Determine the Drinking the water quality of Khairpur Mir's City

We Research the Water quality of Khairpur Mir's City we are Find Arsenic in water of Khairpur city

1. FYP -( II ) B.Sc. Engineering Technology Civil Engineering Technology BY SUPERVISED BY: ENGR:DR.ASIM ALI ABRO PHYSICO-CHEMICAL STUDY OF DRINKING WATER QUALITY OF KHAIRPUR MIR’S CITY 2 THE BANAZIR BHUTTO SHAHEED UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY AND SKILLED DEVELOPMENT KHAIRPUR MIR’S CO-SUPERVISED BY: ENGR. JABIR ALI KEERIO MUNTAZIR ABASS F20-BSc-CET-13 IFTIKHAR HUSSAIN F20-BSc-CET-38 SHUAIB AHMED F20-BSc-CET-40

2. TABLE OF CONTENT 3 01 INTRODUCTION PROBLEM STATEMENT LITERATURE REVIEW AIM AND OBJECTIVES RESEARCH METHODOLOGY RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Presentation Outlines CONCLUSION REFERENCES 08 03 04 05 02 06 07

3. 4 Introduction

4. INTRODUCTION 5 Water is essential for life ; no living thing survives without water. Human, animals and plants need specific amount of water for their various purposes [1] . There are two main sources of water the first one is groundwater and other is surface water [ 1]. The groundwater is present below the water table in saturated zone, whereas the surface water at the surface of earth [1] . SOURCES OF WATER Surface water Ground water

5. 6 Approximately 1.5 billion peoples depended on ground water for their drinking purpose [1]. In total, there is 1400 million billion liters of water, 97% is sea water and only 3% is fresh water, out of which 2% is lidged in the polar ice caps and glaciers [2]. Google images Pakistan ranked 80th in the world on availability of clean drinking water to its people [3]. One-sixth of total human population has no easy access to safe drinking water [4] . A Person needs approximately 3.785( litre )/day for drinking [4]. It is estimated that by 2025 the national population will increase from 141 million to 221 million and the water consumption will decrease from 5600 litre to 1000 litre per annum per capita [5]. INTRODUCTION

6. 7 Water is contaminated by naturally occurring and fashioned by men’s activities [6]. The quality of ground water is most commonly affected by waste disposed and land use . One major source of contamination is the storage of waste materials in excavations, such as pits or mines [6]. Sources of Surface water contaminations Sources of Ground water contaminations Google images INTRODUCTION

7. 8 Literature Review

8. Literature review 9 Sr:No Author Title/year of paper Summary of Study 01 Zeenat M.Ali, Z.A Bhatti et al. GROUND WATER QUALITY OF KHAIRPUR MIR’S SINDH: A CASE STUDY (2015). The research was conducted in Ranipur city of District Khairpur Mir’s to determine the groundwater quality. The ten locations were selected for monitoring the water quality. The pH, temperature, electrical conductivity (EC) and total dissolved solids (TDS) were analyzed. The Arsenic was also monitored by Kit method. The overall quality of groundwater was found satisfactory except the EC of eight locations of Ranipur city of Kharpur Mirs [7]. 02 Abdul Shakoor et al. GROUNDWATER QUALITY ASSESSMENT OF U.C PIRYALOI, DISTRICT KHAIRPUR MIR’S, SINDH PAKISTAN (2022). The present study was carried out to assess the quality of groundwater on the basis of physicochemical parameters i.e., pH, turbidity, EC, TDS, Cl and As. Physicochemical analysis revealed that groundwater in most of the areas of studied U.C meet WHO guidelines and considered as drinkable [8].

9. Literature review 10 Sr:No. Author Title/year of paper Summary of Study 03 Khan S, Aziz T, et al. DRINKING WATER QUALITY IN 13 DIFFERENT DISTRICTS OF SINDH, PAKISTAN (2018 ). This study was intended to assess the quality of drinking water in Sindh including Karachi, Hyderabad, Shikarpur, Sukkar , Badin, Ghotki , Jacobabad, Khairpur, Mirpurkhas, Mithi , Tharparkar , Sanghar and Thatta . Samples were analyzed for various water quality parameters such color, odor, taste, alkalinity, Bicarbonate, Calcium, Carbonate Turbidity, Chloride, Conductivity, Hardness as CaCO3, pH, Sodium, TDS and microbial contamination . Our result shows that in some cities like Badin, Ghotki , Jacobabad, Khairpur, Mirpurkhas, Mithi , Tharparkar (without RO) Sangar , Thatta , water is unfit for drinking purpose as water quality parameters exceeding the prescribed standard values [9]. Literature review

10. 11 Sr : No. Author Title/year of paper Summary of Study 04 S .A. Mangi , Samiullah Sohu , et al. ASSESSMENT OF PHYSICOCHEMICAL PARAMETERS FOR THE DRINKING WATER QUALITY IN THE VICINITY OF NAWABSHAH CITY, SINDH, PAKISTAN(2017). In this study seven physicochemical parameter were investigated and laboratorial investigations demonstrated that the pH values were found with the WHO limits, TDS & EC values were found within the acceptable limits, except in one residential area, Turbidity was also high at all the locations only one area was found within the standards, furthermore, the hardness was present in all the samples at all the locations, which indicate that the water supplied to public was hard in nature and was concluded that the water supplied to residents of the inspected areas were found not fit for drinking [ 10]. Literature review

