RELIABLITY ANALYSIS OF GROUNDWATER

DROUGHT INDEX IN SINA BASIN, INDIA

PRESENTED BY
SOURAV CHOUDHARY
1725004

MID SEMESTER EXAMINATION

4th APRIL. 2019

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING

NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY PATNA
INTRODUCTION
 Groundwater is a vital water source because about two billion
people depend directly upon aquifers for drinking water and 40%
of the world's food is produced by irrigated agriculture that relies
largely on groundwater.

 Groundwater, as a part of water resources, plays a major role in

ensuring domestic water supply for residents and promoting the
development of society and economy.

 Groundwater droughts refer to stored water that

is depleted without being sufficiently recharged. They are of the
hydrological drought type but at a slower rate.
 INTRODUCTION (Contd..)
 Areas with over-exploitation of groundwater faces problems such as
groundwater funnel, land subsidence and saline intrusion and for areas
without qualified sewage treatment, groundwater contamination has directly
led to the deterioration of groundwater quality.

 Therefore, correctly identifying the risk factors of the

regional groundwater system and establishing a reasonable risk analysis
model are crucial.

 Any mathematical formulation of groundwater drought is subject to

uncertainties and frequency analysis can be used to estimate the uncertainties
and duration of droughts for a specified return period of operational
droughts by having a statistical approach.
 OBJECTIVES

 To obtain Environmental Hazard Index (EHI) (potential

environmental impacts) by deriving :

Resistance(representing internal factors) for different drought

band(Mild, Moderate, Severe and Extreme).
 Groundwater drought risk (GDR) for each different drought band.

• To project return period of GDR based on copula interface (a

joint probability approach).
 LITERATURE REVIEW (Contd..)
Authors Title Methodology Research Work
 Sadeghfam Investigating The study investigates the This paper introduces a methodology for
et al. (2018) ‘risk’ of derivation of a probability- estimating GDR by applying reliability
groundwater based index through analysis to aquifers with the goal of
drought reliability analysis to cope delivering its PoC. The methodology is
occurrences by with uncertainties by using particularly applicable to sites, in which
using reliability Monte Carlo Sampling data are sparse and limited to recorded
analysis (MCS) or Latin Hypercube GWD at a sufficient number of
Sampling (LHS). observation wells.

Li et al. Assessment and One of the interpolation
(2018) uncertainty methods used in this paper
analysis of is ordinary kriging.
groundwater risk The Kolmogorov-Smirnov
test (K-S test) was adopted
to test the normality of the
sample distributions and
assign a weighted factor.
Ordinary kriging is a common and the
most widely-used interpolation method.
But, OK requires sample data to comply
with normal distribution. Indicator
kriging (IK) is proved to be a useful tool
for the uncertainty analysis for all
interpolation indexes which have
different randomness and directly lead to
the uncertainty of groundwater risk
assessment.
 LITERATURE REVIEW (Contd..)
Authors Title Methodology
Hosseini et A novel machine Creation of groundwater
al. (2018) learning-based vulnerability map by
approach for the DRASTIC model. Boosted
risk assessment of regression trees (BRT),
Nitrate groundwater multivariate discriminant
contamination analysis (MDA), and
support vector machine
(SVM) were used for the
probability of groundwater
pollution occurrence.
Research Work
To manage and control quality of
groundwater in study area, it is
important to reduce the use of
nitrogenous fertilizers in irrigation.
Furthermore, to avoid leaching of the
soil nitrate, drip irrigation system
should be replaced with flood irrigation
practice.

