Research Progress on Corn Starch Wastewater
Treatment Process
ZHANG Chunyang1, ZHANG Congju1, LIU Jianguang2, HAN Lichao2
1. School of Thermal Energy Engineering; Shandong Jianzhu University; Jinan 250101 China
2. School of Municipal and Environmental Engineering, Shandong Jianzhu University, Jinan, 250101,China;
Abstract: The reclamation approaches and treatment
technology process of corn starch wastewater were re-
viewed. contamination Characteristic of corn starch
wastewater were concentration high and biodegradable,
and the reclamation potential was huge. Treatment tech-
nologies included biological treatment, physical chemistry
treatment, biological pond and photosynthetic bacteria
process. The optimized combine treatment process of re-
source reclamation from corn starch wastewater and treat-
ment technology was recommended.
Keywords: anaerobic, wastewater treatment, Corn Starch
Wastewater, reclamation
1 Introduction
Starch is a kind of important industrial raw materials and
widely used in the food, chemistry, textile, pharmaceutical
industry, etc. In the production and processing process of
starch, a large amount of high concentrated organic
wastewater is discharged, which mainly contains organic
matters such as starch, fiber, protein, etc. Once these or-
ganic matters are discharged into the water, it will lead to
severe water pollution and bring repercussion to the sur-
vival environment of human beings. Therefore, starch
wastewater should be processed to meet the standard be-
fore discharging. Further, the high concentration of organic
matter in the water has revealed significant resource poten-
tial.
2 Quality of the corn starch wastewater
The wastewater generated by the production of corn starch
can be divided into two parts, namely the pickling liquid
and process water. The former contains high content of
organic matters, mostly protein, but little water; and the
latter is generated by the whole production process of
broking corn, removing embryo and drying starch and
___________________________________
978-1-4244-9577-1/11/$26.00 ©2011 IEEE

Authorized licensed use limited to: Queensland University of Technology. Downloaded on August 15,2020 at 04:37:27 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
contains a lot of water which is about 4-5 times of the for-
mer. The pickling liquid is high concentrated organic
wastewater with the characteristic of four high and one low,
namely high CODCr (8,000 ~ 15000mg/L), high suspended
solids (SS) (1000 ~ 3000mg/L), high total nitrogen value
(240 ~ 540mg/L), high concentration of phosphate (in P
plan, about 15 ~ 130mg/L), and low pH (4.2 -5). The proc-
ess water is medium concentrated organic wastewater with
CODCr value in 2000 ~ 3500mg/L, not high ammonia ni-
trogen and phosphate concentration, respectively 20mg/L
and more than 14 ~ 32mg/L.
From the analysis of the above data, it can be concluded
that: (1) Corn starch wastewater is rich in carbohydrates
and nitrogen, phosphorus nutrients, belonging to better
biochemical high concentrated organic wastewater, which
is suitable for high concentration organic wastewater
treatment by biochemical process. (2) Wastewater sus-
pended solids and the colloid protein content is relatively
high, which will produce adverse impact to the develop-
ment of the anaerobic activated sludge system. (3) Corn
immersion process will produce a small number SO32 -. In
anaerobic treatment process, these sulfur-containing com-
pounds are deoxidized to hydrogen sulphide by microor-
ganisms, which is likely to produce certain inhibition on
the anaerobic system.
3 Corn starch wastewater treatment technology situa-
tion
3.1 Biological treatment method
Biological treatment method is to use the effect of the mi-
crobial metabolism, which degrades and converts the dis-
solution and colloid organic pollutants into harmless mate-
rial. The method of purifying wastewater can generally be
divided into anaerobic biological treatment and aerobic
biological treatment. Due to the characteristics of high or-
ganic matter in starch wastewater and difficulty in the
 
process, single biological treatment method is rarely used
and is usually combined to other kinds of biological treat-
ments. By this way, it can make its advantages and disad-
vantages to supplement each other and improve the effi-
ciency.
3.1.1 Anaerobic-aerobic combination
Anaerobic biological treatment can decompose a large
amount of high concentration organic compounds and
produce methane, while aerobic biological treatment is
used as the follow-up process to further remove the resid-
ual organic matters. The combination of these two methods
has a higher efficiency thereby applying in the practical
production process as a whole subject.
Wang Rongmin etc used the three-phase anaerobic-aerobic
one-piece baffle plate bioreactor and added inorganic
polymer abandoned packing rubber as the adherent grow-
ing packing for the aerobic microbes. According to the
result, in temperature between 25 to 35 ć, pH 5.0 ~ 850
and the three-phase anaerobic-aerobic one-piece baffle
plate bioreactor effluent 200mg/L COD concentration be-
low, COD total removal rate topped 98.7%;Effluent am-
monia nitrogen in 10mg/L or so, ammonia nitrogen re-
moval topped 82.3%, which makes the effluent water
standard.
Yang Kaiming and Yang Xiaolin etc introduced a UBF -
CASS combination process to handle starch wastewater in
the northwestern starch company. CODCr tanking water is
reduced by 12000mg/L to 125mg/L, NH3 - N is reduced
by the original 160mg/L to 20mg/L, BOD5 and SS re-
moval rates reached 99.4% and 87% respectively, which
makes the effluent water to achieve the secondary standard.
The system has high impact resistance for strong capability
of load, stable operation effect in biochemical treatment
unit. Moreover, the generated biogas and protein feed all
can have certain economic benefits.
Shi Hui etc used EGSB - A/O combination process to han-
dle high concentration starch wastewater in a starch com-
pany in Si Ping City. The result indicates that the process-
ing high concentration starch wastewater by methods is
completely feasible. When COD for wastewater is
8000~10000mg/L, the COD for processed wastewater is
less than 100mg/L; the reactor COD is stable in 20kg /

Authorized licensed use limited to: Queensland University of Technology. Downloaded on August 15,2020 at 04:37:27 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
(m3·d) or so; the combination process on COD, BOD5, SS
and NH3 - N can reach removal rates 99.1%, 99.6%,82%
and 96% respectively, which reaches the national sewage
comprehensive level 1 emission standard.
3.1.2 Anaerobic biological treatment method
The main processes in anaerobic biological treatment of
handling starch wastewater have ShengLiuShi anaerobic
sludge bed (UASB), anaerobic baffle plate reactor (ABR),
anaerobic fluidized bed (AFB), anaerobic contact method
(ACP), two-phase anaerobic digestion method (TPAD) and
anaerobic filter (AF), etc.
ShengLiuShi anaerobic sludge bed is a kind of anaerobic
reactor based on mature theory. It is developed success-
fully by Lettinga in Wageningen agricultural university in
the Netherlands in 1977. It has a lot of merits, such as high
volume load rate and high sludge load rate etc and it is
widely used in engineering. Li Yafeng etc introduced re-
actor UASB treatment effect used for starch wastewater
treatment in a Shandong company. This company adopted
2 UASB reactors whose diameter was 20m and height was
6.8m in starch wastewater anaerobic biological treatment.
Meanwhile, COD volume load was 8kg / (m3 · for d) with
stable treatment effect and effluent COD, BOD5, SS re-
moval rates were 83%, 90%, 62% respectively, which sat-
isfied the follow-up process requirements. Zhang Chunyan
analyzed the starch wastewater treatment process in Shan-
dong Qingyuan Food Company and proved that it was
economic and effective to use UASB to process high qual-
ity concentration corn starch wastewater, which operation
cost was low and the treatment effect was stable. It further
determined that the best temperature for the UASB treat-
ment was 35 ~ 40 ć; pH value of 6 ~ 7, CODCr reached
8kg / (d. m3) design load and the removal rate reached
above 90%.
Anaerobic baffle plate reactor used built-in vertical guide
plate to divide the reaction chambers into several relative
independent ShangLiuShi sludge bed systems. Several
small reaction chambers were installed in series, which
makes the processed wastewater flow up and down inter-
nally along its baffle plate. In the mixing effect of the flow
and the producing gases, organic matters in the wastewater
contacted with anaerobic sludge repeatedly and ware able
 
25h, COD removal rate could reach amount to 77% ~ 96%.
Both of them have obvious treatment effect.
3.2.2 Floating processing method
Floating processing uses high pressure to dissolve a large
amount of vapor gas as working liquid. After sudden de-
compression, it will release countless small bubbles, which
makes the flocculate in the wastewater stick to their surface.
Thus, the proportion of the flocculate is far less than the
actual proportion. Along with the rising of the bubbles, the
flocculate will float to the liquid surface, thereby achieving
the purpose of liquid-solid separation. Mu Jianbo etc took
the wastewater in a Hubei starch company and adopted an
air floating device to conduct an experimental research.
The wastewater infusing drug went through the pump into
the integration device. The micro bubble produced by the
dissolved gas water contacted with the counter-current
wastewater. Floc properties were clinging to the micro
bubble and ejected along with the rising, the disposed wa-
ter below the column went out through the liquid level
control device. According to the experiment and the analy-
sis of the flocculant, floating agent and the operation pa-
rameters on the treatment effect, it is concluded that the
best operating conditions can be achieved in feeding posi-
tion 70cm, air inflow 120L/h, feeding amount 100ml/min
and liquid surface height 127cm.
3.3 Other processing methods
3.3.1 Biological pond method
Biological pond technology uses the natural purification
capacity of water to handle wastewater. This technology
was developed rapidly after 1950s and mostly adopted in
sewage and organic industrial wastewater. According to
the characteristics of high organic content and rich nutri-
tion in starch wastewater, the combination of anaerobic
pond, facultative pond and aerobic pond is applied. Yang
Fengjiang etc designed a method to handle starch waste-
water with ShuiHuLu and XiLuPing based on the water
characteristic of Xinmin Starch Company in Liaoning
military logistic department. The precipitated wastewater
was ejected into the natural oxidation pond to have natural
fermentation. Then, it was ejected into the ShuiHuLu pond
to be purified by 7d and was ejected into the XILuPing to
be purified by 7d again. All these procedures made the ef-

Authorized licensed use limited to: Queensland University of Technology. Downloaded on August 15,2020 at 04:37:27 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
fluent water to achieve farm irrigation water quality. Prac-
tice has proved that through the metabolic process which
contained 4 degree of wastewater handling, 3 steps of
multi-function and multi-system, this method can achieve
all material energy conversion and recycle. Thus, it has
obvious popularized value.
3.3.2 Photosynthetic bacteria method
Photosynthetic bacteria (PSB) are mainly red pseudomonas
genera, which can conduct bad oxygen photosynthesis un-
der anaerobic condition. The organic matters are used as
the carbon sources and the hydrogen body for photosyn-
thesis, being decomposed and removed. Moreover, they are
able to withstand high concentration organic matters. Pho-
tosynthetic bacteria method is also good in removing con-
taminants, such as nitrogen and phosphorus which has
been widely applied to remove waste water in organic pol-
lutants. Wang Yuxin etc separated out a spherical red coli
L2 from the wastewater sludge in Shandong Wen Deng
Starch Company in order to handle the wastewater after
pretreatment. Under appropriate conditions, CODCr re-
moval rate could reach 95.7% which made the wastewater
to meet the effluent standard.
4 Corn starch wastewater recycling technology
There are a lot of researches at home and abroad using mi-
croorganism for starch wastewater resource disposal in-
cluding using starch wastewater to produce single cell pro-
tein, recycling protein for fodder, producing microbial
flocculants, producing polysaccharide, etc.
Li Suyu etc introduced research in a variety of microbial
purification corn starch wastewater synergy. The result
showed that per cubic meter of wastewater could be used
for producing feed additives SCP1.646 kg and could be
turn into resources of protein production. Meanwhile, mi-
crobial synergy still can make wastewater COD removal
rate more than 90% and the purified wastewater COD re-
moval under 300mg/L. Wang Yuanyuan etc used starch
wastewater to tame, and foster mixed microbial flocculants
to cultivate bacterium. Researching on the cultivated con-
dition, they found that in condition of COD concentration
was 4000mg/L; urea was the source of nitrogen; C: N: P =
100:5-2, training time was 42h, culture temperature was 30
ć, wave bed speed was 150r/min, the MBF - 17 floccula-
 
[23] LI Suyu, LI Yu, REN Jun, et al. Cooperative Effect of Varied Microor- ˖19̚23.
Wastewater[J]. China Water & Wastewater, 2007,23˄5˅
ganism in Purifying Maize Starch Wastewater[J]. Environmental Protec- ⥟ುುˈ⥟৥ϰˈ䰜Ꮰ.߽⫼⎔㉝ᑳ∈෍‫ݏ‬໡ড়ൟ㍂‫ࠖޱ‬ѻ⫳㦠ⷨお[J].
˄1˅
tion, 2003ˈ ˖22̚23. Ё೑㒭∈
ᴢ㋴⥝ˈᴢ⥝ˈӏ࿳ˈㄝ.໮⾡ᖂ⫳⠽‫㉝⎔㉇⥝࣪ޔ‬ᎹϮᑳ∈ⱘणৠᬜ
ᑨⷨお[J].⦃๗ֱᡸˈ2003ˈ ˄1˅ ˖22̚23.
[24] WANG Yunyun, WANG Xiangdong, CHEN Xi. Study on Culture of
Compound Microbial Flocculant-producing Bacteria Using Starch



Authorized licensed use limited to: Queensland University of Technology. Downloaded on August 15,2020 at 04:37:27 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 1265 J. Fettig et al. | Treatment of tapioca starch wastewater Water Science & Technology | 68.6 | 2013

Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC ). As a low- Table 1 | Composition of tapioca starch wastewater

cost solution, some middle-sized plants have recently started

This study (mean
to cover the first anaerobic pond with a synthetic canvas in Parameter values 2010–2012) Data from Mai (2006)
order to collect and utilize the biogas produced (Hoang
Conductivity 1,673 μS/cm –
). In addition, some small companies have constructed
pH 4.5a 4.0–4.2
anaerobic filters combined with aerobic post-treatment
TSS 1,700 mg/L 1,500–2,600 mg/L
tanks (Phuoc & Phuong ). Since there is no biogas collec-
tion, a major benefit of anaerobic processes is not utilized. COD (non-filtered) 11,800 mg/L 14,000–18,000 mg/L

The main objective of this study was to find out whether
a combination of technical and nature-based treatment pro-
cesses suited for small- and middle-sized companies can
meet the discharge requirements corresponding to 50 mg/L
biochemical oxygen demand (BOD5), 30 mg/L total nitro-
gen (total-N), 6 mg/L total phosphorus (total-P) and
0.1 mg/L total cyanide according to Vietnam Standard
TCVN 5945 class B (MONRE ), and whether it can
be operated reliably.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
In small companies the starch is separated by sedimentation,
while in larger plants centrifugal screen extractors are more
common. The latter separation process provides wastewater
with a higher fraction of dissolved organic substances and a
lower portion of particulate matter. In this study the pilot
plant was located at a company that applies centrifugation.
In Table 1 the composition of the wastewater investigated
is compared with data published by Mai ().
Accordingly, the wastewater undergoes acidification
caused by anaerobic micro-organisms in the pre-treatment
units. Although there is a certain amount of nutrients,
organic matter is the main component. A comparison of
non-filtered and filtered samples reveals that total suspended
solids (TSS) make up for about 25% of the chemical oxygen
demand (COD). Therefore, TSS removal prior to biological
treatment was considered an important element of the pro-
cess scheme.
The treatment concept developed includes physical pre-
treatment, anaerobic degradation of organic substances, and
aerobic post-treatment. The process scheme is shown in
Figure 1. As far as we know the specific combination of tech-
nical and nature-based processes is a novel approach for this
type of wastewater. A detailed description of the concept is
given elsewhere (Pick et al. ).
The pilot plant was designed to treat continuously up to
12 m3/d of wastewater. Before flowing into the plant, the
water passes through three buffer tanks with a total hydrau-
lic retention time of 3.5 h. In this stage pH decreases to 4.5
BOD5 6,900 mg/L 9,000–11,000 mg/L
Total phosphorus 71 mg/L –
Kjeldahl nitrogen 280 mg/L –
COD (filtered) 8,840 mg/L –
Total cyanide 22 mg/L 5.8–96 mg/L
a
After 3.5 h of microbial acidification. TSS: total suspended solids; COD: chemical oxygen
demand; BOD5: 5-day biochemical oxygen demand.
due to rapid microbial acidification. As a result, colloidal
organic matter flocculates without adding any chemicals
and the removal efficiency in the flotation stage is much
better than with fresh wastewater. After this effect had
been observed during the first months of operation, pH
was no longer adjusted in the neutralization unit.
Dissolved air flotation (DAF) was applied in order to
remove the major portion of TSS. An Aquatector® Micro-
float® unit (Enviplan Company, Germany) was operated at
a hydraulic surface load of 2.5–3.0 m/h. Since dosing of
polymeric flocculants prior to flotation improved TSS
removal only slightly, flocculants were not added during
regular operation.
The central treatment stage was an anaerobic process
(expanded granular sludge bed (EGSB) reactor, type
ANAFIT-AC, Hager þ Elsässer Company, Germany) which
converts organic matter into biogas. The performance of
the reactor largely depends on stable process conditions
and a low suspended solids loading. This was achieved by
an optimization of the upstream DAF process. The EGSB
W
reactor was operated at a temperature of 35 C and a hydrau-
lic load of 4–5 m/h. It was seeded with sludge from a
brewery wastewater treatment plant. pH was adjusted to
6.8 by adding sodium hydroxide. There was no need for
heating because raw wastewater temperatures were already
at the required level.
For post-treatment, a vertical flow constructed wetland
(VFCW) was designed. The hydraulic surface load of the
unit was about 30 L/(m2 · d) and the average organic surface
load corresponded to 72 g COD/(m2 · d). The effluent was
collected in a small basin which was the sampling point,
and discharged via a fluid tipper to a lagoon operated by
the tapioca starch company.
 1265 J. Fettig et al. | Treatment of tapioca starch wastewater Water Science & Technology | 68.6 | 2013

Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC ). As a low- Table 1 | Composition of tapioca starch wastewater

cost solution, some middle-sized plants have recently started

This study (mean
to cover the first anaerobic pond with a synthetic canvas in Parameter values 2010–2012) Data from Mai (2006)
order to collect and utilize the biogas produced (Hoang
Conductivity 1,673 μS/cm –
). In addition, some small companies have constructed
pH 4.5a 4.0–4.2
anaerobic filters combined with aerobic post-treatment
TSS 1,700 mg/L 1,500–2,600 mg/L
tanks (Phuoc & Phuong ). Since there is no biogas collec-
tion, a major benefit of anaerobic processes is not utilized. COD (non-filtered) 11,800 mg/L 14,000–18,000 mg/L

The main objective of this study was to find out whether
a combination of technical and nature-based treatment pro-
cesses suited for small- and middle-sized companies can
meet the discharge requirements corresponding to 50 mg/L
biochemical oxygen demand (BOD5), 30 mg/L total nitro-
gen (total-N), 6 mg/L total phosphorus (total-P) and
0.1 mg/L total cyanide according to Vietnam Standard
TCVN 5945 class B (MONRE ), and whether it can
be operated reliably.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
In small companies the starch is separated by sedimentation,
while in larger plants centrifugal screen extractors are more
common. The latter separation process provides wastewater
with a higher fraction of dissolved organic substances and a
lower portion of particulate matter. In this study the pilot
plant was located at a company that applies centrifugation.
In Table 1 the composition of the wastewater investigated
is compared with data published by Mai ().
Accordingly, the wastewater undergoes acidification
caused by anaerobic micro-organisms in the pre-treatment
units. Although there is a certain amount of nutrients,
organic matter is the main component. A comparison of
non-filtered and filtered samples reveals that total suspended
solids (TSS) make up for about 25% of the chemical oxygen
demand (COD). Therefore, TSS removal prior to biological
treatment was considered an important element of the pro-
cess scheme.
The treatment concept developed includes physical pre-
treatment, anaerobic degradation of organic substances, and
aerobic post-treatment. The process scheme is shown in
Figure 1. As far as we know the specific combination of tech-
nical and nature-based processes is a novel approach for this
type of wastewater. A detailed description of the concept is
given elsewhere (Pick et al. ).
The pilot plant was designed to treat continuously up to
12 m3/d of wastewater. Before flowing into the plant, the
water passes through three buffer tanks with a total hydrau-
lic retention time of 3.5 h. In this stage pH decreases to 4.5
BOD5 6,900 mg/L 9,000–11,000 mg/L
Total phosphorus 71 mg/L –
Kjeldahl nitrogen 280 mg/L –
COD (filtered) 8,840 mg/L –
Total cyanide 22 mg/L 5.8–96 mg/L
a
After 3.5 h of microbial acidification. TSS: total suspended solids; COD: chemical oxygen
demand; BOD5: 5-day biochemical oxygen demand.
due to rapid microbial acidification. As a result, colloidal
organic matter flocculates without adding any chemicals
and the removal efficiency in the flotation stage is much
better than with fresh wastewater. After this effect had
been observed during the first months of operation, pH
was no longer adjusted in the neutralization unit.
Dissolved air flotation (DAF) was applied in order to
remove the major portion of TSS. An Aquatector® Micro-
float® unit (Enviplan Company, Germany) was operated at
a hydraulic surface load of 2.5–3.0 m/h. Since dosing of
polymeric flocculants prior to flotation improved TSS
removal only slightly, flocculants were not added during
regular operation.
The central treatment stage was an anaerobic process
(expanded granular sludge bed (EGSB) reactor, type
ANAFIT-AC, Hager þ Elsässer Company, Germany) which
converts organic matter into biogas. The performance of
the reactor largely depends on stable process conditions
and a low suspended solids loading. This was achieved by
an optimization of the upstream DAF process. The EGSB
W
reactor was operated at a temperature of 35 C and a hydrau-
lic load of 4–5 m/h. It was seeded with sludge from a
brewery wastewater treatment plant. pH was adjusted to
6.8 by adding sodium hydroxide. There was no need for
heating because raw wastewater temperatures were already
at the required level.
For post-treatment, a vertical flow constructed wetland
(VFCW) was designed. The hydraulic surface load of the
unit was about 30 L/(m2 · d) and the average organic surface
load corresponded to 72 g COD/(m2 · d). The effluent was
collected in a small basin which was the sampling point,
and discharged via a fluid tipper to a lagoon operated by
the tapioca starch company.
 1267 J. Fettig et al. | Treatment of tapioca starch wastewater Water Science & Technology | 68.6 | 2013

Figure 3 | Mean COD concentrations during the last five operating phases.

COD elimination is on the order of 60%. Further removal
takes place in the wetland, which has been operated
mainly under aerobic conditions. The mean COD effluent
concentration in all phases based on 62 samples was
137 ± 73 mg/L, corresponding to an overall COD removal
efficiency of more than 98%. It can be assumed that
the remaining organics are predominantly non-
biodegradable, because BOD5 values were well below the
Vietnamese standard of 50 mg/L in all of the effluent
samples measured.
The organic load of the EGSB reactor is shown in
Figure 4 as a function of time. It was quite low in the begin-
ning because of the adaption period of the anaerobic sludge.
The design load of 15 kg COD/(m³ · d) is indicated in the
figure as a 100% line. After more than 1 year of operation
this value was clearly exceeded, and during a short-term
stress test, a maximum value of 44 kg COD/(m³ · d) has
been obtained. Some lower values observed occasionally
are caused by the fact that the flow rate was not always
constant because of uneven wastewater flow during the
starch production campaign.
The biogas produced in the EGSB reactor has been
measured with respect to quantity and composition. On an
average more than 70% of methane was found. The specific
methane yield calculated after correction to normal con-
ditions (VN) was 0.31 m³ CH4 per kg COD (eliminated).
This value is close to the stoichiometric methane production
of VN ¼ 0.35 m³ per kg COD (eliminated) showing that the
data are conclusive (Austermann-Haun ).
During the first phases of plant operation, only KN and
ammonia were determined as nitrogen components. It was
found that TSS removal by flotation contributes to KN elim-
ination by 10–40%. KN removal in the anaerobic reactor
was observed to be quite small, whereas it was significant
in the wetland. The latter can be attributed to further degra-
dation of organic matter as well as nitrification.
This conclusion is supported by the concentrations of
nitrogen components including nitrate given in Table 2 for
the last two operating phases. Accordingly, both organic
nitrogen (Org.-N) and NH4-N concentrations are very low
in the VFCW effluent. It is interesting to note that the

Table 2 | Mean concentrations of different nitrogen components

Operating phase VII Operating phase VIII

Org.-N NH4-N NO3-N Org.-N NH4-N NO3-N

Sample (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L)

Influent 292 11.3 18.8 228 12.2 15.5

Effluent flotation 230 12.2 18.0 167 12.0 18.0
Effluent EGSB 157 92 0.8 87 80 0.9
Effluent VFCW 5.5 5.3 0.6 17 1.9 115
Figure 4 | Organic load of the EGSB reactor.
 Reproduced with permission of copyright owner.
Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Geotechnical Engineering Bored pile design in stiff clay I: codes of
Volume 165 Issue GE4 practice
Vardanega, Kolody, Pennington, Morrison and
Simpson

ðL !,
For a single pile, not a group, Ed will be taken as the load
Qd ¼ G þ V ¼ DÆ cu dz þ Ab N c cu 3: 0 imparted from the pile cap to the individual pile. The code
10: o
defines Rd,g

14: Rd,g ¼ g Rd,ug

Qd ¼ G þ V
ð 12 !,
Rd,ug is the design ultimate geotechnical strength, determined
¼ D(0:5) (40 þ 11z)dz þ Ab Nc cu 3: 0 from site data and calculation methods;  g is the geotechnical
11: 0
reduction factor (not to be confused with friction angle)

15: g ¼ gb þ (tf  gb )K > gb

(Æ ¼ 0.5 for bored piles in London).

12: Qd ¼ G þ V ¼ ð899:1 þ 246:2Þ=3:0 tf is the intrinsic test factor; K is the testing benefit factor; and
gb is the basic geotechnical reduction factor.

In this example no load testing is being considered so g ¼ gb

13: Qd ¼ G þ V ¼ 381:8 kN as calculated in the next section. There is a testing benefit factor
(K) in the Australian code which allows g to be reduced if load
testing is performed. K is determined using the percentage of
In this case Qd ¼ Qwork as no factors are applied to the loads. piles statically or dynamically tested (see clause 4.3.1 of
AS2159-2009).
The split between G and V based on V being 25% of G returns
values of 7.1 Determination of basic geotechnical reduction
G ¼ 305.4 kN factor
V ¼ 76.4 kN To determine the basic geotechnical reduction factors the indivi-
Qwork ¼ 381.8 kN. dual risk ratings (IRRs) (Table 2) are assigned to each of the risk
factors listed in Table 3. This approach to determine geotechnical
7. AS2159-2009 (Australia) reduction factors was explained in Poulos (2004).
The Australian approach to designing piles makes use of partial
factors with loads being factored separately from the capacities. gb is determined from the average risk rating (ARR), calculated
A single factor is applied to the calculated geotechnical resis- using Equation 16, and then using Table 4. Design of a single
tance, termed the ‘geotechnical reduction factor’, applied to the pile, not in a large group, is treated as a design with low
calculated resistances, not the soil parameters. redundancy.

AS2159-2009 (Standards Australia, 2009) directs the engineer to 16: ARR ¼ Ó(w i IRR i )=Ów i
AS/NZS 1170.0 (Standards Australia, 2002) (structural design
actions) for the load factors. The two relevant combinations for a
pile are most likely to be the greater of: 1.2G + 1.5V or 1.35G.
16a: ARR ¼ 36:5=14:5 ¼ 2:52
Since, for this design, V/G ¼ 0.25, the critical case is
1.2G + 1.5V. Since this paper is only considering collapse limit
states, serviceability and actions induced by ground movements
are not considered. Earthquake loading is also not considered. 16b: gb ¼ 0:52 (low to moderate risk)

Clause 4.3.1 of AS2159-2009 states that the design geotechnical

strength (Rd,g ) must not be less than the design action effect (Ed ). The Australian method gives more responsibility to the engineer

Risk level Very low Low Moderate High Very high

Individual risk rating 1 2 3 4 5

Table 2. Individual risk rating (after T4.3.2(B) AS2159)

219
Geotechnical Engineering Bored pile design in stiff clay I: codes of
Volume 165 Issue GE4 practice
Vardanega, Kolody, Pennington, Morrison and
Simpson

Risk factor Weighting Individual risk Comments

factor, w i rating (IRR)

Site

Geological complexity of 2 2 Well-understood soil strata, London Clay is widely studied and lots of
site testing done on this site
Low risk
Extent of ground 2 2 Relatively deep boreholes with lots of test data down to pile depth
investigation proposed
Low risk
Amount and quality of 2 3 Undrained triaxial data and SPTs taken
geotechnical data Moderate risk

Design

Experience with similar 1 2 Bored piles in London Clay, very common

foundations in similar
geological conditions
Method of assessment of
geotechnical parameters
for design
Design method adopted
Method of utilising results
of in situ test data and
installation data
Low risk
2 3 Combination on conventional laboratory triaxial testing and well-
established site correlations on SPT data
Moderate risk
1 3 Simple empirical methods are being employed here but both are well
calibrated for London Clay
Moderate risk
2 2 Using the 25th percentile of the data to determine cu against depth
relationship
Low risk

Installation

Level of construction 2 3 Since only performing a desktop study, conventional construction

control processes will be used, limited degree of professional involvement.
Moderate risk
Level of monitoring 0.5 3 Assume little long-term monitoring as this is a simple project
Moderate risk

Note: The pile design shall include the risk circumstances for each individual risk category and consideration of all of the relevant site and
construction factors (AS2159 T4.3.2(A)).

Table 3. Geotechnical risk factors, weightings and ratings

to determine the reduction factor on the geotechnical calculations. Qd ¼ 1 G þ 2 V

It bounds the value of gb between 0.67 and 0.4 for low- 2 ð 3
L ,
redundancy systems and between 0.76 and 0.47 for high-redun-
6DÆ ð cu =3 Þdz 7
dancy systems. For low-redundancy problems, this is akin to 4 Ab N c ð cu =4 Þ5
¼ o
þ 7
dividing the calculated resistances by 1.50 for very low risk and 5: 5 6
2.5 for very high risk, as shown in the ‘Equivalent 7 ’ column in
Table 4; that is, the ‘partial factor’ on the geotechnical resistance
is between 1.5 and 2.5 with the loading being considered
separately. ðL !,
Qd ¼ 1 G þ 2 V ¼ DÆ cu dz þ Ab N c cu 7
7.2 Design calculations 17: o
For design to AS2159-2009 Equation 5 reduces to Equation 17

220
Geotechnical Engineering Bored pile design in stiff clay I: codes of
Volume 165 Issue GE4 practice
Vardanega, Kolody, Pennington, Morrison and
Simpson

Range of average risk Overall risk category Low-redundancy systems High-redundancy systems
rating (ARR)
gb Equivalent 7 gb Equivalent 7

ARR < 1.5 Very low 0.67 1.50 0.76 1.32

1.5 , ARR < 2.0 Very low to low 0.61 1.64 0.70 1.43
2.0 , ARR < 2.5 Low 0.56 1.79 0.64 1.56
2.5 , ARR < 3.0 Low to moderate 0.52 1.92 0.60 1.67
3.0 , ARR < 3.5 Moderate 0.48 2.08 0.56 1.79
3.5 , ARR < 4.0 Moderate to high 0.45 2.22 0.53 1.89
4.0 , ARR < 4.5 High 0.42 2.38 0.50 2.00
ARR . 4.5 Very high 0.40 2.50 0.47 2.13

Table 4. Basic geotechnical strength reduction factor for average

risk rating

where approaches: DA1, DA2 and DA3. Partial factors can be applied
1 , partial factor on permanent load ¼1.2 (AS1170) to the actions ‘A’ (i.e. the loads), the material properties ‘M’ (e.g.
2 , partial factor on variable load ¼ 1.5 (AS1170) soil strengths) and the resistances ‘R’ (e.g. skin friction). Differ-
7 ¼ 1/ g ¼ 1.92. ent design approaches use different combinations of partial
factors. In order for the code to be used within a particular
For a 15 m long (12 m into the clay), 0.45 m diameter pile country, the national standards body of that country is required to
produce a national annex (NA). The NA will specify which
Qd ¼ 1 G þ 2 V design approach(es) is/are permitted for construction in that
" country, and specifies the values of the partial factors to be used.
ð 12 In order to demonstrate the use of each design approach, three
¼ DÆ (9:86z þ 39)dz countries have been selected on the basis of their NA choice: the
o
UK for DA1, Ireland for DA2 and the Netherlands for DA3.
#,
þAb N c (9:86 3 12 þ 39) 7
18: 9. EC 7 – design approach 1 (UK national
approach)
9.1 Partial factors
19: Qd ¼ 1:2G þ 1:5V ¼ ð832:6 þ 225:2Þ=1:92 This design approach is the one adopted by the UK NA to
Eurocode 7 (BSI, 2007). In this design approach two sets of
calculations are performed (DA1-1 and DA1-2), with the partial
Taking factors shown in Tables 5 and 6.
V ¼ 0.25G
G ¼ 349.8 kN 9.2 Model factor
V ¼ 87.5 kN Paragraph 2.4.1(8) of Eurocode 7 states: ‘If needed, a modifica-
Qwork ¼ 437.3 kN. tion of the results from the model may be used to ensure that the
The equivalent overall FOS ¼ (832.6 + 225.2)/437.3 ¼ 2.42 design calculation is either accurate or errs on the side of safety.’
Paragraph 2.4.1 (9) states
8. Introduction to Eurocode 7
Eurocode 7 (EN 1997-1:2004 (BSI, 2010)) is a limit state code
which employs partial factors. After checking the relevant limit
states, the designer must ensure that the design value of the effect Description Partial factor  term
of actions, Ed , (the design loads) is less than or equal to the
Variable load 1.5 2
design value of the resistance, Rd (the design capacity)
Permanent load 1.35 1
Skin friction 1.0 5
20: Ed < Rd
Base resistance 1.0 6

Table 5. DA1-1 partial factors used

For design by calculation, Eurocode 7 presents three design

221
Geotechnical Engineering Bored pile design in stiff clay I: codes of
Volume 165 Issue GE4 practice
Vardanega, Kolody, Pennington, Morrison and
Simpson

2 ðL 3
,
Description Partial factor  term
6DÆ cu dz 7
4 A b N c cu 5
:
Qd ¼ G þ 1 3V ¼ o
þ 1: 4
Variable load 1.3 2 22: 1: 6 2: 0
Permanent load 1.0 1
Skin friction 1.5 (driven piles) 5
1.6 (bored piles)
Base resistance 1.7 (driven piles) 6 For the 15 m pile (12 m into the clay) of 0.45 m diameter
2.0 (bored piles) DA1-1
Note: Partial factors on resistances can be reduced with explicit
verification of serviceability limit state (not applicable for this  
example).
: : : 832:6 225:2
Qd ¼ 1 35G þ 1 5(0 25G) ¼ þ : 1: 4
23: 1: 0 10
Table 6. DA1-2 partial factors used

if the modification of the results makes use of a model factor, it 24: 1:725G ¼ ½832:6 þ 225:2=1:4
should take account of: the range of uncertainty in the results of the
method of analysis; any systematic errors known to be associated with
the method of analysis.
G ¼ 438.0 kN
V ¼ 109.5 kN
The UK NA introduces a model factor termed ªRd : In this Qwork ¼ 547.5 kN
example it is applied to the calculated shaft and base resistances The equivalent factor of safety is 1057.8/547.5 ¼ 1.93.
to account for the fact that the analysis model is empirically DA1-2 (governs)
based. The UK NA requires a value of 1.4 (which would be
reduced to 1.2 if there were load testing). This term is represented
in Equation 6 at the 7 term; for more information on pile design  
: : : 832:6 225:2
to Eurocode 7 see Bond and Simpson (2010). Qd ¼ 1 0G þ 1 3(0 25G) ¼ þ : 1: 4
25: 1: 6 20
9.3 Design calculations
For a DA1-1 calculation Equation 5 reduces to Equation 25 and
for a DA1-2 calculation Equation 5 reduces to Equation 22,
assuming that no load testing is carried out 26: 1:325G ¼ ð832:6=1:6 þ 225:2=2Þ=1:4

Qd ¼ 1 G þ 2 V
G ¼ 341.2 kN
2 ð 3
L , V ¼ 85.3 kN
6DÆ ð cu =3 Þdz 7 Qwork ¼ 426.5 kN
4 Ab Nc ð cu =4 Þ5
¼ o
þ 7 The equivalent factor of safety is 1057.8/426.5 ¼ 2.48.
5: 5 6
10. EC 7 – design approach 2 (Irish national
annex)
To demonstrate the use of DA2 for the calculation of pile load
DA1-1; terms 3 , 4 , 5 and 6 are equal to unity and have been carrying capacity, the Irish NA (NSAI, 2005) has been selected.
omitted The Irish NA is unique in that it allows for any of the three
design approaches to be used for geotechnical works.
" ðL #,
10.1 Design parameters
Qd ¼ 1:35G þ 1:5V ¼ DÆ cu dz þ Ab Nc cu 1: 4 Table 7 presents the parameters to be used for the Irish adoption
21: o
of DA2.

10.2 Design calculation

DA1-2; terms 1 , 3 and 4 are equal to unity and have been Therefore, for DA2 design to the Irish NA Equation 5 reduces to
omitted Equation 27

222
Geotechnical Engineering Bored pile design in stiff clay I: codes of
Volume 165 Issue GE4 practice
Vardanega, Kolody, Pennington, Morrison and
Simpson

( j) The major reason SNiP appears unconservative is that the

d ¼ 35

107.7
388.4
447.5
174.0
partial factor on resistance (1.4) and the partial factor on
actions (1.2) are both relatively low. It is not known if the
estimates of skin friction are conservative or not as the source
of the data in SNiP Tables 2 and 7 (Figures 11 and 12 in this

d ¼ 30

89.2
341.1
405.1
160.5
paper) is unclear. A comparison with Æcu values derived
suggests that they are high at shallow depth and low at
greater depth. Overall for the 12 m pile, there is little
difference between the SNiP representative resistance and

d ¼ 25

79.1
303.5
365.0
146.8
that derived from the ‘Æ’ method. It would be interesting to
know performance statistics for piled foundation systems
constructed under the SNiP framework.

d ¼ 20

74.1
275.6
329.2
133.6
Acknowledgements
Thanks must go to the Cambridge Commonwealth Trust and Ove
Arup and Partners for providing financial support to the first
author. The first author offers thanks to Professor Malcolm

d ¼ 15

61.4
236.0
288.5
119.8
Bolton for his supervision. The authors would also like to thank
Professor Harry Poulos for providing a draft copy of AS2159-
2009 for examination and for his advice on an early draft of the
paper.
d ¼ 10

52.2
203.7
252.2
106.6
Appendix – SNiP design charts
For the shaft resistance of piles in clay, cubic equations of the
form in Equation 42 were fitted to the data tables from SNiP. The
47.1
186.7
234.4
100.7
d¼8

regression coefficients are shown in Table 12 and the plotted

functions in Figure 13.

