Arab J Geosci (2011) 4:91–102

DOI 10.1007/s12517-009-0076-7

ORIGINAL PAPER

Groundwater quality assessment from a hard rock terrain,

Salem district of Tamilnadu, India
K. Srinivasamoorthy & C. Nanthakumar & M. Vasanthavigar & K. Vijayaraghavan &
R. Rajivgandhi & S. Chidambaram & P. Anandhan & R. Manivannan & S. Vasudevan

Received: 23 October 2008 / Accepted: 2 July 2009 / Published online: 21 August 2009
# Saudi Society for Geosciences 2009

Abstract A total of 162 groundwater samples for three Keywords Geochemical facies . Groundwater quality .
representative seasons were collected from Salem district Salem district . Sodium adsorption ratio . Spatial distribution
of Tamilnadu, India to decipher hydrogeochemistry and
groundwater quality for determining its suitability for
drinking and agricultural proposes. The water is neutral to
Introduction
alkaline in nature with pH ranging from 6.6 to 8.6 with an
average of 8.0. Higher electrical conductivity was ob- Quality of groundwater is the function of its physical and
served during post-monsoon season. The abundance of
chemical parameters which depend upon the soluble
major ions in the groundwater was in the order of
products of weathering, decomposition, and the related
Na > Ca > Mg > K ¼ Cl > HCO3 > SO4 > NO3 . Pip- changes that occur with respect to time and space
er plot reveals the dominance of geochemical facies as mixed
(Bhargava and Killender 1988; Prasad 1984). Pollution of
Ca–Mg–Cl, Na–Cl, Ca–HCO3, Ca–Na–HCO3, and Ca–Cl
groundwater due to external contaminants such as industrial
type. NO3, Cl, SO4, and F exceed the permissible limit
urban and agricultural practices is influenced by number of
during summer and post-monsoon seasons. Sodium
factors like geology, soil, weathering, growth of industries,
adsorption ratio was higher during post-monsoon and
emission of pollutants, sewage disposal, and other environ-
southwest monsoon season indicating high and low
mental conditions, with which it alters from point of its
salinity, satisfactory for plants having moderate salt
entry to exit (Viessman et al. 1989). Hence, the chemical
tolerance on soils. Permeability index of water irrespec-
composition of groundwater plays a significant role in
tive of season falls in class I and class II indicating water
determining the water quality for various utility purposes
is moderate to good for irrigation purposes. As per the
like domestic, agricultural, and industrial purposes. Criteria
classification of water for irrigation purpose, water is fit
used for classification of water for particular purpose is not
for domestic and agricultural purposes with minor exceptions
suitable for other standards; better results can be obtained
irrespective of seasons.
by combining chemistry of all the ions than the individual
or paired ionic character (Hem 1985).
A detailed work on quality and utility assessment of
K. Srinivasamoorthy (*) : M. Vasanthavigar : groundwater in Naini industrial area in Uttar Pradesh of India
K. Vijayaraghavan : R. Rajivgandhi : S. Chidambaram :
P. Anandhan : R. Manivannan : S. Vasudevan
was attempted by Mohan et al. (2000); they identified
Department of Earth Sciences, Annamalai University, changes in geochemical facies and locations unsafe for
Annamalai Nagar 608002 Tamilnadu, India drinking purpose. Srinivasamoorthy et al. (2008) studied
e-mail: moorthy_ks@yahoo.com about lithological influence of groundwater chemistry in
Mettur talk, Salem district of Tamilnadu state in India and
C. Nanthakumar
Department of Statistics, Salem Sowdeswari College, identified lithological domination along with anthropogenic
Salem, Tamilnadu, India impact in water chemistry. Groundwater quality from Etah
92
district of Uttar Pradesh in India was attempted by Umar and
Umar (2002) and suggested that deeper aquifers can be used
for domestic aquifers than shallow aquifers due to their high
intensity of pollution from anthropogenic impacts. Water
quality variation and its suitability for domestic and irrigation
purposes was discussed by Yvonne et al. (2008), Jalali
(2007), Kumar et al. (2009), and Wen et al. (2008).
Correlation of groundwater quality with Indian Standard
Institute (ISI) and World Health Organization (WHO) in
Guntur region of Andhra Pradesh was attempted by Subba
Rao et al. (2002) by demarcating groundwater pocket zones
as unsafe for domestic purposes. Classification of ground-
water was attempted by Ahmed et al. (2002), Bathrellos et
al. (2008), and Galip Yuce (2007), suggested groundwater
suitability for drinking and public health. Groundwater
quality suitability for drinking and agricultural purposes
was attempted by Subramani et al. (2005) in Chithar river
basin, Tamilnadu and identified locations of contamination
by using geographic information system approach.
Srinivasamoorthy et al. (2005) studied groundwater
quality in Mettur Taluk of Salem district and identified
higher NO3 and PO4 pollution levels. Similar studies were
also attempted by Stamatis et al. (2006), Pachero et al.
(2001), and Antoniou (2002). The study area is a developing
urban environment with insufficient surface water resources
with major population which rely on groundwater for
domestic, agricultural, and industrial purposes. Chain of
industries like thermal power plant and chemical industries is
Fig. 1 Location, geology, and
groundwater sampling points
of the study area
11o 45’
11o 30’
77o 45’
Arab J Geosci (2011) 4:91–102
confined to the northwestern part of the study area and
northeastern part is dominated by agricultural activities.
Meager industries and agricultural practices are distributed
throughout the study area. Few unpublished reports give a
limited idea about geochemical behavior of groundwater in
the study area. Hence, an attempt has been made in this
study to determine the hydrochemistry of groundwater to
classify its quality in order to evaluate its suitability for
municipal, agricultural, and industrial uses along with the
spatial distribution.
Study area
The study area, Salem district, lies in northeastern part of
Tamilnadu, state of India, between north latitudes 11°19′ and
11°57″ and east longitudes 77°38′ and 78°51″. The total
geographical extent of the study area is 5,207 km2. It has an
extensive area covered by hills in east and undulating plains
exposed in west (Srinivasamoorthy et al. 2005). General
elevation ranges from 250 to 320 m above mean sea level,
and higher elevations of 1,200 to 1,500 m are confined to hill
ranges due north. Major part of the study area is covered by
shallow pediments, bajadas, and denudational landforms.
Geologically, the study area is comprised of peninsular
gneiss, charnockite, ultramafic complex, and potassic mem-
bers confined to Archean (Fig. 1). The study area comprises
a number of folds, faults, lineaments, shears, and joints.
78o 30’
Table 1 Statistical parameters for groundwater during different seasons

Parameters Maximum Minimum Average Median Mode Standard deviation

POM SUM SWM POM SUM SWM POM SUM SWM POM SUM SWM POM SUM SWM POM SUM SWM

pH 8.6 8.6 8.5 6.6 6.3 7.1 7.9 7.4 7.8 8 7.5 7.8 7.9 7.3 8.1 0.36 0.41 0.33
EC 2,965 3,090 4,180 221.5 550 520 1,565 1,628 1,761 1,605 1,560 1,639 1,470 1,560 1,330 536 507 808
HCO3 976 887.6 861 4.7 33 55 405 346 328 372 354 319 354 33.7 305 180 201 112
CL 974 1,008 1,400 30.5 35 88 357 286 351 270 248 266 266 124 89 233 201 266
Arab J Geosci (2011) 4:91–102

SO4 160 210.2 127 0.65 0 7 93 90 61 92 94 54 98 92 60 43 40 33

PO4 4.80 0.01 2 0.1 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 0
NO3 162 87.7 56 13.6 1.0 3 31 39 26 30 35 27 18 35 32 17 21 12
F 7 3 4 0.40 0.07 0 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 2 2 1 2 1
H4SIO4 51.6 22.4 45 3.4 2.6 5 24 26 25 24 27 24 30 31 30 7 11 8
Ca 130 196 134 3 7.37 16 94 60 57 82 60 54 70 60 70 47 28 26
Mg 483 166.1 167 20.5 3.9 8 67 75 48 58 59 43 38 42 18 31 68 26
Na 834 415.9 1,038 33 41.8 23 175 213 323 149 139 167 – 148 134 104 184 291
K 384 120.1 474 1 0.4 1 13 32 59 6 13 18 4 3 12 17 68 106
TDS 1,980 1,567 2,741 179 148.7 217 856 820 951 726 737 771 – – – 376 370 559
%Na 79 87 93 16 10 21 42 49 61 40 45 65 – – – 24 1 8
RSC 11 12 10 15 36 15 3 6 1 3 3 1 1 – 1 3 3 2
SAR 5 19 33 1 0 1 4 2 8 3 1 4 – – – 4 0 1
CR 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 – – – 0 0 0
TH 890.0 1,129.5 1,020.0 187.5 129.0 114.0 509.3 437.2 338.6 474.0 402.8 307.8 332.00 431.0 421.5 203.7 189.7 150.3
PI 85 99.0 44 33 12 70 58 58 69 55 58 – – – 1 12 1 1

All values in milligrams per liter except EC in microSiemens per centimeter and pH
POM post-monsoon, SUM summer, SWM southwest monsoon
93
94
Magnesite, bauxite, magnetite, and chromite are the impor-
tant minerals and ores constrict in the district. The drainage
of the district is contributed by two major river systems,
Cauvery which flows due north south and Vellar along the
NW part of the study area. The mean annual temperature
varies between 20°C and 35°C. The district receives meager
rainfall (504.6–920.8 mm/annum) due to its location in rain
shadow region. The occurrence and movement of ground-
water in the study area is restricted to open system of
fractures like fissures and joints in unweathered portion and
also the porous zones of weathered formations. The
weathered layer in gneissic terrain of the study area varies
from 2.2 to 50 m. In charnockite, thickness was ranging
between 5.8 to 55 m. At contacts of gneiss and charnockite,
thickness was ranging between 9.0 to 90.8 m indicating good
groundwater potential. The groundwater fluctuation in the
study area ranges from 0.2 to 13.5 m below ground level. It
reaches the lowest level during summer (SUM; March–June)
and after it starts rising till the end of monsoon season
(August–January).
Materials and methods
Groundwater samples were collected in 1 l polyethylene
bottles during post-monsoon (POM; January), summer
(March), and southwest monsoon (SWM; July) seasons
broadly to cover the seasonal variations. A total of 162
samples were collected at the rate of 54 samples per season.
The samples were filtered using 0.45 μ Millipore filters and
analyzed for chemical constituents. pH and electrical conduc-
tivity (EC) were measured in situ. Water analyses were carried
out by using standard procedures (APHA 1995). Bicarbonate,
calcium, magnesium, and chloride were analyzed by titration
method. Fluoride, determined by using Orion fluoride ion
electrode model (94-09, 96-09). Sulfate, nitrate, and silicate
were determined by using Digital Spectrophotometer model
GS5 700A. Phosphate was determined by using ascorbic
acid method; sodium and potassium are by flame photometer
(Systronics mk-1/mk-III). The charge balance between
cations and anions varies by about 5–10% and in few sites
between 20% and 30%. Total dissolved solid (TDS)/EC ratio
is 0.9/1.7 indicating additional sources of anions other than
weathering reactions.
Results and discussions
Hydrogeochemistry
Statistical parameters like maximum, minimum, average,
median, mode, and standard deviation are represented for
the chemistry data in Table 1. Almost all the parameters
Arab J Geosci (2011) 4:91–102
except pH showed wide fluctuations irrespective of sea-
sons. Groundwater from the study area is neutral to alkaline
with pH ranging from 9.0 to 7.0. Maximum was noted
during SUM followed by SWM and POM seasons. EC was
ranging from 222.0 to 4,282.0μS/cm. Higher concentration
was noted during SWM indicating effective leaching of
ions into the groundwater system during recharge. TDS
values range from 179.0 to 2,741.0 mg/l; higher concen-
tration was noted during SWM. Bicarbonate values range
from 5.0 to 979.0 mg/l with higher concentration during
POM season. Silica was ranging from 3.0 to 52.0 mg/l with
higher concentration noted during SUM. Potassium was
ranging from 474.0 to 0.01 mg/l during SWM and POM
seasons and Na from 1,038.0 to 23.0 mg/l during SWM
season. Chloride concentrations range from 1,400.0 to
31.0 mg/l during SWM and SUM seasons. Nitrate concen-
trations range from 162.0 to 1.0 mg/l during SUM and
POM seasons. Calcium concentrations range from 130.0 to
3.0 mg/l during SUM seasons. The distribution of SO4 is
highly variable from 1.0 to 184.0 during POM and SUM
seasons, respectively. The abundance of major ions in the
groundwater was in the order of Naþ > Ca2þ > Mg2þ >
Kþ ¼ Cl > HCO3 > SO4 > NO3 . Majority of higher con-
centrations were noted higher during SWM season indicat-
ing the effective leaching of ions into the groundwater
during rainfall infiltration. It must be noticed the high
dispersion of values for most variables (high standard
deviations), which indicates variations in chemical compo-
sition along the sampling area.
Presentation of geochemical data in the form of
graphical charts such as Piper–Hill diagram (Piper 1994)
helps us in recognizing various hydrogeochemical types in
a groundwater basin. The plot irrespective of seasons falls
in mixed Ca–Mg–Cl, Na–Cl, and Ca–HCO3 type with
minor representations from mixed Ca–Na–HCO3 and Ca–
Cl type (Fig. 2) indicating alkalinity exceeds alkaline earth
and strong acids exceed weak acids. In general, the total
hydrochemistry of the study area is dominated by alkali and
strong acids.
Classification based on water use criteria for drinking
purpose
The suitability of water for different purposes like
drinking, industrial, and irrigation is assessed due to
its extensive developmental activities like over drafting
and infiltration of agricultural and industrial effluents
into the groundwater system. This has insisted on for
the classification of groundwater based upon its utility
for various purposes. Drinking water standards are
based upon, presence of objectionable taste, odors or
colors along with presence of substances with adverse
physiological effects. Potability of drinking water is
Arab J Geosci (2011) 4:91–102 95

