Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
Skip to main content

Advertisement

Springer Nature Link
Log in

Estimation of pressuremeter modulus and limit pressure of clayey soils by various artificial neural network models

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Neural Computing and Applications Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The main purpose of the present study is to develop some artificial neural network (ANN) models for the prediction of limit pressure (P L) and pressuremeter modulus (E M) for clayey soils. Moisture content, plasticity index, and SPT values are used as inputs in the ANN models. To get plausible results, the number of hidden layer neurons in all models is varied between 1 and 5. In addition, both linear and nonlinear activation functions are considered for the neurons in output layers while a nonlinear activation function is employed for the neurons in the hidden layers of all models. Logistic activation function is used as a nonlinear activation function. During the modeling studies, total eight different ANN models are constructed. The ANN models having two outputs produced the worst results, independent from activation function. However, for P L, the best results are obtained from the feed-forward neural network with five neurons in the hidden layer, and logistic activation function is employed in the output neuron. For E M, the best model producing the most acceptable results is Elman recurrent network model, which has 4 neurons in the neurons in the hidden layer, and linear activation function is used for the output neuron. Finally, the results show that the ANN models produce the more accurate results than the regression-based models. In the literature, when empirical equations based on regression analysis were used, the best root mean square error (RMSE) values obtained to date for P L and E M have been 0.43 and 5.65, respectively. In this study, RMSE values for P L and E M were found to be 0.20 and 2.99, respectively, by using ANN models. It was observed that using ANN approach drastically increases the prediction accuracy in terms of RMSE criterion.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

Explore related subjects

Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.

References

  1. Akca N (2003) Correlation of SPT-CPT data from United Arab Emirates. Eng Geol 67:219–231

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Aladag CH (2011) A new architecture selection method based on tabu search for artificial neural networks. Expert Syst Appl 38:3287–3293

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Aladag CH, Egrioglu E, Kadilar C (2010) Modeling brain wave data by using artificial neural networks. Hacettepe J Math Stat 39(1):81–88

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  4. Aladag CH, Egrioglu E, Yolcu U (2010) Forecast combination by using artificial neural networks. Neural Process Lett 32(3):269–276

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Aladag CH, Egrioglu E, Gunay S, Basaran MA (2010) Improving weighted information criterion by using optimization. J Comput Appl Math 233:2683–2687

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  6. Bani-Hani K, Ghaboussi J, Schneider SP (1999) Experimental study of identification and control of structures using neural network part 1: identification. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 28:995–1018

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Bani-Hani K, Ghaboussi J, Schneider SP (1999) Experimental study of identification and control of structures using neural network part 1: control. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 28:1019–1039

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Bozbey I, Togrol E (2010) Correlation of standard penetration test and pressuremeter data: a case study from Istanbul, Turkey. Bull Eng Geol Environ 69:505–515

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Cabalar AF, Cevik A (2009) Modelling damping ratio and shear modulus of sand-mica mixtures using neural networks. Eng Geol 104:31–40

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Cassan M (1968) Les essays in situ en me`canique des sols—construction 1968–1969; No. 10, Octobre ’68, pp 337–347; No. 5, Mai ’69, pp 178–187; No. 7–8, Julliet-Aouˇt ’69, pp 244–256

  11. Cevik A, Sezer EA, Cabalar AF, Gokceoglu C (2011) Modelling of the uniaxial compressive strength of some clay-bearing rocks using Neural Network. Appl Soft Comput 11(2):2587–2594

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Dagdelenler G, Sezer EA, Gokceoglu C (2011) Some non-linear models to predict the weathering degrees of a granitic rock from physical and mechanical parameters. Expert Syst Appl 38:7476–7485

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Elman JL (1990) Finding structure in time. Cogn Sci 14:179–211

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Egrioglu E, Aladag CH, Yolcu U, Uslu VR, Basaran MA (2009) A new approach based on artificial neural networks for high order multivariate fuzzy time series. Expert Syst Appl 36(7):10589–10594

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Egrioglu E, Aladag CH, Yolcu U (2012) Comparison of feed forward and Elman neural networks forecasting ability: case study for IMKB. In: Aladag CH, Egrioglu E (eds) Advances in time series forecasting. Bentham Science Publishers, USA (in press)

  16. Ghaboussi J, Kwon TH, Pecknold DA, Hashash YMA (2009) Accurate intraocular pressure prediction from applanation response data using genetic algorithm and neural networks. J Biomech 42:2301–2306

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Gokceoglu C, Zorlu K, Ceryan S, Nefeslioglu HA (2009) A comparative study on indirect determination of degree of weathering of granites from some physical and strength parameters by two soft computing techniques. Mater Charact 60:1317–1327

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Hashash YMA, Jung S, Ghaboussi J (2004) Numerical implementation of a neural network based material model in finite element analysis. Int J Numer Meth Eng 59:989–1005

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  19. Hecht-Nielsen R (1987) Kolmogorov’s mapping neural network existence theorem. In: Proceedings of the first IEEE international conference on neural networks, San Diego CA, USA, pp 11–4

  20. Hobbs N-B, Dixon J-C (1969) In situ testing for Bridge Foundations in the Devonian Marl. In: Proceedings of the Conference on in situ investigations in soils and rocks, British Geotechnical Society, London, May 13–15, pp 31–38

  21. Jung S, Ghaboussi J (2006) Neural network constitutive model for rate-dependent materials. Comput Struct 84:955–963

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Kayabasi A (2012) Prediction of pressuremeter modulus and limit pressure of clayey soils by simple and non-linear multiple regression techniques: a case study from Mersin, Turkey. Environ Earth Sci. doi:10.1007/s12665-011-1439-4

  23. Levenberg K (1944) A method for the solution of certain non-linear problems in least squares. Q Appl Math 2:164–168

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  24. Najjar YM, Huang C (2007) Simulating the stress–strain behavior of Georgia kaolin via recurrent neuronet approach. Comput Geotech 34:346–361

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Nejad FP, Jaksa MB, Kakhi M, McCabe BA (2009) Prediction of pile settlement using artificial neural networks based on standard penetration test data. Comput Geotech 36:1125–1133

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Pala M, Caglar N, Elmas M, Cevik A, Saribiyik M (2008) Dynamic soil-structure interaction analysis of buildings by neural networks. Constr Build Mater 22:330–342

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Park HI, Lee SR (2011) Evaluation of the compression index of soils using an artificial neural network. Comput Geotech 38:472–481

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Waschkowski E (1976) Comparaisons entre les re′sultats des essais pressiome′triques et le SPT’’-Rapport de Recherche du Laboratorie Re′gional des Ponts et Chausse′es de Blois, F.A.E.R. 1.05.23.5, Juin. Not Published

  29. Yagiz S, Akyol E, Sen G (2008) Relationship between the standard penetration test and the pressuremeter test on sandy silty clays: a case study from Denizli. Bull Eng Geol Environ 67:405–410

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Yagiz S, Gokceoglu C, Sezer E, Iplikci S (2009) Application of two non-linear prediction tools to the estimation of tunnel boring machine performance. Eng Appl Artif Intell 22:818–824

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Yagiz S, Sezer EA, Gokceoglu C (2012) Artificial neural networks and nonlinear regression techniques to assess the influence of slake durability cycles on the prediction of uniaxial compressive strength and modulus of elasticity for carbonate rocks. Int J Numer Anal Methods Geomech. doi:10.1002/nag.1066

  32. Ye J, Qiao J, Li M, Ruan X (2007) A tabu based neural network learning algorithm. Neurocomputing 70:875–882

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Yun GJ, Ghaboussi J, Elnashai AS (2007) Development of neural network based hysteretic models for steel beam-column connections through self-learning simulation. J Earthq Eng 11(3):1–14

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Yun GJ, Ghaboussi J, Elnashai AS (2008) A new neural network-based model for hysteretic behavior of materials. Int J Numer Method Eng 73:447–469

    Google Scholar 

  35. Zorlu K, Gokceoglu C, Ocakoglu F, Nefeslioglu HA, Acikalin S (2008) Prediction of uniaxial compressive strength of sandstones using petrography-based models. Eng Geol 96:141–158

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Statistics, Faculty of Science, Hacettepe University, 06800, Beytepe, Ankara, Turkey

    C. H. Aladag

  2. General Directorate of Electrical Power Researches Survey and Development Administration, Ankara, Turkey

    A. Kayabasi

  3. Department of Geological Engineering, Engineering Faculty, Hacettepe University, 06800, Beytepe, Ankara, Turkey

    C. Gokceoglu

Authors
  1. C. H. Aladag
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. A. Kayabasi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. C. Gokceoglu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to C. Gokceoglu.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Aladag, C.H., Kayabasi, A. & Gokceoglu, C. Estimation of pressuremeter modulus and limit pressure of clayey soils by various artificial neural network models. Neural Comput & Applic 23, 333–339 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00521-012-0900-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00521-012-0900-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation