ISSN: 2278-0181
Vol. 2 Issue 11, November - 2013
Abstract - Major civil engineering structures like multi-storey development of empirical design rules for pile shafts in
buildings, bridges etc. require stable foundations to ensure safe rock commenced in the 1970’s (Haberfield and Seidel,
working conditions with minimal maintenance. In majority of 1996). The shaft resistance and end bearing resistance
cases, the surface soils are not of adequate strength to provide have been related to the unconfined compressive strength
stable foundations and instead the large loads imposed by these of the rock (McVay, 1992; Zhang, 1997). The roughness
structures must be carried to stronger rock at depth. Large
diameter bored piles socketed in rock are widely used as a
of the interface between concrete and the rock mass plays
common engineering solution to transfer heavy structural loads an important role in the behavior of rock socketed piles
through weak overburden soil to underlying rock. It is (Pells et al., 1980; Williams and Pells, 1981; Horvath,
commonly accepted that pile load testing is the best way to 1983; Hassan and O’Neill, 1997).
predict accurate pile capacity. In current design practice,
empirical relations derived from load tests are often used to It is believed and commonly accepted that pile load
predict the ultimate side resistance and the end bearing testing is the best way to determine the pile capacity and
resistance. However, there is large variation of the values load-settlement behavior of piles. However, field load
RT
obtained from empirical relations. Because of the limitations tests are very expensive and very often in case of bored
discussed above, there is need to search for alternative
piles in rock, tests have to be terminated well before the
solutions for prediction of pile capacity/settlement/load-
deformation response of piles. Artificial Neural Networks anticipated values. Therefore there is a need for research
to develop alternative methods to determine the pile
IJE
Data Normalization: The data used for training and measured load-deformation behavior for 5 cases from
testing set are normalized between 0 - 1 before presenting training set and 4 cases from testing set is shown in Fig.1.
the patterns to the neural network. The following The results achieved by Seidel (ROCKET Program 1993)
procedure is used for normalization (Masters, 1993 are also shown in the same figures itself to have
reported by Goh, 1996): comparison with developed NN model (NN1B).
A = (V - Vmin) / (Vmax - Vmin) --------- ( 1 )
Table I
where, Summary of Results: NN Model (NN1B) - RQD Based
A = Normalised value of parameter Approach-Prediction of Load-Settlement Behavior
Vmax = Maximum value of the parameter Successful Unsuccessful Total Percentage
Details
V = Value of each parameter Cases Cases Cases of Success
Vmin = Minimum value of the parameter Training
9 0 9 100
Data
Execution and Validation: In a present study feed- Testing
forward backpropagation algorithm with supervised 3 1 4 75
Data
learning have been used. The execution and the Total 12 1 13 92
validation of the neural network model have been carried
Input Parameters: fs, D/B, L/B, hav, Sh, iav, Si, n, i(s), RQD(s), (11 Nos.)
out using 'MATLAB - Neural Network Toolbox' Network Structure: 11-5-1; Initff. = 5, 5; Cycles = 4*5000 = 20,000
package. The training and the testing of the network is SSE = 0.180862; Correlation Coeff. = 0.7510 (average)
performed based on the overall results. Practical way is
to check the absolute relative error (ARE) between the It is observed that the overall results achieved are 92
predicated output and actual output in the validation or % with correlation coefficient of 0.7510 between
testing set. The error in training and testing set should be measured and predicted load. When comparison is made
monitored. When the error in the validation set increases, between predicted load and measured load at given
the training should be stopped because the point of best settlement, the absolute relative error is observed as
generalization has been reached. This crossed validation 29.16 %. It is observed that the load-settlement response
is one of the most powerful methods to stop training of is highly influenced by , RQDs, fs and least influenced
net. The result of predicted output for all the patterns by iav, i(s), Si. Moreover, it is observed that the NN
used for both training and testing should be higher or up predictions are far better compared to Seidel predictions.
to decided satisfaction based on the problem and the data.
The absolute relative error (ARE) for individual pattern
is calculated using the following expression:
1.6 10 14
Settlement (mm)
Settlement (mm)
Settlement (mm)
3.2 20 28
4.8 30 42
(a) Training set - Case No. 1 (b) Training set - Case No. 2 (f) Training set - Case No. 8
Average side re sistance (kPa) Average side re sistance (kPa) Average side resistance (kPa)
0 250 500 750 1000 1250
0 140 280 420 560 700 0 120 240 360 480 600
0 0
0
4 12
10
Settlement (mm)
Settlement (mm)
Settlement (mm)
20 8 24
30 12 36
O BSERVED O BSERVED
RT
40 16 48 O BSERVED
PREDICTED PREDICTED PREDICTED
SEIDEL SEIDEL SEIDEL
50 20 60
IJE
(g) Training set - Case No. 9 (i) Training set - Case No. 14 (a) Testing set - Case No. 3
Average Side Resistance (kPa) Average side resistance (kPa) Average side re sistance (kPa)
0 100 200 300 400 500 0 160 320 480 640 800 0 250 500 750 1000 1250
0 0 0
7 16 3
Settlement (mm)
Settlement (mm)
Settlement (mm)
14 32 6
21 48 9
28 O BSERVED 64 12 O BSERVED
O BSERVED PREDICTED
PREDICTED PREDICTED
SEIDEL SEIDEL
35 80
SEIDEL 15
(b) Testing set - Case No. 6 (c) Testing set - Case No. 10 (d) Testing se t - Case No. 15
Fig. 1 Comparison between Predicted (NN1B) and Observed Load-Settlement Response for Skin Friction Piles in
Mudstone (Cases from Australia)
Network Structure: 11-5-1; Initff. = 5, 5; Cycles = 4*5000 = 20,000
Sum-squared Error (SSE) = 0.180862; Correlation coefficient = 0.7510 (average)
Mean absolute Relative Error = 29.16 %
REFERENCES
RT
[1] Goh, A. T. C. (1994). ¡§Seismic liquefaction
potential assessed by neural networks¡¨, Jnl.
IJE