Assessment of Urban Groundwater Quality

UNIVERSITY OF NAIROBI
DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL AND CONSTRUCTION

ENGINEERING
ASSESSMENT OF URBAN GROUNDWATER QUALITY: A

CASE STUDY OF BOREHOLES IN SYOKIMAU ESTATE
IN MACHAKOS COUNTY, KENYA
PETER CAREY ACHACHA
F16/101660/2017
A research project submitted as a partial fulfillment for the requirement for the
award of the degree of
BACHELOR OF SCIENCE IN CIVIL
ENGINEERING 2022
Abstract
The research study was undertaken to determine the suitability of the groundwater in Syokimau
area for domestic purposes. The suspicion of groundwater contamination was due to the fact that
the area has a poor sewerage system which has been further affected by the construction of the
Nairobi Expressway. The lack of a proper sewer network in some places was suspected to be a
source of contamination to the existing boreholes in the area. The presence of many industries in
the area was suspected to have an impact on the groundwater quality as industrial effluent that is
not properly disposed contaminates groundwater. The study was therefore aimed to conduct
chemical and physical analysis of the groundwater and determine the possible pollutants of the
groundwater.
Groundwater samples were collected from six boreholes in Syokimau. The sample points were
chosen based on their proximity to areas with poor sewerage and areas near industries. The
samples were collected using acid cleaned high density 1L linear polyethylene sampling bottles
and each sample labelled systematically and taken to the Public Health Laboratory for analysis.
Chemical and physical analysis was conducted for each sample in accordance to the Standard
Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater. Twelve parameters were selected for
analysis and compared to both the WHO drinking standards and Kenyan Standards. The twelve
parameters chosen were used in calculation of the water quality index (WQI) for each sample.
All parameters measured were within the required standards except chloride, fluoride and
turbidity. Sample S1 had a chloride concentration of 452 mg/l which as far beyond the WHO
and KS standards of 250 mg/l. All six samples had a fluoride concentration above the maximum
allowable value of 1.5 mg/l. In terms of turbidity, sample S2 had a value of 5.76 NTU which was
more than the maximum allowable limit of 5 TCU according to WHO and KS. All samples had
very high WQI values. Sample S1 and S2 had values of more than 100 while samples S3 to S6
had values more than 90. The high level of fluoride in the water was the main contributor to the
high WQI values. The variations in the chemical levels was likely due to contamination by the
poor sewerage or improperly disposed industrial. It was thus recommended that the government
should improve the sewerage system in the area while ensuring proper disposal of industrial
waste and the Water Resources Authority should do regular visits to ensure compliance as per
the required regulations.
ii
Dedication
This project is dedicated to my beloved family Mrs. Florence Achacha and Ms. Cynthia
Achacha. Thank you for the endless support during my education. May you be blessed
iii
Acknowledgments
I would like to thank Eng. Maxwell Odira for the guidance and insight he provided during the
making of this research study. His careful suggestions and constant involvement are what have
helped me reach this far. I would also like to thank the lab technicians from the Public Health
Laboratory who assisted me in testing of the samples. Finally I wish to thank my friends and
fellow classmates who also assisted me and encouraged me throughout this study.
iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CHAPTER 1 : INTRODUCTION..................................................................................................................1
1.0 Study Background..................................................................................................................................1
1.1 Problem Statement...............................................................................................................................2
1.2 Main Objective......................................................................................................................................4
1.3 Specific Objectives.................................................................................................................................4
1.4 Research Questions...............................................................................................................................4
1.5 Scope of Study.......................................................................................................................................4
1.6 Limitation of Study................................................................................................................................4
CHAPTER 2 : LITERATURE REVIEW..........................................................................................................5
2.1 Introduction...........................................................................................................................................5
2.3 Borehole Drilling, Construction and Development................................................................................6
2.4 Groundwater Legislative and Policy Framework...................................................................................9
2.5 Borehole Permitting Process.................................................................................................................9
2.6 Groundwater Contamination...............................................................................................................10
2.6.1 Sources of Groundwater Contamination..........................................................................................11
2.6.1.1 Sewers and Other Pipelines...........................................................................................................11
2.6.1.2 Septic Systems...............................................................................................................................12
2.6.1.3 Surface Impoundments.................................................................................................................12
2.6.1.4 Improper Disposal of Hazardous Waste.........................................................................................12
2.6.1.5 Releases and Spills from Stored Chemicals and Petroleum Products............................................12
2.6.1.6 Mining Activities............................................................................................................................12
2.6.1.7 Improperly Constructed and Abandoned Wells.............................................................................13
2.7 Groundwater Quality Attributes..........................................................................................................13
2.7.1 Chemical Parameters........................................................................................................................13
2.7.2 Biological Parameters.......................................................................................................................15
2.7.3 Physical Parameters..........................................................................................................................15
2.8 Water Quality Index.............................................................................................................................16
2.9 Literature Findings...............................................................................................................................18
CHAPTER 3 : METHODOLOGY...............................................................................................................19
3.1 Introduction.........................................................................................................................................19
3.2 Sampling..............................................................................................................................................19
3.3 Laboratory Investigations....................................................................................................................21
v
3.3.1 Chemical Analysis......................................................................................................................23
3.3.1.1 Determination of pH..................................................................................................................23
3.3.1.2 Determination of Electrical Conductivity...................................................................................23
3.3.1.3 Determination of Sulphates.......................................................................................................24
3.3.1.4 Determination of Nitrates..........................................................................................................25
3.3.1.5 Determination of Chlorides.......................................................................................................25
3.3.1.6 Determination of Iron................................................................................................................25
3.3.1.7 Determination of Total Dissolved Solids....................................................................................26
3.3.1.8 Determination of Fluoride.........................................................................................................27
3.3.1.9 Determination of Alkalinity........................................................................................................28
3.3.2 Physical Analysis........................................................................................................................29
3.3.2.1 Determination of Colour............................................................................................................29
3.3.2.2 Determination of Turbidity........................................................................................................29
3.3.2.3 Determination of Total Hardness...............................................................................................30
3.4 Determination of Water Quality Index (WQI)......................................................................................30
CHAPTER 4 : RESULTS AND DISCUSSION...............................................................................................33
4.1 Introduction.........................................................................................................................................33
4.2 Water quality.......................................................................................................................................33
4.2.1 Chloride.....................................................................................................................................35
4.2.2 Total Hardness...........................................................................................................................36
4.2.3 pH..............................................................................................................................................38
4.2.4 Flouride......................................................................................................................................39
4.2.5 Electrical Conductivity...............................................................................................................40
4.2.6 Alkalinity....................................................................................................................................41
4.2.7 Dissolved Oxygen.......................................................................................................................42
4.2.8 Turbidity....................................................................................................................................43
4.2.9 Sulphate.....................................................................................................................................44
4.2.10 Nitrate........................................................................................................................................45
4.2.11 Colour........................................................................................................................................46
4.2.12 Total Dissolved Solids.................................................................................................................47
4.3 Calculated Water Quality Index Values for Each Parameter..........................................................48
CHAPTER 5 : CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS.......................................................................49
5.1 Conclusions from the Study.................................................................................................................49
vi
5.2 Recommendations...............................................................................................................................49
REFERENCES..............................................................................................................................................51
APPENDICES...............................................................................................................................................55
vii
LIST OF TABLES
Table 3.1: Borehole Data.........................................................................................................................20

Table 3.2: Laboratory Examination of Water Quality Parameters.....................................................22
Table 3.3: Water Quality Index..............................................................................................................32
Table 4.1: Results of Water Quality Analysis........................................................................................34
Table 4.2: Calculated WQI values..........................................................................................................48
viii
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 2.1: Schematic Section of an Example of a Temporary Borehole Completion..........................8

Figure 2.2: Sources of Groundwater Contamination............................................................................11
Figure 3.1: Terrain Map of Sample Points............................................................................................21
Figure 4.1: Measured Chloride Values..................................................................................................35
Figure 4.2: Measured Total Hardness Values.......................................................................................36
Figure 4.3: Measured pH Values............................................................................................................38
Figure 4.4: Measured Electrical Conductivity Values..........................................................................40
Figure 4.5: Measured Alkalinity Values................................................................................................41
Figure 4.6: Measured Dissolved Oxygen Values...................................................................................42
Figure 4.7: Measured Turbidity Values.................................................................................................43
Figure 4.8: Measured Sulphate Values..................................................................................................44
Figure 4.9: Measured Nitrate Values.....................................................................................................45
Figure 4.10: Measured Colour Values...................................................................................................46
Figure 4.11: Measured Total Dissolved Solids Values..........................................................................47
ix
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
1.0 Study Background
Urbanization is a process in which a growing proportion of a population lives in cities and their
suburbs, and/or when land use shifts from agricultural to human settlements, commercial sectors,
and industries. Urbanization and population pressure, particularly in developing countries' cities,
are two major problems to water resource management. In terms of groundwater resources, it is
important to note that urbanization has an impact on both the quantity and quality of subsurface
groundwater systems.
Urbanization is a “double-edged sword” as it accelerates a nation’s economic growth and

improves people’s standard of living, but also leads to severe environmental pollution. Previous
studies have also however found that rapid urbanization affects the atmospheric environment,
energy use and CO2 emissions, land use and land cover change, water resources.
Groundwater systems in urban areas are significantly altered, and these impacts can have
considerable implications for human activity and the environment. Because groundwater is
frequently out of sight, it is often overlooked, but the effects of urbanization on groundwater
systems must be considered in land-use planning, building, and water resource management in
order for future urban areas to be sustainable. Urban groundwater systems remain an
underappreciated and under-underutilized urban resource (Sharp, 2010).
Kenya, like many other African countries, is unable to provide safe drinking water to half of its
population (UN-Water, 2006). Less than half of the population in Nairobi and Mombasa, the two
major cities, uses piped water, with the rest relying on boreholes, rivers and water vendors.
Kenya's Vision 2030 has attempted to alleviate this inequity in the provision of usable water by
advocating for water resource conservation, rainwater harvesting and improved groundwater
utilization and thus the importance of sustainable groundwater development and management
cannot be overstated in this setting.
Groundwater is a primary source of water for home consumption, irrigation, and input to many
streams and rivers, and it serves an important role in the water cycle. Presence of fresh water fit
for domestic use is rapidly declining due to factors such as pollution and high population growth
leading to overconsumption of the resource. Various causes, such as improper management and
1
storage of residential and industrial effluents, and agrochemical applications in agricultural areas,
contaminate water with chloride, hazardous metals, nitrate, pesticides, and coliforms.
Access to clean, safe water and sanitation is a basic human need that is critical to human well-
being (UN, 2006) however, about a billion people, especially in developing countries, do not
have access to safe and sufficient water (WHO, 2012). One of the United Nations Sustainable
Development Goals (SDG) addresses the issue of water and sanitation. The goal is to ensure that
all people have access to clean water and sanitation. The COVID-19 pandemic adds to the
challenge, denying billions of people access to safe water for domestic use, sanitation, and
hygiene services, all of which are critical to preventing the virus from spreading.
1.1 Problem Statement

Groundwater's significant socioeconomic and ecological relevance, as well as its status as a
critical strategic resource, are widely acknowledged in developing countries. According to a
study by (Pavelic et al., 2012), data on groundwater systems in Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) is
scarce, and the current level of knowledge creates a barrier to long-term groundwater
development.
The unanticipated and extensive use of groundwater has resulted in serious and escalating issues
of exhaustion and value deterioration around the world. Despite an increasing number of
examples of worsening groundwater conditions, information about the state of groundwater
resources is fragmented and there is a shortage of reliable data (World Bank, 2012).
The amount of data available on the occurrence and abstraction of groundwater resources varies
greatly from country to country. Global groundwater resource assessments frequently lack
current data on the state of groundwater resources for various nations and reliable
information on groundwater quality is scarce.
Syokimau is a residential suburb in Machakos County, Kenya, located west of Nairobi and
approximately south of Jomo Kenyatta International Airport. The area has undergone rapid
urbanization evidenced by the development of the Nairobi Commuter Rail Service, which is a
means of transport for people in the area. The area has also seen development in housing with a
number of apartments and houses being erected. A number of people have taken up residence in
the area due to the convenience of the railway and the affordable cost of housing and land. With
2
the improvement in infrastructural facilities and increase in trained manpower, several small to
3
large-sized industries have also been rapidly established near the area. Such growth is
accompanied by increasing demand for water supply.
The presence of several private water distributors in the form of water bowsers and water
boreholes, whose source is unknown and hence quality unclear, demonstrates a water deficit. To
fulfill the expanding demand, residents in the Syokimau area have had to increasingly rely on
groundwater as their only or additional supply of water. However, Syokimau is known for lack
of a proper sewerage system. Recently many residents have complained due to sewer line
outbursts that made sewer spill over in their premises including schools and private property.
This was due to the poor coordination between contractors working on the Nairobi Expressway
(Owiti, 2021) that led to closure of a primary school. The lack of an existing sewer network in
most parts of the Mlolongo/Syokimau area (MAVWASCO, 2018) exposes the aquifers to
microbiological contamination and so the water obtained from the boreholes may be polluted.
The presence of industries in the area is also a cause for concern. While some industrial
wastewater can be recycled and reused inside the company or by other consumers, the vast
majority of effluent is discharged directly into the water cycle, typically without proper
treatment. It is the volumes of these effluents and the concentrations of hazardous substances
they contain, combined with the mode of disposal and the vulnerability of the underlying
groundwater which determine the risk of pollution (Morris et al, 2003) and therefore,
groundwater quality issues are likely to be much more dominant than quantity. For newly-
urbanised areas, the main concern may be for the potential impacts of rapidly-growing, often
unplanned and poorly regulated industrial activities. Although these may be individually small in
scale, their potential environmental impact may not yet be observed, and the risk they pose to
groundwater not appreciated.
Due to the rapid development and the increase in population in the area, it is critical that the
quality of groundwater be analysed and determined to protect the health of the residents. This
creates a need to know the present status of groundwater quality and introduce measures to
safeguard the groundwater sources in the area.
4
1.2 Main Objective
The main objective of the research study was to determine the suitability of the groundwater in
Syokimau for domestic purposes.
1.3 Specific Objectives

 To conduct chemical analysis of the groundwater in Syokimau.
 To conduct physical analysis of the groundwater in Syokimau.
 To establish the possible pollutants of the groundwater in Syokimau.
1.4 Research Questions

The research intended to answer the following questions:
1. Is the groundwater used in the Syokimau area safe for domestic use?
2. Does the level of quality of the selected groundwater parameters in Syokimau meet
acceptable water quality standards?
1.5 Scope of Study

The study was conducted in Syokimau ward in Mavoko Constituency of Machakos County
particularly focusing on groundwater sources used for domestic purposes. Samples were
collected from six boreholes considered as representatives of boreholes in the area. Chemical
parameters and physical parameters were then tested.
1.6 Limitation of Study

The major limitations were related to time and financial constraints and thus samples were only
collected from a few sources and not all the groundwater sources. Gaining access to water from
different boreholes was also a limitation. Conducting all necessary tests also proved to be a
limitation as the Public Health laboratory could not conduct the microbial test and equipment for
measuring fluoride levels in the water samples could only test up to 2mg/l.
5
CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 Introduction
Safe drinking water and sanitary sanitation are prerequisites for good health and success in the
battle against poverty, hunger, child mortality, and gender inequality. It is also a fundamental
part of life to every person on earth. 2.2 billion people do not have access to safe drinking water,
and 297,000 children under the age of five die each year from diarrhoeal infections caused by
poor sanitation, hygiene, or unsafe drinking water. (WHO/UNICEF 2019).
Machakos County's average portable water access ranges from 40% to 51% (UN, 2018), with
rural and urban consumers sharing the same percentage. Within the serviced areas, the county
currently has access to water for 18 hours a day. The majority of home water sources in cities
and rural areas, however, rely on surface water, groundwater, and rainwater. As a result, water
supply discrepancies and inequities exist across different sections of the county and among users.
Further trends in water availability and supply are tied to the county's level of infrastructural
development, rainfall patterns, and economic activity. However, rising population, fast
urbanization, and the need for new industries are driving up demand and, as a result, supply
requirements. The current water supply system can't keep up with rising demand. Because a large
section of the population in emerging countries lacks access to clean water, they are forced to
rely on groundwater from shallow wells and boreholes, which is hazardous for household use
and consumption due to the high risk of pollution.
The full potential of groundwater in Kenya has yet to be discovered. Due to a lack of scientific
evidence about position and capacity, only 5% of the entire countrywide water benefit is
expected (Makhoka, 2017). Meanwhile, the growing demand for water in Kenya demonstrates its
strategic importance. Development is hampered by a lack of knowledge of groundwater
resources and monitoring systems, as well as rainfall unpredictability, stream temporality, and
the lack of large reservoirs for water storage.
6
2.2 Groundwater Occurrence
Groundwater is a major source of portable water, accounting for 97% of the world's freshwater
(World Bank, 2011). Groundwater occurs from the percolation, infiltration or seepage of
precipitation into the ground. It is divided into two zones: the unsaturated zone (immediately
below the surface) and the saturated zone (below the unsaturated zone). The saturated zone,
which is primarily responsible for supplying wells and springs, is generally referred to as
groundwater (Heath, 1983).
An aquifer is a body of permeable rock or rock fractures that stores groundwater. The term
"groundwater" refers to precipitation that has penetrated the soil below the surface and gathered
in voids underground. Aquifers are divided into two types: confined and unconfined. Unconfined
aquifers exist beneath a permeable layer of soil, whereas confined aquifers have an impenetrable
layer of rock or clay above them.
The following are some of the features of aquifers that are essential in both studying and
extracting groundwater:
 Specific yield: The amount of water in storage that will drain freely under the influence
of gravity (Heath, 1983).
 Porosity: The ratio of openings (voids) to the total volume of a soil or rock (Heath, 1983).
 Specific storage: The amount of water that is retained as a film on rock surfaces and in
very small openings (Heath, 1983).
 Storativity: The volume of water released from storage per unit surface area of a
confined aquifer (or aquitard) per unit decline in hydraulic head (Ferris J.G. et al, 1962)
 Hydraulic Conductivity: The rate of flow under a unit hydraulic gradient through a unit
cross-sectional area of aquifer (Ferris J.G. et al, 1962).
 Transmissivity: The rate of flow under a unit hydraulic gradient through a unit width of
aquifer of thickness (Ferris J.G. et al, 1962).
2.3 Borehole Drilling, Construction and Development
Choosing a borehole site is a critical part of the process of providing a safe and reliable supply of
groundwater. The best sites are those in which catchment (natural water input) may be
maximized. Another aspect of borehole siting that demands careful consideration in populated
areas is the
7
potential for contamination by cattle and pit latrines or other waste disposal facilities. Because
near-surface groundwater migrates downslope, a shallow dug well or a borehole tapping shallow
groundwater should be sited as far away as possible (while bearing in mind the human need for
proximity to a source of water) and upslope of potential sources of pollution (latrines or sewage
pipes, for instance) (ICRC, 2010).
Boreholes are often drilled to a target depth in one continuous diameter or in a series of declining
sizes using a telescoping procedure. Drilling is normally halted when an aquifer with the
appropriate yield is discovered within a rig's drilling reach. Drilling fluids, such as bentonite
muds or organic polymers, are used to lubricate the process and trap cuttings that are pumped to
the surface. Drilling can also be done with the use of air, albeit the method chosen is often
determined by the geology encountered. This geology also influences borehole design and
drilling logs, which are created from rock samples taken at regular intervals during drilling and
used to determine this geology (ICRC, 2010).
Boreholes are often built to ensure the structural integrity of the borehole while also allowing for
water abstraction. Casings, mostly constructed of steel, galvanized iron, or PVC, are used to
construct the structure. In a borehole, a gravel pack or screen is used to filter away colloids from
the water, and a submersible pump is used to lift water from the aquifer to the ground. A sanitary
seal is often set at the top of the borehole, but it can also be used to close the borehole from the
bottom.
8
Figure 2.1: Schematic Section of an Example of a Temporary Borehole Completion
Source: ICRC, 2010.
Borehole development has two primary goals. The first is to repair any damage to the formation
caused by the drilling process, restoring the formation's inherent hydraulic capabilities. Second,
it changes the aquifer's basic physical features near the borehole, allowing water to flow more
readily to a well. Mud dispersants, acid treatment, surging, blowing yield, air-lift pumping, jet
washing and mechanical cleaning are all options for development.
A borehole is also subjected to test pumping in order to evaluate its yield, and this information is
employed in pump selection as well as the establishment of a pumping regime. Test pumping
primarily establishes the borehole's performance, efficiency, or fluctuation in performance under
various discharge rates, as well as quantifying aquifer parameters such as transmissivity,
hydraulic conductivity, and storativity. On a borehole, several tests are routinely performed,
including test pumps, step tests, constant discharge testing, and verticality checks. After testing,
geophysical logging and disinfection are carried out (ICRC, 2010).
9
2.4 Groundwater Legislative and Policy Framework
The Kenya Water Act of 2002, the Environmental Management and Coordination Act (EMCA)
of 1999, and the Water Resource Management Rules of 2006 are some of the important
legislations that govern groundwater management in Kenya. County governments, the Water
Resources Management Authority (WRMA), the National Environmental Management
Authority (NEMA), the Kenya Forestry Service (KFS), Water Service Boards (WSB),
Catchment Water Boards (CWB), and Water Resource Users Associations (WRUAs) are among
the regulatory institutions mandated by these regulations in groundwater management. WRMA
however has overall mandate over groundwater and is charged with the duty of licensing
borehole drilling and water abstraction, (Simiyu, 2015).
2.5 Borehole Permitting Process

The current groundwater abstraction permit process begins with hydrogeological investigations
that result in a hydrogeological survey report. This report is submitted to WRMA as part of a
borehole drilling permit application. After this drilling permit is issued, a constructor or
contractor can begin drilling, and once completed, a borehole completion report must be
submitted to WRMA in order to apply for a water abstraction permit. Aquifer and geology data,
well coordinates, well designs, borehole depth, needed pumping rates, and a map of neighboring
boreholes are all included in the borehole completion report provided to WRMA. An
Environmental Impact Assessment is also prepared for boreholes and this is submitted to NEMA
for approval as well as WRMA. A letter of no objection from the pertinent water service board is
also required prior to the issuance of the water abstraction permit (Simiyu, 2015).
According to CCN (2007), there are no rigorous or precise restrictions in Kenya governing
borehole spacing, but the Water Management Rules of 2007 merely demand that when testing a
newly drilled borehole, the water levels in all boreholes within a 0.8 km radius be monitored.
This legislation is said to be difficult to enforce since it can raise the cost of drilling boreholes
and the owners of neighboring boreholes may not always agree to have their boreholes
monitored. Furthermore, while it is usually accepted as good practice to keep boreholes within
100 meters of each other, police advise that this distance be determined based on the area of
influence of existing boreholes. The demand for groundwater induced by a rising population
living in relatively small parcels of land, however, is a constant challenge to the enforcement of
1
regulations. The underlying
1
premise is that the WRMA has enough knowledge about Kenya's aquifers to evaluate each
application on its own merits in the context of the specific aquifer from which the applicant seeks
to draw water (WRMA, 2011).
2.6 Groundwater Contamination

Groundwater pollution is the addition of undesired compounds to groundwater as a result of
human activity. Chemicals, road salt, bacteria, viruses, pharmaceuticals, fertilizers, and fuel can
all contribute to this. Groundwater pollution, on the other hand, varies from surface water
contamination in that it is unseen, and recovery of the resource is challenging at the current
technological level (MacDonald et al, 1994). Groundwater contaminants are usually colorless
and odorless. Furthermore, the harmful effects of contaminated groundwater on human health are
long- term and difficult to detect (Chakraborti et al, 2015). Because groundwater is located in
underground geological strata and residence durations are long, clean-up is difficult and
expensive once it has been contaminated. Even if the source of pollution is removed, natural
cleansing methods for contaminated groundwater can take decades or even hundreds of years.
1
2.6.1 Sources of Groundwater Contamination
Figure 2.2: Sources of Groundwater Contamination
Source: GRID-Arendal
Some of the sources of groundwater contamination as shown in the figure are:
2.6.1.1 Sewers and Other Pipelines

Occasionally, waste-transporting sewer lines leak fluids into the surrounding soil and ground
water. Organic matter, inorganic salts, heavy metals, bacteria, viruses, and nitrogen make up
sewage. Other pipelines carrying industrial chemicals and oil brine have been known to leak,
particularly when the ingredients being transported are corrosive.
1
2.6.1.2 Septic Systems
The effluent (outflow) from septic tanks, cesspools, and privies is one of the most common
sources of ground water contamination. Despite the fact that each system releases a modest
quantity of effluent into the ground, their large number and broad use make them a significant
source of contamination. Bacteria, viruses, nitrates, detergents, oils, and chemicals can
contaminate ground water if septic systems are incorrectly sited, built, constructed, or
maintained. Commercially accessible septic system cleansers containing synthetic organic
compounds such as trichloroethane or methylene chloride are also pollutants. These cleaners
have the potential to pollute water supply wells and septic systems' natural breakdown processes.
2.6.1.3 Surface Impoundments

Surface impoundments are shallow ponds or lagoons used to hold, process, and dispose of liquid
waste by industries and municipalities. Surface impoundment facilities, like landfills, are
required to have liners, yet even these liners might leak.
2.6.1.4 Improper Disposal of Hazardous Waste

Hazardous waste should always be handled by a licensed hazardous waste handler or collected
during municipal hazardous waste collection days. Many chemicals, such as oils (cooking,
motor), garden chemicals, paints and paint thinners, disinfectants, pharmaceuticals, photography
chemicals, and swimming pool chemicals, should not be disposed of in domestic septic systems.
Similarly, many compounds used in industrial processes should not be disposed of in workplace
drains since they may contaminate a supply of drinking water.
2.6.1.5 Releases and Spills from Stored Chemicals and Petroleum Products
Petroleum fuels and other chemical compounds are widely stored in underground and
aboveground storage tanks. Chemicals used in industrial processes are stored in storage tanks. If
a leak develops in an underground storage tank, which is typical as the tank corrodes and ages,
the contents can move through the soil and reach ground water. If a spill or leak happens and
proper barriers are not in place, aboveground storage tanks can potentially pose a threat to
ground water.
2.6.1.6 Mining Activities

Mines, both active and abandoned, can contaminate groundwater. Precipitation has the potential
1
to leach soluble minerals from mine waste (also known as spoils or tailings) into the groundwater
1
below. Metals, acid, minerals, and sulphides are frequently found in these wastes. Abandoned
mines are frequently used as wells and trash pits at the same time. In addition, mines are
sometimes pumped to keep them dry; this might result in contaminated ground water migrating
upward, which can be captured by a well.
2.6.1.7 Improperly Constructed and Abandoned Wells

When contaminated surface or ground water is introduced into the well due to problems with
inadequately designed wells, ground water pollution can occur. If the well casing has been
removed, as is common, or if the casing is deteriorated, abandoned wells might operate as a
conduit through which contaminants can enter an aquifer. Furthermore, some people utilize
abandoned wells to dispose of garbage like spent motor oil. These wells may reach an aquifer
that supplies drinking water wells. Abandoned exploration wells (e.g., for gas, oil, or coal) or test
hole wells are typically exposed and can serve as a conduit for contaminants.
2.7 Groundwater Quality Attributes

Features of water quality are classified according physical, chemical and biological parameters.
2.7.1 Chemical Parameters