Fig. 2 Geochemical classifica-

tion of groundwater in the study
area

mainly based on recommended permissible limits of
certain parameters; when water exceeds the permissible
limit, it is unfit for human consumption. The Table 2
shows the range of ionic concentration in groundwater of
the study area and prescribed specifications of WHO
(1996) and ISI (1995). Parameters exceeding permissible
limits were identified in most of the locations indicating
higher ionic concentration. Mg and Cl exceed the
maximum limit in all the seasons and may be due to
weathering from silicate-rich rocks and leaching from soil
due to infiltration of anthropogenic activities. NO3 is also
exceeding the permissible limit of 45 mg/l indicating
anthropogenic impact from fertilizers. HCO3 is higher and
exceeds ISI limit for drinking water indicating precipita-
tion of CO3 as scales in pipelines and affects pumps
causing loss to farmers (Rengarajan and Balasubramanian

Table 2 Comparison of groundwater quality with standards

Parameters WHO (1996) Highest desirable ISI (1995) maximum permissible POM SUM SWM

pH 6.5–8.5 7.5–8.5 6.5–9.2 6.6–8.6 7.2–6.30 7.1–8.5

EC 1,400.0 – 221–2,965 550–3,090 520–4,180
TDS 1,000.0 500 1,500.0 179–1,980 148–1,567 216–2,741
Ca 500.0 75 200.0 3–130 7.3–196 16–134
Mg 30 100.0 20–483 4.0–146 8–166
Na 200.0 – – 33–834 41–415 23–1,038
K – – – 1–384 0.46–120 1–474
HCO3 – 300 600.0 4–976 33–887 54–860
CL 250.0 250 1,000.0 30–974 35–1,008 87–1,400
SO4 400.0 200 400.0 0.65–665 0.01–210.2 6–127
NO3 45.0 – 45.0 13–162 1.0–87 2.5–55.5
F 1.0 1.5 1.5 0.40–7.00 0.07–3.00 0.0–4.00
TH 100.0 500 150.0 129–890 187–1,129 114–1,020
96 Arab J Geosci (2011) 4:91–102

Table 3 Classification
TDS (mg/l) Nature of water POM (total wells) SUM (total wells) SWM (total wells)
of groundwater based on total
dissolved solids
<1,000 Freshwater 39 38 34
1,000–10,000 Brackish water 15 16 20
10,000–100,000 Saline water Nil Nil Nil
>100,000 Brine water Nil Nil Nil

SUM
1990). Sixty-five percent of groundwater in study area is
40
suitable for domestic and drinking purpose with few 18 19
48
abnormalities. 39 28 20
54 43 29
4
41 25
As groundwater moves or stays for a long period along 50 24 23
26 27
2
3
1
its flow path, there is normally an increase in TDS which 47
49 22 21 32 33
36 34
42 14 6
38 13 51
determines the suitability of groundwater for any purpose 35 12 53
46 37 5
17 44 15 10
11
(Freez and Cherry 1979). TDS in majority of the samples 52
9 7
45
are within the permissible limits of WHO and ISI with few 16 3031 8
exceptions irrespective of seasons. In Table 3, majority of
the samples fall in freshwater irrespective of seasons with
few representations from brackish water. Spatial distribu-
0 10 20
tion of TDS values was demarcated on the basis of
minimum and maximum permissible limit (<500, 500–
POM
1,500, and >1,500 mg/l) and indicated that majority of the
40
study area is having higher TDS which cannot be used for 19
18
48
safe drinking purpose (Fig. 3). 39 28 20 43 4
41 25 54 29
Hardness of water refers to soap neutralizing power of 26 27 3
50 24 23 1 2
water. Hardness refers to reaction with soap and scale 49 22 21
36 32
33 42 14
6
47 38 34 13
formation. It increases the boiling point of water and do not 37 35 12 53 51
5
17 46 10
15
have any adverse effect on health of human. Hardness of 44 11
52
9 7
45
the water varies from moderately hard to very hard 16 30 31
8
(Table 4); increasing of hardness was noted in POM season.
In general, hardness is increased during POM and SUM
seasons and may be due to leaching of Ca and Mg ions into 0 10 20
groundwater.
Chloride was ranging from 31 to 1,400 mg/l. Average
SWM
values for all the seasons were within the prescribed limits.
Spatial distribution of chloride was classified on the basis 40
19
of maximum allowable limit of 600 mg/l (Fig. 4). Higher 18 48
39 28 20 43 4
concentration >600 mg/l was confined to northeastern and 41 25 54 29
26 27 3
northwestern part of the study area during post-monsoon 50 24 23 1 2
49 22 21 32 33 42 14 6
and summer seasons but during southwest monsoon, 47 36 34 13 51
38 12 53
37 35 5
dilution effect is well noted. 17 46
44 15 11 10
9 7
Nitrogen in groundwater derived from organic industrial 52
45
16 3031
effluents, fertilizer or nitrogen-fixing bacteria, leaching of 8