11. 12 Sr : No. Author Title/year of paper Summary of Study 05 A.A MAJIDANO, S. KHAN, et al. PHYSICOCHEMICAL STUDY OF DRINKING WATER OF TALUKA MIRWAH AND KOTDIJI FROM DISTRICT KHAIRPUR MIR’S (2017). A comprehensive picture of quality of water of 24 different location of taluka Mirwah and Kotdiji of district Khairpur Mir’s of Sindh Pakistan is presented in this paper. Samples from hand pumps were collected and investigated pH, EC, TDS, hardness and alkalinity for quality investigation. These parameters limits were compared with the permissible limits recommended by W.H.O some parameters were obtained within the allowable levels but most have objectionable limits. Water samples of Mirwah and Kotdiji showed very high level of conductance 3480µS/cm TDS 2227mg/L higher than recommended by World Health Organization. Some samples are suitable for drinking purposes but many have objectionable levels of certain parameters. Therefore the water from Mirwah and Kotdiji are unsuitable for human consumption [ 11]. Literature review

12. 13 Sr : No. Author Title/year of paper Summary of Study 06 G. S.  Solangi,M . A.  Keerio , J. A.  Keerio , et al. Assessing and mapping the groundwater quality of Taluka Larkana , Sindh, Pakistan, using water quality indices and geospatial tools(2022). This study was carried out to assess the groundwater quality of Taluka Larkana , Sindh, Pakistan. The assessment of groundwater quality was carried out by randomly collecting (43) groundwater samples from various locations, and physicochemical parameters of each sample were determined. Also, three (03) standard water quality indices such as the (SPI), (PIG) and ArcGIS 10.3 software were used for evaluation of overall groundwater quality, and development of spatial distribution maps, respectively. Analysis revealed that 96% of the samples were colorless, odorless and had no turbidity; however, 14% of samples had a bitter taste.Analysis based on the SPI categorized 49%, 30%, and 21% of the samples as moderately polluted, highly polluted, and unsuitable for drinking purposes, respectively, while the WQI categorized 53.53%, 18.6%, 16.27%, 11.6% of the samples as good, poor, very poor, and unsuitable for drinking, respectively. Overall, the study revealed that groundwater in most of the parts of the study area is not suitable for drinking purposes. Thus, it is recommended that groundwater of the study area should be treated well prior to its use for drinking purposes [12]. Literature review

13. 14 Sr : No. Author Title/year of paper Summary of Study 07 G. S.  Solangi , A. A Siyal , et al. , Groundwater quality evaluation using the water quality index (WQI), the synthetic pollution index (SPI), and geospatial tools: a case study of Sujawal district, Pakistan(2019). This study was conducted to evaluate and map the quality of groundwater in the Sujawal district, a coastal area of Pakistan based on the physicochemical analysis of 94 samples using two standard numerical models and geospatial techniques. The WQI model revealed that 2.13%, 6.38%, 55.32%, 22.34%, and 13.83% of water samples were excellent, good, poor, very poor, and unsuitable for drinking purposes. Also, the SPI model identified that 32%, 13.83%, 20.12%, 18.1%, and 15.95% of samples were slightly polluted, moderately polluted, highly polluted, suitable, and unsuitable. Overall, the study revealed that groundwater in most of the areas does not meet WHO guidelines. The prevalence of water-related diseases in the area suggests that groundwater is contaminated and using that water is of high risk for human health. The study highlights the significance of using numerical models and geospatial techniques for water quality evaluation in the coastal areas of the world [13]. Literature review

14. 15 Sr : No. Author Title/year of paper Summary of Study 08 G.  Shabir .  Solangi , M. M Babar , et al., Evaluation of drinking water quality using the water quality index (WQI), the synthetic pollution index (SPI) and geospatial tools in Thatta district, Pakistan. The study was to evaluate the quality of groundwater in the deltaic region of the Indus River in district Thatta , Pakistan. In the region, the groundwater is widely used for drinking purposes. Due to excessive abstraction rates of groundwater, a significant amount of seawater intrudes into the aquifers. Thus, groundwater samples (100) were analyzed for different physicochemical parameters. A number of water quality parameters crossed the WHO guidelines. The WQI model revealed that 8%, 57%, 20%, and 15% of the samples were good, poor, very poor and unsuitable for drinking purposes, respectively. Likewise, the SPI model indicated that 10%, 55%, 19%, and 16% were slightly polluted, moderately polluted, highly polluted and unsuitable for drinking. Though the model’s input is different, the proportionate of ranking revealed a significant correlation (R2 = 0.78) between the outcomes of both models. The geospatial mapping of physicochemical parameters, WQI, and SPI model outcomes indicated that most of the groundwater resource in the study area is contaminated, thus not suitable for drinking purposes. The methodology developed in this study is extendable to other similar environments in the world [14]. Literature review

15. 16 Sr : No. Author Title/year of paper Summary of Study 09 G.  Shabir .  Solangi , P. Siyal , et al. Evaluation of surface water quality using the water quality index (WQI) and the synthetic pollution index (SPI): a case study of Indus Delta region of Pakistan Under changing climate scenario, groundwater aquifers in the Indus Delta. The present study was thus carried out to assess the water quality of the surface water bodies using numerical indices, that is, the water quality index (WQI) and the synthetic pollution index (SPI). Fifty water samples collected from natural lakes, ponds, and depressions were analyzed for different physicochemical parameters using standard methods. The physicochemical analysis revealed that most of the sampled surface water bodies contained unsafe water for drinking as well as for irrigation purposes. The WQI identified that water of 82% of water bodies was unfit for drinking purpose while remaining 18% was classified as very poor. Whereas SPI revealed that water of 2% of surface water bodies was moderately polluted, 20% severally polluted, and remaining 78% was unfit water for drinking purpose. The study highlights the significance of using WQIs for evaluation of water quality for domestic use and a healthy ecosystem in the similar deltaic areas of the world [15]. Literature review

16. 17 Problem statement

17. Problem statement 18 The researchers reported that Anemia, Arsenicosis , Cholera, Diarrhea , Fluorosis, Guinea worm disease, Hepatitis, HIV/AIDS, Intestinal worms, Malaria, Schistosomiasis, Trachoma, Typhoidaa are the water born diseases [ 19]. Google images It is expected that 30 % of all diseases and 40 % of all life losses are due t o poor water quality [ 16]. The ongoing research reveals that the drinking water causes more than 50,000 deaths per day [ 17]. Unplanned urban development and human activities contaminated the groundwater reservoirs [ 18].

