CHAPTER One

Introduction

1.1 General
In Iraq surface water are facing an increasing problem through the
disposal of pollutants due to the rapid growth of industrial and municipal
activities because of the increasing of population growth as well as the
increase of land drainage due to agricultural activities. Thus, there has been
an increasing concern about the water quality.

There are three types of water pollution:

1- Physical pollution which causes change in the watercolor,

turbidity, temperature, suspended solids.

2- Chemical pollution, caused by organic and inorganic chemicals and

resulting in the change of pH value which increases toxicity by heavy
metals and other toxic material.

3- Biological pollution which is caused by viruses, bacteria, protozoa,

and helminthes (Mahdi,2009).

So, we all have a responsibility to manage and maintain our water

resources and one way we can accomplish this is through water quality
monitoring. Also, accurate information on the condition and trends of water
resources quantity and quality is required as a basis for economic and social
development, and for the development and maintenance of environmental
quality.
Water quality index is one of the most effective tools to communicate information
on the quality of water to the concerned citizens and decision-makers. It, thus,
1
becomes an important parameter for the assessment and management of surface
water, and is widely used in multiple scientific publications related to the
necessities of sustainable management (Parparov, 2006). Water quality in an
aquatic ecosystem is determined by many physical, chemical and biological
factors (Sargaonkar, 2003). Therefore, particular problem in the case of water
Quality monitoring is the complexity associated with analyzing the large number
of measured variables (Boyacioglu, 2006) and High variability due to
anthropogenic and natural influences (Simeonov, 2002).

1.2 Water quality of River:

Water quality is defined in terms of its biological, chemical and physical

parameters. Water quality achieving is important before using for different
intended uses such as drinking water, agricultural, and industrial water usages.
Determining of water quality parameters is important to identify the quality,
conditions and pollution level of surface water. One of the simplest methods to
assess water quality conditions is by using water quality indices (Gray, 2008).

The water quality evaluation may be complicated practice in compound

parameters causing numerous anxieties in general quality of water. It is not easy
to assess water quality for huge samples containing concentrations for many
parameters. The conventional methods for evaluating quality of water are based
on the comparison of experimentally determined parameter values with the
existing guidelines. So, water quality indices are such approaches which
minimizes the data volume to a great extent and simplifies the expression of
water quality status. Calculation of water quality index is based on number of
physic-chemical and bacteriological parameters. The advantage of number of
water quality indices developed. They give efficiently the overall water quality of
a specific area.
1.3 The Aim of This Study:

 Using weighted arithmetic mean (WAM) to assess the water quality for
drinking water of Al-Abbassia branch.
 Attention the decision makers about problems of water to control it.

1.4 Methodology
1-Collecting the data from department of standardization and
control(D.S.C,2016).
2-Choise four stations along AL-Abbasia branch.
3-Calculate water quality index by using weighted arithmetic mean
(WAM).
4-Compare the results with standard value.
5-Given the recommendation to the decision maker.
 CHAPTER Two

Literature Review
‫ئ‬

Kalavathy, and Rakesh, 2011 monitored the water quality of

Cauvery River in Tiruchirappalli district for a period of 3 months (January,
February, and March, 2009). Water samples were assessed by analyzing the
various physico -chemical parameters, such as pH, total dissolved solids,
total hardness, total alkalinity, dissolved oxygen, biological oxygen demand,
chloride, sulphate, nitrate and calcium. These 10 parameters were considered
to compute the Water Quality Index (WQI). The WQI reveals the water of
Cauvery River to be polluted moderately in the upstream of the city and unfit
for human consumption towards the downstream. It needs sufficient
treatment and management.

Layla , 2012 this study was conducted at nine water treatment plants
distributed in four regions (Hilla, Hashemiya, Musayyib and Mahaweel) in
Babylon province in order to study water stability and water quality. Some of
the chemical and physical properties were analyzed, including pH, Turb., Ec,
Temp., Ca+2, Mg+2, Cl-, TH, Alk., SO4-2, Na+, TDS, TSS, K+, Fe+2 and Mn+2.
The samples were collected and analyzed for raw water and drinking water at
all treatment plants for a period of nine months. Water quality index (WQI)
was used to assess water quality. The results showed that the water quality
index (WQI) values ranged between (37.54-55.38) of raw water and (36.95-
55.04) of drinking water, and the worst water quality of raw water and
drinking water was in December.

