4.6 Article

Water quality assessment of a tropical river using water quality index (WQI), multivariate statistical techniques and GIS

期刊

APPLIED WATER SCIENCE
卷 9, 期 7, 页码 -

出版社

SPRINGER HEIDELBERG
DOI: 10.1007/s13201-019-1045-2

关键词

Sodium adsorption ratio; Residual sodium carbonate; Magnesium hazard; Aggressive index; Langelier index

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Mahananda River is an important river in India and Bangladesh, as the people of both the countries use the water extensively, without sufficient and reliable information about water qualities and pollution status. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the water quality of the river and to analyse the suitability for drinking, agricultural and industrial uses. This is why this study on the Mahananda River is extremely important for the region. For this study, samples from fourteen sampling stations were collected in pre-monsoon and post-monsoon seasons in 2016 and water quality index (WQI), agriculture and industry-related indices were computed. WQI values designated two sampling stations out of fourteen sampling stations as 'very bad' category and another two sampling stations as 'bad' category. The pH values of some sampling stations slightly exceeded the upper permissible limit. USSL diagram analysis classified two samples of pre-monsoon season in C2S1 category which indicates a medium salinity and low sodium water. Magnesium hazard values of four sampling stations are above 50% suggesting not suitable for irrigation. However, some indices like sodium per cent, residual sodium carbonate and residual sodium bicarbonate, Kelly's index, permeability index and potential salinity allow the water for use in irrigation purposes. Langelier Saturation Index and aggressive index values designate the water as moderately aggressive or non-aggressive. Ryznar Stability Index values designate the water as 'aggressive' or 'very aggressive' indicating unsuitability for industrial uses. Sampling stations S-1, S-2, S-8 and S-14 need special attention.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据