American Journal of Climate Change, 2012, 1, 217-230
http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/ajcc.2012.14019 Published Online December 2012 (http://www.SciRP.org/journal/ajcc)
Hydrochemical Characteristics of Groundwater for
Domestic and Irrigation Purposes in Dwarakeswar
W atershed Area, India
Sisir Kanti Nag*, Anindita Lahiri
Department of Geological Sciences, Jadavpur University, Kolkata, India
Received October 11, 2012; revised November 10, 2012; accepted November 18, 2012
ABSTRACT
The Hydrochemical study was carried out in Dwarakeswar watershed area, Bankura and Purulia districts, West Bengal,
India, with an objective of understanding the suitability of local groundwater quality for domestic and irrigation pur-
poses. Groundwater samples have been collected from different villages within Dwarakeswar watershed area. The sam-
ples have been analysed to determine physical parameters like pH, EC, TDS and Hardness, the chemical parameters like
Na, K, Ca, Fe, HCO3, SO4 and Cl. From the analysed data, some parameters like Sodium Absorption Ratio (SAR),
Soluble Sodium Percentage (SSP), Residual Sodium Carbonate (RSC), Total Hardness (TH), Magnesium Absorption
Ration (MAR) and Kelly’s Ratio (KR) have also been determined. The distribution pattern of TDS and chlorides, which
are the general indicators of groundwater quality reveals that on an average the ground water is fresh and potable except
the ground water in and around Teghari, Gara and Satyatan Primary school where the groundwater is not potable and
may affect the health of local population because concentration of TDS exceeds the desirable limits of 500 mg/L. The
aerial distribution of Total Dissolved Solids (TDS) reveals that highest concentration is recorded at Gara and Teghri and
the lowest concentrations is noted in Suburdih and Kalabani. SAR values were ranged between 0.09 - 0.54 meq/L in pre-
monsoon and 0.01 - 0.24 meq/L in post-monsoon. It is evident from the whole sample set that the SAR value is excel-
lent in all the samples. Hence, our findings strongly suggest that all the abstracted groundwater samples from the study
area were suitable for irrigation. Results of analyses for physical and chemical parameters of groundwater in this area
was found to be within the desirable Bureau of Indian Standards and World Health Organisation limits for drinking wa-
ter.
Keywords: Groundwater Quality; Sodium Absorption Ratio (SAR); Irrigation Suitability; Drinking Water Suitability;
Dwarakeswar Watershed
1. Introduction
Water is the most important resource for human exist-
ence. Ensuring access to cheap and clean drinking water
is emerging as one of the most difficult challenges of this
century. In rural side, there is an acute crisis of potable
water with some of the water pockets containing excess
salinity, hardness, fluoride, arsenic, or harmful pathogens
which cause several health problems.
Water being a universal solvent has been and is being
utilized by man kind time and now. Of the total amount
of global water, only 2.4% is distributed on the main land,
of which only a small portion can be utilized as fresh
water. The available fresh water to man is hardly 0.3% -
0.5% of the total water available on the earth and there-
fore, its judicious use is imperative [1]. The fresh water
is a finite and limited resource [2]. The utilization of wa-
ter from ages has led to its over exploitation coupled with
the growing population along with improved standard of
living as a consequence of technological innovations [3,
4]. This contamination of groundwater is not away from
the evils of modernization. Therefore, quality of ground-
water is deteriorating at a faster pace due to pollution
ranging from septic tanks [5,6], land fill leachates, do-
mestic sewage [7-9], agricultural runoff/agricultural fi-
elds [10-14] and industrial wastes [3,4,8,15]. Contami-
nation of groundwater also depends on the geology of the
area and it is rapid in hard rock areas especially in lime-
stone regions where extensive cavern systems are below
the water table [16]. This is a common feature, not only
in developed countries but also in developing countries
like India. The changes in quality of groundwater re-
sponse to variation in physical, chemical and biological
environments through which it passes [17].
Groundwater is normally used directly in rural areas
*Corresponding author.
C
opyright © 2012 SciRes. AJCC

S. K. NAG, A. LAHIRI 218
without proper monitoring and treatment. Groundwater
may also become contaminated by the agrochemical pro-
ducts used for irrigation. The groundwater quality in
southern part of the country namely Chennai, Kanche-
epuram and Chengalpet, has been studied earlier [18-23].
However, no such studies have been carried out in the
Dwarakeswar watershed region of West Bengal, pertain-
ing to groundwater quality. The suitability of groundwa-
ter for domestic and irrigation purposes thus had to be
determined based on the presence of major ions in the
groundwater of this region. The present study, which was
carried out in 2009, will serve as baseline data for com-
paring future groundwater quality.
2. Study Area
The study area comprises of Precambrian crystalline and
recently deposited alluvium connected by an intervening
tract. The Dwarkeswar watershed with a semi-elliptical
shape occupies the Kashipur block which is situated in
northeastern part of Puruliya district, but the major part
of the Dwarkeswar watershed is situated in a part of Ch-
hatna block of Bankura district of West Bengal state,
India.
The Dwarkeswar watershed is bounded by longitudes
86˚51'E and 87˚0'E and latitudes 23˚16'N to 23˚50'N. and
is covered in the Survey of India Toposheet numbers 73
I/11, 73 I/15 and 73 I/16 on 1:50,000 scale The Dwark-
eswar watershed lies in between the Damodar basin (to
the north) and Kangsabati basin (to the south). The
Dwarkeswar river is one of them largest river which rises
in the hilly terrain of Puruliya district and flows from
northwest to south east, almost dividing the Chhatna
Block into two equal halves. The Dwarkeswar flows east
up to Kashipur and then South east from 86˚44'E. where
it receives the Bekon Nala flowing east-south east. The
other left bank tributary Dangra Nala has scissored the
undulating surface into mesh of gully before entering the
Bankura district as the Kumari Nala. The right bank
tributaries of the Dwarkeswar river are the Futuari Nala
flowing north east, Dudhbhaiya Nala flowing north and
Arkasa Nala flowing east the last two having their
sources near Hura block. The Arkasa turn north east in
Bankura district where from its confluence, the Dwark-
eswar River becomes a perennial stream. Dwarkeswar
river and all above mentioned tributaries dry up during
the cold and hot seasons. Gully erosion all along their
channels is a very conspicuous feature. In its lower course
the Dwarkeswar river is known as Rupnarayan.
3. Materials and Methods
Groundwater samples were collected in polythene bottles
of 2 liters capacity for physicochemical analysis after
pumping out sufficient quantity of water from the tub-
ewells such that, the sample collected served as a repre-
sentative sample. The sample locations are shown in
Figure 1. The bottles were completely filled before seal-
ing tightly. All particulars regarding water sample were
written in the field itself, immediately after sampling,
and tagged to the sample bottle. Special treatment are
given for preservation, fixation and handling of water
samples before analysis so that the quality of water is not
changed and many of heavy metal ions normally present
in small quantities in natural water remain in water till
the sample is analyzed. High temperature is avoided in
the storage room. Only high pure (Analytical IR Grade)
chemicals and double-distilled water was used for pre-
paring solutions for analysis. Physical parameters like pH,
Electrical Conductivity (EC), Total Dissolved Solids
(TDS) were determined at the site with the help of field
kit.
The groundwater quality was assessed by the analysis
of chemical parameters such as chlorides sulphates, bi-
carbonates, iron, calcium, magnesium and sodium using
standard methods [24]. The results of the physicochemi-
cal parameters of the samples are shown in Table 1.
4. Results and Discussions
4.1. Hydrogeology
Hard rocks are mainly composed of metamorphic and
magmatic rocks of Precambrian or Archean ages. The
importance of hard rock aquifers from groundwater point
of view differs from place to place, depending on various
factors, but mainly on the overall availability and de-
mand of water. Hard rock aquifers generally occupy the
upper tens of meters of the subsurface profile [25]. The
hydrogeologi cal characteristics of the weathered mantle
and underlying bedrock depend mainly on the weathering
and erosional processes [26,27].
Hydrogeological studies reveal that ground water oc-
curs in two distinct group of aquifers—the upper one is
weathered residuum of mica-schists and associated rocks,
restricted within 10 to 15 m below ground level and deeper
Figure 1. Map of the study area showing sample locations.

S. K. NAG, A. LAHIRI 219
Table 1. Report of physico-chemical parameters of the studied groundwater samples (pre-monsoon and post-monsoon, 2009).
Chemical Parameters
Physical Parameters
Anions Cations
pH EC
(S/cm)
TDS
(mg/L)
Hardness
(mg/L)
Cl
(mg/L)
HCO3
(mg/L)
SO4
(mg/L)
Fe
(mg/L)
Mg
(mg/L)
Ca
(mg/L)
Na
(mg/L)
Sample
No.
Location
Name
prepost prepostpre
p
os
t
pre postpr
e
post pre postpre postprepostprepostprepostprepost
A1 Dubrajpur
More 7.97.1340 700218257210 230706026022076.134.10.800.254.322.0722.7430.067.531.27
A2 Satyatan
p.school 7.77.1190300122122100130404011017047.576.30.500.8 3.924.83 9.9859.946.375.21
A3
D
warkeswa
r
R. Bed 7.96.4180400115 122901070 203011017012.242.9 0.10 0.44.204.1814.4046.436.573.72
A4 Teghri 6.76.6185
0
3400118413651030750640580 180 28053.776.40.500.85.204.7153.74113.2411.474.16
A5 Gara 7.06.5194
0
24001242948119020066034021031024.4127.30.301.35.163.1252.55 98.53 11.572.03
A6 Suburdih6.46.513030083130903304011013019041.6116.50.501.23.343.516.3979.965.354.07
A7 Kamalpur7.07.04809003073342802003040430350127.8138.43.003.04.813.7121.6140.066.994.59
A8 Sukhnibash6.16.445090028833320031090110140150153.143.53.000.54.393.6218.1936.5310.017.83
A9 Jhatipahari6.16.459040037832735021011010015023098.521.63.000.24.873.7824.0230.078.106.87
A10Morgaboni6.36.5220 500141177140 210 2050160 23026.325.90.300.24.213.67 12.4184.576.575.71
A11Kharbona7.56.65901300378495400 42080110 780 35037.228.50.300.34.714.1330.8459.969.347.52
A12Narandihi7.27.1460 800294360240 2707050240 25086.727.40.800.24.693.4123.6974.866.616.32
A13 Kanudi 6.56.5170300109104901501040130180152.431.51.200.34.324.818.0979.535.237.26
A14Bhagbanpur7.17.1220 400141144110 2002020120 17023.627.50.302.04.244.8310.68103.275.225.02
A15Hutgram6.67.1220 400141153100 140103016021047.936.90.503.04.804.889.64214.236.507.53
A16 Chaitor 6.96.9780110049944246043016012025029042.211.60.500.34.813.7944.2943.766.996.52
A17 Goaldanga7.46.48801500563542460 450220200 160 17059.424.70.500.34.853.9241.0636.298.655.74
A18Kalabani6.6 6.83502001340921010190570 3029018073.635.70.700.14.962.07110.6
4
43.873.94 1.04
A19Damankiari6.46.6130900438325380 3309090140 21036.339.60.3033.763.5236.4273.653.583.68
A20 Simla 6.86.4120160044763347046012731031023043.128.50.401.24.132.1646.7368.273.975.83
A21Kashipur6.66.2160 800540283490 260220110 190 18016.3.321.60.201.24.762.2338.7953.948.374.39
A22 Rugri 6.66.92101700115462298266036025035033056.824.730.761.22.862.3894.6857.735.276.84
A23Kapistha 6.56.9280 2003094160 12031030320 140112.720.050.800.13.721.9379.3753.263.946.38
A24 Bhatin 6.96.6207150037657438550017017034021036.322.730.301.23.842.3458.6941.375.824.72
A25 Sutabai 6.76.6210180017472148050014025028018018.717.630.300.54.863.26114.3
7
68.385.86 5.96
A26 Natungram7.2 6.850 900363531402206290130280163.946.382.070.44.873.1778.4161.946.483.46
A27Sialdanga 7.16.440 2500148100
8
130 80068400 130 39018329.72.040.24.962.0678.4152.176.485.29
one represented by fractures occurring at varying depth
between 30 m to 150 m below ground level. Both the
aquifers are the repositories of ground water within sec-
ondary porosities developed due to geological process.
The first aquifers is developed by due wells and solely
used for drinking and other domestic purposes. The sec-
ond aquifer (fracture zones) being exploited for industrial
water supply are also used for drinking water supply.
Ground water is hidden from view beneath the land
surface, it can only be directly observed through moni-
toring wells. In order to assess water level configuration
of different aquifers, hydrogeological studies have been
carried out. The upper aquifer is tapped by open dug
wells and mainly used for domestic consumption. Bore

