processes
Article
Impact Analysis of Water Quality on the
Development of Construction Materials
Hamad Farid 1 , Muhammad Shoaib Mansoor 1 , Syyed Adnan Raheel Shah 1, *,
Nasir Mahmood Khan 2 , Rana Muhammad Farooq Shabbir 1 , Muhammad Adnan 1 ,
Hunain Arshad 1 , Inzmam-Ul Haq 1 and Muhammad Waseem 3
1
2
3
*
Department of Civil Engineering, Pakistan Institute of Engineering & Technology, Multan 60000, Pakistan
Pakistan Engineering Council, Ataturk Avenue (East), G-5/2, Islamabad 44000, Pakistan
Department of Environmental Chemistry, Bayreuth Centre for Ecology and Environmental Research,
University of Bayreuth, 95440 Bayreuth, Germany
Correspondence: syyed.adnanraheelshah@uhasselt.be; Tel.: +92-300-791-4248
Received: 19 July 2019; Accepted: 21 August 2019; Published: 2 September 2019
Abstract: This research dealt with the impact of the quality of the water source on the mechanical
properties of construction materials. The mechanical properties of construction materials include
compressive, tensile, and flexural strength. Water samples were collected from different resources,
these samples were then synthetically investigated to identify and compare their quality parameters.
After a detailed chemical analysis of water samples from three sources—wastewater, surface or canal
water, and ground water—construction concrete material samples were prepared. The construction
materials were developed with the same water–cement ratio, i.e., 0.60 for each concrete mix sample at
two mix ratios—M1 (1:2:4) and M2 (1:1.5:3). Slump cone and compacting factor tests were conducted
on the fresh concrete to determine its workability prior to its hardening. Then, at 7, 14, 21, and 28 days
for each mix, tests for mechanical properties were carried out to determine the compressive, tensile,
and flexure strengths. Results showed that the mechanical properties of the concrete made by
utilizing wastewater and surface water were more noteworthy as compared to the concrete made by
groundwater. This study will help in the production of concrete which depends on waste and surface
canal water, even for large projects like rigid pavement construction and water-related structures.
Keywords: water quality; wastewater; water management; materials; strength
1. Introduction
In the construction process, fresh or potable water is generally utilized for the development of
concrete materials. Different sources of used water were recently tried for use in concrete construction.
These incorporate ocean and alkali waters, canal, and stream water, Textile emanating, Treated
Wastewater, car wash effluent, industrial wastewater, and so forth. Previously, water from different
quality resources was utilized in the development of construction materials. Reclaimed wastewater was
used in the concrete, in comparison with potable water [1]. Wastewater from car wash stations was used
in high strength concrete and was compared, with reference to freshwater, on the basis of strength [2].
Textile effluent was also tested in comparison to ordinary water for the strength of concrete [3].
Primary treated wastewater, secondary treated wastewater, car wash wastewater, sugar wastewater,
seawater, and treated sewage water were compared with potable water and domestic water for
concrete development [4–10]. The effect of quality of water on the compressive strength of concrete was
investigated [11,12]. So, water management, especially of wastewater, is also a problem, and wastewater
management systems have been developed to deal with it [13–18]. Because of the various sorts of
contaminants that exist in each water types, it is hard to make a sound determination concerning the
Processes 2019, 7, 579; doi:10.3390/pr7090579
www.mdpi.com/journal/processes
Processes 2017, 5, x FOR PEER REVIEW
2 of 13
Processes 2019, 7, 579
2 of 13
to make a sound determination concerning the utilization of non-fresh water in concrete. The research
on the utilization of different water resources still has not compared the performance of developed
utilization
of non-fresh
water in concrete.
The research
on the
utilization
of different
waterwith
resources
concrete
with
help of groundwater,
wastewater,
and surface
water
(canal water
connected
riverstill
has
not
compared
the
performance
of
developed
concrete
with
help
of
groundwater,
wastewater,
water source precipitation). Furthermore, this research gap can be studied under different mix design
and surfaceand
water
(canal
water connected
withthe
river-water
source
precipitation).
Furthermore,
parameters
water
resources
to understand
utilization
of developed
concrete
with the helpthis
of
research
gap
can
be
studied
under
different
mix
design
parameters
and
water
resources
understand
standard testing of mechanical properties, i.e., compressive strength, tensile strength,toand
flexural
the utilization
strength
tests. of developed concrete with the help of standard testing of mechanical properties, i.e.,
compressive
strength,
strength,
and flexural
strength
The primary
goaltensile
of this
examination
is to study
thetests.
potential utilization of various water
The
primary
goal
of
this
examination
is
to
study
the
potential
utilization
of various
resources
resources collected from various sources for the development
of concrete,
withwater
the following
collected from various sources for the development of concrete, with the following objectives:
objectives:
1.
Development of construction materials with different ratios with different water quality sources;
1. Development of construction materials with different ratios with different water quality sources;
2. Determination
Determination of
of mechanical
mechanical properties
properties of
of concrete
concrete mixes
mixes utilizing
utilizing various
various sources
sources of
of water;
water;
2.
3.
To
study
the
applicability
and
future
goals
of
using
non-fresh
or
wastewater
in the
3. To study the applicability and future goals of using non-fresh or wastewater in the construction
construction industry;
industry;
4.
To study
study the
ofof
wastewater
utilization
in
4. To
the impact
impact of
of changing
changingmaterial
materialcombinations
combinationsand
andthe
thelevel
level
wastewater
utilization
thethe
construction
industry.
in
construction
industry.
2. Materials and Methods
2. Materials and Methods
The detailed methodological framework for the development and strength analysis of developed
The detailed methodological framework for the development and strength analysis of
concrete [4,5,7,10] using different water resources is given in Figure 1.
developed concrete [4, 5, 7, 10] using different water resources is given in Figure 1.
Figure 1. Methodological framework.
Figure 1. Methodological framework.
As per the established concept of concrete development and strength analysis, the following steps
As
per the established
of concrete
development
and strength
analysis,
the
following
were performed
to develop concept
the concrete
with help
of groundwater,
surface water,
and
wastewater,
steps
were
to develop
thetoconcrete
help of[4,5,7,10].
groundwater, surface water, and
and later
on performed
they were tested
according
standardwith
procedures
wastewater, and later on they were tested according to standard procedures [4, 5, 7, 10].
Step 1: Collection of water samples and testing of chemical and physical properties;
Step
samples
testing of chemical and physical properties;
Step 1:
2: Collection
Collection of
of water
concrete
mixingand
materials;
Step
2:
Collection
of
concrete
mixing
materials;
Step 3: Deciding the mix ratio and mix design (Mix D-1 (1:2:4) and Mix D-2 (1:1.5:3));
Step 3: Deciding the mix ratio and mix design (Mix D-1 (1:2:4) and Mix D-2 (1:1.5:3));
Step 4: Developing the concrete samples with each type of water samples;
Step 4: Developing the concrete samples with each type of water samples;
Step 5: Testing fresh properties of concrete samples;
Step 5. Testing fresh properties of concrete samples;
Step 6: Testing hardened mechanical properties (compression, tensile, and flexural) with reference to
Step. 6: Testing hardened mechanical properties (compression, tensile, and flexural) with reference
different curing day conditions;
to different curing day conditions;
Processes 2019, 7, 579
3 of 13
Processes 2017, 5, x FOR PEER REVIEW
3 of 13
Step 7: Final decision making and discussion of results.
Step.7: Final decision making and discussion of results.
2.1. Basic Materials
2.1. Basic Materials
2.1.1. Cement
2.1.1. Cement
The cement used in this study was ordinary Portland cement (OPC) of 53 grades, which was
The from
cement
used Leaf
in thisCement
study was
ordinaryThis
Portland
cement
(OPC)
53 grades,
purchased
Maple
Company.
cement
is the
mostofwidely
usedwhich
type was
in the
purchased
from
Maple
Leaf
Cement
Company.
This
cement
is
the
most
widely
used
type
in
the
construction industry in Pakistan.
construction industry in Pakistan.
2.1.2. Fine Aggregates
2.1.2. Fine Aggregates
Fine aggregates or fine sand was taken from the Chenab River, which is widely used and easily
Fine
fine sand was taken from the Chenab River, which is widely used and easily
available
in aggregates
the Multanorregion.
available in the Multan region.
2.1.3. Coarse Aggregates
2.1.3. Coarse Aggregates
Coarse aggregates were procured, as shown in Figure 2, from a nearby crusher in the Sakhi-Sarwar
Coarse
were
procured,
as as
shown
Figure
2, fromconcrete
a nearbymixtures.
crusher inThe
thegradation
Sakhiarea, which
areaggregates
typically the
same
materials
thoseinused
in normal
Sarwar area, which are typically the same materials as those used in normal concrete mixtures. The
test conducted on aggregates showed that they met the specifications requirements.
gradation test conducted on aggregates showed that they met the specifications requirements.
100
Percent Passing By Weight
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
100
10
1
0.1
0.01
Grain Size In millimeter
Figure2.2. Gradation
Gradation curve
Figure
curve of
of aggregates.
aggregates.
2.1.4.
Mixing
Water
2.1.4.
Mixing
Water
Water
was
taken
from
three
different
sources.
Groundwater
or tap
water
waswas
taken
250 feet
below
Water
was
taken
from
three
different
sources.
Groundwater
or tap
water
taken
250 feet
thebelow
land surface,
taken
canal
as Naubahar
Canal
(connected
to the
the land surface
surface, water
surfacewas
water
wasfrom
takenthe
from
the known
canal known
as Naubahar
Canal
(connected
Chenab
precipitation)
in Multan,
while thewhile
wastewater
was taken
from
thefrom
effluent
to theRiver-Source:
Chenab River-Source:
precipitation)
in Multan,
the wastewater
was
taken
the of
of Fertilizer
the National
Fertilizer
Company
Multan,
Pakistan.
Water as
tests
analysis
as shown
in
theeffluent
National
Company
Multan,
Pakistan.
Water
tests analysis
shown
in Table
1, included
Table.1,
included
bicarbonates,
conductivity,
hardness,
total
dissolved
solids
(T.D.S),
total
suspended
bicarbonates, conductivity, hardness, total dissolved solids (T.D.S), total suspended solids (T.S.S),
solids (T.S.S),
dissolved
oxygen, pH,
biochemical
oxygen
demand, and
chemical
oxygen demand.
dissolved
oxygen,
pH, biochemical
oxygen
demand,
and chemical
oxygen
demand.
Processes 2019, 7, 579
4 of 13
Table 1. Chemical properties of water samples.
Parameters
Units
Maximum Allowable Limit
Ground Water
Surface Water
Wastewater
pH
T.D.S
T.S.S
Turbidity
Bicarbonates
Conductivity
Hardness
D.O
C.O.D
B.O.D
N/A
mg/L
mg/L
NTU
mg/L
micro-S/cm
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
6.8–8.5 WHO
1000 WHO
150 EPA
10 WHO
1000 WHO
1000
100 WHO
4–7 EPA
150 EPA
80 EPA
7.4
899
52
0.97
330
1450
360
6.3
18
12
7.3
1010
75
8.7
200
1630
270
6.1
55
37
6.5
1007
155
112
600
1632
280
4.7
257
179
Note: Limit for drinking water (errors and omissions excepted) WHO [19], EPA [20].
After analysis, the wastewater ranged beyond safe drinking water because the total dissolved
solids (T.D.S), total suspended solids (T.S.S), turbidity, hardness, dissolved oxygen (DO), biochemical
oxygen demand (BOD), and chemical oxygen demand (COD) values were beyond the safe limit.
The disposal and treatment of such wastewater is also a wastewater management issue. Thus, if a
successful alternative for utilizing such wastewater with potable water in concrete development is
attained, drinking water/ground water consumption can be saved, which is a major resource for
human life.
2.2. Mix Design and Sample Preparation
Two mix design proportions were used for the preparation of concrete based on a cement, sand,
and aggregate combination. These proportions were M-I (1:2:4) and M-II (1:1.5:3). The water–cement
ratio was kept constant at 0.60 for both the design proportions. It should be noted that only one
water sample was used at a time while preparing the concrete, and there was no intermixing among
the other water samples in any case or in any design ratio. The constituents were weighted in a
separate tray and then the materials were mixed in a concrete mixer, as per the American Society for
Testing and Materials (ASTM C192-98). The general blending time was around 5–7 min, after which
the concrete mix was then compacted, utilizing a vibrating table. The slump test was carried out to
determine its workability and to later compare the effect of the water sample on the workability of
the concrete. Furthermore, the compacting factor test was also performed to check the workability of
the prepared concrete. The specimens were demoulded after 24 h, cured in water, and then tested at
room temperature at the required time. To determine the compressive strength and tensile strength, 36
150 mm diameter × 300 mm long cylinders were prepared for each mix design (two mix design ratios
were taken, i.e., M-1 (1:2:4) and M-II (1:1.5:3), in the casting process). In addition, to determine the
flexural strength (modulus of rupture) for each mix, 36 100 mm × 100 mm × 500 mm prisms or beams
were cast. So, a total of 216 samples (72 (comp strength-cylinder) + 72 (tensile strength-cylinder) +
72 (flexural strength-beams)) were developed. All these samples were tested after 7, 14, and 28 days
of curing.
2.3. Mechanical Testing Procedure
After curing, the following tests were carried out on the concrete specimens:
•
•
•
A compressive strength test was carried out at 7, 14, 21, and 28 days according to the ASTM C39,
with a loading rate of 2.5 kN/s;
The splitting cylinder tensile test was carried out at 7, 14, 21 and 28 days to the ASTM C496-96,
with an increasing loading rate of 2 kN/s;
A three-point loaded, flexure strength test of a beam was carried out according to the ASTM
C78-94, with a loading rate of 0.2 kN/s.
Processes 2019, 7, 579
5 of 13
3. Results
Processes 2017, 5, x FOR PEER REVIEW
5 of 13
3.1. Analysis of Fresh Properties of Concrete
The slump and the compacting factor test results are given in Table 2 below. The results show
Theslump
slumpobtained
and the compacting
factor test
givenfor
inboth
Tablethe
2 below.
The resultswas
show
that
that the
from wastewater
andresults
surfaceare
water
mix proportions
a true
the
slump
obtained
from
wastewater
and
surface
water
for
both
the
mix
proportions
was
a
true
slump,
slump, while that of the tap or groundwater was a shear slump. On the other hand, the compacting
while
the tap
or groundwater
was arange,
shear slump.
On theThe
other
hand,
the
compactinginfactor
factor that
test of
results
were
in the permissible
i.e., 0.7–0.95.
values
are
represented
Tabletest
2.
results were in the permissible range, i.e., 0.7–0.95. The values are represented in Table 2.
Table 2. Properties of fresh concrete developed with different water resources.
Table 2. Properties of fresh concrete developed with different water resources.
Groundwater
Groundwater
Wastewater
Wastewater
Surface water
Surface water
Mix Ratio
Mix(1:2:4)
Ratio
M-I
M-I(1:1.5:3)
(1:2:4)
M-II
M-II
(1:1.5:3)
M-I (1:2:4)
M-I(1:1.5:3)
(1:2:4)
M-II
M-II
(1:1.5:3)
M-I (1:2:4)
M-I(1:1.5:3)
(1:2:4)
M-II
M-II (1:1.5:3)
Slump Value (mm) Compaction Factor
Slump
Value (mm)
Compaction
Factor
132.2
0.93
132.2
0.93
102.3
0.85
102.3
0.85
39
0.79
0.79
29.539
0.72
29.5
0.72
25.5
0.81
0.81
50.825.5
0.88
50.8
0.88
3.2. Analysis of Mechanical Properties of Concrete
3.2. Analysis of Mechanical Properties of Concrete
The mechanical properties of concrete consist of three major parameters, i.e., compressive
The mechanical
properties
concretestrength.
consist ofAll
three
parameters,
compressive
strength,
strength,
tensile strength,
andofflexural
themajor
properties
of thei.e.,
concrete
samples
were
tensile
strength,
and
flexural
strength.
All
the
properties
of
the
concrete
samples
were
developed
using
developed using ground, surface, and wastewater for both the design mix proportions, as shown in
ground,
and wastewater
for both
mix
as shown
intesting
Table 3.machine
These results
Table 3. surface,
These results
were obtained
at 7,the
14,design
21, and
28proportions,
days of curing
and the
used
were
obtained
at 7, 14,
is shown
in Figure
3. 21, and 28 days of curing and the testing machine used is shown in Figure 3.
(b)
(c)
(a)
(d)
Figure 3.
3. (a) Compression machine, (b) compressive strength, (c) split tensile, (d) flexural strength
test mechanism.
The results clearly show that the compressive strength of the concrete cylinders increased at 28
days for both the concrete mix designs. Moreover, the compressive strength of wastewater for both
the mix design proportions was greater than the cylinders made by surface and groundwater. The
compressive strength of wastewater at 28 days was 20.02 MPa for the mix design ratio M-I (1:2:4).
Furthermore, the compressive strength of concrete of mix proportion M-II (1:1.5:3) of wastewater at
28 days was also greater than the other two, at 21.85 MPa. Split tensile strength (MPa) was also
observed to be increasing, as it increased from 1.35 MPa to 2.10 MPa for Mix Design-I, and from 1.49
Processes 2019, 7, 579
6 of 13
The results clearly show that the compressive strength of the concrete cylinders increased at
28 days for both the concrete mix designs. Moreover, the compressive strength of wastewater for
both the mix design proportions was greater than the cylinders made by surface and groundwater.
The compressive strength of wastewater at 28 days was 20.02 MPa for the mix design ratio M-I (1:2:4).
Processes 2017, 5, x FOR PEER REVIEW
6 of 13
Furthermore,
the compressive strength of concrete of mix proportion M-II (1:1.5:3) of wastewater
at 28 days was also greater than the other two, at 21.85 MPa. Split tensile strength (MPa) was also
MPa to 2.29 MPa for Mix Design-II, when using wastewater in comparison to groundwater. Figures
observed to be increasing, as it increased from 1.35 MPa to 2.10 MPa for Mix Design-I, and from
4–8 display the graphical representation of the given data. In the graphs, M1 refers to mix design
1.49 MPa to 2.29 MPa for Mix Design-II, when using wastewater in comparison to groundwater.
ratio 1:2:4, and M2 mix design ratio 1:1.5:3.
Figures 4–8 display the graphical representation of the given data. In the graphs, M1 refers to mix
design ratio 1:2:4, and M2
mix3.design
ratio
1:1.5:3.
Table
Detailed
range
of concrete properties after testing.
Variable
Description
Minafter testing.
Q1
Med
Q3
Max
Table 3. Detailed range Mean
of concreteSD
properties
CS
Compressive Strength (MPa)
17.171
2.815
9.93
15.731 17.105 18.885 24.13
Variable
Description
Mean
Q3
Max
TS
Tensile
Strength (MPa)
1.5762 SD0.4974 Min0.43 Q1
1.2563 Med
1.5425 1.9175
3.105
FS
Flexural Strength
Strength(MPa)
(MPa)
0.6751 9.931.07 15.731
2.4425 17.105
2.8675 18.885
3.1325 24.13
5.67
CS
Compressive
17.1712.885 2.815
TS
Tensile
1.5425
1.9175
3.105
Days
CuringStrength
Days (7,(MPa)
14, 21, 28) 1.5762 - 0.4974
7.881 0.43 7 1.2563
28
FS
Flexural
2.8675
3.1325
5.67
WT
Water
TypeStrength
(1-GW, (MPa)
2-WW, 3-SW)2.885 - 0.6751 - 1.07 1 2.4425
3
Days
Curing Days (7, 14, 21, 28)
7.881
7
28
WAT
Water (L)
20
2.014
18
18
20
22
22
WT
Water Type (1-GW, 2-WW, 3-SW)
1
3
CEM
Cement
36
WAT
Water
(L) (kg)
20 32 2.0144.028 18 28
1828
2032
2236
22
SND
Sand(kg)
(kg)
56
CEM
Cement
32 55 4.0281.007 28 54
2854
3255
3656
36
AGG
Aggregate
110
112
112
SND
Sand (kg) (kg)
55 110 1.0072.01 54 108
54108
55
56
56
AGG
Aggregate
(kg)
1107.0667 2.010.4056 1086.5
108
110
112
112
Ph
Ph Value
6.5
7.3
7.4
7.4
Ph
Ph Value (NTU)
7.066740.560.4056
6.5
7.3
7.4
7.4
TUR
Turbidity
50.97 6.50.97
0.97
8.7
112
112
TUR
Turbidity (NTU)
40.56
50.97
0.97
0.97
8.7
112
112
HARD
Hardness (mg/L)
303.33
40.56
270
270
280
360
360
HARD
Hardness (mg/L)
303.33
40.56
270
270
280
360
360
N
No.
of
Samples
(36
for
each
mix)
72(CS-Cylinder)
+
72(TS-Cylinder)
+
72(FS-Beams)
=
216
N
No. of Samples (36 for each mix)
72(CS-Cylinder) + 72(TS-Cylinder) + 72(FS-Beams) = 216 No. No.
Note: SD—Standard deviation, Min—minimum, Max—maximum, Q1–Q3—quartile range, Med—
Note: SD—Standard deviation, Min—minimum, Max—maximum, Q1–Q3—quartile range, Med—median.
Samples
(3 each
Samples
for each
× 4 Curing
= 36
× 2 Types of
72median.
Samples72
= (3
Samples=for
× 3 Water
Types× ×3 4Water
CuringTypes
Conditions
= 36 × Conditions
2 Types of Mix
Design).
Mix Design).
The
wastewater, and
andsurface
surfacewater
water
Thebar
barchart
chartin
inFigure
Figure44illustrates
illustrates the
the impact of groundwater,
groundwater, wastewater,
on
the
compressive
strength
of
concrete
(mix
ratio
1:2:4)
at
a
7
to
28
days
interval.
It
can
be
seen
that
on the compressive strength of concrete (mix ratio 1:2:4)
interval. It can be seen that
the
with the
the use
use of
of wastewater
wastewaterand
andsurface
surfacewater.
water.
theoverall
overalltrend
trendof
ofcompressive
compressive strength
strength increased with
However,
surface water.
water.
However,the
theoverall
overallstrength
strengthgain
gainby
byincorporating
incorporating wastewater
wastewater was larger than with surface
Compressive Strength at Mix Ratio M-I
Compressive Strength (MPa)
25
20
15
Groundwater
10
Wastewater
Surfacewater
5
0
7 Days
14 Days
21 Days
28 Days
Curing Period
Figure
the ratio
ratio M-I
M-I (1:2:4).
(1:2:4).
Figure4.4. Cylinder
Cylinder compressive
compressive strength of concrete for the
In the following bar chart in Figure 5, the trend of compressive strength of concrete (mix ratio
1:1.5:3) is shown. It is clear from the bar chart that the wastewater added more strength to the concrete
than the surface water. Overall, the performance of wastewater and surface water was better than the
groundwater.
Processes 2019, 7, 579
7 of 13
In the following bar chart in Figure 5, the trend of compressive strength of concrete (mix ratio
1:1.5:3)
is shown. It is clear from the bar chart that the wastewater added more strength to the concrete
Processes 2017, 5, x FOR PEER REVIEW
7 of 13
than the surface water. Overall, the performance of wastewater and surface water was better than
Processes
2017, 5, x FOR PEER REVIEW
7 of 13
the
groundwater.
Compressive
Strength
(MPa)
Compressive
Strength
(MPa)
25
Compressive Strength at Mix Ratio M-II
Compressive Strength at Mix Ratio M-II
25
20
20
15
Groundwater
15
10
Wastewater
Groundwater
Surfacewater
Wastewater
10
5
Surfacewater
5
0
0
7 Days
14 Days
21 Days
28 Days
7 Days
Curing Period
14 Days
21 Days
28 Days
Curing Period
Figure 5. Cylinder compressive strength of concrete for the ratio M-II (1:1.5:3).
Figure 5. Cylinder compressive strength of concrete for the ratio M-II (1:1.5:3).
Figure 5. Cylinder compressive strength of concrete for the ratio M-II (1:1.5:3).
The behavior of tensile strength is illustrated in Figure 6, with substantial improvement in the
The
behavior
tensileat
strength
illustrated
6, with
inhad
the
tensile
strength
of of
concrete
the mixisratio
1:2:4. ItinisFigure
clear from
thesubstantial
graph that improvement
the wastewater
The behavior of tensile strength is illustrated in Figure 6, with substantial improvement in the
tensile
strength
of concrete
the
mix
ratio 1:2:4.
