INTRODUCTION:

Water is an important natural resource, used for drinking and other developmental purposes in our lives. Groundwater is one of the largest available resources of freshwater and potable water on earth. Water quality is essential parameter to be studied when the overall focus is sustainable development keeping mankind at focal point. It has raised certain basic challenges in our environment and we are suffering from both the problems of quality and quantity of water, since it is directly linked with human welfare¹. The quality of groundwater is affected by its quantitative and qualitative composition of suspended solids and dissolved minerals. also, variation in natural and human activities are reflected in the hydro chemical parameters of the groundwater. The groundwater quality is influenced and degrading due to natural and anthropogenic effects including local climate, geology, irrigation practices and discharge of sewage, effluents from industries, precipitation, irrigation and soil type. Another factor is that rapid increase in urbanization and industrialization leads into deterioration in groundwater quality^2-3. Groundwater contamination can also occur through several anthropogenic factors, such as industrialization and excessive use of insecticides and pesticides⁴. Groundwater quality depends on the quality of recharged water, atmospheric precipitation, inland surface water and subsurface geochemical processes^5-6-7.

MATERIAL AND METHOD:

Jaipur is the capital of Rajasthan is one of the fastest growing cities in the country, is undergoing rapid urbanization and industrialization. Urbanization has led to immense pressure on ground water resources and has resulted in quality deterioration of ground water as well⁸. Groundwater is a vital resource in coastal areas to supply domestic, drinking, irrigation and industrial needs^9-10-11.

In the present study four ground water samples were (Bore well and Hand pump) collected from Muhana (S1), Vatika (S2), Shivdaspura (S3) and Tiwadi (S4) sampling sites of sanganar block of Jaipur (Rajasthan). The ground water samples were collected in cleaned and well-dried glass bottles (2 L) with necessary precautions. These bottles were labelled with respect to collecting sites, time and date in order to avoid any error between collection and analysis. The collected samples were stored in an icebox and brought to laboratory for determining the Physico-chemical parameters. All the chemicals used were analytical research(AR) grade of pure quality. Double distilled water was used for the preparation of all the reagents and solutions¹².

The objective was to investigate the quality of ground water of Jaipur city during post -monsoon session (Sept 2022 to Dec. 2022). Physico-chemical parameters like pH, EC, TDS, TH, Ca²⁺, Mg²⁺, Na⁺, K⁺, Cl^-,SO₄^2-, NO₃^-, and F^- were analyzed by as the standard method of APHA. The pH, EC, TDS and DO was analyzed by using Microprocessor water and soil Analysis kit (Model LT-59). The Na⁺and K⁺ in the groundwater samples was analyzed using Flamephotometer. The calcium (Ca²⁺) and magnesium(Mg²⁺) in the groundwater samples was analyzed using Titrimetric method. Fluoride ion (F^-) concentrations in water were determined using by ion selective electrode method. Chloride(Cl^-) ion concentrations in water were determined using by Argentometric Titration Method. The biochemical oxygen demand (BOD) test is based on mainly bio-assay procedure which measures the dissolved oxygen consumed by micro-organisms while assimilating and oxidizing the organic matter under aerobic conditions¹³. Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD) in water were determined using by Open Reflux Method.

In this study, the correlation matrix of 15 variables for the four water samples was computed using excel 2007software and is shown in Table- 1. A correlation analysis was conducted to determine the correlation coefficient (r) among the parameters. correlation coefficient (r) Value is used to identify the highly correlated and interrelated water quality parameter and that may influence the water quality of the sampling site. The value of correlation coefficient (r ) change from -1 to + 1, r = -1 or close to -1 reveals strongest negative linear correlation and r = +1 or near to 1 reveals strong positive linear correlation between two parameters compared¹⁴.