Lezzaik et The groundwater Groundwater Risk Index The index relies on gridded up-to date
al. (2018) risk index: (GRI) was developed as a regional datasets and models to quantify
Development and distributed composite groundwater reserve and utilizes
application in the index to assess and GRACE, a robust and popular
Middle East and evaluate groundwater gravimetric-based satellite, to track
North Africa region depletion risk by groundwater storages changes with a
combining different monthly resolution
environmental and
socioeconomic datasets
and models.
 LITERATURE REVIEW (Contd..)
Authors Title Methodology Research Work
 Huan et al. Comprehensive Model for groundwater risk The HVF model was proved to
(2018) assessment of assessment was proposed by be suitable for assessing
groundwater pollution combining the hazard of groundwater pollution risk at a
risk based on HVF contaminated sources (H) regional scale.
model: A case study in groundwater intrinsic Correct areas of groundwater
Jilin City of northeast vulnerability (V) and pollution risk mapping accounted
China. groundwater function value. for 95.81% of the study area with
The mappings of H and V low possibility of contamination.
were combined to indicate the
contamination occurrence
probability.

Sreekanth et Pareto-based efficient Simulation–optimization It is concluded that the low

al. (2016) stochastic simulation methods are used to develop injection rates are necessary for
optimization for optimal solutions for a variety achieving minimum variance of
robust and reliable of groundwater the predicted heads, while high
groundwater management problems and is injection rates could be achieved
management accounted where model at the cost of reduced reliability
predictions are uncertain due and robustness of the solution.
to parameter uncertainty.
 LITERATURE REVIEW (CONTD..)
Authors Title Methodology Research Work

  In this study, the standardized

Karamouz et al. Development of In calculating the SPI a precipitation index, water surface supply
(2009) a Hybrid Index gamma distribution is index, and Palmer drought severity index
for Drought fitted to the observed have been combined to develop an
Prediction: Case precipitation values. integrated index, called the hybrid
Study drought index HDI, using associated
damage of drought events.

Sohrabi et al. Development of Development of Soil A new drought index termed the “soil
(2015) Soil Moisture Moisture Drought Index moisture drought index (SODI)” is
Drought Index to Characterize developed to characterize droughts. The
to Characterize Droughts premise of the index is based on how
Droughts much water is required to attain soil
moisture at field capacity.
 STUDY AREA
The basin of Sina river,
a drought prone area is
located in India of
Maharashtra state,
which is characterised
under a semiarid
region.

Fig. no. 1 Study area of the basin

 METHODOLOGY

The methodology introduced in the paper will be:

 Deriving resistance (representing internal factors) directly from observed GWD

data in terms of system capacity expressed as designated drought management
bands: (No Drought, Mild, Moderate, Severe and Extreme).
 Deriving load (representing external factors) from appropriate arrays of the
observed data, their PDFs and statistical moments to create appropriate
parameters for generating a set of random series;
 Extending the horizon of the observed data from limited sample sizes to suitably
high sample sizes
 Deriving decision parameters of GDR and EHI from random series using the
reliability analysis.
 To calculate the return period of the GDR (Groundwater
drought risk) with respect to severity and duration.

 To obtain the joint probability distribution of severity and

duration.
FLOWCHART
Collect GWD data from Gather GWD Annual maxima
Create {GWD}sum array
1990 to 2009 {GWD}AM array

Divide array into two equal Set drought intensity:

time periods 1. Mild drought
Calculate SWI Generate CDF of the Annual
1. {GWD1}sum 2. Moderate drought
maxima array
2. {GWD2}sum 3. Severe drought
4. Extreme drought

Generate Random Series

Fit PDF type
{RS1} and {RS2}
Normal
Using Monte Carlo Frequency analysis to calculate
Log - Normal
simulation resistance

Output: Randomly
Calculate area under the
Generated Loads
curve by using SWI in the
{GWD1}sum and
fitted PDF Output: Calculated resistance
{GWD2}sum

Selection of
representative well
by clustering
Box 3. Define performance function
DSS { Z1 , Z 2 } :
Calculation of SWI Resistance – Load (Normal PDF)
Module Ln (Resistance / Load) (Lognormal
for the
representative well PDF)

Calculate Statistical
Calculation of moments Output set 2 :
Duration and (µz1 and µz2 ) and also EHI = 0
Severity (σz1 and σz2 )