animal dung, sewage, and septic tanks through soil and

water matrix to groundwater. In general, increase of nitrate
in groundwater may be an indicator of bacterial pollution 0 10 20
(Srinivasamoorthy et al. 2005). Nitrate was ranging from 1
to 162 mg/l. Higher concentration (>45 mg/l) that was TDS - < 500 mg/l

observed during summer season might be due to intensive TDS - 500 - 1500 mg/l

agricultural activity, and lower concentration (<45 mg/l) TDS - > 1500 mg/l

that was observed during southwest monsoon season

indicating surface runoff might have decreased the nitrate Fig. 3 Spatial distribution of TDS in the study area (POM post-
concentration (Fig. 5). monsoon, SUM summer, SWM southwest monsoon)
Arab J Geosci (2011) 4:91–102 97

Table 4 Classification
of groundwater based Total hardness Water class POM SUM SWM
on hardness as CaCO3 (mg/l) (total wells) (total wells) (total wells)

<75 Soft Nil Nil Nil

75–150 Moderately hard Nil Nil 2
150–300 Hard 7 15 25
>300 Very hard 47 39 27

SUM
SUM

40 40
18 19 18 19
48 48
39 28 20
54 43 29
4 39 28 20 43 4
41 25 41 25 54 29
26 27 3 26 27 3
50 24 23 1 2 50 24 23 1 2
49 22 21 32 33 42 14 6 22 21 33 42 6
47 36 34 13 51 47
49 36 32 34 14
38 12 53 38 12
13
51
37 35 5 37 35 53 5
17 46 10 46
44 15 11 17 44 15 11
10
9 7 9 7
52 52
45 45
16 3031 8 16 30 31
8

0 10 20 0 10 20

POM
POM

40 40
18 19 18 19
48 48
39 28 20
54 43 29
4 39 28 20
54 43 29
4
41 25 41 25
26 27 3 26 27 3
50 24 23 1 2 50 24 23 1 2
49 22 2136 32 33 42 14 6 22 21 33 42 6
47 34 47
49 36 32 34 14
38 12 53 13 51 38 12
13
51
35 35 53
46 37 5 46 37 5
17 44 15 11 10 17 44 15 11
10
52 9 7 52
9 7
45 45
16 3031 8
16 30 31
8

0 10 20 0 10 20

SWM
SWM
40
19 40
18
48 18 19
39 28 20 4 48
54 43 29 28 20
41 25 39 43 4
41 25 54 29
26 27 3
50 24 1 2 26 27 3
23 50 2
22 21 33 6 24 23 1
42
47
49 36 32 34 14 22 21 33 42 6
38 12
13
51 47
49 36 32 34 14
35 53 38 13
37 5 35 12 53 51
17 46 10 37 5
44 15 11 17 46
9 44 15 10
52 7 11 9
45 52 7
45
16 30 31
8 16 30 31
8

0 10 20 0 10 20

Cl < 600 mg/l NO3 - < 45 mg/l

Cl > 600 mg/l NO3 - > 45 mg/l

Fig. 5 Spatial distribution of nitrate in the study area

Fig. 4 Spatial distribution of chloride in the study area
98 Arab J Geosci (2011) 4:91–102

Sulfate is found in smaller concentration due to its lesser

POM
breaking down of organic substances from weathered
40
18 19 soil/water (Miller 1979). The highest desirable limit is
48
39 28
25
20
54 43 29
4 200 mg/l and the maximum permissible limit in ground-
41
50 24 23
26 27
1 2
3 water is 400 mg/l. SO4 concentration ranges from 1 to
21 33 6
47
49 22
36 32 34
42 14
13
184 mg/l. Sulfate was within the permissible limit through-
38 12 51
35 53
17 46 37
15 10
5 out the seasons.
44 11 9
45
52 7 Fluoride ion predominantly present in groundwater is
16 30 31
8 considered as toxicological geoenvironmental issue when
present in excess or deficit amount. Consumption of higher
fluoride groundwater (>1.5 mg/l) can affect bones and soft
0 10 20 tissues like skeletal muscles, erythrocytes, gastrointestinal
tissues, and ligaments. Effect of fluoride on teeth is called
SUM dental fluorosis and on bone is called skeletal fluorosis.
40
Fluoride in groundwater was ranging from 0.2 to 7 mg/l.
18
48
19 Higher concentration was noted during summer season due
28
41
39
25
20
54 43 29
4 to weathering and leaching of the greater availability of
50 24
26 27
1 2
3 fluoride-bearing minerals like apatite, biotite, muscovite,
23
21 33 6
47
49 22
36 32 34
42 14
13
lepidolite, and hornblende which has been reported from
38 12 51
53
17 46 37 35
10
5 litho units of the study area (Ramanathan 1956). Spatial
44 15 11
45
52
9 7 distribution of fluoride was classified on the basis of its
16 30 31
8
concentration as (<0.5, 1.0–1.5, and >1.5 mg/l). Higher
concentration was noted in the areas dominated by
0 10 20
peninsular gneiss and charnockite (Fig. 6).

SWM Classification of water use for irrigation purpose

40
18 19
48
39 28
25
20
54 43 29
4 The suitability of groundwater for irrigation purpose is
41
50 24 23
26 27
1 2
3 mainly based upon factors as soil texture and composition,
22 21 33 42 6
47
49
38
36 32 34
12
14
13
51
crops grown, and irrigation practices in addition to
35 53 5
37
17 46
44 15 11
10
9
chemical characteristics of the water. Quality of irrigation
52 7
45
16
water is judged by estimation of parameters like sodium
30 31
8
adsorption ratio (SAR), Na%, and residual sodium carbon-
ate (RSC).
0 10 20 Total Na + concentration and EC is important in
classifying the irrigation water (Raghunath 1987). Sodium
F - < 0.5 mg/l
percentage is calculated by using the formula:
F - 0.5 - 1.0 mg/l
F - > 1.0 mg/l
Percent Na ¼fðNa þ KÞ  100g=
Fig. 6 Spatial distribution of fluoride in the study area ððCa þ Mg þ Na þ KÞÞ expressed in meq=1:

Majority of samples (Table 5) irrespective of seasons fall in

good to doubtful zone with minor representations from

Table 5 Classification
%Na Water class POM (total wells) SUM (total wells) SWM (total wells)
of groundwater based on percent
sodium
<20 Excellent 1 2 1
<21 Good 29 18 8
<22 Permissible 17 15 17
<23 Doubtful 6 19 19
<24 Unsuitable 1 Nil 9
Arab J Geosci (2011) 4:91–102 99

Table 6 Classification
EC (μS/cm) Water class POM (total wells) SUM (total wells) SWM (total wells)
of groundwater based
on conductivity
<250 Excellent Nil Nil Nil
<250–750 Good 2 1 3
750–2,000 Permissible 37 45 35
2,000–3,000 Doubtful 21 8 12
>3,000 Unsuitable 4 Nil 4

excellent and unsuitable zones for irrigation purpose. Wilcox
(1955) classified groundwater on percent sodium and EC.
Majority of samples irrespective of seasons fall (Table 6) in
permissible limit with minor representations in good, doubt-
ful, and unsuitable range (Fig. 7). Na+ is an important cation
which in excess may harm plant growth physically by
limiting the uptake of water through modification of osmotic
process or chemically by metabolic reactions. Effects of Na%
on solid structure reduces permeability and results in soil with
poor internal drainage (Subramani et al. 2005).
Salinity of groundwater and SAR determines its utility
for agricultural purposes. Salinity originates in groundwater
due to weathering of rocks and leaching from top soil,
anthropogenic sources along with minor influence on
climate. The level of Na + and HCO 3 in irrigation
groundwater affects permeability of soil and drainage of
Fig. 7 Wilcox classification 30
of groundwater in the study area
28
C1S4
26
24
Sodium Adsorption Ratio
the area. A better measure of the sodium hazard has been
expressed as the percent sodium of total cations. A better
measure of the sodium hazard is the SAR which is used to
express reactions in the soil. SAR is based primarily on the
effect of exchangeable sodium on the physical condition of
the soil. Sodium sensitive plants may suffer injury as a
result of sodium accumulation in the plant tissue when
exchangeable sodium values are lower than those effective
in causing deterioration of the physical condition of the
soil. SAR is computed as
.npffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffio
SAR ¼ðNaÞ ðCa þ MgÞ=2 expressed in eq=m:
When SAR (alkali hazard) and specific conductance
(salinity hazard) are plotted in USSL (1954) diagram,
classification of water for irrigation purpose can be
C4S4
C2S4 C3S4

22
C1S3 C2S3
20
18
16 C3S3
14
C1S2 C2S2
12
10 C4S3
C3S2
8
6 C4S2
4 C1S1 C2S1 C3S1
2
C4S1
0
0 250 500 750 1000 1250 1500 1750 2000 2250 2500 2750
EC-->

