The traditional graphical approach for drawing iso-concentration curves to analyze flocculent settling data and design sedimentation basins poses difficulties for computer-based design methods. Thus, researchers have developed empirical approaches to analyze settling data. In this study, the ability of five empirical approaches to fit flocculent settling test data is compared. Particular emphasis is given to compare rule-based SETTLE and rule-based nonlinear programming (NLP) techniques as a viable alternative to the modeling methods of Berthouex and Stevens (1982), San (1989), and Ozer (1994). Published flocculent settling data are used to test the suitability of these empirical approaches. The primary objective, however, is to determine if the results of a NLP optimization technique are more reliable than those of other approaches. For this, mathematical curve fitting is conducted and the modeled concentration data are graphically compared to the observed data. The design results in terms of average solid removal efficiency as a function of detention times are also compared. Finally, the sum of squared errors values from these approaches are compared. The results indicate a strong correlation between observed and NLP modeled concentration data. The SETTLE and NLP approaches tend to be more conservative at lower retention times and less conservative at longer retention times. The SETTLE approach appears to be the most conservative. In terms of sum of squared errors values, NLP appears to be rank number one (i.e., best model) for eight data sets and number two for six data sets among 15 data sets. Therefore, NLP is recommended for analyzing flocculent settling data as a logical extension of other approaches. The NLP approach is further recommended as it is an optimization technique and uses conventional mathematical algorithms that can be solved using widely available software such as EXCEL and LINGO.