18. 19 Metals like nickel and arsenic are very harmful if present in water [20]. Exposure to As contamination in drinking water led to chronic and carcinogenic problems [21]. Chronic health effects include abdominal pain , black foot disease, diabetes, hypertension , severe diarrhea , vomiting , reproductive disorder , inhabit the mental growth of children , DNA damage and immune deficiency . The carcinogenic effects of As include cancer (bladder, kidney, liver, lungs and skin) [ 18]. Therefore , the analysis of water is essential for comparing the levels of essential parameters to the permissible level as given in the guidelines of WHO(world health organization ) [22]. The purpose of this study is to investigate and map the groundwater quality of city Khairpur Mir‘s, Sindh and comparison with WHO standards . Problem statement

19. Aim and objectives 20 Aim The aim of this study is to the analyze the ground water quality of Khairpur Mir’s city for drinking purpose.

20. 21 And following are these objectives which are mentioned. To Analyze the drinking water quality of Khairpur city by Physico – chemical parameters. To predict the quality of groundwater of the study area by using Water Quality Index(WQI) and SYNTHETIC POLLUTION INDEX(SPI) . Objectives Aim and objectives

21. 22 Methodology

22. 23 COLLECTION OF SAMPLES SELECTION OF SAMPLING POINTS TRANSPORTATION AND PRESERVATION OF COLLECTED WATER SAMPLES LABELLING OF SAMPLES ANALYSIS OF PHYSICO-CHEMICAL PARAMETERS DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION PREDICTION OF THE EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS BY USING WQI AND SPI MODELS. GPS COORDINATES Methodology

23. 24 AIM and OBJECTIVES STUDY OF AREA:. The study area of present research work is Khairpur Mir’s which is an agricultural and industrial city in the province of Sindh, Pakistan.The city comprises 29 wards . Actual location of Khairpur district is the northern part of Sindh. The range of temperature is from 4 to 46 °C Celsius having more than 250 mm average rainfall [ 23]. It has been observed that the industrial or agricultural contamination might be the major source of heavy metals contamination in underground and surface water [ 24]. Khairpur city has a population of 183120 (according to Election Commision of Pakistan 2022) [ 25]. Methodology

24. 25 AIM and OBJECTIVES GROUNDWATER SAMPLING Fifty(58) groundwater samples will be collected from identified locations from different sources in the study area. The samples will be obtained from the already installed hand pumps and electric motors at public and residential places. While sampling, GPS coordinates of sampling sites will be also noted using electronic mobile GPS. All standard procedures will be adopted, during the collection, transportation, and analyses of the samples. Samples will be collected in the half litre plastic bottles and will be sealed and tagged properly and will be preserved into ice bags until testing. During sampling, the depth of groundwater aquifer of hand pumps and motor pumps to be noted. Methodology

25. 26 AIM and OBJECTIVES Methodology III. To determine the overall quality of groundwater for domestic use by the application of WQI model and SPI model. The water quality indices are important tools that evaluate the overall status of water, for various purposes like agriculture use and domestic use. The WQI is the mathematical tool which is widely used around the globe for assessing the overall suitability of groundwater and surface water for drinking purposes [26]. The SPI is a modern tool being widely used for the evalua t ion of the comprehensive quality of the groundwater by several researchers throughout the world [ 27]. .

26. 27 AIM and OBJECTIVES Methodology Area Code Area Name Sampling Source Latitude (N) Longitude (E) Area Code Area Name Sampling Source Latitude (N) Latitude (N) W1, S1 Saleemabad Hand pump N 27.55663⁰ E068.76621⁰ W11,S1 Hyderi chok Banaras Colony Hand pump N 27.52150⁰ E068.74204⁰ W1,S2 Khajor Mandi Hand pump N 27.56134⁰ E068.76625⁰ W11,S2 Matchis factory opposite railway station Water Supply N 27.51991⁰ E068.73917⁰ W2,S1 Faizabad Hand pump N 27.54848⁰ E068.75887⁰ W12,S1 Madarsa Ibn Masood Allahabad Water Supply N 27.51424⁰ E068.73911⁰ W2,S2 Kachi Abadi Hand pump N 27.54768⁰ E068.76293⁰ W12,S2 Civil hospital near Emergency Water Supply N 27.51929⁰ E068.74316⁰ W3,S1 Central Jail Water Supply N 27.54647⁰ E068.76220⁰ W13,S1 Ali public School street Chandia Mor Hand pump N 27.51470⁰ E068.74821⁰ W3,S2 Babu Shah colony Water Supply N 27.54014⁰ E068.76197⁰ W13,S2 Civil Department BBSUTSD Water Supply N 27.51294⁰ E068.74185⁰ W4,S1 Sanwlo Jamali Hand pump N 27.53959⁰ E068.77593⁰ W14,S1 Khanan Shah colony Water Supply N 27.52025⁰ E068.74695⁰ W4,S2 Photo Khan Katohar Hand pump N 27.53808⁰ E068.76761⁰ W14,S2 Kamangar Muhalla ( Qabrustan ) Hand pump N 27.52161⁰ E068.74885⁰ W5,S1 Hamid Shah colony Hand pump N 27.53419⁰ E068.76672⁰ W15,S1 Azam Colony near Microsoft Hand pump N 27.52535⁰ E068.74173⁰ W5,S2 Gareebabad Hand pump N 27.53328⁰ E068.76431⁰ W15,S2 Bus Stop near Phatak Hand pump N 27.52380⁰ E068.73961⁰ W6,S1 Ostagahi ( Jamia Masjid Hand pump N 27.52591⁰ E068.76778⁰ W16,S1 Opposite PakTurk School Hand pump N 27.52271 E068.74663 W6,S2 Dabbar Mohalla Water Supply N 27.52493⁰ E068.76605⁰ W16,S2 Dahot Autak Nizamani Hand pump N 27.52276 E068.74323 W7,S1 Mumtaz college Water Supply N 25.51997⁰ E068.76974⁰ W17,S1 Sindhi School Yasir Shah chok Hand pump N 27.52254⁰ E068.73351⁰ W7,S2 Bhatti chok near Khalid Pump Hand pump N 27.52121⁰ E068.76708⁰ W17,S2 Hussaini chok Rikshaw stand Hand pump N 27.52431⁰ E068.73506⁰ W8,S1 Superior Science collloge Hand pump N 27.51860⁰ E068.76112⁰ W18,S1 Maitla Muhallla Hand pump N 27.52741⁰ E068.73005⁰ W8,S2 Mir.A Bazar Near Wassan House Hand pump N 25.52497⁰ E068.75787⁰ W18,S2 Narai Dhakan Hand pump N 27.52517⁰ E068.72888⁰ W9,S1 Lashari Muhalla Bhurgiri Hand pump N 27.51369⁰ E068.76434⁰ W19,S1 Memon Muhalla Hand pump N 27.52722⁰ E068.73255⁰ W9,S2 Rajper Mohalla Bhurgiri Hand pump N 27.51649⁰ E068.76682⁰ W19,S2 Shahi bazar Lambo athar chok Hand pump N 27.52547⁰ E068.73199⁰ W10,S1 Madina Masjid Shehbaz colony Hand pump N 27.52020⁰ E068.75143⁰ W20,S1 Hockey Ground near Allied Bank Hand pump N 27.52575⁰ E068.73698⁰ W10,S2 Boys primary school Wandh Hand pump N 27.51851⁰ E068.75516⁰ W20,S2 Jan M Janvri Near Township Hand pump N 27.52944⁰ E068.74026⁰

27. 28 AIM and OBJECTIVES Methodology Area Code Area Name Sampling Source Latitude (N) Longitude (E) W21,S1 Latif colony Hand pump N 27.52493⁰ E068.75219⁰ W21,S2 Talpur colony DHO office Hand pump N 27.53056⁰ E068.74860⁰ W22,S1 Tanveer Kiryana Phanjhati Hand pump N 27.52425⁰ E068.76458⁰ W22,S2 Hindoro Pir Water Supply N 27.52335⁰ E068.76174⁰ W23,S1 Khaki Shah Pul Hand pump N 27.52537⁰ E068.75475⁰ W23,S2 Phool bagh Hand pump N 27.52661⁰ E068.75938⁰ W24,S1 Jillani Muhalla Hand pump N 27.53165⁰ E068.76299⁰ W24,S2 Ali Raza Shah Thalo Jamia Masjid Hand pump N 27.53158⁰ E068.75922⁰ W25,S1 Munshi Muhalla Water Supply N 27.52819⁰ E068.76237⁰ W25,S2 Bara Alam Water Supply N 27.53006⁰ E068.76215⁰ W26,S1 Abid colony near Microsoft Hand pump N 27.53008⁰ E068.75329⁰ W26,S2 Khamisani Garden Hand pump N 27.52933⁰ E068.75753⁰ W27,S1 Gulistan Colony Water Supply N 27.53393⁰ E068.76325⁰ W27,S2 Ali Murad Muhalla post office Hand pump N 27.53552⁰ E068.76131⁰ W28,S1 Garhi pul Hand pump N 27.53378⁰ E068.75365⁰ W28,S2 Citizen/People Colony Hand pump N 27.53359⁰ E068.75127⁰ W29,S1 Staff Quarter Water Supply N 27.53851⁰ E068.76054⁰ W29,S2 Saida Goth Water Supply N 27.53377⁰ E068.75367⁰

28. 29 Physico-chemical parameters of drinking water Sr :No . Physical parameters Method 01 Tem perature( celcius °C ) Thermometer 02 Turbidity(NTU) Turbidity meter 03 Electrical conductivity(EC) ( µ s/cm) EC by formula from TDS Sr: No Chemical parameters Method 01 pH pH meter (Probe method) 02 Dissolved oxygen(DO) (mg/L or ppm) DO meter (Probe method) 03 Total dissolved solids(TDS) (mg/L or ppm) TDS meter (Probe method) 04 Arsenic(AS) ( µ g/L or ppb) Kit method (Probe method) Methodology Methodology

29. 30 Equipments use for Water testing Methodology Thermometer TDS meter pH meter DO meter EC meter Turbidity meter Arsenic Kit

30. 31 AIM and OBJECTIVES Methodology Fig: 1 Pictorial view of Samples collection

31. 32 Methodology Fig: 2 Pictorial view of Lab testing

32. Results and discussion 33 pH Graphical representation of pH value % of samples in WHO limit or beyond pH value

33. Results and discussion 34 Fig 1. Graphical representation of TDS value Fig 2. % of sampes in WHO imit or beyond Graphical representation of TDS value % of samples in WHO limit or beyond TDS value

34. Results and discussion 35 Graphical representation of DO value % of samples in WHO limit or beyond DO value

35. Results and discussion 36 Graphical representation of Turbidity value % of samples in WHO limit or beyond Turbidity value

36. Results and discussion 37 Graphical representation of EC value % of samples in WHO limit or beyond EC value Graphical representation of EC value % of samples in WHO limit or beyond

37. Results and discussion 38 Graphical representation of A rsenic value % of samples in WHO limit or beyond Arsenic value

38. Results and discussion 39 Area pH TDS DO Turbidity EC Arsenic Results ppm mg/L NTU µs/cm mg/L W1, S1 7.3 870 3.74 1.8 435 W1,S2 8.2 640 4.67 1.6 320 0.005 W2,S1 7.1 1820 4.18 5.8 910 0.005 W2,S2 6.9 1710 1.25 6 855 W3,S1 7.4 470 6.53 2.4 235 W3,S2 8.5 1980 5.48 2.3 990 0.010 W4,S1 7.3 890 1 1.8 445 W4,S2 6.9 550 4.44 1.6 275 W5,S1 6.7 2510 3.75 3.6 1255 0.005 W5,S2 6.6 2210 4.25 6.9 1105 W6,S1 7.6 620 4.62 4 310 W6,S2 6.3 1570 4.24 4.1 785 0.005 W7,S1 7.6 570 1.85 4.5 285 0.05 W7,S2 7.5 940 3.15 4.2 470 0.005 W8,S1 7.4 1100 4.1 1.5 550 W8,S2 6.3 2300 7.01 2.6 1150 W9,S1 7.4 700 4.86 3.7 350 0.025 W9,S2 7.4 890 3.32 14 445 W10S1 7.2 1470 2.91 3.4 735 0.005 W10,S2 7.9 110 4.82 2.3 55 Area pH TDS DO Turbidity EC Arsenic Results ppm mg/L NTU µs/cm mg/L W21,S1 8.2 300 2.77 2.7 150 0.005 W21,S2 7.1 710 2.22 1.7 355 0.005 W22,S1 7.4 740 0.75 4.4 370 W22,S2 7.3 960 3.37 1.2 480 0.10 W23,S1 7.2 280 3.8 0.8 140 0.005 W23,S2 7.2 2640 8.73 2.7 1320 W24,S1 7.2 2000 1.57 1.5 1000 0.025 W24,S2 7.9 1270 2.09 1 635 0.005 W25,S1 8 1040 1.12 1.2 520 0.10 W25,S2 7.2 4040 10.7 1.3 2020 W26,S1 7.7 310 3.28 1.4 155 W26,S2 6.7 2560 13.2 1.4 1280 0.005 W27,S1 8.5 3850 5.72 1.5 1925 0.005 W27,S2 8.2 650 3.56 2.3 325 0.005 W28,S1 7.8 260 2.28 1.3 130 W28,S2 7 580 4.56 1.7 290 W29,S1 7.8 510 2.61 2.1 255 0.005 W29,S2 7.1 730 4.68 1.8 365 Area pH TDS DO Turbidity EC Arsenic Results ppm mg/L NTU µs/cm mg/L W11,S1 7.3 2550 4.08 2.7 1275 W11,S2 7.8 590 2.07 2.6 295 0.005 W12,S1 7.7 720 4.66 1.1 360 0.005 W12,S2 7.4 630 4.23 2.1 315 0.005 W13,S1 7.7 650 4.36 4.5 325 W13,S2 8 640 2.83 4 320 0.005 W14,S1 7.6 1200 8.1 3.4 600 W14,S2 7.6 1610 5.12 1.5 805 0.005 W15,S1 7.1 980 4.03 1.6 490 0.005 W15,S2 7.5 970 1.12 1 485 0.005 W16,S1 6.8 1090 4.11 2.6 545 W16,S2 6.6 1440 4.74 9.4 720 W17,S1 7.1 800 9.34 1.6 400 0.005 W17,S2 7.5 910 1.95 1.5 455 0.010 W18,S1 8.2 320 2.56 0.9 160 0.005 W18,S2 8 350 2.67 2 175 W19,S1 7.9 560 2.2 1.5 280 0.010 W19,S2 8.1 310 4.94 1.5 155 0.010 W20,S1 7.4 1920 2.55 2.2 960 0.005 W20,S2 7.5 1100 4.92 2.9 550

39. Results and discussion 40 Parameter pH TDS mg/L Turbidity NTU DO mg/L EC µs/cm As mg/L Permissible 8.5 1000 5 5 400 0.01 Maximum 8.5 3850 14 13.2 2020 0.1 Minimum 6.3 110 0.8 1 55 Summary of Ground water Quality Parameters Analysis Results Parameter pH TDS mg/L Turbidity NTU DO mg/L EC µs/cm As mg/L Permissible 8.5 1000 5 5 400 0.01 Maximum 8.5 3850 14 13.2 2020 0.1 Minimum 6.3 110 0.8 1 55

40. 41 SPI WQI Area code Longitude Latitude WQI = ∑ Wi*qi Category of water Wi=Ci/Si*Wi (AS) Category of water W1, S1 N 27.55663⁰ E068.76621⁰ 88.17 Good water 0.003799226 Suitable Water W1,S2 N 27.56134⁰ E068.76625⁰ 165.02 Poor water 0.50152535 Moderately contaminated W2,S1 N 27.54848⁰ E068.75887⁰ 139.08 Poor water 0.502932049 Moderately contaminated W2,S2 N 27.54768⁰ E068.76293⁰ 76.75 Good water 0.004507971 Suitable Water W3,S1 N 27.54647⁰ E068.76220⁰ 181.86 Poor water 0.00511594 Suitable Water W3,S2 N 27.54014⁰ E068.76197⁰ 79.48 Good water 0.999644937 Moderately contaminated W4,S1 N 27.53959⁰ E068.77593⁰ 70.38 Good water 0.002711792 Suitable Water W4,S2 N 27.53808⁰ E068.76761⁰ 196.64 Poor water 0.003875178 Suitable Water W5,S1 N 27.53419⁰ E068.76672⁰ 180.88 Poor water 0.501894647 Moderately contaminated W5,S2 N 27.53328⁰ E068.76431⁰ 83.64 Good water 0.006063871 Suitable Water W6,S1 N 27.52591⁰ E068.76778⁰ 143.79 Poor water 0.005052789 Suitable Water W6,S2 N 27.52493⁰ E068.76605⁰ 162.15 Poor water 0.502084602 Moderately contaminated W7,S1 N 25.51997⁰ E068.76974⁰ 106.38 Poor water 4.976973781 Unsuitable Water W7,S2 N 27.52121⁰ E068.76708⁰ 102.34 Poor water 0.501852083 Moderately contaminated W8,S1 N 27.51860⁰ E068.76112⁰ 183.27 Poor water 0.003873416 Suitable Water W8,S2 N 25.52497⁰ E068.75787⁰ 132.83 Poor water 0.005402075 Suitable Water W9,S1 N 27.51369⁰ E068.76434⁰ 122.81 Poor water 2.49141406 Highly contaminated W9,S2 N 27.51649⁰ E068.76682⁰ 133.51 Poor water 0.008588095 Suitable Water W10,S1 N 27.52020⁰ E068.75143⁰ 50.54 Good water 0.501446636 Moderately contaminated W10,S2 N 27.51851⁰ E068.75516⁰ 190.19 Poor water 0.004450367 Suitable Water

41. 42 Area code Longitude Latitude WQI = ∑ Wi*qi Category of water Wi=Ci/Si*Wi (AS) Category of water W11,S1 N 27.52150⁰ E068.74204⁰ 190.19 Poor water 0.004511833 Suitable Water W11,S2 N 27.51991⁰ E068.73917⁰ 78.30 Good water 0.500801112 Moderately contaminated W12,S1 N 27.51424⁰ E068.73911⁰ 90.78 Good water 0.501231415 Moderately contaminated W12,S2 N 27.51929⁰ E068.74316⁰ 85.99 Good water 0.501385536 Moderately contaminated W13,S1 N 27.51470⁰ E068.74821⁰ 86.12 Good water 0.005172481 Suitable Water W13,S2 N 27.51294⁰ E068.74185⁰ 88.40 Good water 0.501707538 Moderately contaminated W14,S1 N 27.52025⁰ E068.74695⁰ 128.42 Poor water 0.006274241 Suitable Water W14,S2 N 27.52161⁰ E068.74885⁰ 145.36 Poor water 0.501669426 Moderately contaminated W15,S1 N 27.52535⁰ E068.74173⁰ 103.58 Poor water 0.501091853 Moderately contaminated W15,S2 N 27.52380⁰ E068.73961⁰ 91.86 Good water 0.499775366 Slightly Contaminated W16,S1 N 27.52271 E068.74663 103.33 Good water 0.004191915 Suitable Water W16,S2 N 27.52276 E068.74323 144.60 Poor water 0.007152859 Suitable Water W17,S1 N 27.52254⁰ E068.73351⁰ 112.16 Poor water 0.503180815 Moderately contaminated W17,S2 N 27.52431⁰ E068.73506⁰ 101.74 Poor water 0.997579702 Moderately contaminated W18,S1 N 27.52741⁰ E068.73005⁰ 60.54 Good water 0.500365686 Moderately contaminated W18,S2 N 27.52517⁰ E068.72888⁰ 56.26 Good water 0.003527319 Suitable Water W19,S1 N 27.52722⁰ E068.73255⁰ 83.19 Good water 0.99771466 Moderately contaminated W19,S2 N 27.52547⁰ E068.73199⁰ 78.95 Good water 0.998812664 Moderately contaminated W20,S1 N 27.52575⁰ E068.73698⁰ 155.69 Poor water 0.500925363 Moderately contaminated W20,S2 N 27.52944⁰ E068.74026⁰ 109.47 Poor water 0.004776888 Suitable Water SPI WQI

