An investigative comparison of purging and non-purging groundwater sampling methods in Karoo aquifer monitoring wells

•Purging and non-purging groundwater sampling methods were compared.•Inorganic chemistry parameters and saturation indices were assessed.•Analysis of variance was used to compare the two methods.•No statistical significant differences were found between the two data sets. An investigation was conducted to statistically compare the influence of non-purging and purging groundwater sampling methods on analysed inorganic chemistry parameters and calculated saturation indices. Groundwater samples were collected from 15 monitoring wells drilled in Karoo aquifers before and after purging for the comparative study. For the non-purging method, samples were collected from groundwater flow zones located in the wells using electrical conductivity (EC) profiling. The two data sets of non-purged and purged groundwater samples were analysed for inorganic chemistry parameters at the Institute of Groundwater Studies (IGS) laboratory of the Free University in South Africa. Saturation indices for mineral phases that were found in the data base of PHREEQC hydrogeochemical model were calculated for each data set. Four one-way ANOVA tests were conducted using Microsoft excel 2007 to investigate if there is any statistically significant difference between: (1) all inorganic chemistry parameters measured in the non-purged and purged groundwater samples per each specific well, (2) all mineral saturation indices calculated for the non-purged and purged groundwater samples per each specific well, (3) individual inorganic chemistry parameters measured in the non-purged and purged groundwater samples across all wells and (4) Individual mineral saturation indices calculated for non-purged and purged groundwater samples across all wells. For all the ANOVA tests conducted, the calculated alpha values (p) are greater than 0.05 (significance level) and test statistic (F) is less than the critical value (Fcrit) (F