S. K. NAG, A. LAHIRI 220
wells in different industries withdrawal water from the
deeper fracture zones, which occurs under semi-confined
to confined conditions.
Altogether 27 nos. of bore wells and 24 nos. of dug
wells were marked and monitored for having an idea of
water table in pre- and post-monsoon 2009 (Figure 2).
Water table studies indicate that groundwater level varies
in between 95.94 mts to 193.17 mts. in pre-monsoon.
Highest value of water table is recorded in Damankiari
area. In post-monsoon water table studies indicate that
groundwater level varies in between 98.41 m to 195.70 m.
Highest value of water table is recorded in Kalabani area
(Figures 2 (a) and (b)).
In case of dug well water table varies between 105.05
mts to 193.88 mts in pre-monsoon and in post-monsoon
it varies between 108.25 mts to 196.88 mts. Lowest value
of water table is recorded in Hanuliya area 105.5 mts and
108.25 mts during pre-and post-monsoon respectively.
Water table contour map of dug well indicates the for-
(a)
(b)
Figure 2. Water table contour map of the study area bore
well: (a) pre-monsoon; (b) post-monsoon.
mation of a cone of depression in the area surrounding
Teghori and Jambani in pre- and post-monsoon time
(Figures 3 (a) and (b))
4.2. Major Ion Chemistry and Spatial
Distribution
The pH values of the groundwater varied from 6.1 to 7.9
with an average value 6.9 (pre-monsoon) while the pH
values range between 6.2 to 7.1 (post-monsoon) with an
average value 6.7. This indicates that water is neutral in
nature. The variation in pH values both in pre- and post-
monsoon periods are shown in Fi gures 4(a) and (b).
In the study area, the value of electrical conductivity
varied from 40 - 1940 μS/cm with an average value of
423.96 μS/cm during pre-monsoon while the value rang-
ed between 200 - 3400 μS/cm with an average of 1040.74
μS/cm during post-monsoon period (Figures 5(a) and
(b)).
In the study area, the concentration value of TDS
86.55 86.6 86.65 86.7 86.75 86.8 86.85 86.9 86.9587
23.2
23.25
23.3
23.35
23.4
23.45
23.5
kashipur
simla
Damankiari
Kalabani
sonaijuri
Rudra sialdanga
Balarampur
Hanulia
Dalpur
Murgabani
Arra
Dubrajpur
Jhagrapur
Bijpur
Kamalpur
Bahara
Teghori
Kendsaer
Jambani
Danmari
Bhimpur
Niasa
Kelai
105110115120125130135140145150155160165170175180185190195
Contour Scale
(a)
86.55 86.6 86.65 86.7 86.75 86.8 86.85 86.9 86.9587
23.2
23.25
23.3
23.35
23.4
23.45
23.5
kashipur
simla
Damankiari
Kalabani
sonaijuri
Rudra sialdanga
Balarampur
Hanulia
Dalpur
Murgabani
Arra
Dubrajpur
Jhagrapur
Bijpur
Kamalpur
Bahara
Teghori
Kendsaer
Jambani
Danmari
Bhimpur
Niasa
Kelai
105110115120125130135140145150155160165170175180185190195
Contour Scale
(b)
Figure 3. Water table contour map of the study area dug
well: (a) pre-monsoon; (b) post-monsoon.

S. K. NAG, A. LAHIRI 221
ranged between 30 to 1340 mg/L (pre-monsoon) with the
mean value of 403.18 mg/L. The TDS value ranged be-
tween 92 to 1365 mg/L (post-monsoon) with the mean
value of 409.63 mg/L. The TDS of the study area falls
within the WHO (2004) Standard of 1000 mg/L. The wa-
ter is thus good for human consumption (domestic) and
agricultural purposes (Figures 6(a) and (b)).
The total hardness expressed as CaCO3 is above the
desirable limit (300 mg/L) and allowable limit is (600
mg/L). The hardness is temporary in nature and can be
removed by boiling. The water samples of the study area
show variation from 90 - 1190 mg/L (pre-monsoon) with
an average value of 376.55 mg/L while the value of
hardness ranged between 120 - 1070 mg/L during post-
monsoon period with the average value of 360.74 mg/L
(Figures 7 (a) and (b))
The hardness in water is derived from the solution of
carbon dioxide released by bacterial action in the soil, in
percolating rain water. Low pH conditions develop and
lead to the dissolution of insoluble carbonates in the soil
and in limestone formations to convert them into soluble
86.55 86.6 86.65 86.7 86.75 86.8 86.85 86.9 86.9587
23.2
23.25
23.3
23.35
23.4
23.45
23.5
66.16.26.36.46.56.66.76.86.977.17.27.37.47.57.67.77.87.98
Contour Scale
(a)
86.55 86.6 86.65 86.7 86.75 86.8 86.85 86.9 86.9587
23.2
23.25
23.3
23.35
23.4
23.45
23.5
55.25.45.65.866.26.46.66.877.27.47.67.88
Contour Scale
(b)
Figure 4. pH contour map: (a) pre-monsoon; (b) post-mon-
soon.
bicarbonates. Impurities in limestone, such as sulfates,
chlorides and silicates, become exposed to the solvent
action of water as the carbonates are dissolved so that
they also pass into solution. The general acceptance level
of hardness is 300 mg/L, although WHO [23] has set an
allowable limit of 600 mg/L. The spatial distribution pat-
tern of physical parameters like pH, Electrical Conduc-
tivity (EC), Total Dissolved Solids (TDS) during the
study period are shown in Figures 4(a) and (b), Figures
5(a) and (b) and Figures 6(a) and (b).
In the study area, the concentration of chloride is
found to vary between 10 - 660 mg/L with the average
value of 163.2 mg/L in pre-monsoon while during post-
monsoon the value ranged between 20 - 580 mg/L with
the mean value of 139.3 mg/L (Figures 8(a) and (b)).
The mean values during pre- and post-monsoon time are
much below the maximum allowable concentration of
250 mg/L [28]. WHO has set standards of 200 - 500 mg/L
for chloride in drinking water. Too much of chloride
leads to bad taste in water and also chloride ion combines
with the Na (that is being derived from the weathering of
(a)
86.55 86.686.6586.7 86.7586.8 86.85 86.986.9587
23.2
23.25
23.3
23.35
23.4
23.45
23.5
00.511.522.533.5
Contour Scale
(b)
Figure 5. Specific conductivity contour map: (a) pre-mon-
soon; (b) post-monsoon.

S. K. NAG, A. LAHIRI 222
86.6 86.65 86.7 86.75 86.8 86.85 86.9 86.95
23.2
23.25
23.3
23.35
23.4
23.45
301302303304305306307308309301030113012301330
Contour Scale
(a)
86.55 86.6 86.65 86.7 86.75 86.8 86.85 86.9 86.9587
23.2
23.25
23.3
23.35
23.4
23.45
23.5
0200400600800100012001400
Contour Scale
(b)
Figure 6. Total dissolved solids contour map: (a) pre-mon-
soon; (b) post-monsoon.
granitic terrains) and forms NaCl, whose excess presence
in water makes it saline and unfit for drinking and irriga-
tion purposes. Here too, as exhibited by contours, the
chloride value decreases during post-monsoon.
Bicarbonate ion varied from 110 to 780 and with mean
value of 229.6 mg/L during pre-monsoon and 140 to 390
mg/L with average value of 231.5 mg/L in the ground-
water samples of post-monsoon season period (Figures
9(a) and (b)).
The sulfate ion causes no particular harmful effects on
soils or plants; however, it contributes to increase the
salinity in the soil solution. Sulphur is an essential ele-
ment in plant nutrition and in the form of sulphate it is
readily available to plants. Sulfate ion varied from 12.2
to 183.0 mg/L during the pre-monsoon and from 11.6 to
138.4 mg/L in post-monsoon seasons (Figures 10(a) and
(b)).
Calcium and magnesium ions present in groundwater
(a)
86.55 86.6 86.65 86.7 86.75 86.8 86.85 86.986.9587
23.2
23.25
23.3
23.35
23.4
23.45
23.5
01002003004005006007008009001000110012001300
Contour Scale
(b)
Figure 7. Hardness contour map: (a) pre-monsoon; (b) post-
monsoon.
of nearby coastal areas are derived from leaching of
limestone, dolomite, gypsum and anhydrites whereas
calcium ions may derive from cation exchange processes
[29]. Calcium in normal potable ground water has con-
centration between 10 and 100 ppm which has no known
effect on the health of human or animals. In the present
study, the concentration of Calcium ranged from 6.39 to
114.37 mg/L during pre-monsoon while it varied from
30.06 to 214.23 mg/L during post-monsoon periods. The
spatial distribution of calcium during the study period is
shown in Figures 11(a) and (b).
In the present study, the concentration of Magnesium
ranged from 2.86 to 5.2 mg/L during pre-monsoon while
it varied from 1.93 to 4.88 mg/L during post-monsoon
periods (Figures 12(a) and (b)).
The adverse effect of sodium on the soil was more
closely related to the ratio of sodium to the total cations
in the irrigation water than to the absolute concentration

S. K. NAG, A. LAHIRI 223
86.6 86.65 86.786.75 86.8 86.8586.9 86.95
23.2
23.25
23.3
23.35
23.4
23.45
010020030040050060070080090010001100120013001400
Contour Scale
86.55 86.6 86.65 86.7 86.75 86.8 86.85 86.9 86.9587
23.2
23.25
23.3
23.35
23.4
23.45
23.5
2070120170220270320370420470520570620
Contour Scale
(a) (b)
Figure 8. Chloride contour map: (a) pre-monsoon; (b) post-monsoon.
86.55 86.6 86.65 86.7 86.75 86.8 86.85 86.9 86.9587
23.2
23.25
23.3
23.35
23.4
23.45
23.5
050100150200250300350400450500550600650700750
Contour Scale
86.55 86.6 86.65 86.7 86.75 86.8 86.85 86.9 86.9587
23.2
23.25
23.3
23.35
23.4
23.45
23.5
50100150200250300350400450500550600650700
Contour Scale
(a) (b)
Figure 9. Bi-carbonate contour map: (a) pre-monsoon; (b) post-monsoon.
86.55 86.6 86.6586.7 86.7586.8 86.85 86.9 86.9587
23.2
23.25
23.3
23.35
23.4
23.45
23.5
102030405060708090100110120130
Contour Scale
(a) (b)
Figure 10. Sulphate contour map: (a) pre-monsoon; (b) post-monsoon.

