Quality Valuation of Groundwater for Irrigation at Dhanbad

Download Full-Text PDF Cite this Publication

Text Only Version

Quality Valuation of Groundwater for Irrigation at Dhanbad

1Anshul Jain, 2SR Kumar, 1KDSR Prashant and 1J. Ravi Kiran

1ISM, Dhanbad

2CFMS-NIH, Patna

Abstract – In the present study Wilcoxs criteria for evaluating the suitability of groundwater for irrigation purpose on the basis of soluble sodium percent (SSP) has been applied at Dhanbad and different samples of the study area are classified on the basis of SSP.

Keywords: Wilcox, Groundwater, Irrigation, Dhanbad, SSP

  1. INRODUCTION

    Water is the next important input to fertilizer for crop production. If low quality of water is utilized for irrigation, soluble salts and /or other toxic elements like arsenic may accumulate in the soil thus deteriorating soil properties and crop quality. Good quality water helps maintaining agricultural productivity and sustaining soil fertility.

    The guideline for interpreting water quality can be used to identify potential problems in the use of the particular quality of water for crop irrigation. Usually the quality of groundwater for irrigation purpose is evaluated on the basis of total concentration of soluble salts or salinity hazards, exchangeable sodium or sodicity hazards, toxicity hazards due to specific constituents and other miscellaneous effects. Various authors have depicted popular criteria to evaluate the quality of irrigation water (USDA, 1954; Ayers et al., 1985; Shainberge and Oster, 1978).

    High concentrations of exchangeable sodium in irrigation waters and soils cause the eventual deterioration of soil structure and resulting reduction in hydraulic conductivity. When calcium and magnesium are the predominant cations occupying soil exchange sites, soils tend to have a granular structure that is readily permeable to both air and water. As the concentration of exchangeable sodium in the soil increases, the ratio of sodium to calcium and magnesium ions rises and the number of exchange sites occupied by calcium or magnesium decreases. This causes soil mineral particles to disperse and hydraulic conductivity to decrease.

  2. STUDY AREA

    The Dhanbad district is situated in the state of Jharkhand and lies between 23º37'3" and 24º4' North latitude and between 86º6´30" and 86º50' East longitude. Dhanbad district shares its boundaries with West Bengal in the eastern

    and south part Dumka and Giridih district in North and Bokaro district in West. Its geographical length extending from North to South is 43 miles and the breadth stretching across East to West is 47 miles. Dhanbad comes under the Chota-Nagpur Plateau.

    The climate is tropical in nature with hot summer. In winter, the minimum temperature remains around 8ºC with a maximum of 22ºC. Dhanbad town which have been taken into consideration for the study cover an area between G.T. Road and Bank More in N-S direction and between Govindpur East and Hirak Bye pass Road in E-W direction.

    Two types of soil around the district, namely, Alfiso red sandy soil and Ultiso red and yellow soil. The Alfiso red sandy soil is found in north and northwest part of the district which is a densely wooded hilly terrain. The rest part of the district has cultivated lands having ultiso red and yellow soil. Although ground water potentiality is not very much encouraging for the whole district, even then Dhanbad town and its surrounding areas have moderately thick confined or unconfined aquifers beneath the surface. In the rest part of the district, the ground water is restricted to weathered zone having poor porosity. Over and above the soil of Dhanbad town and its adjoining areas has reasonably better water holding capacity compared to other part of the district.

    The rocks beneath Dhanbad and its adjoining terrains are metamorphic rocks made up of older basement rocks- Mica-Schist, Amphibolites, quartze-felspatite, sniessis and granitite. These older basement rocks have been intruded by Dolerite and later on these rocks were again intruded by acid intrusive rock layers of quartzite, etc. Though, metamorphic rocks are impermeable but some associated fissured rock layers are in aquifers which might have joined with fault planes or shear planes but their exact location and depth are not known exactly. Their depth differs from place to place. Therefore, in deep borings for water, it has been found that at a particular location, no water is found, but in the same vicinity few meters near about water is found. Such phenomena have been found at many locations during deep tubewell boring for water. All these findings can be attributed to folding characteristic of rocks beneath the ground.

    Figure – 1 Location of study area

  3. METHODOLOGY

    Conductivity had been analyzed at the site using field testing kit and the remaining parameters like calcium, magnesium and Sodium concentrations have been analysed in the laboratory as per the method described in APHA (1992).

    the groundwater quality for irrigation because sodium causes an increase in the hardness of the soil as well as a reduction in its permeability. The SSP or Na% of all the samples was calculated by the following formula:

    The Wilcoxs (1948) classification scheme for rating irrigation water on the basis of specific electrical conductance, soluble sodium per cent (SSP) has been used. Sodium concentration plays an important role in evaluating

    SSP = (Na++K+)*100/(Ca2++Mg2++Na++K+)

    where all concentrations are expressed in epm.

    Excellent

    <20%

    250

    Good

    20-40%

    250-750

    Permissible

    40-60%

    750-2000

    Doubtful

    60-80%

    2000-3000

    Unsuitable

    >80%

    3000

    Excellent

    <20%

    250

    Good

    20-40%

    250-750

    Permissible

    40-60%

    750-2000

    Doubtful

    60-80%

    2000-3000

    Unsuitable

    >80%

    3000

    The following scheme of classification was given by the Wilcox: Water Classes SSP or Na% Conductivity (micro-mhos/cm)

  4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

    Results of 24 samples in the study area show that SSP values in groundwater is varying from 6.51 to 92.43 with the average of 45.52 (Table-1). Its concentration is widely distributed with various proportions in the study area (Figure-

    2). Site wise variation of SSP using graphical presentation is shown in Figure-3 while individual site wise SSP class are presented in Table 3.

    Figure – 2 Wilcox SSP Value at Various Locations

    Table 1 – Statistical analysis of various parameters

    Descriptive Statistics Conductivity (µS/cm) Na+ (meq) Ca2+ (meq) Mg2+ (meq) Wilcox SSP

    Minimum

    107.49

    0.06

    0.70

    0.02

    6.51

    Maximum

    2460.63

    13.64

    10.04

    3.48

    92.43

    Mean

    869.00

    4.43

    3.02

    0.98

    45.52

    Median

    683.94

    2.98

    2.49

    0.80

    47.37

    Standard Deviation/p>

    627.26

    4.10

    2.34

    0.92

    19.20

    Kurtosis

    1.45

    0.47

    3.10

    2.92

    0.42

    Skewness

    1.37

    1.24

    1.82

    1.72

    0.27

    Coef. of Var. %

    72.18

    92.67

    77.56

    93.54

    42.17

    Table 2 – Individual site wise Wilcox SSP and related classification

    Site Sampling site No.

    Wilcox SSP

    Wilcox Classification

    Site No.

    Sampling site

    Wilcox SSP

    Wilcox Classification

    1. Polytechnic

    92.43

    Doubtful to

    mandir

    53.59

    Excellent to Good

    college

    Unsuitable

    2. Grewal

    38.41

    Excellent to Good

    21.43

    Excellent to Good

    colony

    3. Railway

    47.52

    Excellent to Good

    36.78

    Excellent to Good

    colony

    4. Bank more

    41.31

    Excellent to Good

    40.95

    Excellent to Good

    thana

    5. Municipal

    57.59

    Excellent to Good

    35.06

    Excellent to Good

    office

    6. Washepur

    65.48

    Permissible to

    24.77

    Excellent to Good

    masjid

    Doubtful

    7. Matkuria

    72.54

    Permissible to

    52.31

    Good to

    Doubtful

    Permissible

    1. Chiragora

    2. Hari mandir

    3. Telipara

    4. Heerapur

    5. Saraidhela

    6. Steel gate

    7. Bhojpur

    68.84

    23.50

    47.23

    59.22

    6.51

    Permissible to Doubtful Excellent to Good

    Good to Permissible

    Permissible to Doubtful Excellent to Good

    colony

    campus

    51.18

    53.86

    49.48

    27.12

    25.41

    Doubtful to Unsuitable

    Doubtful to Unsuitable Good to

    Permissible

    Excellent to Good

    Good to Permissible

    1. Barmasia

    2. Gandhi nagar

    3. Gaguatard

    4. Tikkiapara

    5. Barmasia

    1. Dhaiya

    2. Housing

    3. CIMFR

    4. Bekar Bandh

    5. Bishnupur

    Figure – 3 Site wise variation of SSP

    The hydro geochemical analysis according to Wilcox (1948) (Figure-4) reveals that about 54.17% samples are excellent to good, 16.67% samples are good to permissible, 16.67% are permissible to doubtful and 12.50% samples are doubtful to unsuitable (Figure-5). The groundwater near 3

    stations (site no. 1, 20, 21) which fall in doubtful to unsuitable class (Figure-4) should be avoided for irrigation purpose and other surface water sources should be utilised to meet the irrigation needs.

    Figure – 4 Wilcoxs SSP (Na%) plot

    Figure – 5 % frequency of samples

  5. CONCLUSION

The analytical results show that the overall quality of groundwater in the study area is Excellent-to-Good and Good- to-Permissible for the irrigational uses as classified by Wilcox. Precaution should be taken before using the groundwater for irrigation near the sites which fall under doubtful to unsuitable class.

REFERENCES

  1. Ayers, R.S. and Branson, R.L. (1975). Guidelines for Interpretation of Water Quality for Agriculture, University of California. Extension Mimeographed, 13 p.

  2. Ayers, R.S. and West Cot, D.W. (1985). FAO Irrigation Drainage Paper 29 (Rev1), Rome, Italy.

  3. Shainberg, I. and Oster, J.D. (1978). Quality of Irrigation Water, IIIC Publication No. 2, International Irrigation Information Centre, Volcani Centre, P.O.B. 49, Bet Dagan, Israel.

  4. Wilcox, L.V. (1948). The Quality of Water for Irrigation Use, USDA Tech. Bull. 162, Washington D.C., 40 p.

  5. Wilcox L.V. (1955). Classification and use of irrigation water. US Department of Agriculture, Washington, 969.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *