Abstract
This article presents the feasibility of using support vector regression (SVR) technique to determine the fresh and hardened properties of self-compacting concrete. Two different kernel functions, namely exponential radial basis function (ERBF) and radial basis function (RBF), were used to develop the SVR model. An experimental database of 115 data samples was collected from different literatures to develop the SVR model. The data used in SVR model have been organized in the form of six input parameters that covers dosage of binder content, fly ash, water–powder ratio, fine aggregate, coarse aggregate and superplasticiser. The above-mentioned ingredients have been taken as input variables, whereas slump flow value, L-box ratio, V-funnel time and compressive strength have been considered as output variables. The obtained results indicate that the SVR–ERBF model outperforms SVR–RBF model for learning and predicting the experimental data with the highest value of the coefficient of correlation (R) equal to 0.965, 0.954, 0.979 and 0.9773 for slump flow, L-box ratio, V-funnel and compressive strength, respectively, with small values of statistical errors. Also, the efficiency of SVR model is compared to artificial neural network (ANN) and multivariable regression analysis (MVR). In addition, a sensitivity analysis was also carried out to determine the effects of various input parameters on output. This study indicates that SVR–ERBF model can be used as an alternative approach in predicting the properties of self-compacting concrete.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Sfikas IP, Badogiannis EG, Trezos KG (2014) Rheology and mechanical characteristics of self-compacting concrete mixtures containing metakaolin. Constr Build Mater 64:121–129. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2014.04.048
Beycioglu A, Yilmaz Aruntas H (2014) Workability and mechanical properties of self-compacting concretes containing LLFA, GBFS and MC. Constr Build Mater 73:626–635. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2014.09.071
Yoo S-W, Ryu G-S, Choo JF (2015) Evaluation of the effects of high-volume fly ash on the flexural behavior of reinforced concrete beams. Constr Build Mater 93:1132–1144. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2015.05.021
Acharya PK, Patro SK (2015) Effect of lime and ferrochrome ash (FA) as partial replacement of cement on strength, ultrasonic pulse velocity and permeability of concrete. Constr Build Mater 94:448–457. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2015.07.081
Jalal M, Pouladkhan A, Fasihi O, Jafari D (2015) Comparative study on effects of Class F fly ash, nano silica and silica fume on properties of high performance self compacting concrete. Constr Build Mater 94:90–104
Siddique R, Aggarwal P, Aggarwal Y (2012) Influence of water/powder ratio on strength properties of self-compacting concrete containing coal fly ash and bottom ash. Constr Build Mater 29:73–81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2011.10.035
Sukumar B, Nagamani K, Srinivasa Raghavan R (2008) Evaluation of strength at early ages of self-compacting concrete with high volume fly ash. Constr Build Mater 22:1394–1401. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2007.04.005
Saridemir M (2009) Prediction of compressive strength of concretes containing metakaolin and silica fume by artificial neural networks. Adv Eng Softw 40:350–355. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.advengsoft.2008.05.002
Bilim C, Atiş CD, Tanyildizi H, Karahan O (2009) Predicting the compressive strength of ground granulated blast furnace slag concrete using artificial neural network. Adv Eng Softw 40:334–340. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.advengsoft.2008.05.005
Özcan F, Atiş CD, Karahan O et al (2009) Comparison of artificial neural network and fuzzy logic models for prediction of long-term compressive strength of silica fume concrete. Adv Eng Softw 40:856–863. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.advengsoft.2009.01.005
Yaprak H, Karaci A, Demir I (2013) Prediction of the effect of varying cure conditions and w/c ratio on the compressive strength of concrete using artificial neural networks. Neural Comput Appl 22:133–141. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00521-011-0671-x
Nazari A, Hajiallahyari H, Rahimi A et al (2012) Prediction compressive strength of Portland cement-based geopolymers by artificial neural networks. Neural Comput Appl. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00521-012-1082-3
Riahi S, Nazari A (2012) Predicting the effects of nanoparticles on early age compressive strength of ash-based geopolymers by artificial neural networks. Neural Comput Appl. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00521-012-1085-0
Subaşi S, Beycioǧlu A, Sancak E, Şahin I (2013) Rule-based Mamdani type fuzzy logic model for the prediction of compressive strength of silica fume included concrete using non-destructive test results. Neural Comput Appl 22:1133–1139. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00521-012-0879-4
Kostić S, Vasović D (2015) Prediction model for compressive strength of basic concrete mixture using artificial neural networks. Neural Comput Appl 26:1005–1024. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00521-014-1763-1
Belalia Douma O, Boukhatem B, Ghrici M, Tagnit-Hamou A (2016) Prediction of properties of self-compacting concrete containing fly ash using artificial neural network. Neural Comput Appl 28:707–718. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00521-016-2368-7
Sonebi M, Cevik A, Grünewald S, Walraven J (2016) Modelling the fresh properties of self-compacting concrete using support vector machine approach. Constr Build Mater 106:55–64. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2015.12.035
Lee JJ, Kim DK, Chang SK, Lee J-H (2007) Application of support vector regression for the prediction of concrete strength. Comput Concr 4:299–316
Yang HY, Dong YF (2013) Modelling concrete strength using support vector machines. Appl Mech Mater 438–439:170–173. https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMM.438-439.170