S. K. NAG, A. LAHIRI 224
of sodium. It has now been recognized that as percent of
sodium increases in the soil solution larger quantities are
absorbed during the exchange, replacing calcium and
magnesium, thus resulting in alkali soil. The concentra-
tion of sodium in the water samples collected vary
from 3.58 to 11.57 mg/L (pre-monsoon) and 1.04 to 7.83
mg/L (post-monsoon) (Figures 13(a) and (b)).
Iron is an essential element in human [30]. Although
iron has little concern as a health hazard, it is still con-
sidered as a nuisance in excessive quantities [31]. It
causes staining of clothes and utensils. It is also not suit-
able for processing of food, beverages, dyeing, bleaching
etc. The concentration limits of iron in drinking water
ranges between 0.3 mg/L (maximum acceptable) and 1.0
mg/L (maximum allowable) (Figures 14(a) and (b)).
The concentration of iron in the water samples collected
vary from 0.1 to 3.0 mg/L both in pre- and post-mon-
soon.
During pre-monsoon, most of the ion concentrations
are high compared to the post-monsoon period and this
may be due to the dissolution of minerals [32,33].
4.3. Irrigational Suitability
Water for agricultural purposes should be good for both
plant and animals. Good quality of waters for irrigation
is characterized by acceptable range of:
1) The Sodium Adsorption Ratio (SAR);
2) The Soluble Sodium Percentage (SSP);
3) The Residual Sodium Carbonate (RSC);
4) The Magnesium Adsorption Ratio (MAR);
5) The Kellys Ratio (KR);
6) The Permeability Index (PI).
All these parameters are calculated and are presented
in Table 2.
The Sodium Adsorption Ratio (SAR) was calculated
by the following equation given by Richards [34] as:
Na
SAR Ca Mg
2
 (1)
where, all the ions are expressed in meq/L.
Sodium Adsorption Ratio (SAR) also influences infil-
tration rate of water. So, low SAR is always desirable. In
the studied samples, SAR values were ranged between
0.09 - 0.54 meq/L in pre monsoon and 0.01 - 0.24 in post-
monsoon. It is evident from the whole sample set that the
SAR value is excellent in all the samples. (Figure 15)
Hence, our findings strongly suggest that all the ab-
stracted groundwater samples from the study area were
suitable for irrigation.
The Soluble Sodium Percentage (SSP) was calculated
by the following equation Todd [35]:


Na K100
SSP Ca Mg Na K

 (2)
where, all the ions are expressed in meq/L. Wilcox [36]
has developed a table for classificat
ter with reference to Na percentage and EC value (um-
ion of irrigation wa-
hos/cm) (Figure 16).The Soluble Sodium Percentage
(SSP) values were found from 2.78 meq/L at Kalabani to
28.01 meq/L at Suburdih in pre monsoon and 1.52 meq/L
at Gara and 13.82 meq/L at Sukhnibash in post monsoon.
The Residual Sodium Carbonate (RSC) was calculated
according to Gupta and Gupta [37]:

 
 
33
RSCCOHCOCaMg (3)
where, RSC and the concentration of the constituents
are expressed in meq/L. The Residual Sodium Carbonate
(RSC) values were found from ‒2.2 meq/L at Sialdanga
5.57 meq/L at Kamalpur in pre-monsoon and ‒7.67
meq/L at Gara and 3.62 meq/L at Sukhnibash in post
monsoon.
Total Hardness (TH) was calculated by the following
equation Raghunath [38]:


THCaMg50

 (4)
where, TH is expressed in meq/L and the concentrations of
the constituents are expressed in meq/L. Total Hardness
(TH) values were found from 29.89 meq/L at Suburdih
297 meq/L at Kalabani in pre-monsoon and 83.5 meq/L
at Dubrajpur 555.5 meq/L at Hutgram in post-monsoon.
Magnesium Adsorption Ratio (MAR) was calculated
by the equation Raghunath [38] as:

MARMg 100CaMg (5)
where all the ionic concentrations are expressed in
meq/L. Magnesium Adsorption Ratio (MAR) values were
found from 4.63 at Rugri 47.09 at Kanudi in pre-mon-
soon and 3.60 at Hutgram and 17.12 at Jhatipahari in
post-monsoon.
The Kelly’s Ratio was calculated using the equation
Kelly [39] as:


KRNaCaMg (6)
where, all the ionic concentrations are expressed in meq/L.
The Kelly’s Ratio (KR) values were found from 0.02 at
Kalabani 0.34 at Sukhnibash in pre-monsoon and 0.01 at
Kalabani,Gara 0.16 at Jhatipahari in post-monsoon.
Permeability Index
Doneen [40] has evolved a modified criterion based on
the solubility of salts and the reaction occurring in the
ation exchange for estimating the
ducting a series of experiments for which he has used
soil solution from c
quality of agricultural waters. According to him, soil
permeability, as affected by long-term use of irrigation
water, is influenced by 1) total dissolvesolid 2) sodium
contents, 3) bicarbonate contents, and the soil. To incor-
porate the first three items Doneen [40] has empirically
developed a term called, “Permeability Index” after con-

S. K. NAG, A. LAHIRI 225
Table 2. Resulting parameters (pre-monsoon and ponsoon, 2009) of the studied groundwater samples.
SAR PI SS
st-m
P MAR TH RSC KR
o
Sample
No. Location Name
prepost pre post prepost prepost prepost pre post prepost
A1 Dubrajpur More 0.3905 131.11 2.7917.9.9024.074.855 2.793 0.22020.115251.01783.7 1.0.
A2 Saty1 234
W
S
Kr
S
–
B
Goaldanga
213.
Bhatin 162.
N
Sialdanga
atan p. school0.930.16 46.9152.075.12 6.099.5611.791.28169.5 0.98 –1.21 0.340.06
A3 arkeswar R. Bed 0.380.13 120.13 64.5321.075.6732.7112.7853.50133 0.73 0.12 0.270.06
A4 Teghri 0.390.1 61.25 37.23 13.782.8813.896.44 156.02302.5 –0.17 –1.46 0.160.02
A5 Gara 0.400.05 66.24 44.2914.131.5214.065.01152.88259 0.39 –0.1 0.160.01
A6 uburdih0.430.11 203.8 43.3728.01 3.40 46.56 6.77 29.89214 1.53 –1.17 0.390.03
A7 amalpu0.240.01 165.74 103.6117.027.6327.0613.0474.07115 5.57 3.43 0.210.08
A8 ukhnibash0.540.03 114.01 121.7925.4413.8228.6914.1563.77106 1.02 0.33 0.340.16
A9 Jhatipahari 0.390.3 98.02 105.2317.9813.8025.2617.1280.3490.5 0.85 1.96 0.22 0.16
A10 Morgaboni 0.400.16 151.57
45.7922.73 5.04 36.12 6.63 48.57226 1.65 –0.75 0.290.05
A11 Kharbona 0.400.24 170.13 74.24 17.358.7620.29 10.21 96.73 166.5 10.85 2.4 0.210.09
A12 Narandihi 0.310.19 122.16 53.3715.136.2924.846.9678.5201 2.36 0.07 0.170.06
A13 Kanudi 0.360.21 170.1 43.1622.93 6.62 47.09 9.15 38.23218.5 1.37 1.42 0.300.07
A14 hagbanpur 0.330.12 146.24 32.420.73 3.63 39.82 7.1944.37278 1.08 –2.78 0.260.03
A15 Hutgram 0.420.13 136.33 18.9824.27 2.7945.35 3.60 44.10555.5 1.74 –7.67 0.320.02
A16 Chaitor 0.260.21 79.76 88.4 10.41 9.78 15.3312.14130.77124.5 1.48 2.26 0.120.10
A17 0.330.23 70.44 80.1613.2710.1216.4515.02122.86106.5 0.17 0.65 0.150.11
A18 Kalabani 0.090.03 38.29 72.912.781.666.907.20297118
–1.19 0.59 0.020.01
A19 Damankiari 0.140.11 72.8 48.66 6.573.87 14.55 7.30 106.5198.5 0.16 –0.53 0.070.04
A20 Simla 0.140.18 85.21 57.03 5.986.51 12.73 5.01133.5179.5 2.41 0.9 0.060.06
A21 Kashipur 0.33 0.15 79.1 62.0913.436.2016.816.27116143.5 0.79 0.08 0.15 0.06
A22 Rugri 0.140.23 50.38 77.67 4.248.634.636.18248153.5 0.77 2.33 0.040.09
A23 Kapistha 0.110.22 55.18 57.63.828.737.255.675141 0.97 –0.78 0.030.09
A24 0.190.18 74.57 83.67 7.148.169.848.445112.5 2.32 1.19 0.070.08
A25 Sutabai 0.140.18 37.57 49.873.936.366.547.33305.5184 –1.52 0.73 0.060.06
A26 atungram0.190.11 37.6 65.426.084.289.257.76216167.5 –2.19 1.24 0.060.04
A27 0.190.19 37.52 91.66 6.077.669.466.13 216.5138.5 –2.2 3.62 0.060.08
No—Soion RPI—eanP—bleumntaARagn Total-
nes—Re Bicte;Ka
iven by the following formula:
te: SAR
s RSBC
dium Absorpt
sidual Sodium
atio;
arbona
Perm
KR—
bility I
elly’s R
dex; SS
tio.
Solu Sodi Percege; M—Mnesium Absorptio Ratio;H—T Hard
a large number of irrigation waters varying in ionic rela-
tionships and concentration. The permeability index is
g


