Application of Artificial Intelligence in Pile Foundation: Project Team

Application of Artificial Intelligence in Pile Foundation
Project Team
Sl. No. Reg. No. Student Name

01 14ETCE001003 Amit Patel
02 14ETCE001005 Arjun Rathod
03 14ETCE001006 Arnab Bhargav
04 14ETCE001018 Sachin Kulkarni
Supervisors: 1. Dr. S. D. Anitha kumari

2. Mr. Abhishek P V
May-2018
B.Tech in Civil Engineering

FACULTY OF ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY
RAMAIAH UNIVERSITY OF APPLIED SCIENCES
Bengaluru -560 054
Application of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in Pile foundation
i
FACULTY OF ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY
Certificate
This is to certify that the Project titled “Application of Artificial
Intelligence in Pile Foundation” is a bonafide work carried out in the
Department of Civil Engineering by Mr Amit Patel, Arjun Rathod, Arnab
Bhargav and Sachin Kulkarni bearing Reg. No. 14ETCE001003,
14ETCE001005, 14ETCE001006 and 14ETCE001018 respectively in partial
fulfilment of requirements for the award of B. Tech. Degree in Civil
Engineering of Ramaiah University of Applied Sciences.
August – 2018
Dr.S.D.Anitha kumari Mr. Abhishek Pulgur

Supervisors
Dr. H.M. Rajashekara Swamy Dr. M. Arulanantham

Head – Department of CE Dean-FET
i
M.S.Ramaiah University of Applied Sciences – Faculty of Engineering and Technology (FET)
Declaration
Application of Artificial Intelligence in Pile Foundation
The project work is submitted in partial fulfilment of academic requirements for the
award of B. Tech. Degree in the Department of Civil Engineering of the Faculty of
Engineering and Technology of Ramaiah University of Applied Sciences. The project
report submitted herewith is a result of our own work and in conformance to the
guidelines on plagiarism as laid out in the University Student Handbook. All sections of
the text and results which have been obtained from other sources are fully referenced.
We understand that cheating and plagiarism constitute a breach of University
regulations, hence this project report has been passed through plagiarism check and the
report has been submitted to the supervisor.
Sl. No. Reg. No. Student Name Signature

01 14ETCE001003 Amit Patel
02 14ETCE001005 Arjun Rathod
03 14ETCE001006 Arnab Bhargav
04 14ETCE001018 Sachin Kulkarni
Date : 21st May 2018
1
Acknowledgements
We would like to sincerely thank our supervisors Dr. S. D. Anitha Kumari and Mr.
Abhishek Pulgur for their invaluable guidance, constant assistance, support, endurance
and constructive suggestions for the betterment of the project.
We also would like to convey my heartfelt thanks to Dr. H.M Rajashekhar Swamy, Head
of Civil Engineering Department, RUAS for giving us the opportunity to embark upon this
topic.
We wish to thank Ramaiah University of Applied Sciences for providing us a healthy
environment to proceed with the topic.
Finally, we are thankful to our parents and friends for their continued moral and
material support throughout the course.
Arjun. Rathod
Amit Patel
Arnab Bhargav
Sachin Kulkarni
Application of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in Pile foundations

2
Abstract
Artificial Intelligence (AI) is not based on making robots or machines, it is about

making an artificial mind that can solve problems like a human mind. Creating an
artificial mind to simulate human behaviour is one of the main aim of the researchers
and scientists all over the world. AI is prominent in handling uncertainty principles and
non-linearity issues. The behaviour of pile foundations in soils is complex, uncertain and
not yet entirely understood. This fact has encouraged many researchers to apply the AI
techniques for prediction and modelling of the behaviour of pile foundations, including
the Ultimate Bearing Capacity (UBC), settlement estimation and load-settlement
response. Among the above-mentioned factors UBC is the most important aspect of soil.
The aim of this project is to predict the UBC of pile foundation on cohesive and
cohesionless soils.
The Artificial Neural Networks (ANN) have been applied to find the UBC on
cohesive and cohesionless soils by using nntool in MATLAB. Totally 128 data for
cohesionless soil and 164 data for cohesive soil were collected from different sources.
60% of total data sets is used for training and remaining 40% is used for testing. After
several attempts back propagation neural network was efficient to provide us 88%
accuracy for cohesive soil and 95% accuracy for cohesionless soil samples.
The results indicate that neural network was successfully used in modelling the
non-linear relationship between UBC and other parameters.

3
Table of Contents
Certificate ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………….……(i)
Declaration……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………1
Acknowledgements......................................................................................................................... 2
Abstract ............................................................................................ Error! Bookmark not defined.
Table of Contents ............................................................................................................................ 4
List of Tables ................................................................................................................................... 6
List of Figures .................................................................................................................................. 7
Nomenclature14…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….8
1. Introduction ................................................................................................................... 159
1.1 Artificial intelligence (AI)…………………………………………………………………………….10
1.1.1 Moments that Shaped AI……………………………10
1.1.2 Recent development in AI.............................11
1.1.2.1 Need of AI....................................................11
1.1.2.2 Backdrop of AI..............................................12
1.2 The Future of Artificial Intelligence……………………………………………………………..12
1.3 AI in Civil Engineering………………………………………………………………………………….13
Organisation of the report…………………………………………………………………….........................14
Appendix………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………14
2. Literature review.............................................................................................................. 15
3. Overview of ANN and Procedures..................................................................................... 17
3.1 Introduction .................................................................................................... 17
3.2 Neural Network:........................................................................................... 18
3.2.1 Comparison between Artificial Neural Network (ANN) with Biological
Neural Network (BNN): ......................................................................................... 18
3.2.2 Principle of Artificial Neural Network: ..................................................... 20
3.3 Artificial Neural Network Architecture: ....................................................... 22

4
3.4 Learning Techniques in Artificial Neural Networks: .................................... 23

3.5 Conclusion ........................................................................................... .........24
4. Experimental data ............................................................................................................ 25
4.1 Introduction: ................................................................................................... 25
4.2 Prediction of ultimate bearing capacity in cohesionless soil: ........................ 25
4.3 Prediction of ultimate bearing capacity in cohesive soil: ............................... 26
5. Analysis and Discussion .................................................................................................... 29
5.1 Analysis: .......................................................................................................... 29
5.2 Method adopted in this study ........................................................................ 30
6. Conclusion and Future recommendations ......................................................................... 38
References

5
List of Tables
Table 3.1 Comparative analysis of BNN and ANN ………………….……………………20

Table 4.1 Data collected for cohesionless soil……..…………….…………………………26
Table 4.2 Data collected for cohesive soil.………….………….……….……………………28
Table 5.1 Pile driving formulae………………………………………….…………………………30
Table 5.2 List of data……………………………………………………………………………………31

6
List of Figures
________________________________________________________________________
Figure 1.1 Humanoid Robot Sophia ………………………………………………………………………9

Figure 1.2 Pile Foundation…………………………………………………………………………………….13
Figure 3.1 Inter-connection in brain………………………………………………………………………17
Figure 3.2 Difference between computer and human brain………………………………….18
Figure 3.4 Biological Neural Network…………………………………………………………………….19
Figure 3.5 Artificial Neuron Network…………………………………………………………………….19
Figure 3.6 Linear activation function…………………………………………………………………….21
Figure 3.7 Non- Linear activation function…………………………………………………………….22
Figure 3.8 Layers in ANN ………………………………………………………………………………………22
Figure 4.1 Cohesionless Soil…………………………………………………………………………………..25
Figure 4.2 Cohesive Soil…………………………………………………………………………………………27
Figure 5.1 Neural network tool in MATLAB……………………………………………………………32
Figure 5.2 Neural network model………………………………………………………………………….33
Figure 5.3 Training phase………………………………………………………………………………….....34
Figure 5.4 Regression for cohesive soil………………………………………………………………...35
Figure 5.5 Regression for cohesionless soil……………………………………………………………36
Figure 5.6 Check for cohesive soil sample……………………………………………………………..36
Figure 5.7 Check for cohesionless soil…………………………………………………………………...37

7
Nomenclature
________________________________________________________________________
B Width of Footing (m)

D Depth of Footing (m)
L/B Footing Geometry
γ Unit Weight Sand (kNm−3)
φ Shearing Resistance (deg.)
A Area (m2 )
L Length (m)
E Young’s modulus (Nm−2 ))
N Flap Number
W Soil Specific Weight (W)
C Cohesion (kNm−2 )
Qu Ultimate Bearing Capacity (kN)

8
1. Introduction
Human mind is the most complex system in the world. The most complex networks
which the existing systems can’t imagine can be easily analysed by human brain. Making an
artificial mind to act in the same way as a human being tackles an objective, is the main aim of
the researchers and scientists all over the world. In 1956, John McCarthy introduced the term
artificial intelligence and defined it as ’the science and Engineering of making intelligent
machines’ (towardsdatascience.com). Artificial Intelligence (AI) is not based on making robots or
machines, it is about making an artificial mind that can solve problems like a human mind. Over
the years, many people have been successful in making robots that can interact and talk with
others like a normal human being. One such example is that of Hanson Robotics who has been
able to successfully develop a humanoid robot named Sophia as shown in figure 1.
Figure 3.1: Humanoid Robot Sophia (www.electronicsmedia.info)
Sophia is the most advanced robot to date and also is a cultural icon. Showing up in
various media outlets she has become a media darling, lighting up the interest of people towards
AI. Sophia has gained her name as a renowned speaker in business and showed her great
potential across several industries.

9
1.1 What is AI?
Today artificial intelligence has entered our lives and has become a part of it. From the
apple voice assistant SIRI to self-driving cars, all have been developed using artificial intelligence.
Science fiction movies portray artificial intelligence as robots with human like features but AI is
not only robots, it can be used in anything from Google’s search engine to autonomous
weapons.
In the 21st century artificial intelligence has only been able to perform small tasks like
only facial recognition or only driving a car. However, in future many researchers have the
motive to create a general AI that would be able to outperform human beings at nearly every
cognitive task.
1.1.1 Moments that Shaped AI

1956
The Dartmouth Summer Research Project on Artificial Intelligence introduces a field that will aim
to create software as smart as human beings.
1965
Eliza, the first chatbot, which used to behave like a psychotherapist was created by Joseph
Weizenbaum.
1975
A program was developed at Stanford named Meta-Dendral to interpret chemical analyses.
1987
Engineer Ernst Dickmanns fitted a Mercedes van with two cameras and a number of computers
to drive itself 20 kilometers along a German highway at more than 55 mph.
1997
The then world chess champion Garry Kasparov was defeated by IBM’s computer Deep Blue.
2004
A robot car race named Darpa Grand Challenge was organised by The Pentagon in the Mojave
Desert that jump starts the autonomous-car industry.
2012

10
A new field called deep learning was introduced which enhanced new corporate interests in AI
by revealing that their ideas could make speech and image recognition more precise.
2012
Neuro-fuzzy based prediction of the durability of self-consolidating concrete to various sodium
sulfate exposure regimes was developed by Bassuoni and Nehdi.
2016
The world champion of the board game named ‘Go’ was defeated by a google based computer
program called AlphaGo.
1.1.2 Recent development in AI

Recently many people like Stephen Hawking, Elon Musk, Steve Wozniak, Bill Gates, and
many others have showed concern in the worldwide media and via open letters about the
danger posed by AI. Now a question comes in mind regarding the sudden concern for AI.
A few centuries ago, the thought of artificial intelligence was merely a science fiction.
However, in the past few years’ major milestones have been seen in the artificial intelligence
field. Experts viewed these milestones to be decades ahead, but the breakthrough has struck
everyone with surprise. But some experts still suggest that the human-level AI is centuries away.
The behaviour of a superintelligence cannot be predicted by human beings. For instance,

looking at the human evolution. Humans now control the planet, not of the fact that humans are
the strongest, fastest or biggest, but because human beings are the smartest. But now if humans
are no longer the smartest, then there might be no assurance of human beings to remain in
control.
1.1.2.1 Importance of AI
 The first and foremost advantage of AI is that it will have a very lower error rate as
compared to humans. AI will have an outstanding precision and speed
 AI will be able to work in a hostile environment, thus able to perform hazardous tasks,
like space exploration, mining and tackle life threatening problems

11
 In case of laborious work AI can be a significant help for human beings, for example in
case of construction of a high rise building or other complicated structures all the
calculations can be done at the blink of an eye with the help of AI.
 AI system doesn’t require to sleep, doesn’t get bored or is not required to get
entertained
 In card-based systems AI can catch any frauds
 The present practicing engineers are using AI to tackle a whole range of problems.
Future development of AI will be a boost to the construction industry which mainly will
include benefits in terms of optimisation, speed of processes and cost reduction
1.1.2.2 Backdrop of AI
Experts foretell that a super intelligent AI is unlikely to exhibit human emotions like love or
hate. While experts predict two most likely scenarios:
 The AI is programmed to do something catastrophic: Autonomous weapons in the
hands of the wrong person, could easily cause mass destruction
 The AI is programmed to benefit the society, but it takes a wrong path for attaining
the goal: this can be understood by considering the following example if a command is
given to an intelligent car to drive to the airport as fast as possible, the car might get
there in time but at the same time chased by the police, thus doing not what expected
but literally what it was asked for
1.2 The Future of Artificial Intelligence
At present, people can expect more AI powered features in their gadgets and
smartphones. The AI advancement will improve virtual assistance and smart speakers as
predicted by Google and Amazon in particular.
The present decade is the best time for an AI researcher. The AI investigating labs have
sprung up in number and also are better funded than ever in history. Despite the whirlwind of
late advances in AI and predictions about its future, there are as yet numerous things that
machines can't do, for example, understanding the variation of languages, common sense and
taking in knowledge from a couple of examples. AI programming should ace assignments like
these in the future if it is to draw near to the multifaceted, versatile and imaginative knowledge
of people.