It is clear
from
the graph
that
theMPa
wastewater
had the
the most
significant
impactaton
the
concrete
in tension,
as it
improved
from
1.35
to 2.10 MPa
for
tensile strength of concrete at the mix ratio 1:2:4. It is clear from the graph that the wastewater had
most
significant
impact
on
the
concrete
in
tension,
as
it
improved
from
1.35
MPa
to
2.10
MPa
for
Mix
Mix Design-I and from 1.49 MPa to 2.29 MPa for Mix Design-II when using wastewater, in
the most significant impact on the concrete in tension, as it improved from 1.35 MPa to 2.10 MPa for
Design-I
and to
from
1.49 MPa to The
2.29 MPa
for trend
Mix Design-II
when
in comparison
to
comparison
groundwater.
overall
increased
for using
both wastewater,
waste and surface
water as
Mix Design-I and from 1.49 MPa to 2.29 MPa for Mix Design-II when using wastewater, in
groundwater.
The
overall
trend
increased
for
both
waste
and
surface
water
as
compared
to
groundwater.
compared to groundwater.
comparison to groundwater. The overall trend increased for both waste and surface water as
compared to groundwater.
Tensile
Strength
(MPa)
Tensile
Strength
(MPa)
2.5
Tensile Strength at Mix Ratio M-I
Tensile Strength at Mix Ratio M-I
2.5
2
2
1.5
Groundwater
1.5
1
Wastewater
Groundwater
Surfacewater
Wastewater
1
0.5
Surfacewater
0.5
0
0
7 Days
14 Days
21 Days
28 Days
7 Days
Curing Period
14 Days
21 Days
28 Days
Curing Period
Figure 6. Split tensile strength of concrete for the ratio M-I (1:2:4).
Figure 6. Split tensile strength of concrete for the ratio M-I (1:2:4).
In Figure 7, a bar chart illustrates the effect of the use of wastewater and surface water on the
tensile strength of concrete (mix ratio 1:1.5:3). Wastewater had a considerable impact on the tensile
In Figure 7, a bar chart illustrates the effect of the use of wastewater and surface water on the
strength as compared to surface water, as it improved from 1.49 MPa to 2.29 MPa using wastewater
tensile strength of concrete (mix ratio 1:1.5:3). Wastewater had a considerable impact on the tensile
in comparison to groundwater. However, the overall trend for both increased and it improved the
strength as compared to surface water, as it improved from 1.49 MPa to 2.29 MPa using wastewater
tensile strength of concrete as compared to the groundwater.
in comparison to groundwater. However, the overall trend for both increased and it improved the
Processes 2019, 7, 579
8 of 13
In Figure 7, a bar chart illustrates the effect of the use of wastewater and surface water on the
tensile strength of concrete (mix ratio 1:1.5:3). Wastewater had a considerable impact on the tensile
strength as compared to surface water, as it improved from 1.49 MPa to 2.29 MPa using wastewater in
comparison to groundwater. However, the overall trend for both increased and it improved the tensile
Processes 2017, 5, x FOR PEER REVIEW
8 of 13
Processes 2017,
5, x FOR PEER
REVIEW to the groundwater.
8 of 13
strength
of concrete
as compared
Tensile Strength
Strength at
at Mix
Mix Ratio
Ratio M-II
M-II
Tensile
Tensile
TensileStrength
Strength(MPa)
(MPa)
33
2.5
2.5
22
Groundwater
Groundwater
Wastewater
Wastewater
1.5
1.5
11
Surfacewater
Surfacewater
0.5
0.5
00
Days
77 Days
14 Days
Days
14
21 Days
Days
21
28 Days
Days
28
Curing Period
Period
Curing
Figure 7. Split tensile strength of concrete for the ratio M-II
M-II (1:1.5:3).
(1:1.5:3).
Figure 7. Split tensile strength of concrete for the ratio M-II
(1:1.5:3).
In
In Figure
Figure 8,
8, the
the gain
gain in
in the
the flexure
flexure strength
strength of
of concrete
concrete (mix
(mix ratio
ratio 1:2:4)
1:2:4) is
is shown.
shown. The
The flexure
flexure
In
Figure
8,
the
gain
in
the
flexure
strength
of
concrete
(mix
ratio
1:2:4)
is
shown.
The
flexure
strength
increased
for
both
wastewater
and
surface
water
as
compared
to
groundwater.
It
is
strength increased
increased for
for both
both wastewater
wastewater and
and surface
surface water
water as
as compared
compared to
to groundwater.
groundwater. It
It is
is clear
clear
strength
clear
that
the
overall
trend
for
flexure
strength
was
increasing,
with
a
maximum
gain
by
using
wastewater.
that
the
overall
trend
for
flexure
strength
was
increasing,
with
a
maximum
gain
by
using
wastewater.
that the overall trend for flexure strength was increasing, with a maximum gain by using wastewater.
At
At 28
28 days
days the
the trending
trending increased
increased from
from2.79
2.79MPa
MPato
to3.13
3.13MPa.
MPa.
At
28
days
the
trending
increased
from
2.79
MPa
to
3.13
MPa.
Flexure Strength
Strength at
at Mix
Mix Ratio
Ratio M-I
M-I
Flexure
Flexure
FlexureStrength
Strength(MPa)
(MPa)
3.5
3.5
33
2.5
2.5
22
1.5
1.5
Ground Water
Water
Ground
Wastewater
Wastewater
11
Surface Water
Water
Surface
0.5
0.5
00
Days
77 Days
14 Days
Days
14
21 Days
Days
21
28 Days
Days
28
Curing Period
Period
Curing
Figure 8. Flexure strength of concrete for the ratio M-I
M-I (1:2:4).
(1:2:4).
Figure 8. Flexure strength of concrete for the ratio M-I
(1:2:4).
The graph
graph below
below in
in Figure
Figure 99 shows
shows the
the increasing
increasing trend
trend in
in the
the flexure
flexure strength
strength of
of concrete
concrete
The
(1:1.5:3). The
The flexure
flexure strength
strength of
of concrete
concrete improved
improved from
from 2.89
2.89 MPa
MPa to
to 3.27
3.27 MPa
MPa and
and 3.09
3.09 MPa
MPa with
with
(1:1.5:3).
the
use
of
wastewater
and
surface
water,
with
reference
to
groundwater.
Overall,
the
strength
the use of wastewater and surface water, with reference to groundwater. Overall, the strength
increasing trend
trend of
of wastewater
wastewater was
was better
better than
than for
for surface
surface water,
water, however,
however, both
both made
made aa significant
significant
increasing
improvement
in
flexure
strength.
improvement in flexure strength.
Processes 2019, 7, 579
9 of 13
The graph below in Figure 9 shows the increasing trend in the flexure strength of concrete (1:1.5:3).
The flexure strength of concrete improved from 2.89 MPa to 3.27 MPa and 3.09 MPa with the use of
wastewater and surface water, with reference to groundwater. Overall, the strength increasing trend
of wastewater was better than for surface water, however, both made a significant improvement in
Processes 2017,
5, x FOR PEER REVIEW
9 of 13
flexure
strength.
Processes 2017, 5, x FOR PEER REVIEW
9 of 13
Flexure
Mix Ratio
RatioM-II
M-II
FlexureStrength
Strength at
at Mix
44
Flexure Strength (MPa)
Flexure Strength (MPa)
3.53.5
33
2.52.5
Groundwater
Groundwater
22
Wastewater
Wastewater
1.51.5
Surfacewater
Surfacewater
11
0.50.5
00
7 Days
7 Days
14 Days
14 Days
21 Days
21 Days
28 Days
28 Days
Curing Period
Curing Period
Figure 9.Flexural
Flexuralstrength
strength of
of concrete
concrete for
the ratio
M-II (1:1.5:3).
Figure
for
Figure 9.
9. Flexural strength
of concrete
for the
the ratio
ratio M-II
M-II (1:1.5:3).
(1:1.5:3).
3.3.3.3.
Comparative
with respect
RespecttotoMix
MixDesign
Design
Construction
ComparativeAnalysis
Analysisfor
forthe
theImpact
Impactofof Water
Water Quality with
onon
Construction
3.3.Materials
Comparative Analysis for the Impact of Water Quality with respect to Mix Design on Construction
Materials
Materials
Figure
1010
shows
strengthfor
forboth
bothconcrete
concretemix
mix
ratios
using
Figure
showsthe
theoverall
overallbehavior
behavior of
of compressive
compressive strength
ratios
using
Figure
10
shows
of compressive
strength
for
bothon
concrete
mix
ratios using
lineline
graph
analysis.
ItItthe
can
be
that
wastewater
hadthe
the
highest
impact
on
concrete
compressive
graph
analysis.
canoverall
beseen
seenbehavior
that the wastewater
had
highest
impact
concrete
compressive
line
graph
It can
be
that the wastewater
the highest impact on concrete compressive
strength
as
compared
theseen
groundwater
andsurface
surfacehad
water.
strength
asanalysis.
compared
totothe
groundwater
and
strength as compared to the groundwater and surface water.
Compressive Strength
(MPa)20.82
of Cylinders
19.67
15.49
17.42
16.43 15.49
14.81
14.31
12.15
16.43
14.81
10.11 14.31
17.13
18.66
17.28
17.13
17.28
16.31
16.31
15.41
20.82
18.69
18.69
19.15
19.15
18.31
18.31
21.85
21.85
17.01
19.52
19.52
17.01 20.02 19.22
15.90
20.02 19.22
15.90
15.41
7 days
DAYS W.R.T WATER TYPE
14 days
21 days
DAYS W.R.T WATER TYPE
28 days
Mix Design-I
Mix Design-I
Surfacewater
Surfacewater
Wastewater
Wastewater
Groundwater
Groundwater
21 days
Surfacewater
Surfacewater
Wastewater
Wastewater
14 days
Groundwater
Groundwater
7 days
Groundwater
Groundwater
10.11
Surfacewater
Surfacewater
0
19.67
Surfacewater
Surfacewater
17.42
12.15 16.44
Groundwater
Groundwater
0
16.44
18.66
Wastewater
Wastewater
25
Wastewater
Wastewater
Compressive Strength (MPa)
Compressive Strength (MPa)
Compressive Strength (MPa) of Cylinders
25
Mix Design-II
28 days
Mix Design-II
Figure
Comparative
analysis
for the
impact
of water
quality
on compressive
strength
respect
Figure
10.10.
Comparative
analysis
for the
impact
of water
quality
on compressive
strength
with with
respect
to
to
mix
design.
mix design.
Figure 10. Comparative analysis for the impact of water quality on compressive strength with respect to
Figure 11 below illustrates the effect of water type on the tensile strength of concrete at a 7 to 28
mix design.
days interval, with respect to both concrete mix ratios. The overall trend in the graph indicates that
theFigure
wastewater
andillustrates
surface water
the tensile
strength
of concrete
when
used in both
11 below
the improved
effect of water
type on
the tensile
strength
of concrete
at a 7mix
to 28
ratios,
however,
wastewater
most
significant
improvement
in tensile
strength as
days
interval,
withthe
respect
to both showed
concretethe
mix
ratios.
The overall
trend in the
graph indicates
that
compared
to
the
other
two
types.
the wastewater and surface water improved the tensile strength of concrete when used in both mix
Processes 2019, 7, 579
10 of 13
Figure 11 below illustrates the effect of water type on the tensile strength of concrete at a 7 to
28 days interval, with respect to both concrete mix ratios. The overall trend in the graph indicates
that the wastewater and surface water improved the tensile strength of concrete when used in both
mix ratios, however, the wastewater showed the most significant improvement in tensile strength as
compared
to the
other
twoREVIEW
types.
Processes 2017,
5, x FOR
PEER
10 of 13
Tensile Strength (MPa) of Cylinders
Tensile Strength (MPa) of Cylinders
1.26
7 days
1.62
14 days
1.43
1.38
1.43
1.31
1.38
1.31
1.98
1.78
1.78
21 days
DAYS W.R.T WATER TYPE
14 days
21 days
7 days
DAYS W.R.T WATER TYPE
1.49
1.72
1.46
1.49
1.35
2.10
1.46
1.35
Wastewater
Wastewater
1.31
1.68
2.29
2.10
Groundwater
Groundwater
1.36
1.87
1.62
1.72
2.29
Surfacewater
Surfacewater
1.36
1.26
1.36
1.68
Wastewater
Wastewater
1.57
1.31
Groundwater
Groundwater
1.36
Surfacewater
Surfacewater
0.00
0.86
Groundwater
Groundwater
0.00
1.64
Wastewater
Wastewater
0.94
0.86
1.57
Groundwater
Groundwater
1.64
0.94
1.98
1.87
Surfacewater
Surfacewater
3.00
Wastewater
Wastewater
3.00
Tensile
Strength
Tensile
Strength
(MPa)(MPa)
10 of 13
28 days
2.05
2.05
2.02
2.02
Surfacewater
Surfacewater
Processes 2017, 5, x FOR PEER REVIEW
Mix Design-I 28 days
Mix Design-II
Mix Design-I
Mix Design-II
Figure
Comparative
analysis
forimpact
the impact
of quality
water quality
onstrength
tensile strength
with
to
Figure
11. 11.
Comparative
analysis
for the
of water
on tensile
with respect
torespect
mix design.
mix design.
Figure 11. Comparative analysis for the impact of water quality on tensile strength with respect to mix design.
A comparison of the overall improvement in the flexure strength of concrete is illustrated in
A comparison
improvement
inflexure
the flexure
strength
of concrete
is illustrated
Figure
12 below. Itof
is the
clearoverall
from the
graph that the
strength
improved
when wastewater
and in
A comparison of the overall improvement in the flexure strength of concrete is illustrated in
Figure
12
below.
It
is
clear
from
the
graph
that
the
flexure
strength
improved
when
wastewater
and
surface water were used, as compared to groundwater.
Figure 12 below. It is clear from the graph that the flexure strength improved when wastewater and
surface water were used, as compared to groundwater.
surface water were used, as compared to groundwater.
2.83
2.75
2.84
2.69
2.89
2.91
2.75
14 days
Wastewater
Wastewater
Surfacewater
Surfacewater
Groundwater
Groundwater
2.92
2.84
2.65
3.06
2.89
3.19
3.02
3.06
3.00
2.89
2.79
3.02
3.00
2.79
3.27
3.09
3.27
3.13
3.09
3.07
3.13
3.07
Surfacewater
Surfacewater
3.02
2.91
2.84
2.65
3.19
Wastewater
Wastewater
3.10
2.89
2.76
Groundwater
Groundwater
2.76
2.69
2.92
Surfacewater
Surfacewater
2.83
Groundwater
Groundwater
2.23
3.02
Surfacewater
Surfacewater
2.30
2.23
3.10
2.84
Wastewater
Wastewater
2.30
0.00
0.00
Groundwater
Groundwater
Flexural
Strength
Flexural
Strength
(MPa)(MPa)
5.00
Wastewater
Wastewater
Flexural Strength (MPa) of Beams
Flexural Strength (MPa) of Beams
5.00
7 days
7 days
21 days
DAYS W.R.T WATER TYPE
14 days
21 days
Mix Design-I
DAYS W.R.T WATER TYPE
Mix Design-I
28 days
Mix Design-II
28 days
Mix Design-II
Figure 12. Comparative analysis for the impact of water quality on flexural strength with respect to mix design.
Figure
Comparative
analysis
forimpact
the impact
of water
on flexural
with to
respect
to
Figure
12.12.
Comparative
analysis
for the
of water
qualityquality
on flexural
strengthstrength
with respect
mix design.
mix design.
4. Limitations of the Study
4. Limitations
The focus of
of the
thisStudy
study was to test the utilization and applicability of untreated wastewater and
surface water with reference to groundwater for the development of construction materials. Efficient
The focus of this study was to test the utilization and applicability of untreated wastewater and
water resource utilization is one of the key issues around the globe. There may be a discussion on the
surface water with reference to groundwater for the development of construction materials. Efficient
utilization of such concrete in buildings, because of the environmental impact of odor and fumes, but
water resource utilization is one of the key issues around the globe. There may be a discussion on the
such concrete can be used as rigid pavement concrete, which can be a beneficial utilization of such
utilization of such concrete in buildings, because of the environmental impact of odor and fumes, but
concrete. This study is the first phase of such testing, as testing mechanical properties is considered
such concrete can be used as rigid pavement concrete, which can be a beneficial utilization of such
Processes 2019, 7, 579
11 of 13
4. Limitations of the Study
The focus of this study was to test the utilization and applicability of untreated wastewater
and surface water with reference to groundwater for the development of construction materials.
Efficient water resource utilization is one of the key issues around the globe. There may be a discussion
on the utilization of such concrete in buildings, because of the environmental impact of odor and fumes,
but such concrete can be used as rigid pavement concrete, which can be a beneficial utilization of such
concrete. This study is the first phase of such testing, as testing mechanical properties is considered a
strong basis of concrete utilization. Further testing related to its health monitoring can be conducted in
the future.
5. Conclusions
This study investigated the development of construction materials with the help of different water
resources. Water samples were collected from different resources and chemical examination, which
was performed on the groundwater, surface water, and wastewater, elaborated the quality of the water.
The information shows that all the chemical structures of the wastewater and surface water were a lot
higher than those parameters found in groundwater. The results demonstrate that the target objectives
have been achieved, such as:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Construction materials like concrete can be successfully developed with the help of wastewater
and surface water, i.e., different water quality resources;
The mechanical properties of developed concrete from different water resources were tested
and analyzed, showing a successful replacement of groundwater with wastewater for
concrete development. These properties include compressive strength, tensile strength,
and flexural strength;
The compressive strength of concrete developed using wastewater (20.02 MPa) is better than
surface water (19.22 MPa) and groundwater (15.9 MPa) with mix ratio M1, and also using
wastewater (21.85 MPa) is better than surface water (19.52 MPa) and groundwater (17.01 MPa)
with mix ratio M2;
The tensile strength of concrete developed using wastewater (2.10 MPa) is better than surface
water (2.02 MPa) and groundwater (1.35 MPa) with mix ratio M1 and also using wastewater
(2.29 MPa) is better than surface water (2.05 MPa) and groundwater (1.49 MPa) with mix ratio M2;
The flexural strength of concrete developed using wastewater (3.13 MPa) is better than surface
water (3.07 MPa) and groundwater (2.79 MPa) with mix ratio M1 and also using wastewater
(3.27 MPa) is better than surface water (3.09 MPa) and groundwater (2.89 MPa) with mix ratio M2;
The analysis showed that wastewater and surface water can be successfully utilized in the
construction industry for the formation of concrete structures, especially rigid pavement
construction, which has no issue with the environment and odor-related problems during
the applicability of such water resources;
For the utilization of concrete structures, structural properties change with a change in mix
design, and it has also been shown that the successful implementation of wastewater and surface
water as mechanical properties has improved even with a change in mix design parameters.
Concrete Mix-M-I is usually used for normal single-story structures, whereas Mix Design-M-II is
used as a high-strength concrete for multistory buildings and heavy loading structures.
The water samples used in the research process are suitable for the environment, except in the case
of wastewater, as it contains more dissolved and suspended solids than that of other two, and therefore
it is unsuitable for the environment. The following conclusions are justified by taking into consideration
ground, surface, and wastewater on the mechanical properties of concrete. The chemical compositions
of wastewater and surface water are different from ground water. So, the suitability of wastewater was
established for small construction to large construction projects, like rigid pavement road construction
Processes 2019, 7, 579
12 of 13
and water-related structures of barrages and dams. It might be concluded from this study that the
utilization of wastewater and ground water effectively affects the mechanical properties of concrete.
Moreover, the research should be extended to check the conduct of wastewater and surface water on
the environmental impact of concrete.
6. Future Recommendations
After the successful compilation of concrete with the help of three different water sources, i.e.,
groundwater, wastewater, and surface water, it was found that wastewater and surface water can
work as replacements for potable/groundwater, even after changing the mix design parameters.
For further investigation, research can be directed towards impact analysis of changes in the chemical
parameters of water samples on the development of concrete. This can be conducted by changing
water resources (i.e., wastewater resources of different chemical properties/sources or from different
wastewater treatment plants/sewage plants) and the development of different types of concrete (e.g.,
normal concrete, high-strength concrete, self-compacted concrete).
Author Contributions: Conceptualization, H.F., S.A.R.S. and R.M.F.S.; Data curation, I.-U.-H.; Formal analysis,
H.F., M.S.M., S.A.R.S., M.A. and I.-U.-H.; Investigation, N.M.K. and M.A.; Methodology, S.A.R.S. and R.M.F.S.;
Project administration, H.A.; Resources, H.F., N.M.K. and I.-U.-H.; Software, S.A.R.S.; Supervision, R.M.F.S., M.A.
and H.A.; Validation, N.M.K.; Writing—original draft, H.F., M.S.M. and S.A.R.S.; Writing—review & editing,
N.M.K., R.M.F.S., M.A. and M.W.
Funding: This research received no external funding.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.
References
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
Tay, J.; Yip, W. Use of Reclaimed Wastewater for Concrete Mixing. J. Environ. Eng. 1987, 113, 1156–1161.
[CrossRef]
Al-Jabri, S.K.; Taha, R.A.; Al-Saidy, A.H. Effects of Using Non-Fresh Water on the Mechanical Properties
of Cement Mortars and Concrete. In Proceedings of the 3rd International fib Congress and Exhibition,
Incorporating the PCI Annual Convention and Bridge Conference, Washington, DC, USA, 25 May 2010.
Mohanapriya, R.; Mohanasundaram, C.; Sankar, S. Comparative Study on Effect of Concrete Made with
Textile Effluent and Ordinary Water. South Asian J. Appl. Sci. 2015, 1, 28–31.
Ramkar, A.; Ansari, U. Effect of treated waste water on strength of concrete. J. Mech. Civ. Eng. 2016, 13,
41–45.
Shahidan, S.; Senin, M.S.; Kadir, K.A.A.; Yee, L.H.; Ali, N. Properties of Concrete Mixes with Carwash
Wastewater. In Proceedings of the MATEC Web of Conferences, Les Ulis Cedex A, France, 12 December 2016.
Gadzama, E.; Ekele, O.J.; Anametemfiok, V.E.; Abubakar, A.U. Effects of sugar factory wastewater as mixing
water on the properties of normal strength concrete. Int. J. Sci. Environ. Technol. 2015, 4, 813–825.
Wegian, F.M. Effect of seawater for mixing and curing on structural concrete. IES J. Part A Civ. Struct. Eng.
2010, 3, 235–243. [CrossRef]
Alaejos, P.; Bermúdez, M.A. Influence of seawater curing in standard and high-strength submerged concrete.
J. Mater. Civ. Eng. 2010, 23, 915–920. [CrossRef]
Silva, M.; Naik, T.R. Sustainable use of resources—Recycling of sewage treatment plant water in concrete.
In Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Sustainable Construction Materials and
Technologies, Ancona, Italy, 28 June 2010.
Meena, K.; Luhar, S. Effect of wastewater on properties of concrete. J. Build. Eng. 2019, 21, 106–112. [CrossRef]
Obi, L.E. Empirical Investigation of the Effects of Water Quality on Concrete Compressive Strength. Int. J.
Constr. Res. Civ. Eng. 2016, 2, 30–35.
Kucche, K.; Jamkar, S.; Sadgir, P. Quality of water for making concrete: A review of literature. Int. J. Sci.
Res. Publ 2015, 5, 1–10.
Aral, M.M.; Maslia, M.L.; Ulirsch, G.V.; Reyes, J.J. Estimating Exposure to Volatile Organic Compounds from
Municipal Water-Supply Systems: Use of a Better Computational Model. Arch. Environ. Health Int. J. 1996,
51, 300–309. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Processes 2019, 7, 579
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
13 of 13
Guan, J.; Aral, M.M.; Maslia, M.L.; Grayman, W.M. Optimization Model and Algorithms for Design of Water
Sensor Placement in Water Distribution Systems. In Proceedings of the Eighth Annual Water Distribution
Systems Analysis Symposium (WDSA), Cincinnati, OH, USA, 27–30 August 2006.
DeDe, O.T.; Telci, I.T.; Aral, M.M. The Use of Water Quality Index Models for the Evaluation of Surface Water
Quality: A Case Study for Kirmir Basin, Ankara, Turkey. Water Qual. Expo. Health 2013, 5, 41–56.
Telci, I.T.; Aral, M.M. Contaminant Source Location Identification in River Networks Using Water Quality
Monitoring Systems for Exposure Analysis. Water Qual. Expo. Health 2011, 2, 205–218. [CrossRef]
Aral, M.M.; Taylor, S.W. Groundwater Quantity and Quality Management; American Society of Civil Engineers:
Reston, VA, USA, 2011.
Telci, I.T.; Nam, K.; Guan, J.; Aral, M.M. Optimal water quality monitoring network design for river systems.
J. Environ. Manag. 2009, 90, 2987–2998. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
WHO. Guidelines for Drinking Water Quality Criteria, 4th ed.; World Health Organization: Geneva, Switzerland, 2011.
EPA. National Standards for Drinking Water Quality; Reported by Pakistan Council of Research and Water
Resources; Environmental Protection Agency, Ministry of Environment, Government of Pakistan: Islamabad,
Pakistan, 2018.
© 2019 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access
article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution
(CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).