Table 1: Correlation Matrix of ground water quality parameters of sampling sites of Jaipur

	pH	EC	*TDS*	TH	*Ca²⁺*	*Mg²⁺*	*Na⁺*
pH	1
EC	-0.23472	1
*TDS*	0.813977	-0.5582	1
TH	0.312757	0.74983	-0.25509	1
*Ca²⁺*	-0.87831	0.295466	-0.9567	0.004878	1
*Mg²⁺*	-0.62825	0.839023	-0.6411	0.270601	0.469413	1
*Na⁺*	-0.25527	0.99525	-0.61303	0.775819	0.357072	0.815081	1
K⁺	-0.31782	0.866321	-0.35208	0.381633	0.126229	0.931972	0.818828
*SO₄^2-*	-0.67245	0.875065	-0.80025	0.38945	0.630999	0.965779	0.87608
*Cl-*	-0.62697	0.900135	-0.76626	0.424236	0.582888	0.971116	0.897522
F-	-0.08497	0.95063	-0.55253	0.902911	0.292021	0.647664	0.969091
*NO₃^-*	-0.42948	-0.02116	-0.6969	0.144006	0.785286	-0.10107	0.073653
DO	-0.87831	0.295466	-0.9567	0.004878	1	0.469413	0.357072
*BOD*	0.508136	0.308486	-0.07936	0.849998	-0.0585	-0.23932	0.363877
*COD*	0.75095	0.152127	0.233237	0.764984	-0.36232	-0.41012	0.187143

Continue Table No: 1

	K⁺	*SO₄^2-*	*Cl^-*	*F^-*	*NO₃^-*	DO	*BOD*	*COD*
pH
EC
*TDS*
TH
*Ca²⁺*
*Mg²⁺*
*Na⁺*
K⁺	1
*SO₄^2-*	0.843019	1
*Cl-*	0.870458	0.997987	1
F-	0.672908	0.74746	0.772016	1
*NO₃^-*	-0.39981	0.143988	0.097838	0.163063	1
DO	0.126229	0.630999	0.582888	0.292021	0.785286	1
*BOD*	-0.16247	-0.06025	-0.03917	0.582383	0.388675	-0.0585	1
*COD*	-0.23893	-0.28885	-0.25623	0.416166	0.14252	0.36232	0.95037	1

RESULT AND DISCUSSION:

The physicochemical parameters of ground water samples from Muhana (S1), Vatika (S2), Shivdaspura (S3) and Tiwadi (S4) sampling sites are summarized in Table -2 and Figure -1,2,3 and 4. which included pH, EC, TDS, TH, Ca²⁺,Mg²⁺, Na⁺, K⁺, F^-, Cl^-, NO₃^-, SO₄^2-, BOD, COD & DO.

pH: The hydrogen ion(H⁺) concentration present in ground water sample is the measuring of pH of that ground water samples. The permissible range of pH in water is 6.5 to 8.5(WHO). The pH values (7.4 to 7.8) in sampling sites was observed to under the permissible limit. The mean and standard deviation of pH was observed like 4.57and 0.17 respectively (Table -2). Alkaline water may tend to have a bitter like taste but acidic water tends to be corrosive to pipes.

EC: The values of electrical conductance of groundwater samples are ranged from 350 to 2010µmho/cm with mean value 817µmho/cm and standard deviation value 795.35µmho/cm (Table-2). In sampling sites, out of 4 samples, except three samples (S1, S2, S4), one sample (S3) have higher value than permissible limit. The permissible limit of EC values for drinking water is specified as 1400 µmho/cm as per WHO: 2003.

TDS: The most important parameters of water is total dissolved solid, which decide the quality of drinking water. In the present study, the value of TDS in the analyzed ground water samples varied between 295 to 822mg/l with mean value 327.7mg/l and standard deviation value 37.10mg/l (Table-2). The permissible limit of TDS values for drinking water is specified as 600mg/L as per WHO: 2003.High level of TDS may aesthetically be unsatisfactory for washing and bathing and affects the qualities of water like hardness and taste.

TH: The Total Hardness is the important Physico chemical parameter of ground water quality for agricultural purpose, domestic purpose or industrial purpose. The desirable limit of TH is 200mg/l and maximum acceptable is 600mg/l. The Total Hardens ranges between 250 to 414mg/l with mean value 341.5mg/l and standard deviation value 68.3 mg/l(Table-2). The hardness is due to dissolution of alkaline earth metal salts from geological matter.