42: f i ¼ a(I L )3 þ b(I L )2 þ c(I L ) þ z

41.2
168.2
214.7
93.7
d¼6

For the base resistance of piles in clay, linear equations of the

form shown below were fitted to the data tables from SNiP. The
58.9
198.2
226.4
93.0
d¼5

regression coefficients are shown in Table 13 and the plotted

functions in Figure 14.
76.6
225.8
235.1
91.1
d¼4

43: R ¼ A(I L ) þ K
48.0
168.5
195.9
80.4

Depth of stratum: m
d¼3
displacement and bored piles, fi : kPa

200
1 2
180
3 4
Shaft resistance for driven,

Table 12. Fitted coefficients (Table 2, SNiP)

160 5 6
43.8
151.3
174.5
70.6
d¼2

140 8 10
120 15 20
100 25 30
35
80
90.1
230.7
206.0
67.2
d¼1

60
40
20
Stratum depth,

0
0 0·1 0·2 0·3 0·4 0·5 0·6 0·7 0·8 0·9 1·0 1·1
Liquidity index, IL
d: m

Figure 13. Graphical representation of Table 2 in SNiP 2.02.03-85

b
a

c
z

230
Geotechnical Engineering
Volume 165 Issue GE4
Standards Australia (2009) AS2159-2009: Piling – design and
installation. Standards Australia, Sydney, New South Wales,
Australia.
Stroud MA (1974) The standard penetration test in sensitive clays
and soft rocks. Proceedings of the European Seminar on
Penetration Testing, Stockholm, Sweden, vol. 2:2, pp. 366–
375.
Tomlinson MJ (1986) Foundation Design and Construction, 5th
Bored pile design in stiff clay I: codes of
practice
Vardanega, Kolody, Pennington, Morrison and
Simpson
edn. Longman Group, Harlow, UK.
Vardanega PJ and Bolton MD (2011) Strength mobilization in
clays and silts. Canadian Geotechnical Journal 48(10):
1485–1503.
Vardanega PJ, Williamson MG and Bolton MD (2012) Bored pile
design in stiff clay II: mechanisms and uncertainty.
Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers –
Geotechnical Engineering 165(4): 233–246.
Geotechnical Engineering
Volume 167 Issue GE1
the geotechnical reduction factors (similar to partial factors), and
a risk analysis matrix is used to search for a value of the
reduction factor applicable to the specific design project being
undertaken. This gives the design engineer the flexibility to
reduce the partial factors if good ground investigation data and
load testing are carried out, or increase them if designing in an
unfamiliar soil deposit. The code itself gives advice on the
elements of geotechnical risk that the designer must consider; in
other words, they recognise that a ‘one size fits all’ approach is
perhaps limited. Eurocode 7 aims to achieve a similar result by
encouraging the designer to vary the characteristic values of soil
properties in relation to the quality of the supporting data, while
keeping the values of partial factors constant.
The discussion of the adhesion factor Æ for bored pile design is
interesting. The parameter Æ relates to the soil deposit being
studied; the value Æ ¼ 0.5 is commonly used in London Clay.
Increasing Æ to account for rate effects in clay might be
warranted, but only if load-test data were also available (e.g.
Burland et al., 1966). For example, previous use of ‘constant rate
of penetration’ tests generally showed slightly higher values of Æ
for London Clay (Patel, 1992). For static loading, Æ ¼ 0.7 used in
the Caltrans amendment, as noted by the discussers, does seem
surprisingly high for a stiff clay (API, 1984); the overall
reliability of the design will depend not only on this and the
applied strength reduction factor, but also on the factors applied
to loads. We understand that, in practice, the use of this value is
often replaced by results from load testing.
REFERENCES
Aashto (2007) LRFD bridge design specifications. Customary US
Units, 4th edn. American Association of State Highway and
Transportation Officials, Washington, DC, USA.
API (1984) Planning, Designing and Constructing Fixed Offshore
88
Discussion
Vardanega, Kolody, Pennington et al.
Platforms. American Petroleum Institute, Washington, DC,
USA.
Burland JB, Butler FG and Dunican P (1966) The behaviour and
design of large diameter bored piles in stiff clay. Proceedings
of the ICE Symposium on Large Bored Piles, London, UK,
pp. 51–71.
Caltrans (2011) California Amendments to Aashto LRFD Bridge
Design Specifications, 4th edn. California Department of
Transportation, Sacramento, CA.
FHWA (Federal Highway Administration) (2010) Drilled Shafts:
Construction Procedures and LRFD Design Methods, Report
No FHWA NHI-10-016. National Highway Institute,
Washington, DC, USA.
Guha S (1995) Dynamic Characteristics of Old Bay Clay
Deposits in the East San Francisco Bay Area. PhD thesis,
Purdue University, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
Paikowsky S (2004) Load and Resistance Factors for Deep
Foundations, NCHRP Report 507. Transportation Research
Board, Washington, DC, USA.
Patel D (1992) Interpretation of results of pile tests in London
Clay. In Piling: European Practice and Worldwide Trends
(Sands MJ (ed.)). Thomas Telford, London, UK, pp. 100–
110.
Poulos HG (2004) An approach for assessing geotechnical
reduction factors for pile design. Proceedings of the 9th
Australia New Zealand Conference on Geomechanics,
Auckland, New Zealand, vol. 1, pp. 109–115.
Standards Australia (2009) AS2159-2009: Piling: design
and installation. Standards Australia, Sydney, NSW,
Australia.
Vardanega PJ, Kolody E, Pennington SH, Morrison PRJ and
Simpson B (2012) Bored pile design in stiff clay I: codes of
practice. Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers –
Geotechnical Engineering 165(4): 213–232.