| Literature DB >> 32426433 |
Apoorv Verma1, Brijesh Kumar Yadav2, N B Singh1,3.
Abstract
This data article deals with the assessment of groundwater quality based on water quality index (WQI) and irrigation indices. A total of 8 sites have been selected for the qualification of groundwater fitness. The assessment of groundwater quality has been done by selecting 13 physico-chemical parameters such as pH, EC, TDS, Ca2+, Mg2+, Na+, K+, Cl-, SO4-, HCO3-, NO3-, F-, and TH. Inverse distance-weighted (IDW) application was used to prepare the spatial distribution maps of WQI for the pre and post-monsoon period. All the samples were found in the rock dominance zone in Gibbs plot and according to the Piper plot, Ca-HCO3 is the dominant hydrochemical facies in the study area. On the other hand, irrigation water quality was examined by computing irrigation indices such as SAR, RSC, SSP, MHR, KR, %Na, PI, and PS. The outcomes of the irrigation indices suggests that the water quality is of a good and excellent category except for MHR and RSC.Entities:
Keywords: Groundwater; Inverse Distance-Weighted; Irrigation indices; Water Quality Index
Year: 2020 PMID: 32426433 PMCID: PMC7225388 DOI: 10.1016/j.dib.2020.105660
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Data Brief ISSN: 2352-3409
Charge balance error values.
| Sample ID | %CBE | |
|---|---|---|
| Post monsoon | Pre monsoon | |
| LKO1 | 1.05 | 0.26 |
| LKO2 | 1.42 | -0.27 |
| LKO3 | 2.03 | 0.02 |
| LKO4 | 4.33 | 0.35 |
| LKO5 | -1.44 | 0.50 |
| LKO6 | -0.10 | 0.61 |
| LKO7 | 4.86 | -0.33 |
| LKO8 | -1.31 | -4.26 |
Fig. 1Location of study area and sampling points, Lucknow, India.
Laboratory and field observation of hydrochemical data of groundwater.
| Sample ID | GPS Co-ordinate | pH | EC | TDS | Ca2+ | Mg2+ | Na+ | K+ | Cl- | SO42- | HCO3- | TH | F- | NO3- | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| LKO1 | 81.03 | 26.62 | 8 | 560 | 364 | 36 | 33 | 36 | 4.5 | 14 | 3 | 342 | 225.2 | 0.2 | 0 |
| LKO2 | 81.12 | 26.74 | 8.1 | 462 | 300 | 40 | 28 | 16 | 2.8 | 7.1 | 16 | 268 | 215.2 | 0.6 | 0.34 |
| LKO3 | 80.85 | 26.72 | 8.1 | 585 | 380 | 32 | 39 | 35 | 4.4 | 28 | 10 | 317 | 240.2 | 0.2 | 0.09 |
| LKO4 | 80.94 | 27.04 | 8.5 | 520 | 338 | 20 | 30 | 49 | 5.6 | 18 | 12 | 275 | 175.1 | 0.7 | 0 |
| LKO5 | 80.73 | 27.03 | 8.1 | 754 | 490 | 68 | 36 | 37 | 5.2 | 28 | 31 | 421 | 320.3 | 0.6 | 0.25 |
| LKO6 | 80.69 | 26.93 | 8 | 615 | 400 | 48 | 41 | 20 | 3.7 | 14 | 17 | 366 | 290.2 | 0.7 | 1.2 |
| LKO7 | 80.78 | 26.87 | 8.2 | 662 | 430 | 48 | 39 | 37 | 4.4 | 43 | 17 | 310 | 280.2 | 0.9 | 31 |
| LKO8 | 80.94 | 26.86 | 8.2 | 738 | 480 | 60 | 36 | 37 | 4.8 | 57 | 46 | 325 | 300.2 | 0.3 | 108 |
| LKO1 | 81.03 | 26.62 | 8.2 | 320 | 214 | 28 | 19 | 10 | 2.4 | 7 | 2.2 | 195 | 150 | 0.3 | 0.6 |
| LKO2 | 81.12 | 26.74 | 8 | 614 | 411 | 36 | 34 | 48 | 2.8 | 21 | 19 | 354 | 230 | 0.1 | 1.9 |
| LKO3 | 80.85 | 26.72 | 7.9 | 426 | 285 | 36 | 27 | 13 | 3.8 | 7 | 4.3 | 268 | 200 | 0 | 0.4 |
| LKO4 | 80.94 | 27.04 | 8 | 591 | 396 | 32 | 32 | 51 | 4.8 | 21 | 6.3 | 354 | 210 | 0.2 | 0.3 |
| LKO5 | 80.73 | 27.03 | 8.1 | 472 | 316 | 20 | 41 | 17 | 4 | 14 | 18 | 268 | 220 | 0.5 | 0.2 |
| LKO6 | 80.69 | 26.93 | 7.9 | 567 | 380 | 36 | 36 | 28 | 5.8 | 7 | 2.5 | 354 | 240 | 0.2 | 0.3 |
| LKO7 | 80.78 | 26.87 | 8.2 | 790 | 529 | 56 | 58 | 24 | 3.8 | 28 | 47 | 427 | 380 | 0.0 | 1.1 |
| LKO8 | 80.94 | 26.86 | 7.9 | 710 | 473 | 61 | 37 | 35 | 4.7 | 59 | 45 | 355 | 310 | 0.3 | 106 |
Units of all the parameters expressed in mgL-1, except pH and electrical conductivity expressed in µmhos/cm.
Assigned and relative weight for computing WQI as per BIS standards 2012.
| Parameter | BIS standards (2012) (Desirable limit) mgL-1 | Assigned Weight(wi) | Relative weight(RWi) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Calcium (Ca2+) | 75 | 2 | 0.06 |
| Magnesium (Mg2+) | 30 | 2 | 0.06 |
| Sodium (Na+) | 200 | 3 | 0.09 |
| Potassium (K+) | 12 | 2 | 0.06 |
| Nitrate (NO3-) | 45 | 5 | 0.15 |
| Sulphate (SO42-) | 200 | 3 | 0.09 |
| Bicarbonate (HCO3-) | 200 | 1 | 0.03 |
| Chloride (Cl-) | 250 | 3 | 0.09 |
| Total Hardness (TH) | 200 | 3 | 0.09 |
| Fluoride (F-) | 1 | 5 | 0.15 |
| Total Dissolved Solid (TDS) | 500 | 5 | 0.15 |
| Ʃ wi = 34 | Ʃ RWi = 1 |
values are taken from WHO [5] guideline.
Groundwater quality index classification for individual sample based on WQI.
| Sample No. | WQI | Water quality category |
|---|---|---|
| LKO-1 | 41.9 | Good water |
| LKO-2 | 42.0 | Good water |
| LKO-3 | 44.7 | Good water |
| LKO-4 | 45.3 | Good water |
| LKO-5 | 60.5 | Fair water |
| LKO-6 | 55.6 | Fair water |
| LKO-7 | 68.9 | Fair water |
| LKO-8 | 89.9 | Poor water |
| LKO-1 | 27.4 | Good water |
| LKO-2 | 43.5 | Good water |
| LKO-3 | 32.1 | Good water |
| LKO-4 | 43.4 | Good water |
| LKO-5 | 43.2 | Good water |
| LKO-6 | 44.8 | Good water |
| LKO-7 | 58.6 | Fair water |
| LKO-8 | 90.3 | Poor water |
Correlation matrix between physico-chemical parameters of groundwater samples.
Fig. 2Spatial distribution map of groundwater quality index (a) 2016: Post monsoon (b) 2015: Pre monsoon.
Fig. 3Gibbs plots a. TDS vs (Na + K)/ (Na + K+ Ca) b. TDS vs Cl (Cl + HCO3).
Fig. 4Piper's Trilinear plot of major ion data of groundwater samples.
Summary of irrigation water quality indices equations [10], [11], [12], [13], [14], [15].
| S.No. | Indices | Acronym | Formula |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Sodium Absorption Ratio | SAR | |
| 2 | Residual Sodium Carbonate | RSC | |
| 3 | Soluble Sodium Percentage | SSP | |
| 4 | Magnesium Hazard Ratio | MHR | |
| 5 | Kelly's Ratio | KR | |
| 6 | Percent Sodium | %Na | |
| 7 | Permeability Index | PI | |
| 8 | Potential Salinity | PS |
Calculated values of irrigation water quality indices.
| Sample No. | SAR | RSC | SSP | MHR | KR | %Na | PI | EC | PS |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| LKO-1 | 1.042544 | 1.09310 | 25.76386 | 60.18391 | 0.347053 | 27.14353 | 39.90986 | 560 | 0.427195 |
| LKO-2 | 0.474628 | 0.09213 | 13.92992 | 53.58062 | 0.161844 | 15.14622 | 42.12295 | 462 | 0.366852 |
| LKO-3 | 0.982082 | 0.38926 | 24.05626 | 66.77378 | 0.316764 | 25.38314 | 37.02259 | 585 | 0.889787 |
| LKO-4 | 1.618882 | 1.04033 | 38.07333 | 71.21011 | 0.614813 | 39.61824 | 39.25198 | 520 | 0.632685 |
| LKO-5 | 0.902807 | 0.54409 | 20.20551 | 46.60913 | 0.253219 | 21.51601 | 34.17892 | 754 | 1.112573 |
| LKO-6 | 0.512214 | 0.22931 | 13.10341 | 58.48017 | 0.150793 | 14.32463 | 37.3364 | 615 | 0.571903 |
| LKO-7 | 0.961408 | -0.52391 | 22.30952 | 57.26096 | 0.287159 | 23.50288 | 32.48741 | 662 | 1.389956 |
| LKO-8 | 0.932570 | -0.63004 | 21.27167 | 49.73300 | 0.270191 | 22.52876 | 31.74922 | 738 | 2.086786 |
| LKO-1 | 0.357500 | 0.23514 | 12.80944 | 52.80655 | 0.146913 | 14.3576 | 52.20749 | 320 | 0.220365 |
| LKO-2 | 1.377554 | 1.20748 | 31.24545 | 60.89706 | 0.454449 | 31.9745 | 37.82385 | 614 | 0.790185 |
| LKO-3 | 0.398933 | 0.37403 | 12.33633 | 55.29169 | 0.140723 | 14.15652 | 45.43549 | 426 | 0.242227 |
| LKO-4 | 1.525357 | 1.57167 | 34.40141 | 62.24935 | 0.524423 | 35.62697 | 38.99621 | 591 | 0.65797 |
| LKO-5 | 0.500141 | 0.02045 | 14.46701 | 77.17088 | 0.16914 | 16.14543 | 41.04004 | 472 | 0.582313 |
| LKO-6 | 0.789556 | 1.04291 | 20.37757 | 62.24935 | 0.255928 | 22.30596 | 40.69097 | 567 | 0.223488 |
| LKO-7 | 0.536684 | -0.56907 | 12.12301 | 63.07037 | 0.137954 | 13.10378 | 31.5189 | 790 | 1.279143 |
| LKO-8 | 0.872532 | -0.27056 | 20.00236 | 50.00474 | 0.250037 | 21.24621 | 32.84148 | 710 | 2.132793 |
Groundwater classification for irrigation use based on different irrigation indices.