Table 2: Physicochemical ground water quality parameters of sampling sites of Jaipur

(Parameters	pH	EC (µmho/cm)	TDS (mg/l)	TH (mg/l)	Ca²⁺ (mg/l)	Mg²⁺ (mg/l)	Na⁺ (mg/l)
S1 (Muhana)	7.4	350	689	250	14	44	269
S2 (Vatika)	7.8	467	610	341	6	25	307
S3 (Shiv daspura)	7.5	2010	295	414	14	65	1160
S4 (Tiwadi)	7.6	451	822	361	14	22	395
Mean	7.57	817	327	341	12	39	532.75
Range	0.4	1660	86	73	8	43	891
SD	0.17	795.3	37.1	68.3	4	19.8	421.48

Continue Table No.: 2

(Parameters	K⁺ (mg/l)	SO₄^2- (mg/l)	Cl^- (mg/l)	F^- (mg/l)	NO₃^- (mg/l)	DO (mg/l)	BOD (mg/l)	COD (mg/l)
S1 (Muhana)	2.1	95	369	0.79	19.6	6.4	7.0	30.2
S2 (Vatika)	2.0	26	106	1.69	6.0	3.7	12.1	67.1
S3 (Shivdaspura)	3.0	178	759	5.12	20.1	6.4	13.1	59.5
S4 (Tiwadi)	1.4	55	199	2.43	35.9	6.4	15.0	71.3
Mean	2.12	88.5	358.25	2.5075	20.4	5.725	11.8	57.02
Range	1.6	152	653	4.33	29.9	2.7	8.0	41.1
SD	0.66	66.03	288.50	1.8663	12.224	1.35	3.418	18.53

SD=Standard Deviation

Calcium (Ca²⁺):

Calcium is one of the most abundant elements found in ground water. It is important ion in informing the hardness to the waters. The calcium ion of groundwater samples varies from 6mg/l to 14mg/l with average of 12mg/l and standard deviation value 4mg/l (Table-2) of ground water analysis. The permissible limit of Ca²⁺ ion values for drinking water is specified as 100mg/L as per WHO:2003.

Magnesium (Mg²⁺):

The magnesium ion concentrations ranged from 22mg/l to 65 mg/l with average of 39mg/l and standard deviation value 19.88 mg/l (Table-2) of ground water analysis. The permissible limit of Mg²⁺ ion values for drinking water is specified as 150mg/l as per WHO: 2003.Too high level (> 400 mg/l) of magnesium causes muscular weakness and paralysis in human body.

Sodium (Na⁺):

Sodium value was varying from 269mg/l to 1160mg/l and the mean value of sodium was 532.75mg/l and 421.48 mg/l was the standard deviation value of the studied ground water samples.

Potassium (K⁺):

Potassium values ranged from 1.4mg/l to 3.0mg/L and the average value of potassium was 2.125mg/l of the studied ground water samples and standard deviation value of the studied ground water samples was 0.660mg/l.

Sulphate (SO₄^2-):

The Sulphate ion concentration in groundwater samples lies in between 26-178mg/l with average of 88.5 mg/l and standard deviation was 66.032mg/l (Table-2). Sulphate come in ground water from mineral deposit in the rocks in the form of Sulphate. High level of Sulphate in the drinking water supply can impart bad taste. All the water samples free from Sulphate problem. According to guidelines of BIS the permissible value of Sulphate 200-400mg/l

Nitrate (NO₃^-):

Nitrate is environmental pollutant that not only arises naturally, but also is released by a number of anthropogenic activities. These activities include the fossil fuel combustion and use of nitrate fertilizers^15-16-17 Nitrate concentration in groundwater samples varies from 6.0 to 35.9mg/l with average of 20.4mg/l. The maximum allowable limit of nitrate in drinking water as per BIS is 45mg/l. Nitrate ion concentration is very important in drinking water because if it exceeds 45 mg/L it causes blue babies syndrome in children.