No

Calculate Reliability
Generating indices
Copula If { Risk2 } > { Risk1 }
(β1 =µz1 /σz1) and
(β2 =µz2 /σz2)
Yes
Calculation of Joint
Output set 2 :
probability and Output: Groundwater
Environmental Hazard
return period drought Risk (GDR)
index (EHI)
{ Risk1 } and { Risk 2 }
Risk2 - Risk1

Interpolation of
return period of the
drought risk Fig . 2 Flowchart of the uncertainty analysis
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

• The groundwater depth data for pre monsoon and post monsoon
has been collected from the CGWB for the past 20 years (1990
– 2009).

• The groundwater depth data is collected for a total of 133 wells

which is uniformly distributed throughout the basin.

• Statistical analysis were performed for getting the statistical

moments (Mean and Standard deviation) for individual wells.
 To plot and work with such a large data set which vary both
spatially (133 wells) and temporally (1990-2009) clustering
of data was recommended.

 During the clustering process K-Means clustering showed

the best correlation between the wells of similar properties.

 The plot of clustered wells and its variation with time period
is being shown in fig. 3 and 4.
Fig . 3 Plotting wells in the
form of clusters
TIME SERIES PLOT OF GROUNDWATER DEPTH FOR
DIFFERENT CLUSTERS FROM GROUND LEVEL

1989 1994
Pre monsoon
1999 2004 2009
3

5
Groundwater depth (m)

11

13

Cluster_0 Linear (Cluster_0) Cluster_1 Linear (Cluster_1) Cluster_2

Linear (Cluster_2) Cluster_3 Linear (Cluster_3) Cluster_4 Linear (Cluster_4)
Fig . 4 Variation of depths of well with time period
 Distribution of groundwater depth of all 133 wells. And
it’s depth Distribution with respect to well’s depth to
bottom.
140
3

120 19
32

100
43
80
59

60

40 59

20 40

0 9
0 2
Pre Post

Less than 2m 2.0m to 5.0 m

5.0m to 8.0m 8.0m to 11.0m Fig . 5 Distribution of wells according to its depth
More than 11m
• 
• The drought band available for the analysis are Mild (Band range of
0 -1), Moderate (1-1.5) Severe(1.5 -2) and Extreme (>2)

• Standardised water index(SWI) is calculated to trigger data into one

of the four drought band available(Mild, Moderate , Severe and
Extreme).

..(1)
Where
GWD is the groundwater depth measured from the ground level.
GWD* is the mean groundwater depth and S* is the standard
deviation of the groundwater depth data.
– The negative SWI calculated was not taken into
consideration as its stress on the groundwater table was not
observed.

– The data obtained after calculation of SWI was very scares

for analysis hence to get more data random numbers were
needed.

– The random number generated was by Monte carlo

simulation.
 The generation of random numbers by Monte Carlo
simulation included :

Xi+1 = {aXi + c}(mod m) i = 1, 2, . . . , n …..(2)

Where a is the multiplier, c is the increment, and m is an

integer-valued modulus.
The number of samples taken for simulation was 10000
The value of a and c is taken according to number of data
taken for simulation.
• The random sampling of SWI is done upto its most possible SWI value
calculated from the observed groundwater data.

• The random numbers is plotted in the standard normal distribution curve

and area under each band (Mild, Moderate, Severe and Extreme) is
calculated from the distribution of data.

• The Probability density function (PDF) for distribution was of Normal and
Triangular distribution type.
• The probability of exceedance of PDF value is projected to the CDF
of annual maxima curve to get the resistance.

• The Cumulative Density Function (CDF) graph is prepared by

gathering maximum value of the wells in the past 20 years(1990 –
2009).

• Resistance is the ability of the system to resist the stresses produced

due to varying GWD values as Loads.
The percentage of SWI values corresponding to different ranges such as
Mild, Moderate, Severe and Extreme is projected on the GWD annual
maxima curve (CDF) for getting the resistance.

Fig . 6 Standard Normal Distribution graph

 The groundwater drought depth (Resistance) is
calculated for 133 wells of different drought bands by
projecting SWI to CDF of annual maxima curve.

 The resistance data is uniformly distributed throughout

the basin by inverse distance weighting (IDW) method
in ArcGIS.
Results : Comparison between Mild and Moderate drought
band

Fig. no. 7 Resistance of (a) Mild drought (b) Moderate drought

 The results shows more stress values (red colour) which in turn
indicates higher risk of depleting aquifer capacity.

 Hence lower the resistance value, the closer the water table to the
ground level, where drought is less likely (green colour) to occur.

 The southern and some part of western region is not seriously

stressed due to Sina river.
 The extreme northern and central part of the basin is
impacted more in case of both Mild drought and Moderate
drought case.

 The system for Mild drought band resists upto a depth of

14m and for Moderate drought band the system resists a
maximum depth of 17m.
Results : Comparison between Severe and Extreme drought
band

Fig. no. 8 Resistance of (c) Severe drought (d) Extreme drought

• The extreme northern and some of the central part of the
basin is impacted more in case of both Severe and Extreme
drought case

• The system for Severe drought band resists upto a depth of

15m and for Extreme drought band the system resists a
maximum depth of 17m.
Results : Comparison of GDR between Mild and Moderate drought band

Fig. no. 9 GDR of (a) Mild, (b) Moderate drought

• The mild GDR peaks upto 97.23% and south western district
(Cluster_2) such as Solapur, some part of Osmanabad is
majorly affected.

• North-western region (Cluater_1) such as A.Nagar is also

affected with a maximum risk of 90% and wells other than this
is less affected.

• In case of moderate drought central region of the study area

such as Solapur and Osmanabad (Cluster_2) is majorly affected
upto a risk of 90% and needs immediate care.
Results : Comparison of GDR between Severe and Extreme drought band

Fig. no. 10 GDR of (c) Severe drought (d) Extreme drought

 In severe and extreme GDR case Central and Southern region
(Cluster_2 and 4) is seriously affected and range from 75% to 90%
and is vulnerable for future access.

 These region include Manganoan, Wada and Narkhedi region of

Solapur district and Kati, Jwala and Hangodi of Osmanabad.

 Beed region (Cluster_0 and 3) is facing abrupt variation (risk upto

70%) in the groundwater level from the past trends and is
environmentally hazardous for the survival of living dependence in
that region.
Fig. no. 11 EHI of a) Mild
(b) Moderate (c) Severe
(d) Extreme drought
• These risks led to the investigation of severity and duration which is
calculated based on SWI plot of different clusters.

• Theses severity and duration plot will be required for plotting the joint
probability and return period of the drought events of different bands of
different clusters.

• MvCat copula algorithm will be used for calculating the joint probability
and based on maximum likelihood a suitable method is adopted which is
Clayton in our case.
 Cluster_0 Cluster_1 Cluster_2 Cluster_3 Cluster_4
2

1.5

0.5

0
SWI

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21
-0.5

-1

-1.5

-2

-2.5
Duration in Months

Fig. no. 13 Index comparison of different clusters incorporating different wells

throught the basin.
• A heatmap is concluded by determining the number of events for
different clusters of varying severity and duration.

• The duration is plotted in terms of months and the severity can be

demarcated as different drought bands as Mild, Moderate, Severe and
Extreme.

• The corresponding maximum severity and duration corresponds to a

representative well in a region.
Fig. no. 14 Severity- Duration plot of different clusters for number of events
constituting drought during the assumed time-period.
CONCLUSION (TILL WORK DONE…)

 The occurrence of Mild and Moderate drought condition is

frequent than Severe and Extreme condition.

 Though the extreme drought condition is less likely to occur but

upper central part of the basin will be impacted more if it happens.