Yazdi JS, Kalantary F, Yazdi HS (2013) Prediction of elastic modulus of concrete using support vector committee method. J Mater Civ Eng 25:9–20. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)MT.1943-5533.0000507
Yan K, Shi C (2010) Prediction of elastic modulus of normal and high strength concrete by support vector machine. Constr Build Mater 24:1479–1485. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2010.01.006
Naseri F, Jafari F, Mohseni E et al (2017) Experimental observations and SVM-based prediction of properties of polypropylene fibres reinforced self-compacting composites incorporating nano-CuO. Constr Build Mater 143:589–598. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2017.03.124
Liu J, Yan KZ, Zhao X, Hu Y (2016) Prediction of autogenous shrinkage of concretes by support vector machine. Int J Pavement Res Technol 9:169–177. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijprt.2016.06.003
Sobhani J, Khanzadi M, Movahedian AH (2013) Support vector machine for prediction of the compressive strength of no-slump concrete. Comput Concr 11:337–350. https://doi.org/10.12989/cac.2013.11.4.337
Yinfeng D, Yingmin L, Ming L, Mingkui X (2008) Nonlinear structural response prediction based on support vector machines. J Sound Vib 311:886–897. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsv.2007.09.054
Saber Mahani A, Shojaee S, Salajegheh E, Khatibinia M (2015) Hybridizing two-stage meta-heuristic optimization model with weighted least squares support vector machine for optimal shape of double-arch dams. Appl Soft Comput J 27:205–218. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asoc.2014.11.014
Yang S, Fang CQ, Yuan ZJ (2014) Study on mechanical properties of corroded reinforced concrete using support vector machines. Appl Mech Mater 578–579:1556–1561. https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMM.578-579.1556
Yu PS, Chen ST, Chang IF (2006) Support vector regression for real-time flood stage forecasting. J Hydrol 328:704–716. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2006.01.021
Yuvaraj P, Ramachandra Murthy A, Iyer NR et al (2013) Support vector regression based models to predict fracture characteristics of high strength and ultra high strength concrete beams. Eng Fract Mech 98:29–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engfracmech.2012.11.014
Tripathi S, Srinivas VV, Nanjundiah RS (2006) Downscaling of precipitation for climate change scenarios: a support vector machine approach. J Hydrol 330:621–640. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2006.04.030
Lin J-Y, Cheng C-T, Chau K-W (2006) Using support vector machines for long-term discharge prediction. Hydrol Sci J 51:599–612. https://doi.org/10.1623/hysj.51.4.599
Yoon H, Jun SC, Hyun Y et al (2011) A comparative study of artificial neural networks and support vector machines for predicting groundwater levels in a coastal aquifer. J Hydrol 396:128–138. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2010.11.002
Debnath P, Dey AK (2017) Prediction of bearing capacity of geogrid-reinforced stone columns using support vector regression. Int J Geomech 18:1–15. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)GM.1943-5622.0001067
Vapnik VN, Golowich SE, Smola A (1996) Support vector method for function approximation, regression estimation, and signal processing. Advances in neural information processing systems, Morgan Kaufmann, San Mateo
Vapnik V, Golowich S, Smola A (1997) Support vector method for function approximation, regression estimation, and signalprocessing. In: Advances in neural information processing systems. MIT Press, Cambridge, pp 281–287
Gunn SR (2001) Support vector machines for classification and regression. In: Technical report. University of Southampton, Southampton. http://www.isis.ecs.soton.ac.uk/isystems/kernel/svm.zip. Accessed 16 May 2018
Hillier FS, Editor S, Quantitative C, et al (2008) Linear and Nonlinear Programming. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-74503-9
Vapnik VN, Jordan M, F- J (2000)The nature of statistical learning theory. Springer, New York. ISBN 0-387-98780-0, SPIN 10713304
Smola AJJ, Schölkopf B (2004) A tutorial on support vector regression. Stat Comput 14:199–222. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:Stco.0000035301.49549.88
Ma CK, Lee YH, Awang AZ et al (2017) Artificial neural network models for FRP-repaired concrete subjected to pre-damaged effects. Neural Comput Appl. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00521-017-3104-7
Sahmaran M, Yaman I, Tokyay M (2009) Transport and mechanical properties of self consolidating concrete with high volume fly ash. Cem Concr Compos 31:99–106. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconcomp.2008.12.003
Siddique R, Aggarwal P, Aggarwal Y (2011) Prediction of compressive strength of self-compacting concrete containing bottom ash using artificial neural networks. Adv Eng Softw 42:780–786. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.advengsoft.2011.05.016
Uysal M, Yilmaz K (2011) Effect of mineral admixtures on properties of self-compacting concrete. Cem Concr Compos 33:771–776. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconcomp.2011.04.005
Patel R (2003) Development of statistical models to simulate and optimize self-consolidating concrete mixes incorporating high volume of fly ash. Dissertation, University of Ryerson, Toronto
Gettu R, Izquierdo J, Gomes PCC, Josa A (2002) Development of high-strength self-compacting concrete with fly ash: a four-step experimental methodology. In: Proceedings of the 27th conference on our world in concrete and structures, Paramasivam y TH Tan, Singapore, pp 217–224
Güneyisi E, Gesolu M, Özbay E (2010) Strength and drying shrinkage properties of self-compacting concretes incorporating multi-system blended mineral admixtures. Constr Build Mater 24:1878–1887. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2010.04.015
Nepomuceno MCS, Pereira-De-Oliveira LA, Lopes SMR (2014) Methodology for the mix design of self-compacting concrete using different mineral additions in binary blends of powders. Constr Build Mater 64:82–94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2014.04.021
Bingol AF, Tohumcu I (2013) Effects of different curing regimes on the compressive strength properties of self compacting concrete incorporating fly ash and silica fume. Mater Des 51:12–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2013.03.106
Krishnapal P, Yadav RK, Rajeev C (2013) Strength characteristics of self compacting concrete containing flyash. Res J Eng Sci. ISSN 2278:9472
Dhiyaneshwaran S, Ramanathan P, Baskar I, Venkatasubramani R (2013) Study on durability characteristics of self-compacting concrete with fly ash. Jordan J Civ Eng 7:342–353
Mahalingam B, Nagamani K (2011) Effect of processed fly ash on fresh and hardened properties of self compacting concrete. Int J Earth Sci Eng 4(5):930–940. ISSN 0974-5904
Muthupriya P, Sri PN, Ramanathan MP, Venkatasubramani R (2012) Strength and workability character of self compacting concrete with GGBFS, FA and SF. Int J Emerg Trends Eng Dev 2(2):424–434. ISSN 2249-6149
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The author declares that they have no conflict of interest.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Appendix: Details of experimental variables and test results
Appendix: Details of experimental variables and test results
Author | Year | B | P | W/B | F | C | SP | D (mm) | L-box | V-funnel | Fc28 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Sahmaran et al. [41] | 2009 | 500 | 0 | 0.35 | 1038 | 639 | 6.75 | 665 | 0.87 | 12.7 | 62.2 |
500 | 30 | 0.34 | 1006 | 620 | 6.75 | 765 | 0.95 | 10.2 | 52.4 | ||
500 | 30 | 0.35 | 1008 | 621 | 6.75 | 715 | 0.95 | 15.8 | 57.3 | ||
500 | 40 | 0.35 | 995 | 613 | 6.75 | 730 | 0.85 | 10.7 | 59.1 | ||
500 | 40 | 0.32 | 1004 | 618 | 6.75 | 745 | 0.95 | 11.7 | 52.3 | ||
500 | 50 | 0.35 | 988 | 608 | 6.75 | 710 | 0.9 | 19.2 | 40.8 | ||
500 | 50 | 0.3 | 1010 | 628 | 6.75 | 738 | 0.88 | 15.1 | 47.5 | ||
500 | 60 | 0.35 | 979 | 603 | 6.75 | 740 | 0.85 | 12.8 | 38.1 | ||
500 | 60 | 0.3 | 997 | 614 | 6.75 | 770 | 0.95 | 9.4 | 39.9 | ||
Siddique [42] | 2012 | 550 | 15 | 0.41 | 910 | 590 | 10.45 | 590 | 0.95 | 6.5 | 29 |
550 | 15 | 0.41 | 910 | 590 | 10.72 | 675 | 0.9 | 7.5 | 35.5 | ||
550 | 20 | 0.41 | 910 | 590 | 6.6 | 600 | 0.7 | 4.8 | 24 | ||
550 | 20 | 0.41 | 910 | 590 | 7.15 | 645 | 0.95 | 4.5 | 27 | ||
550 | 20 | 0.41 | 910 | 590 | 9.9 | 605 | 0.82 | 7.5 | 32 | ||
550 | 20 | 0.41 | 910 | 590 | 11 | 690 | 0.9 | 4.5 | 33.5 | ||
550 | 25 | 0.42 | 910 | 590 | 7.7 | 600 | 0.6 | 7 | 26 | ||
550 | 25 | 0.42 | 910 | 590 | 8.25 | 625 | 0.8 | 5.2 | 28 | ||
550 | 25 | 0.42 | 910 | 590 | 9.9 | 605 | 0.6 | 7 | 32 | ||
550 | 25 | 0.42 | 910 | 590 | 11 | 590 | 0.6 | 4.2 | 21.7 | ||
550 | 30 | 0.43 | 910 | 590 | 7.15 | 610 | 0.87 | 5.4 | 21 | ||
550 | 30 | 0.43 | 910 | 590 | 7.7 | 600 | 0.9 | 6.5 | 25.5 | ||
550 | 30 | 0.43 | 910 | 590 | 8.8 | 605 | 0.7 | 8.9 | 27.5 | ||
550 | 30 | 0.43 | 910 | 590 | 9.9 | 675 | 0.95 | 5 | 31 | ||
550 | 35 | 0.44 | 910 | 590 | 7.15 | 590 | 0.86 | 6.1 | 17 | ||
550 | 35 | 0.44 | 910 | 590 | 8.8 | 590 | 0.8 | 8 | 23 | ||
550 | 35 | 0.44 | 910 | 590 | 9.35 | 645 | 0.9 | 9 | 25 | ||
550 | 35 | 0.44 | 910 | 590 | 9.9 | 635 | 0.92 | 10 | 29.5 | ||
500 | 30 | 0.35 | 900 | 600 | 11 | 660 | 0.9 | 9 | 29.2 | ||
500 | 40 | 0.35 | 900 | 600 | 10.75 | 675 | 0.93 | 7 | 28.6 | ||
Uysal and Yilmaz [43] | 2011 | 550 | 25 | 0.33 | 887 | 752 | 8.8 | 740 | 0.93 | 11.7 | 73.4 |
550 | 35 | 0.33 | 878 | 742 | 8.8 | 750 | 0.91 | 17 | 67.5 | ||
550 | 15 | 0.41 | 910 | 590 | 9.9 | 625 | 0.82 | 4 | 26.5 | ||
550 | 15 | 0.41 | 910 | 590 | 10.17 | 675 | 0.8 | 6.6 | 36 | ||
Patel [44] | 2003 | 400 | 30 | 0.39 | 946 | 900 | 1.4 | 510 | 0.96 | 4.5 | 45 |
370 | 36 | 0.43 | 960 | 900 | 1.85 | 650 | 0.94 | 3 | 46 | ||
430 | 36 | 0.43 | 830 | 900 | 0.86 | 480 | 0.6 | 2.5 | 36 | ||
430 | 36 | 0.43 | 827 | 900 | 2.15 | 810 | 0.95 | 2 | 48 | ||
400 | 45 | 0.45 | 850 | 900 | 1.4 | 760 | 1 | 2.5 | 38 | ||
400 | 45 | 0.39 | 916 | 900 | 1.4 | 580 | 1 | 3 | 45 | ||
400 | 45 | 0.39 | 916 | 900 | 1.4 | 600 | 1 | 3 | 47 | ||
400 | 45 | 0.39 | 916 | 900 | 1.4 | 570 | 1 | 3 | 49 | ||
400 | 45 | 0.39 | 916 | 900 | 1.4 | 590 | 1 | 3.3 | 49 | ||
400 | 45 | 0.39 | 916 | 900 | 1.4 | 590 | 1 | 3.5 | 49 | ||
400 | 45 | 0.39 | 916 | 900 | 2.4 | 770 | 1 | 3.5 | 43 | ||
450 | 45 | 0.39 | 808 | 900 | 1.58 | 680 | 1 | 2.3 | 50 | ||
370 | 54 | 0.43 | 930 | 900 | 0.74 | 600 | 1 | 2.8 | 31 | ||
370 | 54 | 0.43 | 928 | 900 | 1.85 | 760 | 1 | 2.5 | 33 | ||
430 | 54 | 0.34 | 874 | 900 | 0.86 | 540 | 0.87 | 3.3 | 46 | ||
430 | 54 | 0.36 | 872 | 900 | 2.15 | 710 | 1 | 4 | 52 | ||
400 | 60 | 0.39 | 886 | 900 | 1.4 | 630 | 0.91 | 3.5 | 44 | ||
Gettu et al. [45] | 2002 | 701 | 37 | 0.27 | 774 | 723 | 8.1 | 580 | 0.8 | 10 | 69.5 |
733 | 37 | 0.26 | 748 | 698 | 8.4 | 660 | 0.9 | 12 | 68.2 | ||
550 | 20 | 0.41 | 910 | 590 | 11.01 | 690 | 0.95 | 4.5 | 33.2 | ||
Siddique et al. [6] | 2011 | 550 | 25 | 0.42 | 910 | 590 | 9.91 | 603 | 0.85 | 5.2 | 31.5 |
550 | 30 | 0.43 | 910 | 590 | 9.91 | 673 | 0.95 | 6.1 | 30.7 | ||
550 | 35 | 0.44 | 910 | 590 | 9.91 | 633 | 0.92 | 10 | 29.6 | ||
550 | 0 | 0.33 | 869 | 778 | 8.8 | 690 | 0.82 | 14.5 | 75.9 | ||
550 | 15 | 0.33 | 865 | 762 | 8.8 | 710 | 0.91 | 9.4 | 74.2 | ||
Güneyisi et al. [46] | 2010 | 550 | 0 | 0.44 | 826 | 868 | 3.5 | 670 | 0.71 | 3.2 | 61.5 |
550 | 0 | 0.32 | 728 | 935 | 8.43 | 670 | 0.79 | 17 | 80.9 | ||
550 | 20 | 0.44 | 813 | 855 | 3.2 | 675 | 0.71 | 10.4 | 52.1 | ||
550 | 20 | 0.32 | 714 | 917 | 7.43 | 730 | 0.93 | 7 | 69.8 | ||
550 | 40 | 0.44 | 801 | 842 | 2.96 | 730 | 0.8 | 6 | 44.7 | ||
550 | 40 | 0.32 | 700 | 899 | 7.43 | 730 | 0.96 | 6 | 60.9 | ||
550 | 60 | 0.44 | 788 | 829 | 3 | 720 | 0.95 | 4 | 30.3 | ||
550 | 60 | 0.32 | 686 | 881 | 6.67 | 730 | 0.9 | 7 | 47.5 | ||
633 | 0 | 0.27 | 656 | 875 | 20.58 | 635 | 0.79 | 13.2 | 86.8 | ||
Nepomuceno et al. [47] | 2014 | 643 | 0 | 0.29 | 761 | 729 | 19.95 | 630 | 0.86 | 9.9 | 81.9 |
670 | 0 | 0.27 | 695 | 772 | 21.84 | 620 | 0.81 | 10.4 | 85 | ||
551 | 16 | 0.31 | 822 | 772 | 11.34 | 625 | 0.7 | 11.6 | 59.6 | ||
564 | 16 | 0.31 | 841 | 729 | 11.55 | 630 | 0.77 | 10.3 | 56.8 | ||
588 | 16 | 0.28 | 752 | 820 | 12.39 | 635 | 0.77 | 11 | 64.8 | ||
604 | 16 | 0.28 | 772 | 772 | 12.71 | 625 | 0.8 | 9.7 | 63.1 | ||
613 | 16 | 0.26 | 686 | 875 | 12.92 | 615 | 0.77 | 12.7 | 67.5 | ||