3
Na HCO100
PI Ca Mg

 . (7)
Na
The plotted points has been shown that most of the
points fall in the areas which are not good for irrigation
Figure 17.
4.4. Domestic Suitability
Piper’s [41]
the geochemical evaluation of groundwater. It consists of
two lower triangular fields and a central diamond shaped
field, all the three fields have scales reading in 100 parts.
The percentage reacting values of the cations and the
anions are plotted as a single point (according to the
trilinear coordinates) at the lower left and right tri-
angles, respectively. These are projected upwards par-
allel to the sides of the triangles to give a point in the rh-
ombus. The point is represented by a circle whose area
is proportional to the absolute concentration (actual pm)
of the water. The water quality types can be qui ckly
identified by the location of points in the different zones
of the diamond-shaped field as shown in Figure 18.
trilinear diagram is very important to assess

S. K. NAG, A. LAHIRI 226
86.55 86.6 86.65 86.7 86.75 86.8 86.85 86.9 86.9587
23.2
23.25
23.3
23.35
23.4
23.45
23.5
30405060708090100110120130140150160170180190200
Contour Scale
(a) (b)
Figure 11. Calcium contour map: (a) Pre-monsoon; (b) Post-monsoon.
86.55 86.6 86.65 86.786.75 86.8 86.8586.9 86.9587
23.2
23.25
23.3
23.35
23.4
23.45
23.5
2.833.23.43.63.844.24.44.64.855.2
Contour Scale
86.5586.686.6586.7 86.7586.886.8586.9 86.9587
23.2
23.25
23.3
23.35
23.4
23.5
23.45
1.822.22.42.62.833.23.43.63.844.24.44.64.8
Contour Scale
(a) (b)
Figure 12. Magnesium contour map: (a) pre-monsoon; (b) post-monsoon.
86.55 86.686.65 86.7 86.75 86.8 86.85 86.9 86.9587
23.2
23.25
23.3
23.35
23.4
23.45
23.5
01234567891011
Contour Scale
86.55 86.686.6586.7 86.75 86.8 86.85 86.9 86.9587
23.2
23.25
23.3
23.35
23.4
23.45
23.5
11.522.533.544.555.566.577.5
Contour Scale
(a) (b)
Figure 13. Sodium contour map: (a) pre-monsoon; (b) post-monsoon.

S. K. NAG, A. LAHIRI 227
86.55 86.686.65 86.7 86.7586.8 86.85 86.986.9587
23.2
23.25
23.3
23.35
23.4
23.45
23.5
00.20.40.60.811.21.41.61.822.22.42.62.83
Contour Scale
86.55 86.6 86.65 86.786.7586.886.85 86.9 86.9587
23.2
23.25
23.3
23.35
23.4
23.45
23.5
-0.200.20.40.60.811.21.41.61.822.22.42.62.8
Contour Scale
(a) (b)
Figure 14. Iron contour map: (a) pre-monsoon; (b) post-monsoon.
Figure 15. US salinity diagram.
Figure 17. Permeability index diagram.
5. Conclus
ne of the most important use of groundwater is for
drinking purpose. Hence, it is essential to ascertain the
quality of groundwater because the presence of some
minerals beyond certain limits may be unsuitable for
drinking.
BIS, Government of India [42] has evolved a set of
specifications for water to be used for drinking purposes.
These are presented in Table 3 and, when compared with
the analyzed samples of the study area, it is found that
the groundwater is within the safe category, except for
few places where higher values of iron and total hardness
exist. In general, it may be stated that groundwater of the
study area falls within safe category. Hence, the study
has helped to improve understanding of physicochemical
parameters of the area for effective management and
proper utilizatces for better
living conditiononitoring
ions
O
ion of groundwater resour
s of the people. A continuous m
Figure 16. Wilcox diagram.