Chloride (Cl^-):

The chloride concentration in groundwater samples lies in between 106 -759mg/l with average of 358.25mg/l. The two ground water samples (S1 and S3) exceed the permissible limit as prescribed by WHO-2003. Which can cause corrosion and putting of iron plates or pipes. The values observed are within the specified limit of 250mg/L as per WHO: 2003.

Fluoride (F^-):

Fluoride is an important life element for the health of humans and crucial for normal mineralization of bones and for the formation of dental enamel with the presence of lesser quantity. When concentration of Fluoride more than 1.5 mg/l than negative health consequences on peoples. The Fluoride ion concentrations ranged from 0.79mg/l to 5.12 mg/l with mean value of 2.50mg/l and standard deviation value 1.8663mg/l of ground water analysis. There is positive correlation (Table-1) of F⁻ with Na⁺ (r = 0.9690) and negative correlation with TDS^18-19-20 (r =-0.5525). Three (S2, S3 and S4) Groundwater samples collected for chemical analysis have shown fluoride value beyond maximum permissible limit of 1.5mg/L. Due to the higher level of fluoride in drinking water, several dental and skeletal diseases have been reported.

Figure 1: Variations of ground water quality parameters of sampling site Muhana (Jaipur)

Figure 2: Variations of ground water quality parameters of sampling site Vatika (Jaipur)

Figure 3: Variations of ground water quality parameters of sampling site Shivdaspura (Jaipur)

Figure 4: Variations of ground water quality parameters of sampling site Tiwadi (Jaipur)

Water quality Index:

To monitor the surface as well as groundwater pollution, the water quality index can be used efficiently in improving the water quality. Water quality index indicating the water quality in term of index number. Water quality index provides a single number that expresses overall water quality at a certain location and time, based on several water quality parameters. Water quality index is an important technique for demarcating ground water quality and its suitability for drinking purpose. Calculated water quality index were classified into five groups like excellent water (0-50), Good water (50-100), Poor water (100-200, very poor water (200-300) and water unsuitable (more than 300) for drinking of range. The water quality index ranges from 73.25 to 426.35. (Table-3) Therefore, there is a need of some treatment before usage and also required to protect that area from contamination.

Water Quality Index can be calculated from the following:

WQI = Antilog (SW_i log Q_i)

Here

W (Weight of the Pollutants in the Sample) = K/S_i

K (constant) = 1/ (1/S₁+ 1/S₂+ 1/S₃+ ……... + 1/S_i)

S_i = Standard values for different water quality parameters

Q_i(Water Quality Rating) = (V_i– V₁) 100

(S_i– V₁)

Vi = Observed Values V₁ (Ideal Values) = 7.0 for pH and 0 for all other parameters

Table 3: Water Quality Index of sampling sites

S. No	WQI	Water type	Ground water Sample
1.	0-50	Excellent water type	Nil
2	50-100	Good water	S1(73.25)
3	100-200	Poor water	S2(146.49)
4	200-300	Very poor water	S4(205.78)
5	Above 300	Unsuitable for drinking	S3(426.35)

Assessment of groundwater quality for irrigation:

The suitability of groundwater for irrigation is depending on the effects of the mineral constituents of water^21-22-23.Water for irrigation should satisfy the needs of soil and crop. water quality Parameters like Percent Sodium(%Na) and Sodium Absorption Ratio (SAR) are used to determine the appropriateness of water for irrigation.

Percentage Sodium (%Na): The sodium in irrigation water is also expressed as sodium percentage.

% Na =	(Na⁺+ K⁺) x 100
	(Na⁺+ K⁺ + Ca²⁺ + Mg²⁺)

Table 4: Classification of Irrigational water quality based on Na%

Classification on based	Class	Ground Water Sample
Percentage Sodium (%Na)	Excellent (0-20)	Nil
	Good (21-40)	Nil
	Permissible (41-60)	Nil
	Doubtful (61-80)	Nil
	Unsuitable (>80)	S1,S2,S3 and S4

Where, the concentration of Sodium, potassium, calcium and magnesium are in mg/l. The details of the categories based on the sodium percent is presented in the Table 4.

