skip to main content
10.1145/3465222.3465235acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesicgdaConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Comparison of feed-forward, cascade-forward, and Elman algorithms models for determination of the elastic modulus of pavement layers

Authors Info & Claims
Published:28 July 2021Publication History

ABSTRACT

This research presents the ability of three different types of artificial neural networks (ANN) algorithms to predict the elastic modulus of flexible asphalt pavements subject to dynamic traffic load utilizing a falling weight deflectometer (FWD). (The feed-forward, cascade-forward, and Elman) back-propagation network types have been developed with different numbers of neurons in hidden layers to define the optimal ANN model using the Matlab software. The developed ANN models were used to predict the elastic modulus values for 30 new pavement sections that were not used in the process of training, validation, or testing to ensure its suitability and the efficiency of each model. The best model from each algorithm type of developed models was chosen by using evaluation metrics and their results were compared with each other and the real obtained data to determine the most successful model. There were very minor differences in the results between the expected and the actual data. The results indicated that, among these algorithms, the feed-forward model has a better performance compared to the other two ANN types. The research confirms the possibility of ANN models to predict pavement layers elastic modulus with high speed and accuracy for using it in Pavement performance evaluation.

Skip Supplemental Material Section

Supplemental Material

References

  1. Irwin L H. 2002. Backcalculation: An overview and perspective. Pavement Evaluation Conference, 2002, Roanoke, Virginia, USAGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Pekcan O, Tutumluer E, and Thompson M R. 2008. Artificial neural network based backcalculation of conventional flexible pavements on lime stabilized soils Proc. 12th Int. Assoc. Comput. Methods Adv. Geomech, 1647-1654.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Tang X, Stoffels S M, and Palomino A M. 2013. Evaluation of Pavement Layer Moduli using Instrumentation Measurements. Int. J. Pavement Res. Technol. 6(6), 755-764.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Liu G-R, and Han X. 2003. Computational inverse techniques in nondestructive evaluation. (CRC press).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Tutumluer E, Pekcan O, and Ghaboussi J. 2009. Nondestructive pavement evaluation using finite element analysis based soft computing models. (NEXTRANS Center (US)).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. USDOT F A A. 2011. Use of nondestructive testing in the evaluation of airport pavements Advis. Circ. 150/5370-11BGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Schmalzer P N. 2006. Long-Term Pavement Performance Program manual for falling weight deflectometer measurements. version 4.1Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Al-Mansour A I, and Al-Swailem S S. 1999. Pavement Condition Data Collection and Evaluation of Riyadh Main Street Network. J. King Saud Univ. Sci. 11, 1, 1–17.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. ÖCAL A. 2014. BACKCALCULATION OF PAVEMENT LAYER PROPERTIES USING ARTIFICIAL NEURAL NETWORK BASED GRAVITATIONAL SEARCH ALGORITHM. Master Thesis, Civil Engineering Department, Middle East Technical University.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Papalambros P Y, Wilde D J, Zanchettin C, McCulloch W, Pitts W, and Haykin S. 2001. Neural Networks–A Comprehensive Foundation.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Kumar R, Aggarwal R K, and Sharma J D. 2013. Energy analysis of a building using artificial neural network: A review. Energy Build. 65, 352-358.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  12. Glorot X, Bordes A, and Bengio Y. 2011. Domain adaptation for large-scale sentiment classification: A deep learning approach. Proceedings of the 28th International Conference on International Conference on Machine Learning, 513–520.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Ajbar A, and Ali E M. 2015. Prediction of municipal water production in touristic Mecca City in Saudi Arabia using neural networks. J. King Saud Univ. Sci. 27, 83–91.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Anupam K, Dutta S, Bhattacharjee C, and Datta S. 2016. Artificial neural network modelling for removal of chromium (VI) from wastewater using physisorption onto powdered activated carbon. Desalination and Water Treatment 57, 3632–3641.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  15. Mandal S, Mahapatra S S, Sahu M K, and Patel R K. 2015. Artificial neural network modelling of As (III) removal from water by novel hybrid material. Process Saf. Environ. Prot. 93, 249–264.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  16. Li M, and Wang H. 2019. Development of ANN-GA program for backcalculation of pavement moduli under FWD testing with viscoelastic and nonlinear parameters. Int. J. Pavement Eng. 20 490–498.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Ceylan H, Gopalakrishnan K and Bayrak M B 2008 Neural networks based concrete airfield pavement layer moduli backcalculation Civ. Eng. Environ. Syst. 25 185–99Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  18. Mun S, and Kim Y R. 2009. Backcalculation of subgrade stiffness under rubblised PCC slabs using multilevel FWD loads. Int. J. Pavement Eng. 10, 9–18.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  19. Gopalakrishnan K, Kim S, Ceylan H, and Kaya O. 2014. Development of asphalt dynamic modulus master curve using falling weight deflectometer measurements. Iowa State University, Institute for Transportation.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. Abu-Lebdeh G, and Ahmed K. 2013. A Neural Network Approach for Mechanistic Analysis of Jointed Concrete Pavement. Proceedings of the Eastern Asia Society for Transportation Studies vol. 9.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. Ghanizadeh A R, and Ahadi M R. 2015. Application of artificial neural networks for analysis of flexible pavements under static loading of standard axle. Int. J. Transp. Eng. 3, 31–43.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. Khalil A S, Starovoytov S V, and Serpokrylov N S. 2018. The Adaptive Neuro-Fuzzy Inference System (ANFIS) Application for the Ammonium Removal from Aqueous Solution. Predicting by Biochar Materials Science Forum vol. 931 (Trans Tech Publ), 985–990.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. Elshamy M M M, Tiraturyan A N, Uglova E V, and Zakari M 2020 Development of the non-destructive monitoring methods of the pavement conditions via artificial neural networks Journal of Physics: Conference Series vol, 1614 (IOP Publishing), p 12099.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. Gobakis K, Kolokotsa D, Synnefa A, Saliari M, Giannopoulou K, and Santamouris M. 2011. Development of a model for urban heat island prediction using neural network techniques. Sustain. Cities Soc. 1, 2, 104–115Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  25. Hedayat A, Davilu H, Barfrosh A A, and Sepanloo K. 2009. Estimation of research reactor core parameters using cascade feed forward artificial neural networks. Prog. Nucl. Energy 51, 709–718.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  26. Çetin O, Dalcalı A, and Temurtaş F. 2020. A comparative study on parameters estimation of squirrel cage induction motors using neural networks with unmemorized training. Eng. Sci. Technol. an Int. J. Vol. 23, Issue 5, 1126-1133.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref

Recommendations

Comments

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Sign in
  • Published in

    cover image ACM Other conferences
    ICGDA '21: Proceedings of the 2021 4th International Conference on Geoinformatics and Data Analysis
    April 2021
    78 pages
    ISBN:9781450389341
    DOI:10.1145/3465222

    Copyright © 2021 ACM

    Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

    Publisher

    Association for Computing Machinery

    New York, NY, United States

    Publication History

    • Published: 28 July 2021

    Permissions

    Request permissions about this article.

    Request Permissions

    Check for updates

    Qualifiers

    • research-article
    • Research
    • Refereed limited

PDF Format

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader

HTML Format

View this article in HTML Format .

View HTML Format