Basim , 2013 applied water quality index (WQI) using sixteen

physicochemical water quality parameters to evaluate the quality of Tigris
River water for drinking usage. This was done by subjecting the water
samples collected from eight stations in Baghdad city during the period
2004-2010 to comprehensive physicochemical analysis. The sixteen
physicochemical parameters included: turbidity, alkalinity, total hardness
(TH), calcium (Ca+2), magnesium (Mg+2), iron (Fe+2), pH value, electrical
conductivity (EC), sulphate (SO4-2), chloride (Cl-), total solids (TS), total
suspended solids (TSS), nitrite (NO2-), nitrate (NO3-), ammonia (NH3), and
orthophosphate (PO4-3). The average annual overall WQI was 224.32 through
the study period. The high value of the WQI obtained is a result of the high
concentrations of turbidity, total hardness, electrical conductivity, and total
solids which can be attributed to the various human activities taking place at
the River banks. From this analysis the quality of the Tigris River is
classified as "very poor quality" ranging poor water at the River upstream
near Al-Karhk WTP and unsuitable for drinking at the River downstream
near Al-Wahda WTP and would need further treatment.

Saad,2013 used water quality index (WQI) to assess the water quality
of Hemren Lake, Diyala province, using ten water quality parameters ( pH,
electrical conductivity(EC), hardness(TH), total dissolve
solids(TDS),sodium(Na+),calcium(Ca+2),magnesium(Mg+2),potassium(K+),
chloride(Cl-), phosphate) from 2008 to 2010 to evaluate the suitability of
Hemren Lake ecosystem for drinking and irrigation uses. The weighted
arithmetic index method (WAM) was used to calculate the water quality
index (WQI). The results indicated that drinking water quality of Hemren
Lake was good and marginal for the study period according to (WAM),
while the irrigation water quality was good according to (WAM). It was
suggested that monitoring of the lake and application of the WQI were
necessary to evaluate water quality of lakes in Iraq.

Awatif, et. al., 2013 studied the application of water quality index
(WQI) with ten physicochemical water quality parameters to evaluate the
quality of Euphrates River water for drinking usage. This was done by
subjecting the
water samples collected from seven stations within Al-Anbar province
during the period 2004-2010 to comprehensive physicochemical analysis.
The ten physicochemical parameters included: pH, alkalinity (Alk),
orthophosphate (PO4-3), nitrate (NO3-), sulphate (SO4-2), chloride (Cl-), total
hardness (TH), calcium (Ca), magnesium (Mg), and total dissolved solids
(TDS). The average annual overall WQI was found to be 107.59 through the
study period. The high WQI obtained is a result of the high concentrations of
orthophosphate and magnesium which can be attributed to the various human
activities taking place along the River banks. From this analysis the quality
of the Euphrates River is classified as "very poor quality" ranging poor water
at the River upstream near station (E1) and unsuitable for drinking at the
River downstream near station (E7) with an annual minimum WQI of 89.34
in 2008 and maximum 112.44 in 2009.

Atef, 2015 used water quality index method (WQI) to evaluate the
water quality of King Abdullah Canal (KAC). For this purpose, nine
different sampling sites were used in the calculation of WQI during the
period of January to December 2012. The samples were analyzed for various
physico- chemical parameters such as pH, electrical conductivity, total
suspended solids, ions of Sodium, Potassium, Calcium, Magnesium, Fluorite,
Chloride, Sulfate, Bicarbonate, and Nitrate in different seasons (winter,
spring, summer and autumn). The analyzed results (by WQI method) have
been used to suggest models for predicting water quality. The computed
WQI for the nine samples has a range from 46.66 to 542.08. The analysis
reveals that the water quality status of the study area is varying from
excellent to good in the upper part of the canal and from poor to very poor in
the lower part of the canal. Comparing with the World Health Organization
(WHO), the results indicate that the lower part of the canal is polluted.
Therefore, the water is not safe for domestic use and needs further treatment,
especially in the lower part of the canal.
 CHAPTER THREE

THEORY
‫ئ‬
3.1 Water quality parameters: -

Many parameters of water can affect the water quality involving

chemical and physical factors such as (temperature, hardness, pH, turbidity,
chloride, alkalinity, magnesium, total dissolved solid, etc.) and the following
represents these parameters:

3.1.1 Hydrogen power (pH): - pH is represented to the concentation r

of hydrogen ions and the acidity or alkalinity of water. pH is an essential

parameter in water treatment since it greatly affects the amounts of chemicals
required to be added for reducing hardness and coagulate particles
(Osmonics, 1997).

3.1.2 Total Hardness (T.H , mg/l as CaCO3): - water hardness is a

measure of the ability of water to react with soap where hard water requires
much greater of soap for the soapsuds production. It is caused by a variety of
dissolved ions, predominantly calcium and magnesium cations. Hardness is
most commonly expressed as milligrams of calcium carbonate equivalent per
liter,water containing less than 60 mg/l as CaCO 3 generally being considered
as soft, water with less than 75 mg/l as CaCO 3 is considered as moderately,
and above 150 mg/l as CaCO3 as hard. Hardness may also be discussed in
terms of carbonate (temporary) and non-carbonate (permanent) hardness
(AWWA, 1999).

3.1.3 Turbidity (Turb., NTU): - is indicated to the presence of colloidal

particulate in water such as clay, silt, and finely divided organic and
inorganic matter, microorganisms. It is measured by detecting the amount of
light
scattered by particles in a sample, relative to the amount scattered by a
reference suspension. Turbidity is used for many years as an indicator of
drinking water quality and an indicator of the efficiency of water coaglation
and filtration process (AWWA, 1999).

3.1.4 Total Dissolved Solid (TDS, mg/l): - total dissolved solid resulting
from soluble material (inorganic salts) include calcium, magnesium, sodium
and potassium salts of bicarbonate, chloride, sulphate, nitrate and phosphate,
these compound originate from weathering of rock and some of these
compound are added to the water in treatment plants (MWH, 2005). If TDS
levels are high, especially due to dissolved salts, many forms of aquatic life
are affected. Electrical conductivity indicates on the quantity of dissolved
salt in solution.

3.1.5 Chloride (Cl-, mg/l): - chlorides are salts of hydrochloric acid or metal
combined directly with chlorine, it is responsible for brackish taste in water
and it is a key indicator of water quality (Tebbutt, 1998).

3.1.6 Calcium (Ca+2, mg/l): - is the most common constituent in most

surface water. The sources of calcium in natural water are from weathering
mineral forms of calcium, calcite, gypsum, and anhydrite and fluorite.
Calcium is presented as free ion in natural water and adsorbed into soil
particles (Tebbutt, 1998).

3.1.7 Electrical Conductivity(EC, ds/cm): - is a measure of how well water

can pass an electric current. It is an indirect measure of the presence of
inorganic dissolved solids like nitrate, calcium, chloride phosphate,
magnesium, sodium, sulfate and iron. The presence of these materials
increases the conductivity of the body of water. Organic materials such as
alcohol, sugar and oil do not reach electricity very well, and thus have a low
conductivity in the water (Streamkeeper's Field Guide, 1991).
3.1.8 Magnesium (Mg+2 , mg/l):- magnesium in form of Mg2+ ion, comes
from the flow of water on the dolomite (CaCO3-MgCO3) and other
magnesium containing rocks and minerals. Magnesium has many various
uses, and thus may end up in water in many various ways. Chemical
industries add magesium to plastics. It also ends up in the environment from
fertilizer application and as a product from treatment plants. Magnesium ions
Mg2+, also contribute to hard water (Wilkes, 2007(.

3.1.9 Potassium (K+ , mg/l):- Potassium reacts rapidly and intensively with
water, forming a colorless basic solution of potassium hydroxide and
hydrogen gas. Potassium reacts with water more rapidly than sodium
(Wilkes, 2007 (.

3.1.10 Sodium (Na+ ,mg/l):- sodium reacts strongly with water. A colourless
solution formed, consisting of strongly basic sodium hydroxide and
hydrogen gas. A number of sodium ingredients do not react as mightily with
water, but are mightily water soluble (Wilkes, 2007.(

3.1.11 Sulfate (SO4 -2, mg/l): - Sulfate in surface waters results from the
weathering of gypsum and anhydrite or from the oxidation of sulfuric
compounds. It may result also from the industrial effluents, drainage water,
and ground water (Jamil, et at.,1984).

The sulfate ion a contributor to salinity. However, toxicity is rarely a

problem, except at very high concentration where high sulfate may interface
with uptake of other nutrients (Bauder et al,2010).

3.1.12 Total suspended solids (TSS, mg/l): - the most visible indicators of
water quality. These suspended particles can come from soil erosion, runoff,
discharges, stirred bottom sediments or algal blooms.

The particles that are larger than 2 microns found in the water column is
considered a total suspended solid. Most suspended solids are made up of
inorganic materials, also bacteria and algae can also contribute to the total
solids concentration.
Total suspended solids as a measurement of mass are reported in milligrams
of solids per liter water (mg/l). The most accurate method of determining
TSS is by filtering and weighing a water sample (Wetzel, R.G,2001).

3.2 Standards: -

Water quality standard for drinking water was taken from world health
organization (WHO) where gives a range of values for each parameter.

Table (3-1) World Health organization(WHO) Standards for

Drinking Water, 2004. (Mahdi,2009).
Parameter Unit WHO standard
pH - 6.5-8.5
Total Hardness as CaCO3 mg/l 300
Magnesium (Mg) mg/l 50
Calcium (Ca) mg/l 200
Sodium (Na) mg/l 200
Chloride (Cl) mg/l 250
Turbidity NTU 10
Conductivity µs/cm 1000
TDS mg/l 1000
Potassium(K) mg/l 12
Sulphate (SO4) mg/l 250
TSS mg/l 25-40

3.3 Calculation of the (WQI) using (WAM) method: -

The concept of water quality (WQI) is used as a management tool in water

quality assessment by integration the effect of specific parameters in
determining the type and use of water in definite site of the River
(AL_SAFFAR,2001).

The water quality index was calculated using the assigned weighted
arithmetic index method. The important physicochemical parameters were
used with respect to their suitability for human consumption and availability
of data from each station. These parameters were compared with the
permissible values for drinking water quality that recommended by the
Standards based on the formula to calculate WQI proposed by (Tiwari and
Mishra ,1985):

𝑤 =𝐾
∑𝐾 …………. (3-1)
𝑖
Where: -
wi = Unit weight factor;
K = proportional constant

The quality rating scale (qi) is a number reflecting the relative value of
this parameter in the polluted water with respect to its standard permissible
value and is determined as follows:

𝑞𝑖 = (𝑉𝑖−𝑉10)
∗ 100 ……………. (3-2)
𝑆𝑖−𝑉10

Where:
qi= quality rating scale for the ith water quality parameter.
Vi= estimate permissible value of the ith parameter.
V10= Ideal value of the ith parameter pure water.
Si = standard permissible value of ith parameter.

The ideal values for all parameters (V10) = 0 except for pH (V10) = 7

𝑖=𝑛
Overall WQI = ∑ 𝑤𝑖 ∗ 𝑞𝑖 ………….. (3-3)
𝑖=1

Based on the calculated WQI, the classification of water quality types is

shown in table (3-2).
Table (3-2) Water quality classification based on WQI value for
human uses (Tiwari and Mishra 1985).

No. WQI level Water quality classification

1 0-25 Excellent
2 26-50 Good
3 51-75 Poor
4 76-100 Very poor
5 More than 100 Unfit and unsuitable for human uses
 CHAPTER Four

Study area
‫ئ‬

4.1 Description of the study Area: -

Euphrates branches river after AL-Kifil town directly about 1km
into two branches, first one is Kufa branch another branch named Al-Abbasai
branch.

Length of the Al-Abbasai river about 28km from point of branching and
extension along the area of the Al-Abbasia to the borders of the province of
Qadisiyah, where irrigate 55000 acres and discharge of operation 210m3/s..

Al-Abbasia river passes through many villages thus it represents the

main source for different uses such as:

a- Water supply system: the river represents the supply source for many
water treatment plants such as Al-Abbasia water treatment plants.

b- Irrigation: the river is the main source of the irrigation for large
agricultural areas locating on both sides of the branch Fig. (4-1).
 Fig(4-1) Al-Abbasia branch.

4.2 Data collection

The data of Al-abbasia was taken from department of standardization and control .
Data water were choice for four stations along Al-Abbasia branch nearby Al-
Haidary station to the AL-Tawela according to the reading of GPS instrument
(Garmen modal GPS 72H) the coordinates (x,y).
Table(4-1) description of the monitoring stations along Al-Abassia branch.

Coordinates Distance
Accumulated
Abbreviation between
Stations distance
stations
X Y Km
km
A1
Al-Haidary 3540244 451496 0
----------
Abu-gharab A2 3552026 445861 5.5 5.5
Almuwash A3 3548065 449188 13 18.5
A4 23.5
AL-Tawela 3547069 453935 5

Fig (4-2) Stations location for water quality monitoring along the River.
Fig (4-3) Pollution of the AL-Abbasia branch.
Fig (4-4) Pollution of the AL-Abbasia branch.
 CHAPTER FIVE
‫ئ‬

Results and Discussion

5.1 Water Quality: -

This study involves determining the physical and chemical parameters

of surface water at different stations along Al-abbasia Branch. In order to
reach a better view on the causes of deterioration in water quality. The results
were compared with the standards of drinking water.

5.1.1 Turbidity (Turb.):

The highest value recorded was (37.3) (NTU) at station (A3) in March
2016, while the lowest value was (2.1) (NTU) at station (A1) in April 2016.
The maximum concentrations of turbidity exceeded WHO standards for
drinking water. Fig. (5-1) shows the maximum and minimum of the turbidity
during the period of the study for surface water and for all stations.

Turb.NTU
37.3
40
35
30
25
20
15
10 13.6 13.2
5 11.7
0
4.4
2.1 2.6 2.5

st.A1 st.A2 st.A3 st.A4

minmax

Fig. (5-1) The maximum and minimum values of the turbidity during
the period of the study at all stations.
5.1.2 Hydrogen power (pH):

The highest value recorded was (9.3) at station (A4) in April 2016,
while the lowest value was (7.2) at stations (A4) in March 2016. In general,
the maximum and minimum concentrations of pH were within WHO for
drinking water. Fig. (5-3) shows the max. and min. of the pH during the
period of the study.

pH
9.3
10
8.3 8.4 8.3
8
7.5 7.3 7.2
8

0
st.A1 st.A2 st.A3 st.A4
minmax

Fig. (5-2) The maximum and minimum values of the (pH) during
the period of the study at all stations.

5.1.3 Electrical Conductivity (EC):

The highest value recorded was (1626) (µs/cm) at station (A4) in April
2016, while the lowest value was (1011) (µs/cm) at station (A1) in march
2016. The maximum concentrations of conductivity exceeded WHO for
drinking water. Fig. (5-3) shows the max. and min. of the conductivity (EC)
during the period of the study.
 EC. µS/cm
1800 1626
1600
1400 1300 1306 1270
1200 1126 1084
1000 1011 1012
800
600
400
200
0

st.A1 st.A2 st.A3 st.A4

min
max

Fig. (5-3) The maximum and minimum values of the conductivity during
the period of the study at all stations.

5.1.4 Total Hardness (TH):

The highest value obtained was (602) mg/l as CaCO3 at station (A4) in
April 2016, while the lowest value obtained was (336) mg/l as CaCO 3 at
station (A2) in (May) and 2016. The maximum of total hardness
concentrations exceeded WHO standards for drinking water. Fig. (5-4) shows
the max. and min. of the total hardness during the period of the study.

TH mg/l
700 602
600
500 461 465 452
376 366
400 350 336

300
200
100
0

st.A1 st.A2 st.A3 st.A4

minmax

Fig. (5-4) The maximum and minimum values of total hardness during
the period of the study at all stations.
5.1.5 Calcium (Ca++):

The highest value obtained was (150) (mg/l) at station (A4) in March
2016. The lowest value was (84) (mg/l) at station (A2) during June 2016.
The maximum of calcium concentrations exceeded WHO standards for
drinking water. Fig. (5-5) shows the max. and min. of the calcium during the
period of the study for surface water and for all stations.

Ca mg/l
150
160
140
116 116 113
120
100 94 91
88 84
80
60
40
20
0

st.A1 st.A2 st.A3 st.A4

min
max

Fig. (5-5) The maximum and minimum values of calcium during

the period of the study at all stations.

5.1.6 Magnesium (Mg++):

The highest value obtained was (55.3) (mg/l) at station (A4) in April
2016. The lowest value was (30.7) (mg/l) at station (A2) in June 2016. All
values of magnesium concentrations were within WHO for drinking water.
Fig. (5-6) shows the max. and min. of the magnesium during the period of
the study.
 Mg mg/l
60 55.3

50 41.7 42.7 41.3

40 34.4 33.7
31.7 30.7
30

20

10

0 st.A1 st.A2 st.A3 st.A4

min
max

Fig. (5-6) The maximum and minimum values of magnesium

during the period of the study at all stations.

5.1.7 Chloride (Cl-):

The highest value obtained was (170) (mg/l) at station (A4) in April
2016. The lowest value was (112) (mg/l) at station (A1) in June 2016. All
values of chloride concentrations were within WHO standards for drinking
water. Fig. (5-7) shows the max. and min. of chloride during the period of the
study.

Cl mg/l
170
180
160 140 140 138
140
120 120 118
112 112
100
80
60
40
20
0

st.A1 st.A2 st.A3 st.A4

minmax

Fig. (5-7) The maximum and minimum values of chloride during

the period of the study at all stations.
5.1.8 Total Dissolved Solids (TDS):

The highest value obtained was 1178 (mg/l) at station (A1) in Jan
2016, while the lowest value obtained was (580) (mg/l) at station (A2) in
March 2016. The maximum concentrations of the total dissolved solids
exceeded WHO standards for drinking water. Fig. (5-8) shows the max. and
min. of total dissolved solids during the period of the study.

TDS mg/l
1178
1200 1050

1000 900
842
800682 692
610 580
600

400

200

0 st.A1 st.A2 st.A3 st.A4

minmax

Fig. (5-8) The maximum and minimum values of total dissolved solids
during the period of the study at all stations.

5.1.9 Sodium (Na+):

The highest value recorded was (122.5) (mg/l) at station (A4) in April
2016 and the lowest value was (60.9) (mg/l) at station (A1) in May 2016.
The maximum concentrations of sodium exceeded WHO standards for
drinking water. Fig. (5-9) shows the max. and min. of sodium during the
period of the study.
 Na mg/l
140 122.5
120 103
94 96.6
100
80
65.2 68.1 66.9
60.9
60
40
20
0

st.A1 st.A2 st.A3 st.A4

min
max

Fig. (5-9) The maximum and minimum values of sodium during

the period of the study at all stations.

5.1.10 Potassium (K+):

The highest value recorded was (9.5) (mg/l) at stations (A4) in April
2016 and the lowest value was (3.6) (mg/l) at stations (A2) in May 2016. The
maximum concentrations of potassium exceeded (WHO)standards for
drinking water. Fig. (5-10) shows the max. and min. of potassium during the
period of the study.
 K+ mg/l
9.5
10

8
6
6 5 5.1
4.5 4.2
3.9 3.6
4

0
st.A1 st.A2 st.A3 st.A4
min
max

Fig. (5-10) The maximum and minimum values of potassium during the
period of the study at all stations.

5.1.11
Sulphate SO4-2

The highest value recorded was (510) (mg/l) at stations (A4) in April
2016 and the lowest value was (224) (mg/l) at stations (A2) in May 2016.
The maximum concentrations of potassium exceeded WHO standards for
drinking water. Fig. (5-11) shows the max. and min. of potassium during the
period of the study.
 SO4 mg/l
600
510
500
354 351 339
400
300 248 257 247
224

200

100

0 st.A1 st.A2 st.A3 st.A4

min
max

Fig. (5-11) The maximum and minimum values of sulphate during the
period of the study at all stations.

5.1.12 Total suspended solid (TSS); 0)

The highest value recorded was (82) (mg/l) at stations (A3, A4) in Jan
2016 and the lowest value was (12) (mg/l) at stations (A3) in Feb 2016. The
maximum concentrations of potassium exceeded WHO standards for
drinking water. Fig. (5-12) shows the max. and min. of potassium during the
period of the study.
 Tss mg/l
90 82 82
76
80 70
70
60
50
40
30
20
22
10 16
0 12
6

st.A1 st.A2 st.A3 st.A4

min
max

Fig. (5-12) The maximum and minimum values of (TSS) during the
period of the study at all stations.
gg

5.2 Water Quality Index (WQI): -

The water quality index (WQI) along Al-abassia Branch within Al-Najaf
province has been calculated using the (WAM) method by some parameters
of raw water that were studied in respect to their suitability for human
consumption. The descriptive statistical analysis for the collected water
quality parameters are shown in table (5-1).
Table (5-1) Descriptive statistical of mean water quality values along Al-
abbasia Branch within Al-Najaf province during 2016.

Stations
&
Mean A4 A3 A2 A1
paramet
ers
7.945 7.91 7.82 7.98 8.08 pH
9.78 6.62 17.5 8.08 6.92 Turb.

1166.8 1205.44 1178.44 1151.78 1131.44 Ec

766.22 804 769.33 717.11 774.44 TDS
406.94 420.11 413.11 398.11 396.44 T.H
101.66 105.22 102.88 99.44 99.11
Ca+2
37.14 38.26 37.65 36.42 36.22
Mg+2
78.35 80.7 80.13 76.43 76.16 Na+
4.66 5.06 4.81 4.36 4.43
K+
124.72 128.67 126.22 122.88 121.11 Cl-
44.5 41.78 45.78 44.67 45.78 Tss
323.86 311 304.22 287.22 393 So4

5.2.1 Water Quality Index for drinking water:-

Based on the WQI value (using eq. 3-5), water was categorized into five
groups ranging from Excellent water to Unfit and unsuitable for drinking.
Where K: is the proportionality constant assigned to the parameter which is
also weighed according to its relative importance in the quality of water for
drinking purposes. These weights have a range from 1 to 5 and it is given in
table (5-2). The unit weight (wi) for all the eleven chosen parameters with

standard values are given in table (5-2) . The computed overall WQI value of
all the samples and stations along Al-abbasia Branch was (86.66) which
implied that the water was generally "Very poor" as shown in table (5-3) and
fig. (5-13). The computed monthly overall WQI along Al-abassia Branch for
all samples and stations was (87.5), which implied that the water was
generally "Very poor" as shown in table (5-4). The monthly WQI variation
ranged higher value (98.793) at April 2016, and lower value (76.58) in Jun
2016 along Al- abassia Branch, and classified (Very poor water quality) as
shown in fig. (5- 14). The annual branch water quality index variation along
Al-abassia Branch ranged (84.064) "very Poor quality" at the upstream near
station (A1) and (85.612) "Very poor" at the downstream near station (A4)
which reflected the effects of pollution as shown in table (5-5) and fig. (5-
15). The high value of WQI was obtained as a result of the various human
activities taking place at the branch bank.
Table (5-2) Water quality parameter standards, assigned and unit
weight (Atef ,2015).