S. K. NAG, A. LAHIRI 228
Figure 18. Piper trilinear diagram.
Table 3. Comparison of chemical analyses data with BIS, Govt. of India (pre-monsoon and post-monsoon, 2009).
Analysed Samples Remarks
Sample
No. Constituents Limits of General Acceptability
Allowable
Limit Pre-Monsoon Post-MonsoonPre-Monsoon Post-Monsoon
1. pH 7 - 8 0.5 - 9.2 6 - 8 6.2 - 8.1 Within the limit Within the limit
2. Total Dissolved Solid
(mg/L) 500 1500 83 - 1242 92 - 1365 Within the limit Within the limit
3. Specific Conductivity
(at 25˚C) µS/cm Below 780 - 140 - 1940 200 - 3400
Satyatan Primary
School, Teghari,
Gara, and
Goaldanga having
more than 800
µS/cm.
Within the limit
4. Total Hardness
(as CaCO3) (mg/L) 300 600 90 - 1190 20 - 1070
Teghari and Gara
having more than
1000 mg/L of CaCO3.
Satyatan Primary
School has 870 mg/L
of CaCO3.
Teghari and Gara,
Dwarkeswar River
Bed having more than
1000 mg/L of CaCO3.
5. Calcium (mg/L) 75 200 6.39 - 113.7430.06 - 214.23Within the limit Within the limit
6. Magnessium (mg/L) 50 4.88Within the limit Within the limit
Iron (mg/L) 1 Jhatipahari has 3
mg/L of Fe an
Kng/L
Kamalpur,
,
nd
mankiari has 3
go
/L
e
of Cl in water
150 2.84 - 5.22 1.93 -
7. 0.3 1.0 0. - 30 - 3
Kamalpur,
Sukhnibash, Sukhnibash
Jhatipahari a
d also Da
audi, has 1.2 m
of Fe in water
m/L of Fe and als
Kanudi, has 1.2 mg
of Fe in water
8. Chloride (mg/L) 200 600 10 - 660 20 - 580 Tghari and Gara has more than 600 mg/LWithin the limit

S. K. NAG, A. LAHIRI 229
program of water quality is required to avoid further de-
terioratity of the study area.
6. Acknowledgements
The author (SKN) greatfullly acknowledges the financial
support from Centre of Advanced Study (CAS-Phase IV),
Departm Sciencdavpur Ursity
in conductinrk related to this work. The
other author (A. Lahiri) is thankful to University Grants
Cmissi and Jaaur Univso
f rovsearch Fellowship in Scienc
for Meritorious Student 2007-2008 to her.
ERENCES
[1] R. H. Ganesh and Y. S. Kale, “Quality of Lentic Waters
of Dharwad District in North Karnataka,” Indian Journal
of Environmental Health, Vol. 37, No. 1, 1995, pp. 52-56.
H. Bouwer, “Integrated Water Mement: Eg Is-
sues and Challenges,” Agricultural Water Management,
Arid En-
vironment,” Geoenvironment 2000 Conference, American
Reston, 1995, pp. 1429-1449.
onally Perched
Groundwater,” Journal of the Water Pollution Control
Federation, Vol. 55, No. 104.
[7] C. Eison and ffects of Urbaniza-
eptember 1983, pp. 45-
Environmental Heal, 1991. pp. 421-424.
N. C. Datta S. St
ion dro
Aquatic System,” Jouon Research, Vol. 15,
No. 4, 1996, pp. 329-3
[14] R. K. Somashekar, nd-
varna, “Groundwa
(Baal
lysis,” Journal of
2, 2000, pp. 101-10
Rlla-
a dialu ool.
15, No. 4, 1996, pp. 32
[16] K. P. Singh, “Envirots ofn
of Groundwater RSa
Area, Punjab, Ind
phony on Soil, G
Uses in Developing Countrieso.1-
E6.7
[17] M. Singh, S. Kaur
mbing
. 3, 1987, pp. 525-534.
rowth on Surface
Natra-
s of Groundwater in a Part of Kancheepuram Di-
ar and N. Rajmohan, “Hydrochemi-
for the Examination of Water
Influence on the Hydrodynamic
“A Tectono-Geomorphic
ion of the water qual
ent of Geological
g the field wo
es, Janive
omon, New Delhidvpersity al [15] S.
lingam, “Groun
or piding the UGC Ree M
REF
[2] anagmergin
Vol. 45, No. 3, 2000, pp. 217-228.
[3] D. K. Todd, “Groundwater Development in an [18
Society of Civil Engineers,
[4] I. Raj, “Issues and Objectives in Groundwater Quality
Monitoring Programme under Hydrology Project,” Pro-
ceedings of National Symphony Groundwater Quality Mo n-
itoring, Bangalore, 2000, pp. 1-7.
[5] M. S. Olaniya and K. L. Saxena, “Groundwater Pollution
by Open Refuse Dumps, Environmental Health, Vol. 19,
No. 3, 1977, pp. 176-188.
[6] R. J. Gillison and C. R. Patmont, “Lake Phosphorus
Loading from Septic Systems by Seas
jan,
, 1983, pp. 1297-130
M. P. Anderson, “The E
tion on Groundwater Quality,” In: R. E. Jackson, Ed.,
Aquifer Contamination and Protection, UNESCO Press,
Paris, 1980, pp. 378-390.
[8] H. Sharma and B. K. Kaur, “Environmental Chemistry,”
Goel Publishing House, Meerut, 1995.
[9] C. Subba Rao and N. V. Subba Rao, “Groundwater Qual-
cal S
ity in a Residential Colony,” Indian Journal of Environ-
mental Health, Vol. 37, No. 4, 1995, pp. 295-300.
[10] A. K. Banerji, “Importance of Evolving a Management
Plan for Groundwater Development in the Calcutta Re-
gion of the Bengal Basin in Eastern India,” Proceedings
of International Symposium Groundwater Resources and
Planning, Koblent, 28 August-3 S
and W
54.
[11] B. K. Handa, “Hydrochemical Zones of India,” Proceed-
ings of Seminar on Groundwater Development, Roorkee,
1986, pp. 439-450.
[12] S. Ramachandra, A. Narayanan and N. V. Pundarikathan,
“Nitrate and Pesticide Concentrations in Groundwater of
Cultivated Areas in North Madras,” Indian Journal of
tion—An Overview,” Journal of the Institute of Plu
and Heating Engineering, Vol. 2, 2003, pp. 29-31.
th, Vol. 33, No. 4
en Gupta, “Effec
graphic Regime o
rnal of Polluti
33.
[13]
t
and
on the Hy
of Artificial Aera-
f Pesticide Treated
V. Rameshaiah a
ter Chemistry of C
District)—Regressio
Environment and Po
9.
A. Chethana Su
hannapatna Taluk
n and Cluster Ana-
llution, Vol. 7, No.
ngalore Rur
engaraj, T. E
dwater Qu
ampooranan, L. Eango and V. Ram
ality in Suburban R
,” Journal of Polegions of tin Research, Vdras City, In
5-328.
nmental Effec
esources: A Case
ia,” Proceedings of
eology and Landfo
Industrializatio
tudy of Ludhain
international Sym-
rm-Impact of Land
k, 1982, pp. E6, Bangk
and S. S. Sooch, “Groundwater Pollu-
.
] L. Elango and S. Manickam, “Hydrogeochemistry of the
Madras Aquifer, India—Spatial and Temporal Variation
in Chemical Quality of Groundwater,” Geological Society
of Hong Kong Bulletin, No
[19] R. Ramesh, “Groundwater Quality Management: Pollu-
tion Perspectives Impacts of Urban G
Water and Groundwater Quality,” Proceedings of IUGG
99 Symposium HS5, Birmingham, July 1999, pp. 47-55.
[20] N. Rajmohan, L. Elango, S. Ramachandran and M.
“Major Ion Correlation in Groundwater of Kanche-
epuram Region, South India,” Indian Journal of Environ-
mental Protection, Vol. 20, No. 3, 2000, pp. 188-193.
[21] L. Elango, R. Kannan and M. Senthilkumar, “Major Ion
Chemistry and Identification of Hydrogeochemical Pro-
cesse
strict, Tamil Nadu, India,” Environmental Geosciences,
Vol. 10, No. 4, 2003, pp. 1-10.
[22] L. Elango, S. S. Kum
tudies of Groundwater in Chengalpet Region,” In-
dian Journal of Environmental Protection, Vol. 23, No. 6,
2003, pp. 624-632.
[23] M. Kumaresan and P. Riyazuddin, “Major Ion Chemistry
of Environmental Samples around Sub–Urban of Chennai
City,” Current Science, Vol. 91, No. 12, 2006. pp. 1668-
1677.
[24] APHA, “Standard Methods
astewater,” 20th Edition, APHA, San Francisco,
1998.
[25] M. Detay, P. Poyet, Y. Emsellem, A. Bernardi and G.
Aubrac, “Development of the Saprolite Reservoir and Its
State of Saturation:
Characteristics of Drillings in Crystalline Basement (in
French),” Comptes Rendus de l’Académie des Sciences,
Série II, Vol. 309, 1989, pp. 429-436.
[26] R. Taylor and K. Howard,

S. K. NAG, A. LAHIRI 230
Model of the Hydrogeology of Deeply Weathered Crys-
talline Rock: Evidence from Uganda,” Hydrogeology, Vol.
8, No. 3, 2000, pp. 279-294.
doi:10.1007/s100400000069
[27] R. Wyns, J. M. Baltassat, P. Lachassagne, A. Legchenko,
J. Vairon and F. Mathieu, “Application of SNMR Sound-
4, pp
ings for Groundwater Reserves Mapping in Weathered
Basement Rocks (Brittany, France),” Bulletin de la So-
ciete Geologique de France, Vol. 175, No. 1, 200.
21-34. doi:10.2113/175.1.21
[28] WHO, “Guidelines for Drinking Water Quality,” 3rd Edi-
tion, World Health Organization, Geneva, 2004.
[29] A. Garrels, “Survey of Low Temperature Water Mineral
Relations in Interpretation of Environmental Isotope and
Hydrogeochemical Data in Groundwater Hydrology,” In-
ternational Atomic Energy Agency, Vienna, 1976.
[30] C. V. Moore, “Modern Nutrition in Health and Disease,”
Lea and Febiger, Philadelphia, 1973, p. 297.
[31] F. J. Dart, “The Hazard of Iron,” Water and Pollution
Control, Ottawa, 1974.
[32] A. Navarro and M. E. Camonal, “Evaluation of Ground-
water Contamination Beneath an Urban Environment:
The Beso’s River Basin (Barcelona, Spain),” Journal of
Environmental Management, Vol. 85, No. 2, 2007, pp.
259-269. doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2006.08.021
[33] I. Anithamary, “Hydrogeochemical and Environmental
Geochemistry of Water in Kodiakarai Region—Coastal
Zone of Tamilnadu,” M.Phil. Thesis, Annamalai Univer-
sity, Annamalainagar, 2008.
[34] L. A. Richards, “Diagnosis and Improvement of Saline
and Alkali Soils,” United States Department of Agricul-
n Wiley
n, Co., New
roundwater,” 2nd Edition, Wiley
ture, Washington, 1954.
[35] D. K. Todd, “Ground Water Hydrogeology,” Joh
and Sons, Hoboken, 1980.
[36] L. V. Wilcox, “Salinity—A Hidden Danger,” Cotton
Trade Journal of 26th International Yearbook, 1959, pp.
58-64.
[37] S. K. Gupta and I. C. Gupta, “Management of Saline
Soils and Water,” Oxford and IBH Publicatio
Delhi, 1987.
[38] I. I. M. Raghunath, “G
Eastern Ltd., New Delhi, 1987, pp. 344-369.
[39] W. P. Kelly, “Use of Saline Irrigation Water,” Soil Sci-
ence, Vol. 95, No. 4, 1963, pp. 355-391.
[40] L. D. Doneen, “Notes on Water Quality in Agriculture,”
Water Science and Engineering Paper 4001, University of
California, Davis, 1964.
[41] A. M. Piper, “A Graphical Procedure in the Geochemical
Interpretation of Water Analysis,” Transactions—Amer-
ican Geophysical Union, Vol. 25, 1944, pp. 914-928.
doi:10.1029/TR025i006p00914
[42] Bureau of Indian Standards (BIS), “Drinking Water,” 1st
Revision, Government of India, New Delhi, 1991.