Groundwater is expected to have larger quantities of dissolved salts than surface water since it is
mainly associated with rock constituents containing ores that dissolve in water. The geological
nature of salts, as well as the origin and movement of water, determine the kind and quantity of
salts (Ramaraju, 2006). The chemical value of groundwater is normally good, however high
concentrations of certain constituents might cause problems with the water. Increased iron in
groundwater, for example, has been widely reported in emerging countries, where it is primarily
a critical water quality issue. The chemical parameters or groundwater are:
1. pH: The impact of pH on water is important and is denoted by a negative logarithm [H+].
It is defined as the strength of acidity or alkalinity on a scale of 0-14 Acidity is indicated
by a pH less than 7, while alkalinity is indicated by a pH greater than 7. 7 is neutral. The
acceptable limit ranges from 6.5 to 8.5.
2. Electrical conductivity: This is the ability of water to transfer an electrical current. It
varies depending on the number and types of ions it contains. Distilled water has a
conductivity of less than 1 umhos per centimetre.
1
3. Sulphates: Sulphate ions are present in normal water, and a large percentage of these ions
dissolve in water. The addition of oxygen from ores results in the formation of various
sulphate ions. The UV Spectrophotometer is used to determine the magnitude of
sulphate.
4. Nitrates: Taste impairment varies with the nature of the associated cation. Taste
thresholds have been observed to range from 250 mg/litre for sodium sulphate to 1000
mg/litre for calcium sulphate. Taste impairment is minimal at levels below 250 mg/litre
(WHO, 2008).
5. Chlorides: Presence of high concentrations of chloride impart a salty flavour to water and
beverages. The related cation determines the chloride anion's taste thresholds. They are in
the range of 200–300 mg/litre for sodium, potassium and calcium chloride. Chloride
concentration of more than 250 mg/litre is likely to be detected by taste however some
consumers may become acclimated to low levels of chloride-induced taste.
6. Iron: When pumped directly from a well, anaerobic groundwater can contain ferrous iron
at quantities of up to several milligrams per litre without discoloration or turbidity.
Ferrous iron oxidizes to ferric iron when exposed to the atmosphere. This gives the water
a reddish- brown colour. Iron also encourages the growth of "iron bacteria," which get
their energy from the oxidation of ferrous iron to ferric iron and leave a slimy film on the
piping in the process. Iron also causes staining at levels above 0.3 mg/litre. The stains are
observed in plumbing equipment and clothes. At iron concentrations below 0.3 mg/litre,
there is usually no discernible taste, however turbidity and colour may emerge.
7. Total dissolved solids: The palatability of water with a TDS level of less than 600
mg/litre is generally considered to be good; drinking-water becomes significantly and
increasingly unpalatable at TDS levels greater than about 1000 mg/litre (WHO, 2008).
8. Fluorides: Fluoride, in little quantities, can reduce the risk of dental fissures. High
concentration of fluoride in water can lead to fluorosis. This causes tooth yellowing at the
simplest level, while severe teeth fluorosis causes dental enamel deformation and tooth
fissures. Even high doses of fluoride used over a long period of time can cause bone
changes, a condition known as skeletal fluorosis. This can cause joint pain, movement
restrictions, and even the risk of bone fractures. It is considered that fluorides should be at
a level of 1.5mg/l.
1
9. Dissolved oxygen: Dissolved oxygen is the concentration of oxygen in water. The
physical, chemical, and biological activity that exist in the water body determine it.
Dissolved
1
oxygen is essential for aquatic species' survival, and appropriate amounts allow for
complete oxidation of organic materials released into a water body. There are no set
standards.
10. Alkalinity: This is the total number of elements in water that elevate the pH to an alkaline
level on a regular basis. This specifies the water's nature, such as whether it produces
scales, is neutral, or is corrosive, making it a key variable in study. It is measured in
milligrams per liter as calcium carbonate (mg/l as CaCo3) by titration with standardized
acid to a pH of 4.5. Carbon, phosphate, and hydroxide compounds are common elements
in water that promote alkalinity. It is considered that alkalinity should be less than
500mg/l.
2.7.2 Biological Parameters

Bacterial activities, which can alter both mineral and organic components of groundwater, can
have an open and indirect impact on groundwater quality. Geochemical progressions are
generally accelerated by these biotic alterations (Pusch et al., 1998). For their physiological
functions, unicellular and multicellular organisms have acquired adaptations to consume
dissolved particles and suspended matter in water and solid substances in the aquifer. They then
discharge the biomechanical results into the water again (Pusch et al., 1998). As a result, the
presence or absence of oxygen is one of the most important factors controlling microbial activity.
Bacterial activities, which can alter both mineral and organic components of groundwater, can
have an open and indirect impact on groundwater quality. Geochemical progressions are
generally accelerated by these biotic alterations (Pusch et al., 1998). For their physiological
functions, unicellular and multicellular organisms have acquired adaptations to consume
dissolved particles and suspended matter in water and solid substances in the aquifer. They then
discharge the biomechanical results into the water again (Pusch et al., 1998). As a result, the
presence or absence of oxygen is one of the most important factors controlling microbial activity.
2.7.3 Physical Parameters

1. Colour: Drinking water should ideally be colorless. The presence of coloured organic
materials (mainly humic and fulvic acids) linked with the humus portion of soil causes
color in drinking water. The presence of iron and other metals, either as natural impurities
or as corrosion products, has a significant impact on color. It could also be the first sign
1
of a dangerous scenario if the water source has been contaminated with industrial
effluents.
2
The source of color in a drinking-water supply should be studied, especially if there has
been a significant change. Most people can perceive colors over 15 true color units
(TCU). Consumers generally accept color levels of less than 15 TCU, but tolerance
varies. Strong color could also suggest a high proclivity for disinfection process by-
products (WHO, 2008).
2. Turbidity: Turbidity in drinking water is caused by particle matter present in source water
as a result of insufficient filtering or sediment resuspension in the distribution system. It
could also be attributed to inorganic particle matter in some groundwater or biofilm
sloughing within the distribution system. Consumers generally accept the sight of water
with a turbidity of less than 5 NTU, though this may vary depending on local conditions.
Ideally median turbidity should be below 0.1 NTU for effective disinfection, and changes
in turbidity are an important process control parameter (WHO, 2008).
3. Total hardness: Scale in kitchenware and hot water structures in cisterns are the results of
hardness. This is usually caused by dissolved calcium and magnesium in the soil and
subsurface granite ores. Softener ion exchangers and reverse osmosis are two methods for
dealing with hard water. The degree of hardness is divided into four categories based on
the equivalent calcium carbonate concentration: Soft: 0-60 mg/l, Medium: 60-120 mg/l,
Hard: 120-180 mg/l, Very hard: >180 mg/l. The permissible level is 500 mg /l or less.
2.8 Water Quality Index

Water quality index is one of the most useful, straightforward, and understandable tools for
assessing water quality for its suitability for a variety of purposes. These indicators have now
been produced for Haridwar district in Uttarakhand and Muzaffarnagar and Shamli districts of
Uttar Pradesh in India in an effort to make water quality an indicator of groundwater in varied
places (Krishan, 2016). In a similar manner, the WQI was used for the research area in this
study.
According to the Global Drinking Water Quality Index Development and Sensitivity Analysis
Report 2007, the WQI can be measured on a global scale in connection to the Health Water
Quality Index (HWQI), Drinking Water Quality Index (DWQI), or Acceptability Water Quality
Index (AWQI). Despite the fact that there is no universally acknowledged complex indicator of
water quality, certain countries and regions use collective water quality data to develop water
2
quality guidelines. Several major water quality factors rely on data stabilization from one
parameter to the
2
next based on predicted concentrations and some explanation of what constitutes "excellent" and
"poor" concentrations. The value is produced as the subjective mean of all qualities of interest,
and the parameters are then quantified with reference to their stated importance to total water
quality (Tsegaye et al., 2006).
The Canadian Water Quality Index (CWQI) also compares observed results to a standard, which
could be a water quality baseline or a zone-specific contextual concentration (Lumb et al., 2006).
The CWQI counts the total variables that exceed a standard, the number of records in a collection
of data that exceed a standard, and the degree of exceedance of the standard for one location over
a predetermined time period (typically 12 months). The index is flexible dependent on the
computation criteria used, and it is decided by the information required from the index. If the
index being evaluated is to measure the ecological health of the water, for example, procedures
for the protection of aquatic life may be employed (where available), or drinking water quality
procedures may be utilized if the index's concern is drinking water safety. When attempting to
measure nonconformities in natural settings, however, facts describing the natural background
circumstances for a location or region might be used as standards. CWQI levels have risen
(around 100) in locations where water quality parameters barely exceed the norm, whereas
CWQI values have fallen in areas where measured values routinely exceed regulations (close to
0).
According to the Global Drinking Water Quality Index Development and Sensitivity Analysis
Report 2007, water quality for human health (HWQI) across Asia and Oceania is consistently
lower than AWQI (and DWQI in Oceania). In Asia, regardless of AWQI, the DWQI trails
HWQI by a little margin, similar to the pattern seen in the Americas, indicating that DWQI is
heavily influenced by factors other than acceptability.
In India, Sajal and Athar (2016) found deficient water quality in severely industrial areas in the
Greater Noida sub-basin, Uttar Pradesh, with numbers ranging from 53.69 to 267.85. Krishan et
al. (2016) found that 51.8 percent of water trials in Rajkot district, India, fell into the good to
excellent water category. In contrast, 48.2 percent of water experiments fall into the fair to bad
category, indicating that the water is unfit for direct consumption and requires treatment. River
Kibisi (Sindani, 2013) and the Malakisi River (Mwiluka, 2015) were studied in Kenya. Another
study on groundwater in Gatundu (Ashun, 2014) compared shallow wells with boreholes.
2
Analysis
2
of groundwater was also done (Makhoka, 2017). This project was created as part of a related
endeavor and for this specific subject area.
2.9 Literature Findings

Water quality index research has been carried out extensively in India and Egypt, and it has been
discovered to be the cost effective approach of analysing drinking water quality (Kumar et al,
2020). Electrical conductivity is the best metric for groundwater that has been employed in most
studies because it informs about the other parameters. Fluoride is the biggest characteristic
affecting groundwater in Kenya, according to research, and this is linked to the geological
development of the aquifer. Fluoride levels in groundwater are influenced by the weathering and
leaching processes, which are primarily caused by moving and percolating water (Mbithi, 2007).
The factors related to the release of fluoride bearing minerals may include:
 The chemical composition of water.

 The presence and accessibility of fluoride minerals to water.
 The contact time between the source minerals
The factors that control the leachability to fluoride from carbonate concentration or from the top
soil horizon may be:
 The PH of the draining solution

 The dissolved carbon IV oxide in water and in the soil
 Alkalinity
Levels of fluoride concentration have been found to be related to depth and location (Njenga,
1982). Deep boreholes have higher fluoride levels than shallow boreholes because the water is
collected from a deeper level in the ground. Fluoride levels are also related to the kind of aquifer;
confined aquifers have higher fluoride levels than unconfined aquifers since there is no direct
mixing with surface water. Another point raised in prior studies is that shallow wells/boreholes
are more susceptible to contamination by human waste than deep wells/boreholes (Lutterodt et
al, 2018).
2
CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY
3.1 Introduction
This chapter descries the methods used in data collection, analysis and experimentations which
helped in accomplishing the project’s objective which was to assess the quality of groundwater
for domestic use in Syokimau.
3.2 Sampling
Since it was not possible to sample all the boreholes in the area, a number of boreholes were
selected and used as a representative of the groundwater as a whole. The sample points were
chosen based on their proximity to areas with poor sewerage and areas near industries. It was
assumed that the samples collected would act as a representative of the groundwater within the
area of study.
Groundwater samples were collected individually from boreholes into acid cleaned high density
1L linear polyethylene sampling bottles. Samples were refrigerated in an ice cooler in the field
until transported to the laboratory for analysis. Analysis was carried out immediately upon
arrival in the laboratory.
2
The groundwater samples were selected from six boreholes in Syokimau, Machakos
County. Boreholes that were selected as sample points are below represented by their X
and Y coordinates.
Table 3.1: Borehole Data
Area Sampled X Y Depth

Sample
Number
S1 Near Little -1.383665 36.929051 1577

Bees
Kindergarten
S2 Endmor Steel -1.365185 36.915519 1504
S3 Gables Park -1.374259 36.932496 -
S4 Along -1.367056 36.924740 1466

Kiungani
Road
S5 Springville -1.364979 36.927757 1445

Park
S6 Next to Steel -1.374508 36.922112 1428

Wool Africa
Ltd
2
Figure 3.1: Terrain Map of Sample Points
3.3 Laboratory Investigations

The laboratory tests were carried out for each sample in accordance to the Standard Methods for
the Examination of Water and Wastewater. The tests carried out were selected in accordance to
availability of chemical reagents and equipment in the Public Health laboratory. Procedures to
carry out the tests were obtained from the Public Health Engineering laboratory manual.
2
Table 3.2: Laboratory Examination of Water Quality Parameters
Parameter Method of Assessment

pH pH meter
Electrical conductivity Voltage meter
Nitrate Colour measurement against standard colour
values
Chloride Titration with standard silver nitrate solution
Iron Comparator cell with distilled water
Total dissolved solids Weighted difference
Fluoride Fluoride meter
Coliform count Total coliform counts
Colour Lovibond Nessleriser
Turbidity Turbidimeter
Total hardness Titration with standard EDTA solution
Dissolved oxygen Titration against standard sodium thiosulphate
Total alkalinity Titration with N/50 sulphuric acid
2
3.3.1 Chemical Analysis
3.3.1.1 Determination of pH
Reagents
 Distilled water
 pH meter
Procedure
75 ml of sample was placed in a 100ml beaker. The electrodes were carefully raised out of water
and rinsed within the beaker containing the sample. The electrodes were immersed in the beaker
containing the sample. The selector switch was turned to pH. pH was read directly from the
meter. The selector switch was turned again to “CHECK” and the electrodes carefully raised,
rinsed with distilled water and replaced in a beaker of distilled water.
3.3.1.2 Determination of Electrical Conductivity
Apparatus
 Conductivity meter
Procedure
Electrical conductivity was determined with the aid of a conductivity meter. The conductivity
cell was rinsed with at least three portions of 0.01M KCl solution. The temperature of the fourth
portion was adjusted to 25.0 ± 0.1°C. The conductivity cells and beaker were rinsed with a
portion of the sample. The beaker was then filled completely with the sample. The conductivity
cell was inserted into the beaker filled with the sample and the conductance read. It was recorded
after a stable reading.
3
3.3.1.3 Determination of Sulphates
Apparatus
 Nephelometer
 Magnetic stirrer
 Nessler's tubes
 Lab glassware
Reagents
 Conditioning reagent: 50 ml of glycerol was mixed in a solution containing 30
ml of conc. hydrochloric acid, 300ml distilled water (10% HCl), 100 ml of 95%
ethyl alcohol or isopropyl alcohol and 75g NaCl.
 Barium Chloride
 Standard sulphate solution: 147.9mg of AR grade sodium sulphate was dissolved
in distilled water and made up to 1000ml, to give 1ml = 100mg sulphate.
Procedure
Sulphate ion was converted to a barium sulphate (BaSO 4) in an acidic medium with barium
chloride suspension under controlled conditions. The absorbance of the BaSO 4 suspension was
measured by a spectrophotometer at 420 nm and the sulphate concentration was determined by
comparison of the reading with a standard curve. 100 ml sample was measured into a 250 ml
Erlenmeyer flask and exactly 5ml conditioning reagent was added and mixed with the stirring
apparatus. A spoonful of barium chloride (BaCl2) crystals was added while still stirring and
timing commenced immediately for 60 seconds while stirring continued at a constant speed.
After the stirring period, the solution was poured into the absorbance cell and turbidity measured
at 30 seconds intervals for 4 minutes. A calibration curve was prepared using standard sulphate
solution. The result was read directly from the calibration curve and expressed in mg/L.
3
3.3.1.4 Determination of Nitrates
Reagents
 Brucine
 Concentrated sulphuric acid
Procedure
1 ml of the sample was pipetted into a test tube. 0.1ml of brucine and 2ml of concentrated
sulphuric acid was added to the sample. The colour of the solution was measured against
standard colour values.
3.3.1.5 Determination of Chlorides
Reagents
 Silver nitrate
 Potassium chromate
Procedure
1ml of potassium chromate was added to 100ml sample in a conical flask. The solution was
titrated with standard silver nitrate solution with constant stirring until a slight red precipitate
appeared. The volume of the titrant used was recorded.
3.3.1.6 Determination of Iron
Reagents
 Dilute hydrochloric acid
 Potassium permanganate
 Ammonium thonate solution
 Amyl actetate alcoholic solution
 Distilled water
3
Procedure
5ml of the sample, 1ml of dilute hydrochloric acid and two drops of potassium permanganate
solution were added to a separating funnel and mixed. 5ml of ammonium thonate solution was
added followed by 10ml of amyl acetate alcoholic solution and the mixture shaken vigorously.
The solution was allowed to separate and the lower layer discarded. The upper layer was
transferred to a comparator cell. The aforementioned procedure was repeated using distilled
water instead of the sample. The cells were placed in the comparator and then the colour
produced matched against the standard disc.
3.3.1.7 Determination of Total Dissolved Solids
Apparatus
 Glass-fiber filter disks
 Membrane filter funnel
 Filtration apparatus
 Suction flask and pump
 Drying oven
 Grooch crucible
Procedure
The difference in the weights of Total Solids (W1) and Total Suspended Solids (W2) expressed in
the same units gives Total Dissolved Solids (TDS).
W1 = Weight of total solids + dish

W2=Weight of total suspended solids
The determination of total dissolved solids was done using the gravimetric method. The samples
were stirred with a magnetic stirrer and a measured volume transferred into a 100 ml graduated
cylinder by means of a funnel onto a glass fibre filter with applied vacuum. The samples were
filtered through the glass fibre filter under vacuum pressure for three minutes to ensure that water
was removed.
The solid residue that remained on the filter paper was washed with deionised water and suction
continued for three minutes. The total filtrate (with washings) was transferred to a weighed
evaporating dish and evaporated to dryness in a drying oven at 180 ± 2 °C for an hour, cooled in
3
a desiccator and then weighed afterwards. The cycle of drying and weighing was repeated until a
constant weight was obtained as the measured value.
3.3.1.8 Determination of Fluoride
Apparatus
 Spectrophotometer
 Lab glassware
Reagents
 Standard fluoride solution.
 Stock: 221.0mg of AR grade sodium fluoride was dissolved in distilled water and
made up to 1000ml to give 1ml = 100mg of F-
 Working Standard: 100ml of the stock fluoride was diluted to 1000ml to give 1ml
= 10mg of flouride.
 SPADNS Solution: 958mg of SPADNS was dissolved in 500ml of distilled water.
 Zirconyl-acid reagent: 133mg Zirconyl chloride octahydrate (ZrOCl2.8H2O) was

dissolved in about 25ml of distilled water. 350ml of conc. HCl was added and
diluted to 500ml with distilled water.
 Zirconyl acid-SPADNS reagent: Equal volume of SPADNS and zirconyl acid
reagent were mixed.
Procedure
The determination of Flouride (F-) Concentration was done using the SPADNS
Spectrophtometric Method. This method relies on the fact that when fluoride reacts with certain
zirconium dyes, a colourless complex anion and a dye are formed. The complex, which is
proportional to the fluoride concentration, tends to bleach the dye which therefore becomes
progressively lighter as the fluoride concentration increases.
50ml of the sample was measured with a graduated beaker into a conical flask and 5ml SPADNS
(sodium 2- (parasulphophenylazo) -1, 8-dihydroxy-3, 6-naphthalene disulphonate) was mixed
with 5ml of zirconyl acid reagent and added to the sample. The absorbance was then read. The
calibration curves were used to determine the concentration of fluoride in the sample. The results
were expressed in mg/l F-. The procedure was repeated using standard diluted samples.
3
3.3.1.9 Determination of Alkalinity
Reagents
 Methyl Orange indicator
 Standard 0.1M HCl (aq)
Apparatus
 Burettes
 Pipette
 Conical flask
 Beakers
 Droppers
Procedure
50ml of the sample was measured into a conical flask. Two drops of methyl orange
indicator were then added. The resulting mixture was then titrated against a standard
0.1M HCl (aq) to the first permanent pink colour change at a pH 4.5 to get the measured
value.
3
3.3.2 Physical Analysis
3.3.2.1 Determination of Colour
Apparatus
 Nessler cylinder
 Distilled water
 Lovibond Nessleriser
Procedure
The Nessler cylinder was filled with the water sample and transferred to the right hand
compartment of the Lovibond Nessleriser. The colour of the sample was matched against
distilled water. The colour value was read in degree hazens.
3.3.2.2 Determination of Turbidity
Apparatus
 Lovibond turbidemeter
 Distilled water
 Vial
Procedure
The vial was rinsed out three times with the sample to be tested. The vial was then filled with the
sample and capped ensuring all outside surfaces were clean and dry. The vial was placed in the
sample chamber and aligned correctly. The sample chamber was covered using the chamber
cover and the NTU value recorded.
3
3.3.2.3 Determination of Total Hardness
Apparatus
 Burette
 Pipette
 Conical flask
 Beakers
Reagents
 Buffer solution: 16.9 g of ammonium chloride and 1.25g of magnesium salt of
EDTA was dissolved in 143ml of concentrated ammonium hydroxide and
diluted to 250ml with distilled water.
 Total hardness indicator tablet.
 Standard EDTA titrant: 0.01M or Ng AR grade EDTA was dissolved in distilled
water and diluted to 1000ml and standardised against standard calcium solution.
Procedure
50ml of sample was pipetted into a 250 ml conical flask and 1ml of ammonia buffer solution
added to it. One crushed total hardness indicator tablet was also added to it. It was then mixed
constantly and titrated with a standard 0.01M Ethylene Diamine Tetra Acetic Acid (EDTA) until
the colour changed from purple to blue. The volume of the standard was read and the measured
value calculated using the mole concept (Pusch et al, 1998).
3.4 Determination of Water Quality Index (WQI)
In this study, for the calculation of water quality index, twelve important parameters were
chosen. All the twelve parameters tested were chosen in order to improve accuracy. These were
pH, electrical conductivity, nitrates, chlorides, alkalinity, total dissolved solids, fluorides, colour,
turbidity, total hardness, coliform count and dissolved oxygen. The WQI was calculated by using
the standards of drinking water quality recommended by the World Health Organisation (WHO).
The weighted arithmetic index method (Brown et al, 1972) was used for the calculation of WQI
of the waterbody. Quality rating or sub index (qn) was calculated using the following expression
𝑞𝑛 = 100[𝑉𝑛 − 𝑉𝑖𝑜] / [𝑆𝑛 − 𝑉𝑖𝑜]
3
(Let there be n water quality parameters and quality rating or sub index (Qn) corresponding to nth
parameter is a number reflecting the relative value of this parameter in the polluted water with
respect to its standard permissible value.)
Qn = Quality rating for the nth water quality parameter
Vn = Estimated value of the nth parameter at a given sampling
station. Sn = Standard permissible value of the nth parameter.
Vio = Ideal value of nth parameter in pure water. (i.e., 0 for all other parameters except the
parameter pH and Dissolved oxygen (7.0 and 14.6 mg/L respectively)
Unit weight was calculated by a value inversely proportional to the recommended standard value
Sn of the corresponding parameter.
Sn = Standard value for nth
parameters K = Constant for
proportionality.
K = 1/(Σ1/Sn)
Wn = unit weight for the nth
parameters. Wn = K/ Sn
The overall water quality index was calculated by aggregating the quality rating with the unit
weight linearly.
WQI = ∑q𝑛𝑊𝑛/ ∑W𝑛
3
Table 3.3: Water Quality Index
Water Quality Index Level Water Quality Status

0-25 Excellent water quality
26-50 Good water quality
51-75 Poor water quality
76-100 Very poor water quality
>100 Unsuitable for drinking
3
CHAPTER 4: RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
4.1 Introduction
The objective of this project was to determine the suitability of the groundwater in Syokimau
area. Borehole water was sampled and laboratory tests were performed in accordance with the
established goals. The findings were analysed and compared to drinking water standards. The
researched important parameters were used to develop correct results and provide appropriate
recommendations.
4.2 Water quality
The following is a tabular overview of the values obtained of each parameter in the research
area's selected borehole samples. The parameters were tested using standard methods of
laboratory examination. The explanations for each are presented in the form of charts below. The
results of the laboratory investigation of the selected samples are shown in Table 4.2 where S1-
S6 stand for samples one to sample six and KS stands for Kenyan Standards.
4
Table 4.1: Results of Water Quality Analysis
Parameter Units WHO KS S1 S2 S3 S4 S5 S6

Guidelines Guidelines
(Max (Max
Allowable) Allowable)
Chloride mg/l 250 250 452 147 169 160 154 200
Total mg/l 500 300 12 26 14 40 32 26
hardness
pH pH 6.5-8.5 6.5-8.5 8.41 8.09 6.63 7.44 6.51 6.66
scale
Flouride mg/l 1.5 1.5 2 >2 >2 >2 >2 >2
Electrical µS/cm 2500 2500 1498 582 653 687 590 520
conductivity
Alkalinity mg 500 500 471 224 253 283 266 250
CaCO3/l
Dissolved mg/l 6.5-8 6.28 5.64 5.77 4.86 5.22 5.95
oxygen
Turbidity NTU 5 5 2.82 5.76 1.23 1.44 0.78 1.88
Sulphate mg/l 500 400 469.5 75 60 110 65 56
Nitrate mg/l 10 10 1 0.5 7 0.8 0.5 1
Colour TCU 15 15 5 5 5 5 5 5
Total mg/l 1500 1500 1160 360 710 580 550 240
dissolved
solids
4
4.2.1 Chloride
Chloride
500
452
450
400
350
300
250
200 250
Chloride
150
100 200
50 169 160
147 154
0
S1S2S3S4S5S6Max
allowable
Sample
Figure 4.1: Measured Chloride Values
Samples S2-S6 had chloride levels between 147-200 mg/l which was within the maximum
allowable chloride level of 250 mg/l. Sample S1 had the highest measured chloride reading of
452 mg/l which was above the maximum allowable value. This can be attributed to
contamination caused by the lack of proper sewerage in the area where the borehole is located.
Chloride level rises in groundwater where temperature is higher and rainfall is low. The
permeability and absorbency of the soil also have a significant role in determining the chloride
concentration. Water with high chloride concentration has a salty taste and causes corrosion of
metallic water pipes.
4
4.2.2 Total Hardness
Total hardness
350
300 300
250
200
150
Total hardness
100
40 32
50 26 14 26
12
0
S1S2S3S4S5S6Max
allowable
Sample
Figure 4.2: Measured Total Hardness Values
The total hardness of the samples ranged between 12-40 mg CaCo3/l. WHO specifies the
maximum allowable total hardness as 500 mg CaCO3/l and KS specifies the maximum value as
300 mg CaCO3/l, thus all samples are within the acceptable limit. According to WHO (2004),
water hardness is classified as follows:
Water classification Hardness(mg CaCO3/l)
Soft 0-50
Moderately soft 50-100
Slightly hard 100-150
Moderately hard 150-200
Hard 200-300
Very hard >300
The samples fall in the category of soft water because all of them are below 50mg CaCO 3/l.
Positively charged ions with a valency of 2 such as Ca 2+, Mg2+ and alkaline earth metal such as
iron, manganese and strontium are the main cause of hardness in water. Temporary hardness is
4
caused by carbonates and bicarbonates of Ca2+ and Mg2+. The main cause of permanent hardness
in water is presence of chlorides and sulphates. According to the results, there are low levels of
chlorides and sulphates thus the water is fit for use in respect to total hardness.
4
4.2.3 pH
pH
9 8.41 8.5
8.09
8 7.44
7 6.63 6.51 6.66 6.5
6
5
4
3
pH
2
1
0
S1S2S3S4S5S6MinMax
allowableallowable
Sample
Figure 4.3: Measured pH Values
The results of the samples ranged from 6.51-8.41. S1 had the highest value of 8.41 and S3 had
the lowest value of 6.63. This is within the required limits of 6.5-8.5.
Acidity has a significant impact on the ability of water to attack rock components. Acidity
disrupts conduit fittings, transport routes, and infiltrates lethal trace metals into the water,
causing visual issues such as acid taste, fabric discoloration, or blue-green spots in sinks and
water systems. Presence of dissolved CO2 and carbon-based acids in the soil region could cause
acidity.
4
4.2.4 Flouride
Sample S1 had a value of 2 mg/l while samples S2 to S6 had values above 2mg/l. All the
samples have fluoride levels above the maximum allowable level which is 1.5mg/l. Exact
measurement of the fluoride levels could not be achieved as the fluoride meter could only
measure up to a value of 2 mg/l and thus a chart with specific values could not be plotted.
Water with high fluoride levels causes tooth discolouration and fluorosis. It also increases the
risk of getting skeletal flourosis, which has been linked to cancer as a result of high fluoride
consumption.
The groundwater is not safe for drinking as it does not meet the standards in terms of fluoride
concentration. Measures should be applied to manage the high levels.
4
4.2.5 Electrical Conductivity
Electrical conductivity
3000
2500
2500
2000
1498
1500
1000
Electrical
582 653 687 590 520

500
0
S1 S2 S3 S4 S5 S6 Max allowable
Sample
Figure 4.4: Measured Electrical Conductivity Values
The values for the samples collected ranged from 520-1498 µS/cm. These values are below the
maximum allowable value of 2500µS/cm. Ions are made up of dissolved salts and inorganic
materials including chlorides, sulphides, alkalis and carbonate complexes that conduct electricity.
The complexes that dissolve into cations and anions are known as electrolytes. Water
conductivity increases when more cations and anions become accessible. Purified water, because
of its low conductivity, can be utilized as an insulator. Sea water, on the other hand, is
particularly conductive due to its high concentration of electrolytes. This suggests that the ions
that dissolve in water are present in these samples at very low quantities.
The samples are thus fit for domestic use in respect to electrical conductivity.
4
4.2.6 Alkalinity
Alkalinity
600
500
500 471
Alkalinity(mg
400
283 266
300 253 250
224
200
100
0
Sample
Figure 4.5: Measured Alkalinity Values
The alkalinity of the samples ranged from 224-471 mg/l. All the samples fell below the
maximum allowable value for alkalinity which is 500 mg/l thus suitable for domestic use.
Alkalinity may be as a result of calcium carbonate from rocks with calcium carbonate e.g.
limestone. High alkalinity levels may affect taste giving the water a soda taste. High alkalinity
may also cause drying of the skin.
4
4.2.7 Dissolved Oxygen
Dissolved oxygen
10 9.5
9
8 6.5
6.28 5.95
Dissolved oxygen
7 5.64 5.77
4.86 5.22
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
Sample
Figure 4.6: Measured Dissolved Oxygen Values
The samples had dissolved oxygen values ranging from 4.86-6.28. According to WHO the
minimum value should be 6.5mg/l and the maximum value should be 9.5mg/l. Dissolved oxygen
gives water a pleasant taste but too much dissolved oxygen may cause corrosion of water pipes.
4
4.2.8 Turbidity
Turbidity
7
6 5.76
5 5
4
3
2
Turbidity
1 2.82
0 1.88
1.23 1.44
0.78
S1S2S3S4S5S6Max
allowable
Sample
Figure 4.7: Measured Turbidity Values
Sample S2 had a value of 5.76 NTU. It was the only sample that had a higher value than the
maximum allowable limit of 5 NTU. The turbidity level just gives an indication of the level of
pollution (Momba et al., 2006). High levels of turbidity may be an indication of low defence to
pollution. Excessive turbidity is also aesthetically unappealing. Compounds and disease-causing
organisms adsorb on colloidal particles, which can be hazardous to one's health or cause an
unpleasant taste or odour in drinking water (WHO, 1998). If the water changes beyond the 5
NTU standard threshold stipulated by both NEMA (2006) and WHO (2004), disease-causing
agents attach to the small colloidal components. This means that the water must be protected
before being consumed.
5
4.2.9 Sulphate
Sulphate
469.5
500
450
400
350
300
250
200
Sulphates
150
100
50
0 110
75 60 65 56
S1S2S3S4S5S6
Sample
Figure 4.8: Measured Sulphate Values
Sample S1 had the highest value of 469.5 mg/l while the lowest value was 56 in S6. Sulphate is
the most frequent type of sulphur found in well-aerated water. Potable water can have a distinct
flavour and high levels of sulphate, which can cause users to experience a purging effect.
Sodium sulphate taste benchmarks range from 250 mg/l to 1000 mg/L, while calcium sulphate
taste benchmarks are 1000 mg/L.
5
4.2.10 Nitrate
Nitrates
60
50 50
40
30
Nitrates
20
10
0
7
1 0.5 0.8 0.5 1
Sample
Figure 4.9: Measured Nitrate Values
The samples ranged from 0.5-7 mg/l. This was lower than the maximum allowable value of 50
mg/l therefore acceptable. When nitrate levels are high in drinkable water, it poses a health risk.
When nitrate combines with other compounds such as amines, amides or other nitrogenous
combinations as a result of microbial activity, it can cause cancer.
5
4.2.11Colour
Colour
1615
14
12
10
8
Colour
6 5 5 5 5 5 5
4
2
0
S1S2S3S4S5S6Max
allowable
Sample
Figure 4.10: Measured Colour Values
All samples had a value of 5 TCU. The maximum allowable value for colour is 15 TCU thus all
samples were below the maximum value. Colour does not necessarily relate to toxicity or
pathogenic contamination but it does have an important role in marketability for domestic and
industrial use.
5
4.2.12Total Dissolved Solids
Total dissolved solids

1600 1500
1400
1200 1160
1000
Total dissolved solids
800
600 710
400 580 550
200
0 360
240
S1S2S3S4S5S6Max
allowable
Sample
Figure 4.11: Measured Total Dissolved Solids Values
The highest value was from sample S1 with a value of 1160 mg/l. All samples were below the
maximum value of 1500mg/l and thus the water samples were up to standard. Tastiness of water
with total dissolved solid value more than 1000mg/l is considered unpleasant while water with
TDS values less than 600mg/l is considered suitable. Only two samples (S1 and S3) had values
higher than 600 mg/l. High TDS values in water causes scaling in heaters, boilers and water
conduits.
5
4.3 Calculated Water Quality Index Values for Each Parameter
The following table shows the results obtained from the water quality index calculations. Since
the specific value of fluoride level could not be obtained from the apparatus used, an assumed
value of 2mg/l was used in all the samples.
Table 4.2: Calculated Water Quality Index Values
Sample Water Quality Index Level Water Quality Status

S1 102.0784 Unsuitable for drinking
S2 109.2115 Unsuitable for drinking
S3 95.64511 Very poor water quality
All tested samples had very high water quality index values thus proving they were of very poor
quality or unsuitable for drinking. Samples S3-S6 had water quality index values ranging from
90-100 meaning that those water samples were of very poor water quality. Sample S1 and S2 had
higher values of more than 100. These samples are unsuitable for drinking. The high level of
fluoride in all the samples proved to be the main contributor of the high water quality index
values.
5
CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSIONS
AND RECOMMENDATIONS
5.1 Conclusions from the Study
Based on the findings from this study, it can be concluded that the source of water for domestic
use in Syokimau, which is mainly borehole water, met the WHO and KS requirements for total
hardness, pH, electrical conductivity, alkalinity, sulphate, nitrate, colour and total dissolved
solids. All samples did not meet the KS and WHO standards for fluoride concentration which
exposes the residents to fluoride in their drinking water. The high level of fluoride was the major
contributor to the high water quality index values obtained from calculations. Fluoride in
groundwater is mainly due to weathering and leaching of rocks with fluoride bearing minerals
like fluorite, biotite, apatite and hornblende (Karthikeyan et al, 2011). The high fluoride
concentration will affect the residents and is most likely to be major cause of tooth discolouration
and fluorosis.
It was also seen that chloride levels in sample S1 was higher than the recommended maximum
value of 250 mg/l. This is likely due to contamination from sources like the poor sewerage
system and septic systems.
The variations of the chemical parameters especially between sample S1 and the rest may be
caused by proximity to septic tanks or pollution of the groundwater by the poor sewerage or
improperly disposed industrial effluent. This may expose the residents using the water to health
hazards due to cumulative effects of ions in the water. This means that the groundwater from the
Syokimau boreholes need to be treated so as to meet the required WHO and KS values.
5.2 Recommendations
Following the findings of this research, the following recommendations are suggested:
 Assessment should be carried out during diverse seasons like during the rainy season to
determine if quality of the groundwater is affected by rain. This research was conducted
during the dry season which could mean that certain parameters might change during the
wet season.
 The government should improve the sewerage system in the area to ensure boreholes are
not contaminated from leaking sewers. The sewerage system has been highly affected by
5
the construction of the Nairobi Expressway thus measures should be taken to ensure all
damaged or affected sewerage systems are rectified.
 The Water Resources Authority should do regular visits of all borehole sites to ensure
compliance as per the required regulations and recommend appropriate action where
needed.
 The government should take initiative to educate the residents on environment
conservation measures so as to reduce pollution in the area which would otherwise affect
the groundwater sources.
 To reduce pollution by industries in the area, the government should ensure proper
disposal of industrial waste so as to reduce contamination of groundwater sources.
 Further research should be conducted at a wider level to add to the groundwater data
available in the area. The research should especially focus on the fluoride level in the
groundwater since the testing done during this research could not provide the specific
values of fluoride in the groundwater samples. Testing the biological parameters of the
groundwater should also be done to enhance the data of the groundwater in the area
which will help come up with better solutions to help in groundwater conservation in the
area.
5
REFERENCES
Attibu, P.K., Ashun, E. and Young, G.L., (2017). Assessment of groundwater suitability for
irrigation in three sub catchments in Upper Athi River Basin, Kenya. International Journal of
Water Resources and Environmental Engineering, 9(9), pp.201-210.
Brown, R.M., McClelland, N.I., Deininger, R.A. and O’Connor, M.F., 1972. A water quality
index—crashing the psychological barrier. In Indicators of environmental quality (pp. 173-182).
Springer, Boston, MA.
Chakraborti, D., Rahman, M.M., Mukherjee, A., Alauddin, M., Hassan, M., Dutta, R.N., Pati, S.,
Mukherjee, S.C., Roy, S., Quamruzzman, Q. and Rahman, M., (2015). Groundwater arsenic
contamination in Bangladesh—21 Years of research. Journal of Trace elements in Medicine and
Biology, 31, pp.237-248.
Grida.no. 2022. Sources of groundwater contamination | GRID-Arendal. [online] Available at:

<https://www.grida.no/resources/13721> [Accessed 13 May 2022].
Heath, R.C., (1983). Basic ground-water hydrology (Vol. 2220). US Department of the Interior,
US Geological Survey.
ICRC, (2010). Technical Review: Borehole Drilling And Rehabilitation Under Field Conditions.
International Committee of the Red Cross 19, avenue de la Paix 1202 Geneva, Switzerland.
Jha, M.K., Shekhar, A. and Jenifer, M.A., 2020. Assessing groundwater quality for drinking
water supply using hybrid fuzzy-GIS-based water quality index. Water Research.
Kamau, G., (2016). A study of groundwater contamination around Kariobangi sewerage and
treatment plant. Undergraduate. University of Nairobi.
Karthikeyan B. and Lakshmanan E., (2011). Fluoride in Groundwater: Causes, Implications and
Mitigation Measures.
Krishan, G., Singh, S., Kumar, C.P., Garg, P., Suman, G., Ghosh, N.C. and Chaudhary, A.,
(2016). Assessment of groundwater quality for drinking purpose by using water quality
index (WQI) in Muzaffarnagar and Shamli Districts, Uttar Pradesh, India. Hydrol Current
Research, 7(227), p.2.
5
Lumb, A., Halliwell, D. and Sharma, T., (2006). Application of CCME Water Quality Index to
monitor water quality: A case study of the Mackenzie River basin, Canada. Environmental
Monitoring and assessment, 113(1), pp.411-429.
Lutterodt, G., Van de Vossenberg, J., Hoiting, Y., Kamara, A.K., Oduro-Kwarteng, S. and
Foppen, J.W.A., 2018. Microbial groundwater quality status of hand-dug wells and boreholes in
the Dodowa area of Ghana. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public
Health, 15(4), pp 8-9.
MacDonald, J.A. and Kavanaugh, M.C., (1994). Restoring contaminated groundwater: an

achievable goal?. Environmental Science & Technology, 28(8), pp.362A-368A.
Makhoka, J.K. (2017). Analysis of Groundwater Quality and Identification of Abstraction

Points in Kahawa Wendani, Kiambu County. Doctoral dissertation, University of Nairobi.
MAVWASCO (2021). Sewer Services - Mavoko Water and Sewerage Company.

https://www.mav-water.org/services/sewer MAVWASCO 22nd November, 2021.
Mbithi, F., 2017. Assessment of the impact of groundwater fluoride on human health in Makindu
District, Makueni County, Kenya (Doctoral dissertation, South Eastern Kenya University).
Momba M.N.B., Malakate V.K, and Theron J. (2006). Abundance of phathogenic Escherichia
Coli, Salmonella typhimurium and Vibrio cholerae in Nkonkobe drinking water sources. Journal
of Water and Health, 4, pp. 289 - 296.
Morris, B.L., Lawrence, A.R., Chilton, P.J.C., Adams, B., Calow, R.C. and Klinck, B.A., (2003).
Groundwater and its susceptibility to degradation: a global assessment of the problem and
options for management.
Mumma A., Lane M., Kairu E., Tuinhof A., Hirji R. (2011) Kenya groundwater governance case
study. World Bank, Washington, DC.
Mutua, R. (2018). MACHAKOS COUNTY GOVERNMENT WATER POLICY 2018, Ministry

of Agriculture, Livestock, Fisheries and Co-operatives.
Nato, S. (2015). Groundwater Management Practice in Nairobi County. Degree of Master

Science thesis, University of Nairobi.
5
NEMA, 2004. State of the Environment Report of (2003) Nairobi: National Environment
Management Authority(,Nema).
Njenga, L.W., 1982. Determination of fluoride in water and tea using ion selective electrode and
colorimetric methods (Doctoral dissertation).
Owiti, G., (2021). Syokimau sewerage problems blamed on expressway construction.

https://www.the-star.co.ke/counties/eastern/2021-08-18-syokimau-sewerage-problems-blamed-
on-expressway-construction/ The Star, 22nd November, 2021, Radio Africa Group
Pavelic, P., Giordano, M., Keraita, B.N., Ramesh, V. and Rao, T. (2012). Groundwater
availability and use in Sub-Saharan Africa: a review of 15 countries. International Water
Management Institute.
Pusch, M., Fiebig, D., Brettar, I., Eisenmann, H., Ellis, B.K., Kaplan, L.A., Lock, M.A., Naegeli,
M.W. and Traunspurger, W., (1998). The role of micro‐organisms in the ecological connectivity
of running waters. Freshwater Biology, 40(3), pp.453-495.
Rachel O.O. (2014) MSc. Project, Groundwater quality and its suitability for domestic use in
Ruiru area, Kiambu County, Kenya. Kenyatta University.
Ramaraju H.K., (2006) Ground Water Quality Assessment in Rural District of Karnataka - A
GIS Approach. Journal-Indian Waterwork Association, vol.38(No.2), pp.23.
Sharp, J.M., (2010). The impacts of urbanization on groundwater systems and recharge. Aqua
Mundi, 1(3).
Simiyu, N., 2015. Groundwater Management Practice in Nairobi County. Graduate. University
of Nairobi.
Sindani, B.W., (2013). Assessment of water quality status of River Kibisi, Kenya using the
ephemeroptera, plecopteran and trichoptera (EPT) index. Unpublished M. Sc. Thesis, Kenyatta
University, Kenya.
Singh, S. and Hussian, A., (2016). Water quality index development for groundwater quality
assessment of Greater Noida sub-basin, Uttar Pradesh, India. Cogent Engineering, 3(1), pp. 24-
25.
6
Su, Z., Wu, J., He, X. and Elumalai, V., (2020). Temporal changes of groundwater quality
within the groundwater depression cone and prediction of confined groundwater salinity using
Grey Markov model in Yinchuan area of northwest China. Exposure and Health, 12(3), pp.447-
468.
Tatti, F., Papini, M.P., Torretta, V., Mancini, G., Boni, M.R. and Viotti, P., (2019). Experimental
and numerical evaluation of Groundwater Circulation Wells as a remediation technology for
persistent, low permeability contaminant source zones. Journal of contaminant hydrology, 222,
pp.89-100.
Tenge, J.M., Lusweti, J.K. and Ng’wena, G.A.M., (2015). Assessment of drinking water quality
from the Malakisi River in Western Kenya. International Journal of Innovative Research and
Development, 4(4).
Tsegaye, T., Sheppard, D., Islam, K.R., Tadesse, W., Atalay, A. and Marzen, L., (2006).
Development of chemical index as a measure of in-stream water quality in response to land-use
and land cover changes. Water, Air, and Soil Pollution, 174(1), pp.161-179.
Umaru A.B., Barmamu B.R. & Tya T.S.K.,(2012) Bacteriological Analysis Of Hand-Dug Well
Water In Demsa Local Government Area, Nigeria. International Refereed Journal of Engineering
and Science (IRJES), Vol. 1(4), pp28-31.
United Nations (2021). Meeting the MDG Drinking Water & Sanitation Target: A Mid-Term
Assessment of Progress. https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/index.php?
page=view&type=400&nr=102&menu=1515 United Nations 22nd November 2021.
United Nations (2021). Water | United Nations. https://www.un.org/en/global-issues/water>

United Nations 22nd November 2021.
Water, U.N., (2006). Coping with water scarcity–a strategic issue and priority for system-wide
action. UN-Water: Geneva, Switzerland.
WHO, (2008) Guidelines for drinking-water quality, Third Edition. Geneva: World Health
Organization.
WHO, (2012). World Health Statistics 2012, World Health Organisation.
6
APPENDICES
APPENDIX I: TURBIDITY MEASUREMENT
APPENDIX II: FLUORIDE MEASUREMENT
6
APPENDIX III: DISSOLVED OXYGEN MEASUREMENT
APPENDIX IV: PH MEASUREMENT
6
APPENDIX V: WQI CALCULATIONS FOR SAMPLE 1
APPENDIX VI: WQI CALCULATIONS FOR SAMPLE 2
6
APPENDIX VII: WQI CALCULATIONS FOR SAMPLE 3
APPENDIX VIII: WQI CALCULATIONS FOR SAMPLE 4
6
APPENDIX IX: WQI CALCULATIONS FOR SAMPLE 5
APPENDIX X: WQI CALCULATIONS FOR SAMPLE 6

Assessment of Urban Groundwater Quality

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Assessment of Urban Groundwater Quality

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

UNIVERSITY OF NAIROBI

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL AND CONSTRUCTION

ASSESSMENT OF URBAN GROUNDWATER QUALITY: A

PETER CAREY ACHACHA

BACHELOR OF SCIENCE IN CIVIL

Table 3.1: Borehole Data.........................................................................................................................20

Figure 2.1: Schematic Section of an Example of a Temporary Borehole Completion..........................8

Urbanization is a “double-edged sword” as it accelerates a nation’s economic growth and

1.1 Problem Statement

1.3 Specific Objectives

1.4 Research Questions

1.5 Scope of Study

1.6 Limitation of Study

Source: ICRC, 2010.

2.5 Borehole Permitting Process

2.6 Groundwater Contamination

Figure 2.2: Sources of Groundwater Contamination

Some of the sources of groundwater contamination as shown in the figure are:

2.6.1.1 Sewers and Other Pipelines

2.6.1.3 Surface Impoundments

2.6.1.4 Improper Disposal of Hazardous Waste

2.6.1.6 Mining Activities

2.6.1.7 Improperly Constructed and Abandoned Wells

2.7 Groundwater Quality Attributes

2.7.1 Chemical Parameters

2.7.2 Biological Parameters

2.7.3 Physical Parameters

2.8 Water Quality Index

2.9 Literature Findings

 The chemical composition of water.

 The PH of the draining solution

Area Sampled X Y Depth

S1 Near Little -1.383665 36.929051 1577

S2 Endmor Steel -1.365185 36.915519 1504

S3 Gables Park -1.374259 36.932496 -

S4 Along -1.367056 36.924740 1466

S5 Springville -1.364979 36.927757 1445

S6 Next to Steel -1.374508 36.922112 1428

3.3 Laboratory Investigations

Parameter Method of Assessment

W1 = Weight of total solids + dish

 SPADNS Solution: 958mg of SPADNS was dissolved in 500ml of distilled water.

 Zirconyl-acid reagent: 133mg Zirconyl chloride octahydrate (ZrOCl2.8H2O) was

𝑞𝑛 = 100[𝑉𝑛 − 𝑉𝑖𝑜] / [𝑆𝑛 − 𝑉𝑖𝑜]

Qn = Quality rating for the nth water quality parameter

Vn = Estimated value of the nth parameter at a given sampling

station. Sn = Standard permissible value of the nth parameter.

Sn = Standard value for nth

parameters K = Constant for

Wn = unit weight for the nth

WQI = ∑q𝑛𝑊𝑛/ ∑W𝑛

Water Quality Index Level Water Quality Status

Parameter Units WHO KS S1 S2 S3 S4 S5 S6

Figure 4.1: Measured Chloride Values

Figure 4.2: Measured Total Hardness Values

Figure 4.3: Measured pH Values

582 653 687 590 520

Figure 4.4: Measured Electrical Conductivity Values

Figure 4.5: Measured Alkalinity Values

Figure 4.6: Measured Dissolved Oxygen Values

Figure 4.7: Measured Turbidity Values

Figure 4.8: Measured Sulphate Values

Figure 4.9: Measured Nitrate Values