Standar
Water quality Proportional Unit weight
d value
Parameters weight (K) factor (wi)
(Si )
pH 6.5-8.5 4 0.118
Turb. 10 3 0.088
EC 1000 4 0.118
SO4-2 250 4 0.118
TDS 1000 4 0.118
TH 300 3 0.088
Ca+2 200 2 0.059
Mg+2 50 2 0.059
Na+ 200 2 0.059
K+- 12 1 0.029
Cl 250 3 0.088
TSS 25-40 2 0.059
34 1.00
Table (5-3) Computed overall WQI values of drinking water along Al-
abassia Branch.

Unit Proporti
Quality Ideal Standar Measure
WQI weight onal Paramet
rating value d value d value
factor weight ers
(qi)
(wi*qi) (wi) (K) (V10) (Si ) (Vi )
7.434 63 0.118 4 7 6.5-8.5 7.947 pH
8.6064 97.8 0.088 3 0 10 9.78 Turb.
13.7671 116.67 0.118 4 0 1000 1166.75 Ec
14.1057 119.54 0.118 4 0 250 298.863 So4
9.0414 76.622 0.118 4 0 1000 766.22 TDS
11.9363 135.64 0.088 3 0 300 406.94 T.H
2.99897 50.83 0.059 2 0 200 101.66 Ca+2
4.38252 74.28 0.059 2 0 50 37.14 Mg+2
2.31133 39.175 0.059 2 0 200 78.35 Na+
1.12616 38.833 0.029 1 0 12 4.66 K+
4.38944 49.88 0.088 3 0 250 124.72 Cl-
6.56375 111.25 0.059 2 0 25-40 44.5 Tss

86.6631 sum

200 More than 100

180
160
140
120
WQI level

100
80
75-100
WQI(86.66)
50-75
60 26-50
40
20 0-25
0

ExcellentGood Poor Very poorUnfit

Water quality classification
Fig(5-13)overall WQI of drinking water within water quality
classification.
 Table (5-4) Monthly WQI variations along Al-abbasia Branch.

Months WQI Water quality classify

Jan-2016 83.183 Very poor
Feb-2016 82.544 Very Poor
March-2016 84.696 Very poor
April-2016 98.793 Very poor
May-2016 85.66 Very poor
Jon-2016 76.58 Very poor
Jula-2016 90.92 Very Poor
Aug-2016 94.54 Very poor
Sep -2016 90.54 Very Poor
Mean 87.5 Very poor

months

98.793 94.54
85.66 90.92 90.54
10083.18382.544 84.696
76.58
80
60
40
20
0

W…
Jan.FebMarAprMayJunJulAugSep

WQI

Fig. (5-14) Variation of monthly mean values of WQI of drinking

water in Al-Abbasia Branch.
 Table (5-5) Annual WQI variations for all stations along Al-abbasia
Branch.

Stations WQI Water quality classify

A1 84.064 Very Poor
A2 83.561 Very poor
A3 93.511 Very poor
A4 85.612 Very Poor
Mean 86.687 Very poor

STATIONS

93.511
95
90
85.612
84.064 83.561
85
80
W…
75
st.A1 st.A2 st.A3 st.A4

WQI

Fig. (5-15) Variation of annual mean values of WQI of drinking water at

all stations along Al-abassia Branch.
 CHAPTER SIX

Conclusions and Recommendations

6.1 Conclusions:

1. The maximum concentrations of (Cl-, Ca+2, Mg+2, EC, TH, Na+, K+ and
TDS) for surface water in April 2016.
2. The deterioration increased of water quality of Al-abassai Branch
during 2016-2017 because there are many agricultural drainages
surrounding the branch.
3. The results showed that the maximum values of (pH, TH, EC, TDS,
SO4-2, Mg+2and Turb.) were exceeded world health organization
(WHO) standards for drinking water. This means that the water is
certainly unfit for drinking purposes ( without treatment).
(

4. The results indicated that the water quality of Al-abassai is generally

"Very poor" for drinking water and its very poor water at the upstream
and at the downstream which reflected the effect of pollution due to
domestic and agricultural wastes.
5. The results showed that the worst water quality for drinking water
according to the WQI classification was in April 2016.

6.2Recommendations: -

1. Directing the municipal activities which exceeded on the banks of the

branch by the officials not to disposal wastes in the branch.
2. The ministry of water resources development the work of network the
drains and create the treatment plants for the drains of the great
discharge with need to put a program to monitor the type of water in
drains farm.
3. Development of the control of water quality valuable water resources
the fact that the pollution sources different not have a specific time and
required its creation station monitoring of the water resources
continuous monitoring changes chemical and membership in the water,
including the stations fumbling's remote sources of water.
 References

1-Al-Saffar, A.E.A, proposed water quality management system for Tigris

River, PhD, thesis, Civil Engineering, university of Baghdad, Iraq,2001.

2-AWWA, (1999), "Water Quality and Treatment": A Handbook of

Community Water Supplies", 5th edition, MCGraw-Hill, INC.

3- Gray N. F., (2008), "Drinking Water Quality", 2nd edition, Cambridge

University Press.

4- Prepare, A., Ham bright, K.D., Hokinson, L. et al. Hydrobiology (2006).

5-Sargaonkar, A., and Deshpande, V., (2003). Development of an overall

index of pollution for surface water based on a general classification scheme in
Indian context. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment.

6- Semenov, V., Einax, J.W., Stanimirova, I., and Kraft, J., (2002).
Environmetric modelling and interpretation of river water monitoring data.
Anal. Bional. Chem.

7- Stream Keeper’s Field Guide, (1991), "Watershed Inventory and Stream

Monitoring Methods”.

8-Mahdi، W.S.K., Construct a program for irrigation and drinking water

suitability of Tigris and Euphrates Rivers, MSc thesis, Water resources
department, Engineering College, University of Baghdad, Iraq,2009.

9- (M.W.S,2016) (Ministry of Water Resource).

10- MWH, (2005), "Water Treatment Principals and Design", 2nd edition John
Wiley and Sons, Inc. Hoboken N.J.

11- Tebbutt T. H. Y., (1998), "Principles of Water Quality Control", 5th

edition, Butterworth Heinemann.

12- Osmonics, (1997), "Pure Water Handbook", 2nd edition, Osmonics, Inc.

13-Wilkes University Center for Environmental Quality, Environmental

Engineering and Earth Sciences, (2007), "Water Quality Tests”.

14- Tiwari, T.N. and Mishra, M., (1985), "A Preliminary Assignment of Water
Quality Index to Major River", Ind. J. Environ Protect 5, pp.276.
15- Layla Abd Al-kareem, (2012), "Assess the stability of the treated water
from water treatment plants in Babylon province". Thesis, M. Sc.,Department
of Environmental College of Engineering, Babylon University.

16- Awatif S., Basim H., and Ali A., (2013), "Application of Water Quality
Index and Water Suitability for Drinking of the Euphrates River within Al-
Anbar Province, Iraq", Journal of Engineering, No.(12), Vol.(19) December
2013.

17- Saad Sh. Sammen, (2013), "Evaluation Of Water Quality Of Hemren

Lake", Diyala Journal of Engineering Sciences,Vol. 06, No. 02, pp. 57-76,
June 2013.

18- (D.S.C,2016) department of standardization and control.

‫إقرار المشرف‬
:‫أقر بأن المشروع‬
ASSESSMENT OF DRINKING WATER
FOR AL-ABBASIA BRANCH USING
WATER QUALITY INDEX
‫ت العلمية للقسم‬m‫اجري تحت اشرافي ووفقا للمتطلبا‬

‫المشرف‬
 ‫إقرار اللجنة‬
‫نؤيد بأننا اطلعنا على المشروع الموسوم‪:‬‬
‫‪ASSESMENT OF DRINKING WATER‬‬
‫‪FOR AL-ABBASIA BRANCH USING‬‬
‫‪WATER QUALITY INDEX‬‬
‫وكلجنة مناقشة قد تمت مناقشة الطالب (وسام صباح‬
‫ومحمد كريم وموفق عبد األيمة) في محتويات هذا‬
‫المشروع ونرى بانه قد اجتاز متطلبات نيل شهادة‬
‫البكالوريوس في الهندسة المدنية‪.‬‬
‫رئيس اللجنة‪:‬‬
‫التوقيع‪:‬‬
‫التاريخ‪:‬‬

‫عضو اللجنة‪:‬‬
‫التوقيع‪:‬‬

‫عضو اللجنة‪:‬‬
‫التوقيع‪:‬‬