SUM
POM
SWM
100 Arab J Geosci (2011) 4:91–102

Fig. 8 USSL classification 100

of groundwater in the study area

75 Permissible to Doubtful

Percent Sodium --->

Doubtful to unsuitable
Excellent to good

Unsuitable
Good to permissible
50

25

0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35

Total Concentration (meq/l) ---> POM

SUM
SWM

determined (Fig. 8). Majority of samples fall in C3S1 zone
during summer and post-monsoon indicating high and low
salinity, satisfactory for plants having moderate salt
tolerance on soils. Southwest monsoon samples are also
noted in C2S1, C3S2, C3S3, and C4S3 zones. This
indicates medium to very high salinity waters which
renders application of gypsum, makes water feasible, and
also increases soil permeability (Goyal and Jain 1982). Soil
in this terrain is preferable for salt tolerance plants.
Permeability index (PI) is an important factor which
influences quality of irrigation water in relation to soil for
development in agriculture. PI is obtained by considering
the ions in milliequivalents per liter. It is obtained by the
formula.
h pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffii
PI ¼ fNaþðHCO3 Þg= ðCa þ Mg þ NaÞ
 100 expressedin eq=m:
Based on permeability index, Doneen (1948) classified
the groundwater as class I, class II, and class III to find out
suitability of groundwater for irrigation purpose. In all the
seasons, most of the plot irrespective of season fall in class
I and class II indicating water is moderate to good for
irrigation purposes.
In waters having high concentration of bicarbonate, there
is tendency for calcium and magnesium to precipitate as the
water in the soil becomes more concentrated. Hence, it
resulted in increased concentration of sodium in water in
the form of sodium carbonate. RSC is calculated by the
following equation (Eaton 1954)
RSC ¼ðHCO3 ðCa þ MgÞ expressed ineq=m:
Majority of samples irrespective of seasons fall in
“good” zone of RSC (Richards 1954) classification
(Table 7) indicating water is fit for irrigation purposes.
Few representations of “medium” and “bad” water were
also noted.
Groundwater extracted from the study area for various
purposes is transported by metallic pipes that may or may
not be suitable for the transport. This fact is highlighted

