Sujanuha Yogeswaran

1003446149
THE UNIVERSITY of TORONTO at SCARBOROUGH November 6th, 2020
Department of Physical and Environmental Sciences

EESB02: PRINCIPLES OF GEOMORPHOLOGY

Assignment 4 Water Chemistry

To be completed by: November 27th, Friday
Remember to write your name and students number.

Suspended and dissolved load determination in Highland Creek

Objectives
This assignment is to determine the suspended and dissolved loads of Highland Creek,
specifically the concentrations of calcium and magnesium ions (derived from the chemical
weathering of dolomite), being discharged through the channel cross-section on a specific day.
From this tutorial, students will learn the basic concepts of different loads transported in river
systems and how to determine their concentrations using laboratory methods. Furthermore, this
knowledge can then be used to determine the present rates of change in geomorphology
(particularly denudation rates) within the basin.

Part I: River water sample suspended and dissolved load determination

The fluvial sediment transportation system primarily includes three components including
bedload, suspended load and dissolved load. Bedload describes the particles/sediments in a
flowing fluid (water) that are transported along the bed. Suspended load typically refers to the
transported sediment that was uplifted by the stream flow in the process of sediment
transportation. Suspended load usually comprised of smaller particles and debris such as clay, silt
and fine sands. Dissolved load is typically much smaller than suspended load and mainly consist
of ions in solution. Dissolved load contributes a marked portion of the total transported materials
and plays a critical role in controlling the chemistry and biology in the stream system.
Suppose we sampled some water from Highland Creek again at another time using a USDH
48 Suspended Sediment Sampler as we did in Assignment 3. Measuring the concentration of
suspended and dissolved load can be achieved using filtration and evaporation methods. Lab
procedures are as below:
To determine suspended load using filtration method
 Assemble a Buchner funnel and filter apparatus; Record the initial weight of all the filter
paper (dry) used in this experiment. The initial weight of the filter paper used for water
samples is recorded as M_sample 1
 The filter paper is placed in the funnel. Connect the filter apparatus with vacuum

1
 Sujanuha Yogeswaran
1003446149
 Pour the sample retained from the USDH 48 sampler into funnel and apply suction to
increase the rate of filtration; Avoid too much suction as this will rupture the filter
 Record the volume of water passing the filter (using a graduated cylinder) as V_sample;
Be as careful and as accurate as you can here. Filtered water will be retained and later
used in determining ion chemistry in water sample
 Carefully remove the filter paper with the sediment on it and place it in a beaker for over-
drying
 Place the beaker with sample filter paper into the oven and dry it at 40°C
 When the filter papers are dry completely, re-weigh and record the weight of the dry filter
paper plus sediment. Record the weight as M_sample 2
 The concentration of total suspended load = (M_sample 2 - M_sample 1) / V_sample

The filtered water sample will be used to determine total dissolved load using
evaporation method
 Weigh a clean beaker (~500ml volume) and record its weight as M_beaker 1
 Measure a specific amount of filtered water (recorded as V_dis), and pour it into the
weighed beaker
 Place the beaker with water into oven and dry it at 80°C or boil the water in beaker until
it is dry
 When water is completely evaporated, weigh the beaker and record the weight again as
M_beaker 2
 The concentration of total dissolved load = (M_beaker 2 - M_beaker 1) / V_dis

Please watch the videos demonstrating how to measure the suspended solids and dissolved
materials in water samples. Please watch the videos carefully because some questions are related
to the content in the videos. Video link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?
v=DDZmXXft4qI&list=PLc1jTqmjZkhpbkd8qVqzdouLmfmfWPQyd&index=83&t=0s
Questions:
1. In the video, if we observed values (on the balance) 0.1216g and 0.1223g at the time of
1°20' (1 min 20 seconds) and 5°22' of the video (please do not use the values seen in the
video). And the volume of sample water poured into the funnel was measured as 213 ml
(instead of 1 L in the video). Please calculate the mass of suspended solids that remained
on the filter paper.

¿ Mass of beaker 2−Mass of beaker 1

¿ 0.1223 g−0.1216 g
¿ 0.0007 g

2
 Sujanuha Yogeswaran
1003446149

2. Please calculate the total suspended load based on the equation provided above. Unit
should be ppm or mg/L.
Mass of suspened soil
¿
volume of sample water
0.0007 g 1000 mg 1000 ml
¿ × ×
213 ml 1g 1L
mg
¿ 3.29 ∨3.29 ppm
L

3. In the video, if we obtained values 33.0632g and 33.2712g (not measured but mentioned
in video) at the time of 6°26' and 8°02' in the video. We poured the same volume of
sample water into the beaker as the experiment in the video did. Please calculate the total
dissolved load based on the equation provided in our tutorial.
Sample volume = 200 ml
mass of beaker 2−mass of beaker 1
¿
volume of beaker
33.2712 g−33.0632 g
¿
200 ml
g 1000 mg 1000 ml
¿ 0.00104 × ×
ml 1g 1L
mg
¿ 1040 ∨1 040 ppm
L

Part II: Water hardness determination using titration with E.D.T.A.

This session focuses on the determination of Ca2+ and Mg2+ ion concentrations in water
samples. Please read the laboratory procedure on titration with E.D.T.A. carefully. Water sample
filtered from abovementioned filtration experiment will be used for titration in this session.
Laboratory chemicals required:
 E.D.T.A. - a 0.025 molar solution of: Disodium salt of ethylene-diamine tetra-acetic acid
dihydrate
 Calcon Carboxylic solution - an Indicator Solution
 Erio-T - an Indicator Solution
 Buffer Solutions: pH 12 Potassium Hydroxide; pH 10 Ammonium Chloride

3
 Sujanuha Yogeswaran
1003446149
Laboratory steps for measuring Ca2+
 Assemble all equipment as demonstrated and add E.D.T.A. solution to the burette
 Record the meniscus level of the E.D.T.A. in the burette, recorded as Va_1
 Pipette 100 ml of the river water sample into the conical flask
 Add approximately 2-3 ml of the pH 12 Buffer to the sample
 Add a few drops of the Calcon Carboxylic indicator; the solution will assume a reddish-
purple colour
 Add E.D.T.A. slowly from the burette to the sample in the flask by opening the stop cock
at the base of the burette. If possible gently shake the flask as this is happening. Continue
the addition of E.D.T.A. drop by drop until the solution changes colour from reddish-
purple to mauve. Stop addition of E.D.T.A. immediately when the colour change is
observed. Again, shake the flask to ensure the end point has been reached
 Read the E.D.T.A. meniscus level: Record meniscus level as Va_2. The CaCO3 content
can then be determined by a simple equation based on chemical mass balances:
Va = Va_2 – Va_1 (unit in ml)
CaCO3 = 12.5 Va (unit in ppm)
 This gives the concentration of CaCO3 in parts per million (ppm) or milligrams per litre

Laboratory steps for measuring Ca2+ and Mg2+

 Pipette 100 ml of the sample of river water into a clean conical flask
 Add E.D.T.A. solution to the burette and record the meniscus level of the E.D.T.A. in the
burette as Vb_1
 Add a few drops of the pH 10 Buffer to the sample and then add a few drops of the
Eriochrome black (Erio-T) indicator; the solution will assume a red colour
 Add E.D.T.A. very slowly from the burette to the sample in the flask. Continue the
addition of E.D.T.A. drop by drop until the solution changes colour from red to blue. Stop
addition of E.D.T.A. immediately after the colour change is observed. Again, shake the
flask to ensure the end point has been reached
 Read E.D.T.A. meniscus: Record the meniscus level of the E.D.T.A. in the burette V2_b
 The total hardness (CaCO3 + MgCO3) and the MgCO3 content can then be determined by
simple equations using chemical mass balances:
Vb = Vb_2 – Vb_1 (unit in ml)
Total hardness = 12.5 Vb (unit in ppm)
MgCO3 content = 10.55 (Vb – Va) (unit in ppm)

A video demonstrating the titration process may help you better understand the whole
procedure. Watch the video carefully and answer the questions down below. Please note that the
chemicals and volume of sample used in video may be slightly different from what we used. As

4
 Sujanuha Yogeswaran
1003446149
such, when doing the calculation, please refer to the equation provided in this tutorial instead of
those in the videos. Video link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?
v=J979Hc_oq8M&list=PLc1jTqmjZkhpbkd8qVqzdouLmfmfWPQyd&index=82&t=378s

Questions:
4. In the video, assume that at the time of 4°46' and 5°18', the values on the burrette was 2.4
ml and 18.6 ml; while at 6°48' and 7°02', the values on the burrette was 3.6 ml and 15.8
ml respectively. Are these values related to Va (i.e. Va_1, Va_2) or Vb (i.e. Vb_1, Vb_2)
in the calculation provided above in this tutorial? Please indicate which values are related
to the calculation of Va (i.e. Va_1, Va_2) and which are related to Vb (i.e. Vb_1, Vb_2).
The burette containing 2.4 ml and 18.6 ml used pH of 10 buffer and Erio-T indicator meant that
measuring Ca2+ and Mg 2+. The values are related to Vb (Vb_2-Vb_1). Vb_2: 18.6 ml and Vb_1:
2.4 ml. The second reading of 2.3 ml and 15.8 ml used pH of 12 buffer and Carbon Carboxylic
indicator for measuring Ca2+. These values are related to Va (Va_2-Va_1) calculation. Va_2: 15.8
ml and Va_1: 3.6 ml

5. Please calculate Va and Vb values using the values provided in Q4 and provide
calculation process.
Va=Va 2−Va1

¿ 15.8 ml−3.6 ml
¿ 12.2ml
Vb=V b2 −V b 1

¿ 18.6 ml−2.4 ml
¿ 16.2ml

5
 Sujanuha Yogeswaran
1003446149
6. Based on the Va and Vb values you obtained, calculate the CaCO3 and MgCO3 and total
hardness according to the equation provided in our tutorial.

Va = 12.2 ml Vb = 16.2 ml
CaCO3:
CaC O3=12.5 ×Va

¿ 12.5× 12.2 ml

¿ 152.5 ppm

Mg C O3=10.55 × (Vb−Va )

¿ 10.55× ( 16.2 ml−12.2 ml )

¿ 42.2 ppm

Total Hardness=12.5 ×Vb

¿ 12.5× 16.2
¿ 202.5 ppm

7. Based on the Guidelines for Canadian Drinking Water Quality, the degree of hardness of
drinking water in Canada has been classified as showed in Table 1. Question: According
to the calculated CaCO3 of the river water sample, determine the degree of hardness for
this river water sample.
Table 1. The degree of hardness of drinking water in Canada

CaCO3 concentration Water hardness

(ppm or mg/L) degree
0 - 60 Soft
60 - 120 Medium hard
120-180 Hard
180 or above Very hard

The total degree of CaCO3 is 152.5 ppm, based on guidelines for Canadian drinking water
quality, the water hardness degree is determined to be hard.
6
 Sujanuha Yogeswaran
1003446149

8. Which ion, calcium or magnesium, is dominant in the dissolved load of Highland Creek?
Calcium ion concentration in highland creek was calculated to be 152.5 ppm whereas
Magnesium ions were 42.2 ppm. According to the data provided, the calcium ion is 3X higher
than Magnesium ions and therefore is the most dominant.

9. What is the measured difference between the total dissolved load and the load of calcium
and magnesium carbonate (total hardness value)?
Total dissolved load = 1040 ppm,
Total hardness value = 202.5 ppm
¿ 1040 ppm−202.5 ppm
¿ 837.5 ppm

10. Suppose that the bedload concentration has been known as 0.0002 g/L, please compare
the relative proportions of bedload, suspended load and dissolved load. What is the most
important mode of transport in Highland Creek? Make sure your units are compatible.
g 1000 mg
0.000 2 ×
L 1g
mg
¿ 0.2 ∨0.2 ppm
L

Suspended load: 3.29 ppm

Dissolved load: 1040 ppm
When comparing bedload concentration with suspended and dissolved; dissolved had the most
impact on bedload concentration than suspended load. Therefore, Dissolved load is the most
important mode of transport in Highland Creek.

Part III: Ion chemistry and source determination

Dissolved load in river water may be an important contribution to the total loads.
Characterization of the ion composition in river water may provide critical information i.e. water
chemistry and the potential sources of the dissolved materials. For example, comparing the ion
composition in river water sample and that of the potential sources, we may be able to pinpoint
the most likely source of the ions in river water. Suppose that there are several locations (L1, L2,

7
 Sujanuha Yogeswaran
1003446149
L3 and L4) that may be the potential sources of the dissolved load for the river water we sampled
in 2020 in highland creek. Ion characterization analysis indicated that the concentrations of
major ions in the 2020 sample water and in the surface runoff samples from L1, L2, L3 and L4
are listed in Table 2. Please note that the Ca2+ and Mg2+ concentrations have been modified and
are different from the calculated results from the above questions in Part II.
Table 2. Ion composition of water samples from different sites.

Ions Concentration (ppm)

2020 water sample L1 L2 L3 L4
2+
Ca 83.99 173 134 92.65 100.47
Cl- 142.79 180 220.46 165.38 132.87
Mg2+ 14.22 35.6 27.98 10.23 38.1
NO3- 16.6 0.15 10.34 17.5 13.2
K+ 11.75 49 42.61 39.76 18.5
Na+ 101.78 124 89.45 77.59 113.29
SO42- 52.59 13 15.6 34.62 22.4

Questions:
11. Please calculate the percentage of specific groups of ions (i.e. (Ca2+ + Mg2+) %, (Na+ +
K+) %, (Cl- + NO3- + SO42-) %) over the total amount of detected ion concentrations. (For
example, the (Ca2+ + Mg2+) % of L1 sample = ((173 ppm +35.6 ppm)/ (173 ppm + 180
ppm + 35.6 ppm +0.15 ppm +49 ppm +124 ppm +13 ppm)) *100. Then write down the
percentage values into table 3 for Highland Creek 2020 sample water, L1, L2, L3 and L4.
Calculation processes are also required.
Table 3. Percentage of specific groups of ions of water samples at different sites and sampling time.

(%) 2020 water sample L1 L2 L3 L4

2+ 2+
(Ca + Mg ) % 23% 36% 30% 24% 32%
+ +
(Na + K ) % 27% 30% 24% 27% 30%
- - 2-
(Cl + NO3 + SO ) % 4 50% 34% 46% 50% 38%

Total amount of detected ionconcentration∈2020 sample :

83.99+14.22
2+¿= × 100 %
83.99+142.79+14.22+16.6+11.75 +101.78+52.59
2+¿+ M g ¿
C a¿
¿ 23 %

8
 Sujanuha Yogeswaran
1003446149
101.78+11.75
+¿= × 100 %
83.99+ 142.79+ 14.22+16.6+ 11.75+101.78+52.59
+¿+ K ¿
N a¿
¿ 27 %
142.79+16.6+ 52.59
2−¿= ×100 %
83.99+142.79+14.22+16.6+11.75+101.78+52.59
−¿+ S O4¿
−¿+ N O3¿
C l¿
¿ 50 %

Total amount of detected ion concentration ∈ L1 :

173+ 35.6
2+¿= × 100 %
173+180+35.6+ 0.15+49+124 +13
2+¿+ M g ¿
C a¿
¿ 36 %
124 +49
+¿= × 100 %
173+180+ 35.6+0.15+ 49+ 124+13
+¿+ K ¿
N a¿
¿30%
180+ 0.15+13
2−¿= ×100 %
173+ 180+35.6+0.15+ 49+124+13
¿
−¿+ S O4
−¿+ N O3¿
C l¿
¿ 34 %

Total amount of detected ionconcentration∈ L2 :

134 +27.98
2+¿= ×100 %
134+ 220.46+27.98+10.34+ 42.61+89.45+15.6
2+¿+ M g¿
C a¿

9
 Sujanuha Yogeswaran
1003446149
¿ 30 %
89.45+42.61
+¿= ×100 %
134 +220.46+27.98+10.34+ 42.61+89.45+15.6
+¿+ K ¿
N a¿
¿ 24 %
220.46+10.34 +15.6
2−¿= ppm
134+220.46+27.98+10.34 +42.61+89.45+15.6
−¿+ S O4¿
−¿+ N O3¿
C l¿
¿ 46 %

Total amount of detected ionconcentration∈ L3 :

92.65+10.23
2+¿= ×100 %
92.65+165.38+ 10.23+ 17.5+ 39.76+77.59+34.62
2+¿+ M g¿
C a¿
¿ 24 %
77.59+39.76
+¿= × 100 %
92.65+ 165.38+10.23+17.5+39.76+77.59+34.62
¿
+¿+ K
¿
Na
¿ 27 %
165.38+17.5+34.62
2−¿= × 100 %
92.65+165.38+10.23+17.5+39.76+77.59+34.62
−¿+ S O 4¿
−¿+ N O 3¿
C l¿
¿ 50 %

Total amount of detected ionconcentration∈ L 4 :

100.47+ 38.1
2+¿= ×100 %
1 00.47+132.87+38.1+13. 2+18.5+113.29+22.4
2+¿+ M g ¿
C a¿

10
 Sujanuha Yogeswaran
1003446149
¿ 3 2%
113.29+ 18.5
+¿= ×100 %
100.47+ 132.87+38.1+ 13.2+ 18.5+ 113.29+22.4
+¿+ K ¿
N a¿
¿ 30 %
132.87+13.2+22.4
2−¿= × 100 %
100.47+132.87+38.1+18.5+113.29+22.4
−¿+ S O 4¿
−¿+ N O 3¿
C l¿
¿ 38 %

12. To compare the ion composition in water samples, we can plot the percentage values of
specific groups of ions into a ternary plot, and compare the distance of sample dot to L1,
L2, L3 and L4. The closest distance indicates that the location may be the most likely
source for the dissolved materials in sample water. You can use appropriate software to
plot the data into a ternary plot (you may need to self-learn how to do it and some
software may require payment). Or you can also print out the ternary plot grid provided
below, plot your data on it (You may need to learn how ternary plot works first).
Remember to include axis titles, units and labels (indicating which dot is which sample).
Please plot (Ca2+ + Mg2+) % on the left side axis of the ternary plot, (Na+ + K+) % on the
right side axis, (Cl- + NO3- + SO42-) % on the bottom axis. Show your results on the
ternary plot. Based on the ternary plot results, which location (among L1, L2, L3 and L4)
is the most likely source for the dissolved materials in 2020 water sample?

** for the graph below and the next graph, the software I used gave me a midpoint as well. This
is the circle point which is bigger than the four labelled points**

Percentage of Ion present in water samples over time in 2020

11

Cl- & NO3- & SO42- (%) Na+ & K+ (%)

2+ 2+
Ca & Mg (%)
 Sujanuha Yogeswaran
1003446149

Water sample 2020:

Therefore, the most likely dissolved materials in 2020 water sample is near L3 location. While
L2 is also a possible source of dissolved matter L3 was closer than L2.
13. If we also obtained the ion chemistry data for highland creek water in 1955, and results
are shown in Table 4. Please calculate the percentage of specific groups of ions (write
down results in Table 3 or create another table) and plot (superimpose) them on the
ternary plot as you did for question 1 and 2. Assuming that surface runoff ion chemistry
at L1, L2, L3 and L4 did not change over the past century, compare the ion composition
of water sample in 1955 with L1, L2, L3 and L4. Which location may be the most likely
source for the dissolved materials in water sampled in 1955?
Table 4. Ion composition of Highland creak water sample from 1955

Ions 1955 water sample (ppm)

2+
Ca 165.4

12
 Sujanuha Yogeswaran
1003446149
Cl- 153.8
Mg2+ 52.8
NO3- 21.3
K+ 35.2
Na+ 129
SO42- 19.23

(%) 1955 water sample L0

2+ 2+
(Ca + Mg ) % 36%
+ +
(Na + K ) % 30%
- - 2-
(Cl + NO3 + SO ) % 4 34%

165.4+52.8
2+¿= × 100 %
165.4+ 153.8+ 52.8+21.3+35.2+129+19.23
2+¿+ M g¿
C a¿
¿ 24 %
129+35.2
+¿= × 100 %
165.4 +153.8+52.8+21.3+35.2+129+19.23
+¿+ K ¿
N a¿
¿ 27 %
153.8+21.3+19.23
2−¿= ×100 %
165.4+153.8+52.8+21.3+35.2+129+19.23
¿
−¿+ S O 4
−¿+ N O3¿
C l¿
¿ 50 %

Percentage of Ion present in water samples over time in 1955

13
 Sujanuha Yogeswaran
1003446149

Ca2+ & Mg2+ (%)

Na+ & K+ (%)

Cl- & NO3- & SO42- (%)

= 1955 water sample

The main source for dissolved matter was site L4. With L1 being the 2nd most sire for
dissolved matter.

14. Did the source location for highland creek water change when comparing data from 1955
and 2020? If so, please explain the potential reason(s). You may look up some
information online or in textbook and provide your own understanding. Any plausible
and reasonable explanations will be considered.

The source location for water change was significantly different between the years 1955 and
2020. Most dissolved material from 1955 came from site 4, and over time in 2020, the location
from where the dissolved material came from; shifted to site 3. Some of the possible ways this
change has occurred could be due to sediment deposited on the side shores as deposition. Other
cause resulting in dissolved materials could be erosion that occurs when water drops /flow from

14
 Sujanuha Yogeswaran
1003446149
high elevation within the creek. Higher slope results in faster erosion, which then impact the rate
of dissolved sediments.

15