618 | 16 | 0.28 | 790 | 729 | 13.02 | 640 | 0.83 | 11.6 | 63.6 | ||
649 | 16 | 0.26 | 726 | 772 | 13.65 | 650 | 0.84 | 10 | 69.1 | ||
613 | 24 | 0.26 | 685 | 875 | 15.33 | 645 | 0.8 | 13.3 | 78.2 | ||
633 | 24 | 0.26 | 706 | 820 | 15.86 | 630 | 0.79 | 12.4 | 79.2 | ||
649 | 24 | 0.26 | 726 | 772 | 16.28 | 655 | 0.84 | 10.5 | 80.3 | ||
567 | 25 | 0.3 | 846 | 729 | 13.86 | 655 | 0.82 | 11.3 | 69.9 | ||
607 | 25 | 0.27 | 774 | 772 | 15.12 | 640 | 0.83 | 10.8 | 74.5 | ||
620 | 25 | 0.27 | 792 | 729 | 15.54 | 635 | 0.83 | 10.1 | 75.7 | ||
Bingol and Tohumcu [48] | 2013 | 500 | 40 | 0.35 | 923 | 663 | 7.5 | 680 | 0.88 | 6.2 | 55 |
500 | 55 | 0.35 | 908 | 652 | 7.5 | 700 | 0.91 | 7 | 42.7 | ||
450 | 0 | 0.45 | 890 | 810 | 9.25 | 687 | 0.8 | 9 | 50 | ||
480 | 0 | 0.4 | 890 | 810 | 13.3 | 650 | 0.88 | 12 | 52 | ||
Krishnapal et al. [49] | 2013 | 450 | 10 | 0.45 | 890 | 810 | 8.2 | 689 | 0.79 | 8.6 | 45 |
480 | 10 | 0.4 | 890 | 810 | 9.9 | 665 | 0.85 | 9 | 46 | ||
450 | 20 | 0.45 | 890 | 810 | 6.4 | 690 | 0.78 | 8 | 41 | ||
480 | 20 | 0.4 | 890 | 810 | 9.68 | 685 | 0.82 | 8.4 | 42 | ||
450 | 30 | 0.45 | 890 | 810 | 4.8 | 695 | 0.78 | 8 | 39 | ||
480 | 30 | 0.4 | 890 | 810 | 9.4 | 680 | 0.8 | 8.1 | 40 | ||
575 | 0 | 0.31 | 794 | 772 | 17.22 | 645 | 0.75 | 13.3 | 77.8 | ||
589 | 0 | 0.31 | 813 | 729 | 17.64 | 640 | 0.75 | 10.6 | 76.8 | ||
628 | 0 | 0.29 | 744 | 772 | 19.53 | 615 | 0.77 | 11.6 | 82.9 | ||
Dhiyaneshwaran et al. [50] | 2013 | 530 | 20 | 0.45 | 768 | 668 | 4.55 | 680 | 0.95 | 9.8 | 37.9 |
530 | 30 | 0.45 | 768 | 668 | 4.55 | 690 | 0.95 | 8.5 | 41.4 | ||
530 | 40 | 0.45 | 768 | 668 | 4.55 | 685 | 0.95 | 7.9 | 37.2 | ||
530 | 50 | 0.45 | 768 | 668 | 4.55 | 678 | 0.95 | 7.6 | 35.9 | ||
500 | 0 | 0.35 | 967 | 694 | 8 | 630 | 0.84 | 6.1 | 78.6 | ||
500 | 25 | 0.35 | 938 | 673 | 7.5 | 660 | 0.85 | 7 | 62 | ||
Mahalingam and Nagamani [51] | 2011 | 450 | 30 | 0.43 | 789 | 926 | 2.77 | 660 | 0.88 | 3.5 | 44.8 |
500 | 30 | 0.39 | 731 | 862 | 6.15 | 640 | 0.75 | 2.5 | 53.6 | ||
550 | 30 | 0.35 | 711 | 835 | 4.74 | 610 | 0.86 | 3.2 | 57.3 | ||
450 | 40 | 0.43 | 780 | 917 | 2.77 | 650 | 0.88 | 3.7 | 41.3 | ||
500 | 40 | 0.39 | 724 | 850 | 6.15 | 680 | 0.88 | 2.3 | 46.7 | ||
550 | 40 | 0.35 | 701 | 823 | 6.77 | 730 | 0.9 | 3.4 | 54.9 | ||
450 | 50 | 0.43 | 770 | 907 | 2.5 | 675 | 0.72 | 2.7 | 37.1 | ||
500 | 50 | 0.39 | 714 | 836 | 4.92 | 730 | 0.88 | 2.9 | 41.8 | ||
550 | 50 | 0.35 | 703 | 824 | 5.41 | 725 | 0.88 | 2.4 | 44.4 | ||
550 | 15 | 0.41 | 910 | 590 | 10.73 | 673 | 0.89 | 7.5 | 35.2 | ||
Muthupriya et al. [52] | 2012 | 500 | 50 | 0.35 | 900 | 600 | 10.5 | 680 | 0.95 | 7.2 | 28.7 |
530 | 0 | 0.45 | 768 | 668 | 4.55 | 660 | 0.92 | 12 | 30 | ||
530 | 10 | 0.45 | 768 | 668 | 4.55 | 675 | 0.93 | 10.6 | 32.2 |
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Saha, P., Debnath, P. & Thomas, P. Prediction of fresh and hardened properties of self-compacting concrete using support vector regression approach. Neural Comput & Applic 32, 7995–8010 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00521-019-04267-w
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00521-019-04267-w