International Journal of Civil Engineering and (IJCIET), ISSN 0976 6308 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF Technology CIVIL ENGINEERING AND

D (Print), ISSN 0976 6316(Online) Volume 4, Issue 4, July-August (2013), IAEME

TECHNOLOGY (IJCIET)

ISSN 0976 6308 (Print) ISSN 0976 6316(Online) Volume 4, Issue 4, July-August (2013), pp. 119-134 IAEME: www.iaeme.com/ijciet.asp Journal Impact Factor (2013): 5.3277 (Calculated by GISI) www.jifactor.com

IJCIET
IAEME

DEVELOPMENT AND SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS OF WATER QUALITY INDEX FOR EVALUATION OF SURFACE WATER FOR DRINKING PURPOSE
R. S. Sapkal1, Dr. S. S. Valunjkar2
1

Research Scholar, Department of Civil Engineering, Government College of Engineering, Aurangabad, Maharashtra, India 2 Professor in Civil Engineering, Government College of Engineering, Karad, Sistt: Satara, Maharashtra, India

ABSTRACT Water pollution not only affects water quality but also threats human health, economic developments & social prosperity Internationally there are number of attempts made to produce a method that meaningfully integrates the data sets and converts them into simple information called as Water Quality Index (WQI) Water quality indices are used as comprehensive evaluation instrument to assess the river water quality. Water quality index makes expert knowledge available to expert users and public in general. The indices are formulated based either on studies conducted by the indices developers or are formulated based on the Delphi technique which takes into account the opinion of experts or mathematical formulation or by using fuzzy logic. In this study the water quality index is developed by assigning relative weights to each parameter ranging from 1 to 6 based on the adverse effect of the water quality parameter on human health, its concentration with respect to other water quality parameters and method of treatment required. It includes twenty five water quality parameters such as Color water temperature, pH, Electrical Conductivity (EC), Turbidity, Suspended Solids (SS), Total Dissolved Solids (TDS), Total Hardness (TH), Total Alkalinity (TA), Dissolved Oxygen (DO), Biochemical oxygen demand (BOD), Chemical oxygen demand (COD), Sulfates (SO4- -),, Chlorides, Total Phosphates ( TP -), Calcium (Ca++), Magnesium (Mg++), Fluorides Ammonium- Nitrogen (NH3-N), Nitrate-Nitrogen (NO3-N), Nitrite-Nitrogen (NO2-N) Total coliform (TC), Fecal coliform (FC), Sodium (Na+) and Boron(B) Water quality is categorized into five levels based on the values of water quality index as Excellent (WQI = 95 to 100), Good (WQI = 80 to 94), Fair (WQI = 65 to 79), Marginal (WQI = 45 to 64) and Poor (WQI = 0 to 44). The sensitivity analysis shows that this WQI is not influenced by any one or few parameters but it is a combined effect of all the parameters. It is applied to Purna (Tapi) river basin of Maharashtra (India). Key words: Method of aggregation, Purna River, Water Quality Index, water quality parameters
119

International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET), ISSN 0976 6308 (Print), ISSN 0976 6316(Online) Volume 4, Issue 4, July-August (2013), IAEME 1. INTRODUCTION Nowadays environmental protection and water quality management has become an important issue in public policies throughout the world Many countries have introduced a scheme of river water quality monitoring and assessment of surface water in terms of their physical, chemical, biological and nutrient constituents and overall aesthetic condition [1]. There are number of methods to analyze water quality data depending on informational goals, the type of samples and size of sampling area. The water quality is difficult to evaluate from a large number of samples each containing concentrations for many parameters. One of the most effective ways to communicate information on environmental trends and river water quality in particular is with indices Water quality index is a means to summarize large amount of water quality data in to simple language (i.e. good, average or poor quality) for responding to management and the general public in consistent manner. It tells us whether the overall quality of water body possesses a potential to various uses of water such as irrigation, recreation or drinking water purpose. Water Quality Index (WQI.) a great deal was given to the development of index methods by Brown R. M., McClelland N. R., Deininger R. A. and Tozer R. Z. [2] of United States proposed a WQI known as National Sanitation Foundation Water Quality Index (NSF WQI.) It was designed to evaluate general water quality irrespective of water use. It included nine water quality parameters Dissolved Oxygen (DO), Fecal Coli form (FC), pH, Biochemical oxygen demand (BOD), Nitrate Nitrite, Phosphorous, turbidity, temperature and total solids Initially water quality and score ranges were subdivided into seven classes as follows. Excellent (90-100), Good (80-89), slightly good (7079), Average (50-59), slightly bad (40-49), bad (20-39) and very bad (below 19). Initially it was based on arithmetic mean of weighted sub-index of each variable. So it was not significantly sensitive to change in the values of variables. Then it was modified by taking the geometric mean After modification the water quality and score ranges were subdivided into five classes i.e., Excellent- A (91-100), Good-B (71-90), Medium-C (51-70), Bad-D (26-50) and Very bad E (0-25) It serves as the basis of other several water quality indices. Curtis G Cude [3], Oregon Department of Environmental Quality [4] had developed Oregon water quality index (OWQI) in 1970 and modified it in 1990. The OWQI also serves as the bench mark indicator of stream water quality for the Oregon Progress Board. Bindu M. Lohani and G. Todino [5] used factor analysis (FA) to develop water quality index for Chao Phraya river in Thailand. Bhargave D. S., (1985) [6] suggested grouping of water quality parameters for drinking purpose and evaluated a water quality index for drinking water supplies. L Gabriel T., de Azevedo, Timothy K. Gates, Darrell G. Fontane, John W. Labadie and Ruben L. Porto [7] had combined the surface water quantity and quality objectives to develop water quality routing and water allocation model for Piracizaba river in Brazil. Six management alternatives combining various reservoir policies with differing levels of treatment were suggested. Canadian Council of Ministers for Environment (CCME) [8] developed a water quality index called as Canadian Council of Ministers for Environment Water quality Index (CCME WQI) it compared observations to a bench mark where bench mark may be a water quality standard or site specific variable concentration. It included ten water quality variables including 2, 4- D and lindane, it quantifies for one station over a predetermined period of time (typical one year) the number of parameters that exceeded the bench mark the magnitude of exceedance and the number of records exceeded the bench mark. The index is flexible in terms of the bench marks that are used for calculations Sites at which water quality measurement never or rarely exceed the benchmark have high CCME WQI (near 100) where as sites that routinely have measurements that exceed benchmarks have low CCME WQI (near 0).The water quality levels suggested are Excellent (95 100), Good (80-94), Fair (65-79), Marginal (45-64) and Poor (below 45) Shiow - Mey Liou, Shang Lien Lo and Shan - Hsien Wang (2004) [9] proposed a overall index for water quality in Taiwan and
120

International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET), ISSN 0976 6308 (Print), ISSN 0976 6316(Online) Volume 4, Issue 4, July-August (2013), IAEME its application in Keya river. Ahmaid Said et.al [10] defined a new water quality index for Big Lost river water shed in Idhao. to assess water quality for general use Chinmoy Sarkar and S. A. Abbasi, [11] have developed a software called QUALIDEX to determine various WQI William OcampoDuque et.al [12], have developed WQI by using fuzzy inference system. S. S. Asadi, Padmaja Vuppala and M. Anji Reddy [13] assessed the ground water quality in Municipal corporation of Hyderabad (India) by using water quality index related to land use. They have used remote sensing and GIS techniques for evaluation of groundwater quality for development of water quality index Fuzhan Nasiri et al. [14], proposed fuzzy multiple attribute decision support system to compute water quality index and to provide alternative plans based on improvement in water quality index. Prabhata K. Swamee and Aditya Tyagi [15] used alternative method to describe water quality using aggregate index consisting of sub-indices for water quality variables. L. K. Diadovski and M. P. Atanassova [16] had developed an integral index of the tropic pollution level for Mesta river of Bulgeria. The water quality parameter considered were BOD, COD, total nitrogen, total phosphorus DO, metals like cadmium chromium copper, Zinc and lead, detergent phenol and coli form. K values for each parameter was determined and the integral index was formulated. Mohsen [17] had developed WQI to describe water contributed by mining activities in Malaysia. The water quality index was calculated by considering nine water quality parameters. Yilmaz Icaga (2007) [18] suggested a WQI model using fuzzy logic and applied it to assess the water quality of Eber Lake (Turkey). He has tried to remove the ambiguities due to concentration level of the parameter very close to the permissible limits. Prakash Raj Kannad, Seockheon Lee Young Soo Lee, Sushil Raj Kannel, Siddhi Pratap Khan [19] have investigated: WQI considering 18 water quality parameters, WQImin &WQIm (mean water quality index) and WQIDO (considering a single parameter DO) Hulya Boyacioglu [20] ,[21] developed universal WQI (UWQI) based on European Classification Scheme Andre Lermontov et al [22], used fuzzy logic to develop water quality index called as fuzzy water quality index (FWQI) for Pardo river, Brazil. Chaiwar Prakirake et al.[23], developed water quality index (WQI) applying Delphi technique Dinesh Kumar and Babu J. Allappat [24] studied National Sanitation foundation water quality index (NSF-WQI) and brought out the short comings in the formation of NSF WQI and suggested the possible improvement. M. K. Chaturvedi and J. K. Bassin (2009) [25] have assessed the water quality index for water treatment plant and bore well in Delhi area using NSFWQI to classify water quality as excellent, good, medium, bad and very bad. Abdul Hameed Jawad Alobaidy [26] developed WQI using cluster analysis and by considering thirteen water quality parameters Mohamad Ali Fulazzaky et. al [27], assessed the water quality of Selongor river from nine stations along the main stream using WQI. Avnish Chauhan and Suman Singh [28] developed WQI by considering eight water quality variables (Turbidity, DO, BOD, COD ,free CO2, Total solids( TS),Total Suspended Solids(TSS) & TDS) & applied it to evaluate Ganga water for drinking purpose & concluded that Ganga Action Plan launched by Government of India has failed to reduce the pollution level in Ganga river. Abdul Hameed M. Jawed Alobaidy, Haider S. Abid and Bahram K. Maulood [29] developed water quality index considering ten water quality parameters. This WQI was applied to assess the water quality of Docan Lake, Iraq. 1.1. Aggregation Functions It is the most important step in calculating WQI. In order to minimize ambiguity and eclipsing, it is necessary to identify an appropriate function of calculating and aggregated score. The following functions are normally used. Table 1 shows various aggregation functions

121

International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET), ISSN 0976 6308 (Print), ISSN 0976 6316(Online) Volume 4, Issue 4, July-August (2013), IAEME Aggregation function Weighted sum index Multiplicative product index or weighted geometric function Weighted Solway function Table 1: Various aggregation functions Formula

Remarks

WQI

Qi

This method of aggregation is free from ambiguity but suffers from eclipsing. In this aggregation function, an index is zero if any one sub index is zero. This characteristic eliminates the eclipsing as well as ambiguity problem

Un-weighted Solway function Un-weighted geometric function Root mean square function

1 1 100
1/n WQI= }

1 100

0.5

1/

Un-weighted harmonic square mean function Maximum Operator index

I1, I2, I3, In I1, I2, I3, In

Minimum Operator index

This is ideally suited to applications in which an index must report if at least one recommended unit is violated This aggregation method is free from eclipsing as well as ambiguity

Where,

= sub-index for th variable = relative weight for th variable

2.0 MATERIALS AND METHODS 2.1 Development of Water Quality Index The indices are formulated based either on studies conducted by the indices developers or are formulated based on the Delphi technique which takes into account the opinion of experts or mathematical formulation or by using fuzzy logic. In this study WQI is developed as follows
122

International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET), ISSN 0976 6308 (Print), ISSN 0976 6316(Online) Volume 4, Issue 4, July-August (2013), IAEME 2.1.1 Selection of parameters Water quality parameters were selected based on the criteria- Parameters considered by previous researchers, parameters for which data is available and will be available over wide range of time, parameters producing adverse effect on human health It includes twenty five water quality parameters such as Color water temperature, pH, Electrical Conductivity (EC), Turbidity, Suspended Solids (SS), Total Dissolved Solids (TDS), Total Hardness (TH), Total Alkalinity (TA), Dissolved Oxygen (DO), Biochemical oxygen demand (BOD), Chemical oxygen demand (COD), Sulfates (SO4- -),, Chlorides, Total Phosphates ( TP -), Calcium (Ca++), Magnesium (Mg++), Fluorides Ammonium- Nitrogen (NH3-N), Nitrate-Nitrogen (NO3-N), Nitrite-Nitrogen (NO2-N) Total coliform (TC), Fecal coliform (FC), Sodium (Na+) and Boron(B) 2.1.2 Assigning weight Each selected parameter was assigned a weight (WA) based on the criteria shown in Table 2 and Table 3. The parameter which produces adverse effect on human health, has more concentration relative to other parameters and requiring advance or special treatment method for its removal, is assigned less weight so that it should lower the WQI. The parameters which does not have any adverse effect on human health, has less concentration relative to other parameters and requires conventional method for its removal is assigned a higher weight so that it should increase the WQI. Excursion for parameter is determined based on the concentration (test value) of parameter and the guideline value. It is determined as follows. Table 2: Importance of water quality parameters
WHO [30], BIS [31], and CPCB [32] permissible limits 15 Effect on human health beyond permissible limit/ guideline value

Parameter

Unit

Method for removal

Remarks

Color

TCU

No direct health effect Aesthetically unpleasant [31]

Conventional * treatment

Color is due to natural organic matter and colloidal matter from suspended solids, iron, manganese, Here true color is considered. Higher temperature suggests that the water has fewer amount of insoluble pollutants [33] Temperature is known to influence pH, alkalinity and DO [34] Rate of biological reaction and production of bacteria increases [1]

Temperature

18 - 22

No health effect Only aesthetic effect -

123

International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET), ISSN 0976 6308 (Print), ISSN 0976 6316(Online) Volume 4, Issue 4, July-August (2013), IAEME
pH 6.5 8.5 No sufficient evidences for adverse effect are available Only aesthetic effect Conventional treatment pH > 8.5, water is bitter in taste. [35] Ammonia changes to more toxic state of un-ionized ammonia at pH> 7. Color intensity increases with increase in pH [36] Depends on amount of total dissolved solids in water. It represents he salinity It is function of temperature and number of dissolved ions in water. [10, 33] Water reach in bicarbonate, calcium and magnesium has low conductivity. Water with high conductivity has more concentration of sodium and chlorides. [7] Indicates more amount of suspended matter and indicates possibility of harmful matter [10] It contributes to turbidity of water. It increases water temperature by absorbing heat from sunlight leading to depletion of DO [37] Affects electrical conductivity

Electrical Conductivity

S/cm

750

No health effect It greatly affects the taste [26]

Conventional treatment

Turbidity

NTU

Aesthetic ally unpleasant [31]

Conventional treatment

Suspended Solids

mg/l

25

No direct adverse effect on human health Only aesthetic effect

Conventional treatment

Total Dissolved Solids Total hardness

Only aesthetic effect mg/l 500

Conventional treatment

mg/l

300

Only aesthetic effect

Lime softening

Reduces toxicity of cadmium, lead, nickel and zinc [38] If alkalinity is too high water becomes turbid.

Total Alkalinity

mg/l

200

Only aesthetic effect

Conventional treatment

124

International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET), ISSN 0976 6308 (Print), ISSN 0976 6316(Online) Volume 4, Issue 4, July-August (2013), IAEME
Dissolved Oxygen mg/l 6 -10 No health effect Only aesthetic effect Aeration Depends on temperature of water [10] Less concentration converts nitrates to nitrite and sulfates to sulfides High BOD causes oxygen depletion [9] --

Biochemical oxygen demand Chemical oxygen demand Sulfates

mg/l

<3

No direct health effect

Conventional method Conventional method Ion exchange

mg/l

<20

No direct health effect

mg/l

250

No direct health effect It imparts taste to water [36] Impart salty taste to water [36] It imparts taste to water

--

Chlorides

mg/l

250

Desalination

--

Calcium

mg/l

75

Lime softening, Activated carbon Lime softening, Activated carbon Defluoridation by ion exchange activated alumina

Increases hardness

Magnesium

mg/l

30

It imparts taste to water

Increases hardness

Fluorides

mg/l

1.5

Causes dental fluorosis, skeletal diseases, enamel mottling and bone deformations [7, 38] Excess fluoride causes sequence o changes in teeth, bone and tissues leading to simple mechanical back pain to severe crippling and neurological impairment, stiffness in the neck and joints [38] Fluoride concentration over 1.5 mg/l poses high risk of fluorosis to people. The risk increases with increase in fluoride content. [39] Concentration below 0.6mg/l causes dental carries [36] 125

--

International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET), ISSN 0976 6308 (Print), ISSN 0976 6316(Online) Volume 4, Issue 4, July-August (2013), IAEME
Total phosphates mg/l 0.4 Only aesthetic effect Precipitation with Fe (III), Aluminum (III) Excess phosphorus causes algal growth decreasing the DO level & rises water temperature [10] It depends on temperature, pH and total dissolved solids [3] --

Ammoniumnitrogen

Only aesthetic effect mg/l 0.5

Ion exchange

Nitratenitrogen

mg/l

10

High concentration causes methaemoglobinemia or blue baby disease in infants Presence of nitrite in water is dangerous Nitrite reacts with nitrosotable compounds in the body to form Nnitro -so compounds which are carcinogenic [36] Effect on human health beyond permissible limit/ guideline value

Ion exchange

NitriteNitrogen

mg/l

Conventional treatment (Chlorination )

--

Parameter

Unit

WHO guideline value / IS / CPCB permissible limits

Method for removal

Remarks

Total coliform

MPN/ 100ml

Causes gastroentitis, urinary tract infection, diarrhea , typhoid fever, bacillary dysentery[36] Causes gastroentitis, urinary tract infection, diarrhea [36] Impart taste to water

Conventional treatment

It is influenced by temperature

Faecal coliform

MPN/ 100ml

Conventional treatment

It is influenced by temperature

Sodium Boron

mg/l mg/l

200 0.5

Ion exchange

---

It develops metal Ion exchange toxicity It is toxic to and Reverse reproductive tract Osmosis

126

International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET), ISSN 0976 6308 (Print), ISSN 0976 6316(Online) Volume 4, Issue 4, July-August (2013), IAEME Sr. No. 1 Table 3: Criteria for assigning weights to water quality parameters Criteria Description Weight Minimum Maximum (WA) weight weight Effect on human health Aesthetic effect only Aesthetic effect and adverse effect on health Only adverse effect on health Excursion of parameter concentration less than average excursion Excursion of parameter concentration more than average excursion 2 1 1 2 1 1 2

Parameter concentration related to concentration of other parameters

Treatment method Conventional treatment process (Method for Advance / Special treatment removal) process Minimum / Maximum weight

2 1

1 3 (1)

2 6

Test value exceeds the guideline value excursion 1 Test value below the guideline value excursion

(2)

Calculation of relative weight A relative weight R for each parameter is calculated by using equation (3) [i.e. dividing assigned weight of parameter (WA) by sum of assigned weights of all parameters A ].

, and R 1

(3)

2.1.3 Construction of Sub-Index Equations for Individual Selected Parameter To assign the sub-index values, the water quality parameters guideline values (permissible limits) of World Health Organization [30], Bureau of Indian Standards (BIS) [31] and Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) [32] are used The water quality sub-index equations are formulated according to the water quality classification used in this study The For a parameter which requires only conventional method of treatment, the parameter concentration equal to guideline value is considered at WQI value of 80 whereas for a parameter which requires advance or special method of treatment, parameter concentration equal to guideline value is considered at a WQI value of 60 This is done so that WQI should represent correct water quality The sub-index equations for various parameters are shown in Table 4

127

International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET), ISSN 0976 6308 (Print), ISSN 0976 6316(Online) Volume 4, Issue 4, July-August (2013), IAEME Table 4: Sub-index equations
Water quality parameter Color Sub-index equation Water quality parameter Chlorides Sub-index equation

Temperature

pH

Electrical conductivity

x 5, 15 < x 300, x 15 x > 300, x 3, x 18, 18 > x 22, 22 < x 37, x > 37, x 2, 2<x<7 7 x 13, x >13, x 275, 275<x 5000 3700<x7500 x>7500,

y=100 y = -0.254x+81 y = -1.872x+106.1 y=0 y=0 y = 6.441x-12.37 y = 100 y = -6.228x+233.7 y=0 y=0 y = 2.695x2-5.95x+2 y = 2.914x2-78.66x+528 y=0 y = 100 y = 2E-06x2-0.081x+108.4 y = 3E+06x-1.41 y=0

x 78, 75 < x 5000 x > 5000, x 10, 10 < x 425, x > 425

y = 100 y = -23.3ln(x)+198.9 y = 100 y = 100 y = 0.0001x20.274x+98.73 y=0 y = 100 y = 0.001x2-0.716x+100 y=0 y=0 y = 65.8x5+412.2x4888.8x3+685.8x247.27x+3.415 y = 100 y=0 y = 100 y = -22.4ln(x)+47.88 y=0 y = 100 y = -13.8ln(x)+51.78 y=0 y = 100 y = -4.356x+102 y = -30.6ln(x)+120.3 y=0 y = 100 y = -15.3ln(x)+52.11 y = 100 y = -0.403x+100 y = -0.028x+81.2 y = -0.001x+70.77 y=0 y = 100 y = -x+100 y=-0.055+81.11 y = -0.002x+69.76 y= 0

Calcium

Magnesium

x 5, 5 < x 180, x > 180, x 0.15, {0.15< x 0.7, and 1 < x 2.2} 0,7 < x 1, x > 2.2, x 0.1, 0.1 < x 7.5, x > 7.5, x 0.03, 0.3 < x 40, x> 40, x 2, 2 < x 14.5, 15 < x 50, x > 40, x 0.04, 0.4 < x 28, x > 28, x 0, 0< x 50, 50< x 400, 400 < x 70000 x>70000, x 0, 0< x 20, 20 < x 200, 200 < x 34000, x> 350000,

Fluorides

Turbidity

Suspended solids Total dissolved solids Total hardness Total alkalinity

x 2, 2 < x 200, x> 200, x 5, 5 < x 190, x > 190, x 180, 180<x < 28000 x > 28000 x 50, 50< x 2500, x > 2500, x 20, 20 < x 780, 750<x3000, x>3000, x < 1, 1 x <8, 8 x 10, 10 < x 13, x >13, x 1, 1 < x 90, x > 90, x 9, 9 < x 450, x > 450, x 40, 40 < x 2000, x > 2000,

y = 100 y = -21.4ln(x)+115 y=0 y = 100 y = 0.001x2-0.542x+102 y=0 y=0 y = -18.5ln(x)+196.4 y=0 y = 100 y = 1E-05x2-0.066x+109.8 y=0 y = 100 y = -0.105x+102 y = -0.008x+26 y=0 y=0 y = -0.14x3+1.468x2+ 9.519x-2.088 y = 100 y = -0.14x3+1.468x2+ 9.519x-2.088 y=0 y = 100 y = -23.3ln(x)+105.7 y=0 y = 100 y = -25.3ln(x)+155.5 y=0 y = 100 y = -23.4ln(x)+188.8 y=0

Total phosphates

NH3 - N

NO3 N

NO2 - N Total Coliform

Dissolved oxygen

Fecal Coliform

BOD

COD

Sulfates

x 65, y = 100 65 < x 2000, y = -27.8ln(x)+212.1 x > 2000, y=0 x 0.075, y = 100 Boron 0.075 < x 10, y = -19.9ln(x)+47.22 x>10, y=0 Where, x = Concentration of parameter and y = Water quality Sub-index Sodium

2.1.4 Overall WQI The multiplicative product method of aggregation is used to overcome problems of eclipsing and ambiguity Overall water quality index is determined by formula given in equation (4)

(4)

128

International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET), ISSN 0976 6308 (Print), ISSN 0976 6316(Online) Volume 4, Issue 4, July-August (2013), IAEME 2.1.5 Water Quality Categorization The water quality is classified into five categories Table 5 shows the water quality index (WQI) ranges and the classification of water Table 5: Ranges of Water Quality Index
Water quality category Excellent Water Quality Index Values 95 - 100

and water quality category (CCME, 2001)

Water quality description

Good Fair Marginal Poor

80 - 94 65 - 79 45 - 64 0 - 44

Water quality is protected with a virtual absence of threat or impairment. All measurements are within objectives virtually of all the time Water quality is protected with minor degree of threat or impairment; conditions rarely depart from desirable levels Water quality is protected but occasionally threatened or impaired; conditions sometimes depart from desirable levels Water quality is frequently threatened or impaired; conditions often depart from desirable levels Water quality is almost always threatened or impaired; conditions usually depart from desirable levels

Source: Canadian water quality guidelines for protection of aquatic life : CCME water quality index, Users manual. CCME 2001 3.0 STUDY AREA The study area includes Purna (Tapi) river basin of Maharashtra, INDIA Purna river originates at It flows southwards through Amravati district, then westwards through Akola and Buldana districts to discharge itself into Tapi river near Changdeo in Jalgaon district Total length of Purna river is 334 m The river is perennial and has many tributaries The climate of this area is dry and hot except for monsoon (June-September) The basin area is about 7800 Km2 out of which central 3000 Km2 is known as saline track Yearly rainfall is 700-800 mm Six stations were identified for development of WQI Fig 1 shows Purna (Tapi) river basin and location of identified stations

Fig 1: Purna (Tapi) river basin

129

International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET), ISSN 0976 6308 (Print), ISSN 0976 6316(Online) Volume 4, Issue 4, July-August (2013), IAEME 4.0 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Table 6 shows typical water quality characteristics of Purna (Tapi) river basin WQI so developed is applied to selected stations of Purna (Tapi) river basin Temperature, total coliform, Fecal coliform, Suspended solids and turbidity exceeded the guideline value deteriorating the water quality and lowering WQI Fig shows parameters that are exceeded (as percentage of total exceedance) over the guideline value More than 50% exceedance is due to temperature, total coliform and Fecal coliform together where as parameters like Sulfates, Chlorides, Calcium, Magnesium, Total phosphates, Nitrate Nitrogen and sodium are not exceeded the guideline value at all The water quality of these stations is categorized as good. Table 6: Water quality characteristics of Purna (Tapi) river basin Mean SD Parameter Mean SD Parameter 6 0.167 28.7 8.440 8.340.213 438162 3270 3348 289120 158 16451 DO BOD COD Sulfates Chlorides Calcium Magnesium Fluorides 6.290.669 2.730.924 10.050.637 12.446.152 51.7841.903 26.508.091 22.259.886 0.5340,267 TP NH3-N NO3-N NO2-N Total Coli

Parameter Color Temperature 1.041pH EC Turbidity SS TDS TH TA

Mean SD

0.0660.079 0.2020.041 0.6880.597 0.070.200 9199

Faecal Coli 3748 Sodium Boron 87.2427.552 0.1510.152

Fig 2 shows variation in WQI in winter and summer for these stations Due to increased concentration of turbidity, suspended solids, total coliform and fecal coliform in winter lower the WQI whereas the water is very clean with concentration of turbidity and suspended solids improved the WQI in summer Fig 3 shows variation in WQI for these stations during 2005- 2008. Table 7 show correlation coefficient between WQI and concentration of parameters All parameters shown negative correlation with negative correlation with WQI except for color, pH, temperature, dissolved oxygen, sulfates and fluorides Positive correlation between WQI and dissolve oxygen indicates that as dissolved oxygen increases WQI also increases pH values are mostly less than 8.5 As pH concentration approaches to guideline value of 6.5-8.5, WQI increases Guideline value range for temperature is 18 OC22 OC as water temperature approaches to this range WQI increases For color and sulfates the concentrations are well within guideline value, so the decrease in WQI is not due to these parameters but it is due to the combined effect of all other parameters. While deciding the water quality sub-index equation, lower guideline value of 0.6 mg/l is decided to avoid dental carries Fluoride concentration are well within guideline value and as these concentrations approaches to 0.6 mg/l, it lowers the WQI

130

International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET), ISSN 0976 6308 (Print), ISSN 0976 6316(Online) Volume 4, Issue 4, July-August (2013), IAEME
WQI Winter WQI Summer WQI

90 88 86 84 82 80 78 S1

90 85

2005 2006

80 75 70 2007 2008 S1 S2 S3 S4 S5 S6

WQI

S2

S3

S4

S5

S6

Fig 2: Variation in WQI in winter and summer

Fig 3: Variation in WQI during 2005-2008

Table 7: Correlation coefficient between WQI and Concentration of parameters Parameter r Parameter r Parameter r Color Temperature pH EC Turbidity SS TDS TH TA 0.435 0.486 0.411 -0.610 -0.689 -0.960 -0.7 -0.777 -0.496 DO BOD COD Sulfates Chlorides Calcium Magnesium Fluorides 0.880 -0.898 -0.838 0.172 -0.795 -0.303 -0.449 0.346 TP NH3-N NO3-N NO2-N Total Coli Fecal Coli Sodium Boron -0.901 -0.597 -0.255 -0.250 -0.955 -0.831 -0.804 -0.064

r =Correlation coefficient 4.1 Sensitivity Analysis WQI was also determined by removing each parameter at a time Fig 6 shows WQI after removal of the said parameter. It is observed that WQI is not varied much due to removal of an individual parameter. Table 8 shows correlation coefficient between WOI and WQI after a particular parameter is removed. All parameters have shown positive correlation with WQI after its removal. No parameters have shown negative correlation with WQI after its removal. It shows that WQI is not influenced only by one or few parameters but it is the combined effect of all the parameters. It is varied much due to turbidity, temperature and fluorides. Turbidity is exceeded much the guideline value during winter particularly in monsoon which contributed to lower the overall WQI After removal of turbidity, WQI is increased. Climate of Purna (Tapi) river basin being dry and hot throughout the year, water temperature exceeded the guideline value to lower WQI. After removal of temperature WQI is increased Fluoride concentration is well within guideline value. The water quality sub-index equation is such that it lowers WQI if concentration of fluoride is less than 0.6 mg/l to avoid dental carries, after its removal WQI is increased. Though percentage exceedance of concentration is more, but as it is within certain limit which have not contributed much to lower WQI after removal of these parameter.

131

International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET), ISSN 0976 6308 (Print), ISSN 0976 6316(Online) Volume 4, Issue 4, July-August (2013), IAEME Table 8: Correlation coefficient between WQI and WQI after removal of particular parameters Parameter r Parameter r Parameter r Color 0.840 DO 0.872 TP 0.830 Temperature 0.913 BOD 0.901 NH3-N 0.895 pH 0.843 COD 0.827 NO3-N 0.843 EC 0.748 Sulfates 0.809 NO2-N 0.880 Turbidity 0.896 Chlorides 0.840 Total Coli 0.830 SS 0.872 Calcium 0.830 Fecal Coli 0.830 TDS 0.757 Magnesium 0.895 Sodium 0.840 TH 0.783 Fluorides 0.651 Boron 0.871 TA 0.895 r =Correlation coefficient 5.0 CONCLUSION In this study, WQI based mathematical formulation by assigning weights to various physiochemical water quality parameters are proposed based on its adverse effect on human health, its concentration relative to the concentration of other parameters and method of treatment required for it. The new WQI is believed to assist the decision makers in reporting the state of water quality for drinking purpose. The applicability & usefulness of proposed methodology is revealed by a case study. The sensitivity analysis shows that this WQI is not influenced by any one or few parameters but it is a combined effect of all the parameters this WQI could be used to evaluate the water quality of any water body to judge its suitability for drinking purpose. This WQI forces the researchers to assign same weight to the same parameter, moreover this WQI is free from ambiguity and eclipsing. REFERENCES [1] A. A. Najufpoor, Z. Vojodur, M. H. Dehgani, H. Acidadi, (2007), Quality assessment of Kashif river in North-east of Iran in 1996-2005 Journal of Applied Sciences 7(2), 2007, pp 253-257. Brown, R. M: McClell and, N. I, Deininger, R. A and Ronald, G. T A water quality index Do we dare? Water Sewage Works 11, 1970, pp 335- 343 Curtis G. Cude, Oregon water quality index: A tool for evaluating water quality management effectiveness Journal of American water works association Vol. 37, No. 1, 2001, pp 125-137. Curtis G. Cude, Reply to discussion on Oregon water quality index: A tool for evaluating water quality management by, David G. Smith, Robert J. Davies- Colley and John W. Nagels, Journal of the American management by, David G. Smith, Robert J. Davies- Colley and John W. Nagels, Journal of the American Water Resources Association, Vol. 38, No. 1, Feb, 2002, 315-318 Bindu N. Lodhani (1985), Water quality index for Chao Phraya River Journal of Environmental Engineering Vol. 110, No. 6, 1984 pp 1663. Bhagava D. S., Expression for drinking water supply standards Journal of Environmental Engineering Vol 3 No. 3, 1985 pp 304-316. L .Gabriel T, de Azevedo, Timothy K. Gates, Integration of water quality and quantity in strategic river basis planning Journal of water resources planning & management Vol. 126, No. 2, 2000, pp 85-97. CCME (2001), Canadian water quality guidelines for protection of aquatic life: CCME water quality index, Users manual. CCME 2001
132

[2] [3]

[4]

[5] [6] [7]

[8]

International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET), ISSN 0976 6308 (Print), ISSN 0976 6316(Online) Volume 4, Issue 4, July-August (2013), IAEME [9] [10] [11] [12] Shiow Mey Lion, Shang-Lien Lo and Shan-Hsien Wang, A generalized water quality index for Taiwan Environmental Monitoring Assessment,96 : 35-52, 2004 Ahmaid Said, David Stevens, Gerald Sehlke, (2004), An innovative index for evaluating water quality in streams, Environmental Assessment, Vol. 34 No. 3, 2004, pp 406-414 Chinmoy Sarkar and S. A. Abbasi, QUALIDEX A new software for generating water quality indices, Environmental monitoring Assessment, 119, 2006, 201-231 William Andre Ocampo Duque, On the development of decision making systems based on fuzzy models to assess water quality in rivers, Ph. D. Thesis, Universitat Rovira I Virgili, Tarragona, 2008 S. S. Aadi, Padmaja Vapulla, M Anji Reddy, Remote sensing and GIS technique for evaluation of ground water quality In Municipal Corporation Hyderabad (Zone-V) India International Journal of Environmental Research and Pollution Health, 4(1), 2007 pp 45-52 Furhan Iqbal, M. Ali, Abdus Salam,B. A. Khan, S. Ahmad, M. Qamar and Kashif Umer,Seasonal variation of physio-chemical characteristics of River Soan water at Dhoak Pathan Bridge (Chakwal), Pakistan, International Journal of Agricultural and Biology, 6 (1), 2004, 89-92 Prabhata Swamee and Aditya Tyagi, Improved method for Aggregation of water quality sub- indices Journal of Environmental Engineering Vol. 13 No. 2, 2007 pp 220-225 L. K. Diadovski and M. P. Atanasaova (2007), Water quality management based on the integral approach Water Quality Management, Chem. Biochem. Engg. 21 (2) 2007 pp 189194. Mohsen Nasirin, 2007 A new water quality index for environmental contamination controlled by mineral processing: A case study of among (Tin Talling) processing activity Journal of Applied Science 7(20)2977-2987, 2007 Yilmaz Icaga, Fuzzy evaluation of water quality classification, Ecological Indicators, 7, 2007, 710-718 Prakash Raj Kannad, Seockheon Lee Young Soo Lee, Sushil Raj Kannel, Siddhi Pratap Khan,Application of water quality indices and Dissolved oxygen as indicators for river water classification and urban impact assessment, Environmental monitoring Assessment, 132,2007, 93-110 Hulya Boyacioglu, Development of water quality index based on a European classification scheme, Water SA, Vol. 33, No. 1. Jan. 2007, pp 101-106 Hulya Boyacioglu, Utilization of water quality index method as a classification tool, Environmental monitoring Assessment, 167 (2010), 115-124 Andre Lormontov, Lidia Yokoyama, Mihail Lermontov and Maria Augusta Soares Machado, River quality analysis using fuzzy water quality index: Riberia do Iguape river watershed, Brazil, Ecological indicators, 9, 2009,1188-1197 Chaiwat Prakirake, Pawinee Chaipraset and Sudarut Tripetchkul, (2009) Development of Specific water quality index for water supply in Thailand Songklanakarin J. Science Technology 31, (1) 2009 pp 91-104. Dinesh Kumar, Babu J. Alappat, N.S.F. Water quality index : Does it represents the Expert opinion?Practice Periodical of Hazardous, Toxic and Radioactive Waste Management Vol. 13 No. 1, 2009 pp 75-79 M. K. Chaturvedi and K. Basin, Assessing water quality index of water treatment plant and bore wells in Delhi, India, Environment monitoring Assessment, 163 ,2010, 449-453 Abdul Hameed Jawad Alobaidy, Evaluating raw and treated water quality of Tigris river within Baghdad by Index analysis, 2010, file;//localhost/E/wqi121109.mht

[13]

[14]

[15] [16]

[17]

[18] [19]

[20] [21] [22]

[23]

[24]

[25] [26]

133

International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET), ISSN 0976 6308 (Print), ISSN 0976 6316(Online) Volume 4, Issue 4, July-August (2013), IAEME
[27] Mohammad Ali Fulazzaky, Teng Wee Seong and Mohamad Idrus Mohamad Masirin, (2010), Assessment of water quality status for the Selongor river in Malaysia, Water, Air, Soil pollution, 205, 2010 63-77 [28] Avnish Chauhan and Suman Singh, Evaluation of Ganga water for drinking purpose by\water quality index at Rishikesh, Uttarakhand, India, Report and Opinion, 2 (9), 2010, 53-61 [29] Abdul Hameed Jawad Alobaidy, Haider S. Abid and Bahram K. Maulood, Application of water quality index for assessment of Dokan Lake ecosystem , Kurdistan region, Iraq, Journal of Water Resources and Protection, 2, 2010, 792-798 [30] World Health Organization, World Health Organization guidelines for drinking water quality Third Edition, Incorporating first and second Addenda, Volume I, Geneva, 2008 [31] Bureau of Indian Standards, Indian Standard specifications for drinking water, IS 10500, 1991 with third amendment, July 2010 [32] Central Pollution Control Board, (CPCB), Primary water quality criteria for designated best use classes and general quality criteria for raw water for organized community water supplies (Surface and Ground water), 2010, Government of India report [33] Khaiwal Ravindra, Ameena, Minakshi, Rani and Anubha Kaushik, (2003), Seasonal Variation in physio-chemical characteristics of river Yamuna in Haryana and its ecological best- designated use, Journal of Environmental Monitoring, 5, 2003, 419-426. [34] K. V. Paliwal, (1972), Quality of water resources in India, Symposium on Water in mans life, August 5-7, 1971, New Delhi [35] Federal and Provincial Committee 0n Drinking Water (Canada), (2010), "Guidelines for Canadian drinking water quality", Canada Health, 2010 [36] Clair N. Sawyer, Perry L. McCarty and Gene F. Parkin, Chemistry for Environmental Engineering and Science, McGraw Hill Publication [37] Rashmi Sisodia and Chaturbhuj Moundiotiya (2006), Assessment of water quality index of wetland Kalakho Lake, Rajasthan, India, Journal of Environmental Hydrology, Vol 14, No. 23, 2006, 1-1 [38] Warren Viessman Jr. and Mark J. Hammer, Water Supply and Pollution Control, Prentice Hall Water resources Division India and Northern Affairs Canada, Yellowknife NT, Canada, Peel river basin water quality March 2002 [39] Ene Indermitte, Astrid Saava and Enn Karro, (2009), Exposure to high Fluoride drinking water and risk of dental Fluorosis in Estinia, International Journal of Environmental Research Public Health, 6, 2009, 710-721 [40] William Andre Ocampo Duque, (2008), On the development of decision making systems based on fuzzy models to assess water quality in rivers, Ph. D. Thesis, Universitat Rovira I Virgili, Tarragona, 2008 [41] Abdur Rahman, M. A. Zafor and Shantanu Kar, Analysis and Comparision of Surface Water Quality Parameters in and Around Dhaka City, International Journal of Civil Engineering & Technology (IJCIET), Volume 3, Issue 2, 2012, pp. 7 - 15, ISSN Print: 0976 6308, ISSN Online: 0976 6316. [42] Rumman Mowla Chowdhury, Sardar Yafee Muntasir, Md. Niamul Naser and Sardar Rafee Musabbir, Water Quality Analysis of Surface Water Bodies Along the Dhaka-Mawa-Bhanga Road Based on Pre-Monsoon Water Quality Parameters for Aquaculture, International Journal of Civil Engineering & Technology (IJCIET), Volume 3, Issue 2, 2012, pp. 154 - 168, ISSN Print: 0976 6308, ISSN Online: 0976 6316. [43] Neeraj D. Sharma and Dr. J. N. Patel, Experimental Study of Groundwater Quality Improvement by Recharging with Rainwater, International Journal of Civil Engineering & Technology (IJCIET), Volume 2, Issue 1, 2011, pp. 10 - 16, ISSN Print: 0976 6308, ISSN Online: 0976 6316.

134