Sodium Absorption Ratio (SAR): The Na⁺ ion Concentration is necessary for evaluating the irrigational suitability of groundwater. Excess sodium ions in water will produce undesirable effects. SAR indicates the degree to which irrigation water enters into cation exchange reactions in soil. The Sodium Adsorption Ratio (SAR), which was calculated for the ground water samples based on the formula given by the USSL Staff²⁴ as follows:

Where, Sodium, calcium and magnesium are in mg/l.

The calculated values of sodium adsorption ratio (SAR) were ranged from 50.0 to 161.885mg/l. (Table-5) with average of 118.67 mg/l. Classification of groundwater samples (Table-5) as per US agricultural norms reveal that all ground water samples were of Very High Sodium class. Ground Water with very high sodium hazard will generate exchangeable sodium in a harmful level, so this situation demands regular leaching and special soil management for salinity control.

Table 5: Classification of Irrigational water quality based on SAR

Classification on based	class	Ground Water Sample
Sodium Absorption Ratio	Low Sodium (0-10)	Nil
	Medium Sodium (11-18)	Nil
	High Sodium (19-26)	Nil
	Very High Sodium (˃ 26)	S1,S2,S3 and S4

CONCLUSION:

The hydro chemical interpretation for four groundwater samples in the Jaipur revealed that the groundwater is alkaline in nature. Physico-Chemical analysis of groundwater of sampling sites showed that mean concentration of cation is in order Sodium(532.75mg/l) > Magnesium(39mg/l) > Calcium(12mg/l)> Potassium(2.125mg/l) while for the anion it is Chloride(358.25mg/l) > Sulphate(88.5mg/l) > Nitrate(20.4mg/l) > Fluoride (2.50mg/l). On the basis of SAR and Percentage Sodium ground water samples fall in the very high sodium class and unsuitable class respectively The highest correlation was found between EC and Sulphate ion (r = 0.9979)and Na⁺show correlation with EC (r = 0.9952).

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT:

Authors are thankful to our Chairman and Director for providing the laboratory facility in the Department of Chemistry, Poddar International College, Jaipur. Authors are also very thankful to the Department of Rajasthan state Pollution Control Board (Central Laboratory) 4, Institutional Area, Jhalana Doongari, Jaipur for analysing our parameters of this research paper.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST:

The authors have no conflicts of interest regarding this investigation.

REFERENCES:

1. Sultana A, Sultana Q. Study of Physio-Chemical Parameters and Quality Assessment of Ground Water. International Conference on Recent Advances in Civil Engineering Infrastructure. 2019:340-344.

2. Vishnoi D, Tomar PS, Khichi A, Tiwari N. Assessment of Hydrogeochemistry of Groundwater in Pratap Nagar, Sanganer Tehsil, Jaipur District, Rajasthan. International Journal of Engineering Research and Technology (IJERT). 2016,4;23. DOI: 10.17577/IJERTCONV4IS23010.

3. Tatawat RK, Chandel CPS. A hydrochemical profile for assessing the groundwater quality of Jaipur City. (Springer) Environ Monit Assess. 2008; 143:337–343.

4. Pandit MK, Kateja A. Hydrochemistry and groundwater quality assessment around solid waste landfill sites in peri-urban Jaipur, NW India. Environ Monit Assess. 2023; 195: 557.

5. Srinivasa Rao GVR, Rupa Kumari G, Kalyanaramu B. Assessment of Groundwater Quality using CCME-WQI Method in Kurupam Region, Vizianagaram District, Andhra Pradesh, India. Research J. Engineering and Tech. 2020; 11(4): 178-186.

6. Srinivasa Rao GVR, Rupa Kumari G, Sreejani TP, Kalyanaramu B. WQI based Analysis of Groundwater Quality in Lakkavarapu Kota region, Vizianagaram District, Andhra Pradesh. Research J. Science and Tech. 2020; 12(4):235-24.

7. Sajad Abdul-Geni Abdullah, Naeem Shanad Hammadi, Yasser Wassfi Ouda, Assessment of the lower reaches of Tigris River by a development of a water quality index (WQI). Research J. Science and Tech. 2018; 10(1): 01-08.

8. Jain N, Kumar S, Lata R, Singh RK, Ahmad S, Kumar Ground Water Quality Assessment of Jaipur City, Rajasthan (India). International Journal of Engineering Research and Technology. 2014; 3(3). DOI :10.17577/IJERTCONV3IS03021.

9. Faouzi Zahi, Fethi Medjani, Mohamed Djidel, Abdelmalek Drouiche. Groundwater quality and its suitability for different uses in lower Djendjen Watershed, Northest Algeria. Asian Journal of Research in Chemistry. 2021; 14(3):179-5.

10. Kassim AG. Quality Assessment of Drinking Water Sources in Jushi Waje, Zaria, Nigeria. Asian J. Research Chem. 2015; 8(5): 340-345.

11. Jothivenkatachalam K, Nithya A, Mohan SC. Correlation analysis of drinking water quality in and around perur block of Coimbatore District, Tamilnadu, India. Rasayan J.Chem. 2010; 3(4): 649-654

12. Indian Standard, Methods of Sampling and test (Physical and Chemical) for water and wastewater.1993; IS 3025: Part 44.

13. American Public Health Association (APHA) 23 rd Ed:5220B.

14. Yadav S, Singh KN, Manju SK. Hydrochemistry of High Fluoride Groundwater Terrain of Phagi Block, Jaipur District, Rajasthan, India with Special Emphasis on Fluoride Correlation with Different Ions and other Parameters. J Geol Soc India. 2023; 99: 820–826.

15. Rahman A, Mondal NC, Tiwari KK. Anthropogenic nitrate in groundwater and its health risks in the view of background concentration in a semi-arid area of Rajasthan, India. Sci Rep. 2021; 11; 9279. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-88600-1

16. Kothari V, Vij S, Sharma SK, Gupta N. Correlation of various water quality parameters and water quality index of districts of Uttarakhand. Environmental and sustainability indicators. 2021; 9: 100093:1-8.

17. Milan Hait, Shivi Sharma, Leena Sahu, Sangeeta Sharma. Analytical Study of Selected Physicochemical Characteristic of Surface and Underground Water Bodies at Ameri and Its Surrounding Areas. Research J. Science and Tech. 2011; 3(4): 197-199.

18. Chauhan RK, Chhipa RC, Bansal AK, Sharma DK, Gupta Y K. Physico-chemical evaluation of water Quality parameters of Chambal River in Kota, Rajasthan, India. Research J. Pharm. and Tech. 2020; 13(7): 3402-3408.

19. Nawab SS, Mohamed SAlM. The Effect of BOD, COD, Calcium, Chloride and Sulphate Contents of Groundwater Near Thamirabarani River Band in Tirunelveli District, Tamilnadu, India. Jetir. 2020; 7(8) :2018-2033.

20. Kannan D, Mani N. Chemical variability of groundwater samples collected from Needamangalam Region, Thiruvarur District, Tamil Nadu (India). Asian J. Research Chem. 2019; 12(5): 248-252.

21. Athira KR, Warrier CU. Evaluation of Groundwater Quality for Irrigation during the PreMonsoon Period in the Selected Area of Thrissur District, Kerala. International Journal of Science and Research (IJSR). 2018; 7(7):975-989.

22. Kannan D, Mani N. Comparative Study on Chemical analysis of Thanjavur and Nagapattinam region groundwater samples. Asian J. Research Chem. 2021; 14(1):42-46.

23. Somita Thapa, Nandababu Singh Laishram. Physicochemical analysis of some dug well ground waters of Imphal West district of Manipur during pre-monsoon. Asian J. Research Chem. 2018; 11(2):472-476.

24. U.S. Salinity Laboratory Staff, Diagnosis and Improvement of Saline and Alkali Soils. Handbook 60. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Washington, D.C. 1954.

Received on 22.07.2023 Modified on 19.08.2023

Research J. Science and Tech. 2023; 15(4):183-190.

DOI: 10.52711/2349-2988.2023.00030