 The region for Severe and Extreme drought is observed less in

comparison to Mild and Moderate drought case.
 Conclusion (Contd…)
• Hence a percentage increase of 17.6% for resistance is
observed from Mild to Moderate drought band.

• And a percentage increase of 11.6% for resistance is

observed from Severe to Extreme drought band.

• The drought risk in mild and moderate region is basically

more for Solapur, Osmanabad, and A.Nagar region is
moderately concerned.
 Conclusion (Contd…)
• In Severe and Extreme region whose occurrence is less but
will impact more has to be checked for southern region
(Cluster_4) of Osmanabad.

• The risk is less for severe and extreme region but is more
impactful and has to be put under special observation.

• The Beed (Cluster_0 and 3) of north eastern region is

facing an abrupt variation and is vulnerable according to
EHI.
 WORK PLAN AND EXECUTION

TOPIC SELECTION
LITERATURE COLLECTION AND REVIEW
PRESENTATIONS AND EVALUATIONS
DATA COLLECTION
METHODOLOGY SELECTION
ANALYSIS AND
INTERPRETATION OF RESULTS
THESIS WRITING

FINAL
PRESENTATION
AUG’18 SEP’18 OCT’18 NOV’ 18 DEC’18 JAN’19 FEB’19 MAR’ 19 APR’ 19 MAY’ 19
• This study is been accepted for a Book chapter
“PROBABILITY BASED APPROACH FOR
EVALUATING GROUNDWATER RISK
ASSESSMENT IN SINA BASIN, INDIA” , by
authors Roshni Thendiyath, Sourav Choudhary,
Madan K Jha, Nehar Mandal in the book
“HANDBOOK OF PROBABILISTIC MODELS”.
 REFERENCES
Farzaneh Sajedi-Hosseini, Arash Malekian, Bahram Choubin, Omid
Rahmati, Sabrina Cipullo, Frederic Coulon and Biswajeet Pradhan (2018) .
A novel machine learning-based approach for the risk assessment of nitrate
groundwater contamination. J. of Science of the Total Environment, 644
(2018), 954–962.

Fawen Lia, Jingzhao Zhu, Xiyuan Deng, Yong Zhao and Shaofei Lid
(2018). Assessment and uncertainty analysis of groundwater risk. J. of
Environmental Research, 160 (2018) ,140–151.

Huan, Bo-Tao Zhang, Huimin Kong, Mingxiao Li, Wei Wang, Beidou Xi
and Guoqiang Wang (2018). Comprehensive assessment of groundwater
pollution risk based on HVF model: A case study in Jilin City of northeast
China”. J. of Science of the Total Environment 628–629 (2018), 1518–1530.
 REFERENCES (CONTD..)

 J. Sreekanth, Catherine Moore and Leif Wolf (2016). Pareto-

based efficient stochastic simulation–optimization for robust and
reliable groundwater management. Journal of Hydrology 533
(2016), 180–190.

 Khalil Lezzaik, Adam Milewski and Jeffrey Mullen (2018). The

groundwater risk index: Development and application in the
Middle East and North Africa region. J. of Science of the Total
Environment 628–629 (2018), 1149–1164.

 Mohammad Karamouz, Kabir Rasouli and Sara Nazif (2009).

Development of a Hybrid Index for Drought Prediction: Case
Study. J. Hydrol. Eng., 2009, 14(6): 617-627.
 References (Contd..)

 Mohammad M. Sohrabi, Jae H. Ryu, M.ASCE, John Abatzoglou and John

Tracy (2015). Development of Soil Moisture Drought Index to Characterize
Droughts” J. Hydrol. Eng., 2015, 20(11): 04015025

 Sina Sadeghfama, Ali Ehsanitabara Rahman Khatibib and Rasoul Daneshfaraz

(2018). Investigating risk of groundwater drought occurrences by using
reliability Analysis. J. of Ecological Indicators, 94 (2018) ,170–184.
Thank you