| Parameter | Range | Category | No. of Samples | Sample (%) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2015 (PreM) | 2016 (PosM) | 2015 (PreM) | 2016 (PosM) | |||
| SAR | 0-10 | Excellent | 8 | 8 | 100 | 100 |
| 10-18 | Good | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
| 18-26 | Doubtful | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
| >26 | Unsuitable | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
| RSC | <1.25 | Good | 8 | 8 | 100 | 100 |
| 1.25-2.5 | Doubtful | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
| >2.5 | Unsuitable | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
| SSP | <20 | Excellent | 4 | 2 | 50 | 25 |
| 20-40 | Good | 4 | 6 | 50 | 75 | |
| 40-80 | Marginal | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
| >80 | Unsuitable | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
| MHR | <50 | Suitable | 0 | 2 | 0 | 25 |
| >50 | Unsuitable | 8 | 6 | 100 | 75 | |
| KR | <1 | Suitable | 8 | 8 | 100 | 100 |
| 1-2 | Marginal | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
| >2 | Unsuitable | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
| %Na | <20 | Excellent | 4 | 2 | 50 | 25 |
| 20-40 | Good | 4 | 6 | 50 | 75 | |
| 40-60 | Permissible | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
| 60-80 | Doubtful | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
| >80 | Unsuitable | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
| PI | <80 | Good | 8 | 8 | 100 | 100 |
| 80-100 | Moderate | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
| 100-120 | Poor | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
| EC | <250 | Excellent | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 250-750 | Good | 7 | 7 | 87.5 | 87.5 | |
| 750-2250 | Permissible | 1 | 1 | 12.5 | 12.5 | |
| >2250 | Doubtful | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
| PS | <3 | Suitable | 8 | 8 | 100 | 100 |
| >3 | Unsuitable | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
Fig. 5Wilcox diagram, EC vs % Na.
Fig. 6USSL diagram, Salinity Hazard (EC) vs Sodium Hazard (SAR).
Fig. 7PI vs Total concentration (in meqL-1).
| Subject | Environmental science |
| Specific subject area | Water quality, groundwater management |
| Type of data | Table |
| How data was acquired | Digital meter PC/301, CB18/945 Generic hand-held TDS-3 digital meter, Ion chromatography: Metrohmn 792B-IC, Arc GIS version 10.4.1, Origin 8.5-Data analysis and graphic software. |
| Data Format | Raw |
| Parameters for data collection | A total of 13 physico-chemical parameters are selected (pH, EC, TDS, Ca2+, Mg2+, Na+, K+, Cl-, SO4-, HCO3-, NO3-, F-, and TH) to collect the dataset for analysis of groundwater quality. |
| Description of data collection | Samples were collected according to the standard procedure in 1L clean polyethylene bottles in June, 2015 (8 samples in pre-monsoon season) and January, 2016 (8 samples in post-monsoon season). Above mentioned chemical parameters in the abstract section were analyzed as per the standard method. |
| Data source location | Gomti-Ganga alluvial plain, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh, India. The GPS coordinates of the sampling points are presented in |
| Data accessibility | Data are included in this article |
Groundwater quality category based on WQI [6].
| S No. | Range | Category | No. of Samples | Sample (%) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2015 (PreM) | 2016 (PosM) | 2015 (PreM) | 2016 (PosM) | |||
| 1 | <25 | Excellent water | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 2 | 25-50 | Good water | 6 | 4 | 75 | 50 |
| 3 | 50-75 | Fair water | 1 | 3 | 12.5 | 37.5 |
| 4 | 75-100 | Poor water | 1 | 1 | 12.5 | 12.5 |
| 5 | 100-150 | Very poor water | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 6 | >150 | Unsuitable for drinking | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |