrical Conductivity: These values vary from 418µS to 2860µS. Total Dissolved IJSERSolids: The values of total dissolved solidsvary from 568 mg/L to 1670 mg/L for all the water samples except two samples (No.4 and 19) crossed the permissible limits of ISI & WHO2. Salinity: The measured values of salinity range from 220 mg/l to 1620 mg/L.

International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, Volume 5, Issue 4, April-2014 ISSN 2229-5518 221

Table 1 The Physical parameters of Ground Water

Sample Temperature turbidity EC TDS Salinity No. in 0 C pH S/mol in NTU in µS mg/L in mg/L 1 25.9 6.34 2.09 1645 568 220 2 25.9 6.6 3.15 418 920 900 3 25.1 7.51 2.98 1650 900 880 4 26.1 7.96 1.48 2860 1580 1620 5 25.7 9.1 2.08 2050 1170 1140 6 25 7.45 3.03 1310 750 1400 7 24.8 7.22 1.07 2500 1430 1400 8 25.4 8.17 1.24 1220 700 680 9 23 8.19 2.32 1110 653 650 10 23.5 7.52 2.41 1190 690 670 11 21.2 7.95 22.54 1250 750 730 12 22.2 7.76 9.33 1620 930 910 13 22.4 7.64 8.61 1150 680 670 14 23.6 7.3 10.49 2040 1210 1180 15 26.1 7.91 5.52 1530 880 850 16 25.7 7.52 5.22 2140 1210 1200 17 24.7 7.97 6.5 1760 1030 1010 18 24.7 8.99 0.28 2060 1210 1610 19 25.1 6.99 1.1 2860 1670 1170 20 22.1 6.95 0.15 1900 951 930 21 24.3 7.85 0.23 2145 590 570 22 IJSER22.1 7.95 0.99 1100 586 527 23 23.5 7.92 0.25 1250 786 629 24 22.9 9.95 0.36 1364 659 593 WHO -- 7.0 – 8.5 5 to 25 - 500- 1500 -

International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, Volume 5, Issue 4, April-2014 ISSN 2229-5518 222

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Samples

Fig. 1 Temperature variation (0C)

8 pH S/mol 6

2 IJSER

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Samples

Fig. 2 Variation of pH

International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, Volume 5, Issue 4, April-2014 ISSN 2229-5518 223

turbidity 15 in NTU 10

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Samples

Fig. 3 Variation of turbidity

3000 2500 2000 1500IJSER EC in µS 1000 500 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Samples

Fig. 4 Variation of Electrical conductivity

International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, Volume 5, Issue 4, April-2014 ISSN 2229-5518 224

2000

1500

1000 TDS mg/l 500

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Samples

Fig. 5 Variation of TDS

2000

1500 Salinity in mg/l 1000

500

0 IJSER1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Samples

Fig. 6 Variation of salinity

Chemical Parameters: The values measured for total hardness and alkalinity of ions present in watersamples are entered in Table 2 and the graphical variability of these results are shown in Figs. 7 to15. The chemical parameters obtained from the experiments are explained as follows.

Total Hardness: Ten out of 24 water samples tested for total hardness crossed the permissible limits of WHO as shown in Fig.7. The values range from 181 mg/L to 929 mg/L for CaCO3.

Alkalinity: The alkalinity values for all the water samples varyfrom 68 to 660 mg/L which lie 2 - 2- within the permissible limits of ISI & WHO (Table 2) for HCO3 and CO3 .

International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, Volume 5, Issue 4, April-2014 ISSN 2229-5518 225

Chloride: All the water samples are found to have contained with chloride within the permissible limits of ISI & WHO. The values vary from of 26 to 424 mg/L.

Sodium: The sodium contents in all the water samples vary from 26mg/L to 350 mg/L except two samples (No. 14 and 19). The remaining twenty two samples wherein the sodium content falls within the permissible limits of ISI & WHO2.

Calcium: All water samples contain calcium ions whose values lie within the permissible range of ISI & WHO. The values vary in the range of 80 mg/L to 201 mg/L.

Magnesium: All the collected samples contain magnesium ions whose values lie within the permissible limits of ISI & WHO. The values vary from 2 to 120 mg/L.

Potassium: All the water samples contain potassium ions whose values vary from 1 to 21 mg/L.

Fluoride: All thesamples collected for analysis containfluoride, less than the permissible limits of ISI & WHO2. The values vary from 0.01 to 1.0mg/L.

It is seen from the above results that the collected water samples do contain cations and anions. Essentially, all the samples are found to be useful for household purpose of washing and irrigation as the contaminants fall within the allowed permissible values according to WHO and ISO (1993)2. However a few samples (Table 1 and Table 2) are more contaminated with respect within the allowed range of WHO and ISO. In this respect the water samples bearing No 18 and 24 have pH values at 8.99 and 9.95, respectively deviate from 7 to 8.5 pH range. This indicates that these two water samples are highly basic in nature and hence the water in these two water samples are not conducive for either washing, irrigation and drinking purpose. The other physical property,IJSER namely the total dissolved solids present in water sample Nos. 4 and 19 are not good for drinking purpose as they are contaminated with substances whose TDS values are 1580 and 1670mg/L, respectively lie well outside the allowed limits of 500 to 1500mg/L according to WHO and ISO (1993)2.

The chemical property with respect sodium ion present in sample No.14 and 19 whose concentration lies outside the limits of allowed range (200 mg/L). The values of concentrations of sodium ion are found to be 206 and 350 mg/L in the above two samples, indicating that the two samples are not conducively useful for any purpose. Similarly, the other chemical property associated total hardness whose value vary from 611 to 929mg/L for water samples bearing Nos. 2 to 12, 14,17,19and 20. These values are not good as they lie outside the standard limit value of 300 mg/L.

It is obvious from above results and discussion that the water samples, by and large, are conducive for rural and urban utilization either washing, irrigation or drinking purpose. However, two or three water samples are not found to be good for any purpose whose pH, TDS,

International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, Volume 5, Issue 4, April-2014 ISSN 2229-5518 226

total hardness and sodium ion concentration values do not permit to use the water samples as their values lie outside the permissible values.

Table. 2 The Chemical parameters of Ground Water

Tot. Sample Hardness Alkalinity Cl- in Sodium Ca in Mg in K in F- in No. mg/L in mg/L mg/L in mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L 1 181 224 26 26 32 25 1 0.01 2 611 276 145 105 115 79.9 4 0.09 3 284 660 159 126 111 79 12 0.1 4 929 288 218 146 175 79 1 0.04 5 679 104 234 118 75 120 1 0.02 6 344 68 132 154 68 120 1 0.1 7 869 108 312 164 198 120 1 0.11 8 344 112 128 82 65 44 3 0.21 9 624 288 171 74 130 73 5 0.021 10 335 228 92 86 77 35 8 0.025 11 606 380 163 98 135 66 4 0.028 12 486 304 163 154 101 57 7 0.01 13 409 304 96 88 103 37 5 0.2 14 641 424 299 206 98 97 5 0.019 15 490 320 171 122 115 97 8 0.085 16 826 424 265 108 198 81 3 0.028 17 507 368 242 172 158 27 2 0.09 18 753 364 316 130 178 75 11 0.06 19 765 512 424 350 201 64 3 0.07 20 366 376 126 194 91 34 1 0.09 21 391 420 216 83 95 38 1 1 22 439 448 191 96 85 55 15 0.02 23 IJSER495 392 200 116 95 63 12 0.03 24 520 472 222 90 109 63 21 0.08 200 - WHO 300 500 – 1000 600 200 75-200 50-150 1.0-1.5

International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, Volume 5, Issue 4, April-2014 ISSN 2229-5518 227 660

700 512

600 472 448 424 424 420 392 380 376 368

500 364 320 304 304 288 288 400 276 228 Mg/L 300 112 108 200 104 68 100 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Samples

Fig.7 Variation of total hardness

800 660 512 472 448 424 424 420

600 392 380 376 368 364 320 304 304 288 288 276

400 228 Mg/L 112 108 104

200 68

IJSER 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Samples

Fig. 8 Variation of alkalinity

International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, Volume 5, Issue 4, April-2014 ISSN 2229-5518 228

500

400

300

200 Mg/L 100

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Samples

- Fig. 9 Variation of Cl

400

300

200 Mg/L 100

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 IJSER Fig. 10 Variation of Na+

250

200

150

Mg/L 100

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

Samples

Fig. 11 Variation of Ca2+

International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, Volume 5, Issue 4, April-2014 ISSN 2229-5518 229 120 120 120

120 97 97 79.9 81 79 79

100 75 73 66 64 63 63 57

80 55 44 38 37 35

Mg/L 60 34 27 40 25

20 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Samples

Fig. 12 Variation of Mg2+

25 21 20 15 15 12 11 12

Mg/L 10 8 7 8 4 5 4 5 5 5 3 3 3 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 0 IJSER 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Samples

Fig. 13 Variation of K+

International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, Volume 5, Issue 4, April-2014 ISSN 2229-5518 230 1 1 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 Mg/L 0.4 0.21 0.3 0.2 0.085 0.11 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.08 0.1 0.1 0.07 0.06 0.028 0.028 0.025 0.021 0.019

0.2 0.04 0.03 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Samples

Fig. 14 Variation of F-

Conclusion

The physical- chemical parameters of twenty four water samples collected from different tube- wells located in different places in villages around Malur. The above analysis regarding the presence of variousIJSER ions indicates that the water samples are suitable for the domestic and irrigation purpose. However, some chemical parameters such as pH, alkalinity, TDS, Total hardness do not permit using of some water samples.

Acknowledgement

The authors thank Prof. Dr. G. K. Narayanareddy, Former Vice Chancellor Karnatak University, President Janatha Education society Bengaluru, Dr.VenkateshThuppil, Principal Advisor, National Referral Centre for Lead Poisoning in India (NRCLPI) and QCI, Sri Manchegowda. C., N Honorary Secretary Jantha education Society, Bengaluru, Dr. Prathima Rao, Dept. of Chemistry, Vivekananda Degree College, Bengaluru and Sri M.Harish Raju Dept. of Chemistry, Atria IT Bangalore, KSPCB, Bangalore, for their encouragement and providing laboratory facilities to complete the research work.

International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, Volume 5, Issue 4, April-2014 ISSN 2229-5518 231

References [1]. American Public Health Association: Standard Methods for Examination of Water and wastewater. Washington, DC (1999).

[2]. World Health Organization: Guidelines for Drinking Water Quality, WHO Geneva, Vol. 1-3 (1993). [3]. Central Ground Water Board: Ground Water Balance and Mass Awareness Program in Ernakulum District. Published by CGWB, Kerala Region, Thiruananthapuram, India (2002) [4] Kamble. P.N, Bhusal, S. S and Kuchekar, S. R. RASAYAN. J. Chemistry. 1-3 (2008). [5]. Sonwane, D.V,. Lawanda, S.P, Gaikwad,V.B, Kamble, P.N and Kuchekar,S.R. .RASAYAN J. Chemistry, 2, 421-423 (2009). [6]. Manivaskam. Water Analyst Principle Health Laboratory, Coimbatore, India (2005). [7]. Abida B. and Harikrishna. Study on the Quality of Water in Some Streams of Cauvery River, E- Journal of Chemistry, 5, (2): 377-384 (2008). [8]. Ahipathi M.V and Puttaiah, E.T. Ecological Characteristics of Vrishabhavathi River in Bangalore (India), Environmental Geology, 49: 1217-1222 (2006). [9]. Nagarajan. R, Rajmohan. N, Mahendran. U and Senthamilkumar. S,Evaluation of Groundwater Quality and its Suitability for Drinking and Agricultural Use in Thanjavur City, TamilIJSER Nadu, India. Environ Monit Assess., Vol. 171, pp. 289-308(2010). [10]. Iqbal, M. A and Gupta. S. G. Studies on Heavy Metal Ion Pollution of Ground Water Sources As An Effect of Municipal Solid Waste Dumping, African Journal of Basic &Applied Sciences, Vol. 1, No. 5-6, 2009, pp. 117- 122 (2009). [11]. Kanagalakshmi, A.S. and Nagan S. Effect of Urbanization on Groundwater Quality of TirumangalamTaluk, Madurai, Nature Environment and Pollution Technology, Vol (12), No.2, PP:363-366 (2012). [12]. Adekunle, I, Adetunji, M, Gbadebo, A. and Banjoko. O. Assessment of Groundwater Quality in a Typical Rural Settlement in Southwest Nigeria, International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, Vol. 4, No. 4, pp. 307-318 (2007).

International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, Volume 5, Issue 4, April-2014 ISSN 2229-5518 232

[13]. Kodata, K. J, Pophare, A.M, Gajbhiye, K and Meshram,Y, Hydrogeochemistry of

Groundwater From Bhadravati Tehsil, Chandrapur District, Maharastra:With Special

Reference to Fluoride Contamination. Ground Water Geological Magazine, vol.11, pp.113-

118 (2007).

[14]. Tiwari, A.N, Nawale, V.P, Tambe, J.A, and Satyakumar, Y.Correlation of Fuoride

with Bicarbonate in Groundwater of Exploratory Wells in Parts of Maharashtra. Journal of

Applied Geochemistry, vol.10, pp. 93-102 (2008).

[15]. Rajkumar, S, Velmurugan, P, Shanthi, K, Ayyasamy, P. M. and Lakshmanaperumalasamy, P.

Water Quality of Kodaikanal Lake, Tamilnadu in Relation to Physico-Chemical and Bacteriological Characteristics, Capital Publishing Company, Lake, pp. 339-346(2004). [16]. Singh,M.R; BeeteswariKh; Gupta,A. Water quality status of the Iril River, Manipur, J.Curr.Sci.14 (1):173-180 (2009). IJSER