Table 7 Classification
RSC Water class POM (total wells) SUM (total wells) SWM (total wells)
of groundwater based on residual
sodium carbonate
<1.25 Good 47 48 44
1.25–2.5 Doubtful 3 2 4
>2.5 Unsuitable 4 4 6
Arab J Geosci (2011) 4:91–102
using corrosivity ration proposed by Ryznes (1944). The
formula for calculating CR is
CR ¼ fðCI=35:5Þ þ ðSO4 =96Þg=2ðHCO3 Þ=
100 expressed in eq=m:
The CR for the study area is less than one for all the
samples irrespective of seasons indicating groundwater of
the study area is noncorrosive.
Conclusion
1. Groundwater from the study area is neutral to alkaline
in nature. The abundance of major ions in the
groundwater was in the order of Na > Ca > Mg >
K = Cl > HCO3 > SO4 > NO3.
2. Hydrochemistry of the study area is dominated by
alkali and strong acids. As per comparison with WHO
and ISI standard, 65% of groundwater in study area is
suitable for domestic and drinking purpose with few
abnormalities.
3. Higher TDS and EC values were observed in north-
eastern and northwestern part of the study area
dominated by agricultural practices and industrial
dominance. Higher concentration was noted in post-
monsoon season following summer.
4. Cl, NO3, SO4, and F were found higher than permis-
sible limit indicating anthropogenic impact along with
leaching of fluoride from major litho units.
5. Total hardness shows an increasing trend during post-
monsoon and summer seasons. As per the classification
of water for domestic and irrigation purposes, water is
fit for irrigation purposes with minor exceptions
irrespective of seasons.
References
Ahmed SS, Mazumder H, Jahan CS, Ahmed M, Islam S (2002)
Hydrochemistry and classification of groundwater, Rajshahi City
Corporation Area, Bangladesh. J Geol Soc Ind 60:411–418
Antoniou V (2002) Natural and human environment of Athens basin.
Paper presented at the 6th Geographical conference of the
Hellenic Geographical Society, Thessaloniki, I, 311–318
APHA et al (1995) Standard methods for the examination of water
and wastewater. American Public Health Association, Wash-
ington, DC
Bathrellos GD, Skilodimou HD, Kelepertsis A, Alexakis D, Chrisanthaki
I, Archonti D (2008) Environmental research of groundwater in the
urban and suburban areas of Attica region, Greece. Environ Geol
56:11–18
Bhargava DS, Killender DJ (1988) The technology of water resources
in industries. A rational approach. J Ind Water Works Assoc
20:107–112
101
Doneen LD (1948) The quality of irrigation water. California
Agriculture Department, Davis 4–11, 6–14
Eaton, F.M. (1954) Formulae for estimating leaching and gypsum
requirement of irrigation waters, Texas Agri Expt Stn Misc Pub. No. 3
Freez RA, Cherry JA (1979) Groundwater. Prentice Hall, Englewood
Cliffs
Yuce G (2007) A geochemical study of the groundwater in the Misli
basin and environmental implications. Environ Geol 51:857–868
Goyal RS, Jain BL (1982) Use of gypsum, modifying crustal
conductive conditions in saline water irrigated soils. J Ind Soc
Soil Sci 30:447–454
Hem JD (1985) Study and interpretation of the chemical
characteristics of natural water. USGS Water Supply Paper
2254, pp 117–120
ISI (1995) Indian standard specification for drinking water. IS, 10500-
1995. ISI, New Delhi
Kumar M, Kumari K, Singh UK, Ramananthan AL (2009) Hydro-
geochemical processes in the groundwater environment of
Muktsar, Punjab: conventional graphical and multivariate statis-
tical approach. Environ Geol 57:873–884
Miller GT (1979) Living in the environment. Wadsworth, Belmond,
p 470
Jalali M (2007) Hydrochemical identification of groundwater resour-
ces and their changes under the impacts of human activity in the
Chah basin in western Iran. Environ Monit Assess 130:347–364
Pachero J, Marin L, Cabrera A, Steinich B, Escolero O (2001) Nitrate
temporal and spatial patterns in 12 water-supply wells, Yucatan,
Mexico. Environ Geol 40:708–715
Piper AM (1994) A graphic procedure in the geochemical interpre-
tation of water analysis. Am Geophys Union Trans 25:914–923
Prasad, N.B.N (1984) Hydrogeological studies in the Bhadra River
Basin. Ph.D. thesis, University of Mysore, Karnataka, India, p 323.
Mohan R, Singh AK, Tripathi JK, Chowdhary GC (2000) Hydro-
chemistry and quality assessment of groundwater in Naini industrial
area, Allahabad District, Uttapradesh. J Geol Soc Ind 55:77–90
Raghunath HM (1987) Geochemical survey and water quality,
Groundwater Wiley eastern limited, New Delhi, pp 343–347.
Ramanathan S (1956) Ultrabasic rocks of Salem and Dodkanya and
their relationship with Charnockite. Doctoral thesis, Madras
University
Rengarajan R, Balasubramanian A (1990) Corrosion and scale
formation characteristic of groundwater in and around Nanga-
valli, Salem District, Tamilnadu. J Appl Hydrol 2:15–22
Richards LA (1954) Diagnosis and improvement of saline and alkali
soils. USDA handbook 60. Government Printing Office, Wash-
ington, DC 160 pp
Ryznes JW (1944) A new index for determining amount of calcium
carbonate scale formed by water. J Am Water Works Assoc
36:472–486
Srinivasamoorthy K, Chidambaram S, Anandhan P, Vasudevan S
(2005) Application of statistical analysis to hydrogeochemical
study of groundwater in hard rock terrain, Salem district,
Tamilnadu. Ind J Geochem 20:181–190
Srinivasamoorthy K, Chidambaram S, Prasanna MV, Vasanthavihar
M, Peter J, Anandhan P (2008) Identification of major sources
controlling groundwater chemistry from a hard rock terrain—a
case study from Mettur taluk, Salem district, Tamilnadu, India. J
Earth Syst Sci 117:49–59
Stamatis G, Lambrakis N, Alexakis D, Zagana V (2006) Groundwater
quality in Mesogea basin in eastern Attica (Greece). Hydrol
Process 20:2803–2818
Subba Rao N, Prakasa Rao J, John Devadas D, Srinivasa Rao KV,
Krishna C, Nagamalleswara Rao B (2002) Hydrogeochemistry
and groundwater quality in a developing urban environment of a
semi-arid region, Guntur, Andhra Pradesh. J Geol Soc Ind
59:159–166
102
Subramani T, Elango L, Damodarasamy SR (2005) Groundwater quality
and its suitability for drinking and agricultural use in Chithar River
Basin, Tamilnadu, India. Environ Geol 47:1099–1110
Umar A, Umar R (2002) Hydrogeochemical characterization of ground-
water in parts of Etah district central Ganga alluvial plain, Uttar
Pradesh. In: Thangarajan M, Rai SN, Singh VS (eds) Proceedings of
the international groundwater conference on sustainable develop-
ment and management of groundwater resources in semi-arid region
with special reference to hard rocks, Dindugal, Tamilnadu, 20–22
February 2002. Oxford and IBH, New Delhi, pp 247–255
USSL (1954) Diagnosis and improvement of saline and alkali soils.
United States Development Agency handbook 60. Government
Printing Office, Washington, DC 147 pp
Arab J Geosci (2011) 4:91–102
Viessman W Jr, Lewis GL, Knapp JW (1989) Introduction to
hydrology. Harper and Row, Singapore
Wen XH, Wu YQ, Wu J (2008) Hydrochemical characteristics of
groundwater in the Zhangye basin, northwestern China. Environ
Geol 55:1713–1724
WHO (1996) Guidelines for drinking water quality. Geneva 1:53–73
Wilcox LV (1955) Classification and use of irrigation waters. U.S.
Department of Agriculture, Circulation 969, Washington D.C.
p.19
Yvonne, Anku S, Bruce Banoeng Yakubo E, Daniel E, Asiedu K,
Sandow E, Yidana M (2008) Water quality analysis of ground-
water in crystalline basement rocks, northern Ghana. Environ
Geol. doi:00254-008-1578-4