42. 43 Area Longitude Latitude WQI = ∑ Wi*qi Category of water Wi=Ci/Si*Wi (AS) Category of water W21,S1 N 27.52493⁰ E068.75219⁰ 65.17 Good water 0.501162706 Moderately contaminated W21,S2 N 27.53056⁰ E068.74860⁰ 81.54 Good water 0.500376325 Moderately contaminated W22,S1 N 27.52425⁰ E068.76458⁰ 77.34 Good water 0.003647401 Suitable Water W22,S2 N 27.52335⁰ E068.76174⁰ 270.42 Very poor water 9.949086253 Unsuitable Water W23,S1 N 27.52537⁰ E068.75475⁰ 59.81 Good water 0.500611014 Moderately contaminated W23,S2 N 27.52661⁰ E068.75938⁰ 211.94 Very poor water 0.006353177 Suitable Water W24,S1 N 27.53165⁰ E068.76299⁰ 190.37 Poor water 2.489359097 Highly contaminated W24,S2 N 27.53158⁰ E068.75922⁰ 113.93 Poor water 0.500281608 Moderately contaminated W25,S1 N 27.52819⁰ E068.76237⁰ 268.80 Very poor water 9.948343667 Unsuitable Water W25,S2 N 27.53006⁰ E068.76215⁰ 297.16 Very poorwater 0.006778602 Suitable Water W26,S1 N 27.53008⁰ E068.75329⁰ 53.66 Good water 0.003465184 Suitable Water W26,S2 N 27.52933⁰ E068.75753⁰ 227.46 Good water 0.504789394 Moderately contaminated W27,S1 N 27.53393⁰ E068.76325⁰ 281.13 Good water 0.502403497 Moderately contaminated W27,S2 N 27.53552⁰ E068.76131⁰ 87.37 Good water 0.501363546 Moderately contaminated W28,S1 N 27.53378⁰ E068.75365⁰ 47.12 Excellent water 0.003041345 Suitable Water W28,S2 N 27.53359⁰ E068.75127⁰ 73.11 Good water 0.003986914 Suitable Water W29,S1 N 27.53851⁰ E068.76054⁰ 74.17 Good water 0.500806582 Moderately contaminated W29,S2 N 27.53377⁰ E068.75367⁰ 82.85 Good water 0.004114313 Suitable Water SPI WQI

43. 44 AIM and OBJECTIVES Results and discussion WQI SPI Graphical representation of WQI analysis Graphical representation of SPI analysis WQI Value Category of Water <50 Excellent Water >50 -100 Good Water >100-200 Poor Water >200-300 Very Poor Water >300 Unfit for Drinking SPI Value Category of Water <0.2 Suitable Water 0.2≤ SPI < 0.5 Slightly contaminated 0.5≤ SPI < 1.0 Moderately contaminated 1≤ SPI <3 Highly contaminated <3 Unsuitable Water

44. Conclusion 45 The analysis of each sample revealed that, all samples found suitable in Test, Odor and colour . Furthermore, no sample was found having pH value above WHO allowable limits. In terms of TDS , out of 58 samples 19 samples have crossed the WHO limits. The value of a EC range is 400 µs/cm . 31 samples out of 58 were beyond the standard limit . The maximum and minimum range of Turbidity were found 14 NTU and 0.8 NTU respectively. Area W2 S1,W2 S2,W5 S2,W9 S2 and W16 S2 have crossed the target line of 5 NTU. The values of DO were in WHO range except 10 samples. The Arsenic values were found in range except W3 S2,W8 S2,W9S1,W17 S2,W19 S1,W19 S2,W22 S2, W24 S1and W25 S1. It is suggested to avoid groundwater of above mentioned locations for drinking purpose . Overall quality of groundwater of study area is within WHO limits .

45. 46 AIM and OBJECTIVES WQI SPI The WQI model predicated that only one location has the excellent quality of water, 26 locations have the good quality, 24 have the poor, and 3 locations identified as the very poor quality of water . The SPI predicted that 25 locations have suitable water, 1 location have slightly contaminated, 27 location have moderately contaminated, only 2 have highly contaminated water and 3 locations have unsuitable water. Conclusion

46. REFERENCES 47 [1] Ali, Z. M., Bhatti, Z. A., Mukwana , K. C., & Tunio , M. M. (2015). GROUND WATER QUALITY OF KHAIRPUR MIR’S SINDH: A CASE STUDY. ENGINEERING, SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY,14(2) 69-71. [2] Khalid, A., Malik, A. H., Waseem, A., Zahra, S., & Murtaza, G. (2011). Qualitative and quantitative analysis of drinking water samples of different localities in Abbottabad district, Pakistan. International Journal of the Physical Sciences, 6(33), 7480-7489. [3] Arshad, A., Intikhab , A. Q., & Durray , S. (2011). Low-cost filter for flood affected areas of Pakistan. Electronic Journal of Environmental, Agricultural and Food Chemistry, 10(10), 2945-2950. [4] Ali, Z. M., Bhatti, Z. A., Mukwana , K. C., & Tunio , M. M. (2015). GROUND WATER QUALITY OF KHAIRPUR MIR’S SINDH: A CASE STUDY. ENGINEERING, SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY,14(2) 69-71 [5] Arshad, A., Intikhab , A. Q., & Durray , S. (2011). Low-cost filter for flood affected areas of Pakistan. Electronic Journal of Environmental, Agricultural and Food Chemistry, 10(10), 2945-2950 . [ 6 ] Khalid, A., Malik, A. H., Waseem, A., Zahra, S., & Murtaza, G. (2011). Qualitative and quantitative analysis of drinking water samples of different localities in Abbottabad district, Pakistan. International Journal of the Physical Sciences, 6(33), 7480-7489 . [7] Ali, Z. M., Bhatti, Z. A., Mukwana , K. C., & Tunio , M. M. (2015). GROUND WATER QUALITY OF KHAIRPUR MIR’S SINDH: A CASE STUDY. ENGINEERING, SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY,14(2) 69-71. [8] Shakoor, A., Solangi , G. S., Babar, M. M., Shaikh, N. G., & Brohi , R. O. Z(2022). GROUNDWATER QUALITY ASSESSMENT OF UC PIRYALOI, DISTRICT KHAIRPUR MIR’S, SINDH PAKISTAN . 4(6), 5864 – 5869. [ 9 ] Khan, S., Aziz, T., Noor- Ul -Ain, A. K., Ahmed, I., & Nida, A. ( 2018 . ). Drinking water quality in 13 different districts of Sindh , Pakistan. Health Care Curr Rev, 6(4), 1 – 4. [ 10] Mangi, S. A., Sohu, S., Soomro, F. A., Abdullah, A. H., & Nagapan , S. (2017). Assessment of Physicochemical parameters for the drinking water quality in the vicinity of Nawabshah City, Sindh, Pakistan. Engineering Science And Technology International Research Journal,  1(1), 10-14 . [ 11] MAJIDANO, A., Khan, S., SODHOKHOSO, N., Memon, S., & Qureshi, S. (2017). Physicochemical study of drinking water of talukaMirwah and KotDiji from District Khairpur Mir’s. Sindh University Research Journal-SURJ (Science Series), 49(3), 499-504 . [12] Jamali , M. Z., Solangi , G. S., Keerio , M. A., Keerio , J. A., & Bheel , N. (2023). Assessing and mapping the groundwater quality of Taluka Larkana , Sindh, Pakistan, using water quality indices and geospatial tools.  International Journal of Environmental Science and Technology ,  20 (8), 8849-8862. [13] Solangi , G. S., Siyal , A. A., Babar, M. M., & Siyal , P. (2020). Groundwater quality evaluation using the water quality index (WQI), the synthetic pollution index (SPI), and geospatial tools: a case study of Sujawal district, Pakistan.  Human and Ecological Risk Assessment: An International Journal .

47. REFERENCES 48 [14] Solangi , G. S., Siyal , A. A., Babar, M. M., & Siyal , P. (2019). Evaluation of drinking water quality using the water quality index (WQI), the synthetic pollution index (SPI) and geospatial tools in Thatta district, Pakistan.  Desalination and Water Treatment ,  160 , 202-213. [15] Solangi , G. S., Siyal , A. A., Babar, M. M., & Siyal , P. (2018). Evaluation of surface water quality using the water quality index (WQI) and the synthetic pollution index (SPI): a case study of Indus Delta region of Pakistan.  Desalination and Water Treatment ,  118 (1), 39-48. [16] Gyamfi , E. T., Ackah , M., Anim, A. K., Hanson, J. K., Kpattah , L., Enti -Brown, S., ... & Nyarko, E. S. (2012). Chemical analysis of potable water samples from selected suburbs of Accra, Ghana. Proceedings of the international academy of ecology and environmental sciences, 2(2), 118-127. [ 17] Ali, Z. M., Bhatti, Z. A., Mukwana , K. C., & Tunio , M. M. (2015). GROUND WATER QUALITY OF KHAIRPUR MIR’S SINDH: A CASE STUDY. ENGINEERING, SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY,14(2) 69-71 . [ 18] Sinclair, R. G., Jones, E. L., & Gerba, C. P. (2009). Viruses in recreational water‐borne disease outbreaks: a review. Journal of applied microbiology, 107(6), 1769-1780 . [ 19] Shar, G. Q., Shar, A. R., Jatoi, W. B., Shar, L. A., & Ghouri , W. M. (2014). Assessment of the quality of drinking water of Thari Mirwah Town and surrounding villages, District Khairpur, Sindh, Pakistan. Pakistan Journal of Analytical & Environmental Chemistry, 15(2), 39-59. [20] Rasheed, H., Slack, R., Kay, P., & Gong, Y. Y. (2017). Refinement of arsenic attributable health risks in rural Pakistan using population specific dietary intake values. Environment international, 99, 331-342. [21] Brahman, K. D., Kazi, T. G., Afridi, H. I., Baig, J. A., Arain, S. S., Talpur , F. N., ... & Arain, M. B. (2016). Exposure of children to arsenic in drinking water in the Tharparkar region of Sindh, Pakistan. Science of The Total Environment, 544, 653-660. [22] Farahmandkia , Z., Mehrasbi , M., & Sekhavatjou , M. (2011). Relationship between concentrations of heavy metals in wet precipitation and atmospheric PM10 particles in Zanjan , Iran. Journal of Environmental Health Science & Engineering, 8(1), 49-56. [ 23] Nickson, R. T., McArthur, J. M., Shrestha, B., Kyaw- Myint , T. O., & Lowry, D. (2005). Arsenic and other drinking water quality issues, Muzaffargarh District, Pakistan. Applied geochemistry, 20(1), 55-68. [24] Arain, M. B., Kazi, T. G., Jamali, M. K., Jalbani, N., Afridi, H. I., & Shah, A. (2008). Total dissolved and bioavailable elements in water and sediment samples and their accumulation in Oreochromis mossambicus of polluted Manchar Lake. Chemosphere, 70(10), 1845-1856. [ 25]According to Election commission of Pakistan 2022. [26] Shabbir , R., & Ahmad, S. S. (2015). Use of geographic information system and water quality index to assess groundwater quality in Rawalpindi and Islamabad.  Arabian Journal for Science and Engineering ,  40 , 2033-2047 [ 27] Gautam , S.K., Maharana , C., Sharma, D., Singh, A.K., Tripathi , J.K., & Singh, S.K . (2015). Evaluation of groundwater quality in the Chotanagpur plateaue region of the Subarnarekha river basin, Jharkhand State, India. Sustainability Water Qual. Ecol., 6 , 57–74. . .

48. 49 THANK YOU FOR LISTENING