12
1.3 AI in Civil Engineering

Artificial intelligence has been successfully applied to every problem in most of the fields
and civil engineering field has also been benefited from this advancement. The available AI
techniques are artiﬁcial neural networks (ANNs), genetic programming (GP), evolutionary
polynomial regression (EPR), support vector machines (SVM), M5 model trees, and k-nearest
neighbors. Among these ANNs are extensively used. Recently, GP and EPR are also used in civil
engineering stream and have even achieved a prominent success.
A significant number of systems have been developed in geotechnical field such as to
know the site characterization, classification of soils and rocks, foundations, earth retaining
structures, slopes, tunnels and underground openings, mining, liquefaction, ground
improvement, geotextiles, ground water/dams, roads and earthworks. For instance, the
behaviour of pile foundations in soils is complex, uncertain, and not yet entirely understood. This
fact has encouraged many researchers to apply the AI techniques for prediction and modelling
of the behaviour of pile foundations, including the ultimate bearing capacity, settlement
estimation, and load-settlement response. A typical pile foundation is shown in figure 2. This
report aims to cover the aspects of the ultimate bearing capacity of pile foundation with the
help of artificial neural networks.
Figure 1.4 Pile Foundation (www.civildigital.com)

13
Organisation of the report
Chapter 1: Introduction
Introduction to the topic of artificial intelligence and looking at the pros and cons of AI. Also
discussing about the future of AI and the application of AI in civil engineering.
Chapter 2: Literature Review

A review of the various books and articles referred for understanding the current scenario of the
application of ANN in pile foundations.
Chapter 3: Overview of ANN and Methodology

Discussion on the various methods of AI and selection of the method used for the project.
Explanation of the steps taken to complete the project using MATLAB software.
Chapter 4: Experimental Data

Collection of previous experimental data to be used in the project.
Chapter 5: Analysis and Discussion

The analysis of the results obtained from the ANN and the discussions.
Chapter 6: Conclusion
Inference from the results and future scope.
References
Appendix

14
2. Literature review
Proposed traditional theories for predicting the ultimate bearing capacity of foundations have a
similar format to the theory proposed by Terzaghi (1943), which was based on a similar
superposition formula. Eq. (1) illustrates the format for vertically loaded foundations on
cohesionless soils.
Qu = qNqFqsFqd +0.5γBNγFγsFγd------------------------------------------- (1)
where B is the width of foundation (m), γ is unit weight of soil (kN/m3), q=γD, D is the depth of
footing embedment (m), Nq and Nγ are the bearing capacity factors, Fqs and Fγs are the shape
factors and Fqs and Fγs are the depth factors. All the mentioned factors in Eq. (1) are non-
dimensional. Terzaghi derived this equation from the theory of bearing capacity developed by
Prandtl (1920) that was obtained from the theory of plasticity for evaluating the punching of a
rigid base into a softer material (Bowles, 1982). There are several different equations to
calculate these factors, and various definitions have been proposed by numerous researchers,
including Terzaghi (1943), Meyerhof (1963), Hansen (1970), Vesic (1973), Lundgren and
Mortensten (1953), De Beer (1970), Kumbhojkar (1993), and Bolton and Lau (1993). In each of
these methods, the footing geometry and the shearing resistance angle of sand play key roles in
the bearing capacity of a foundation against external loads. They illustrate the effects of physical
conditions of the soil and foundation system. Among the foundation parameters, width (B) is the
smaller lateral dimension), length (L) is the larger lateral dimension), and shape; among the
environmental parameters, depth of the foundation embedment (D), unit weight of soil (γ) and
shearing resistance angle of soil (ϕ) have the most significant effects on the ultimate bearing
capacity value. Meyerhof (1950) believed that, of the physical characteristics of the footing,
foundation depth has the greatest effect on the bearing capacity. There are also some other
parameters that may affect the bearing capacity, such as the compressibility of the soil;
however, they have a low degree of importance in comparison with other parameters.
Considering the unit weight of soil (γ) and the internal friction angle of soil (ϕ) allows a formula
to be proposed without including the compressibility of soil. Additionally, the important effect of
the water table level should also be considered. A recent study by Foye et al. (2006) revealed

15
that the most important parameters to be considered are B, L, D, γ and ϕ, and the L/B ratio
interferes with the effect of the footing shape. All the above-mentioned ways to express shape,
depth and bearing capacity factors are based on these parameters.
By extensive computing methods (particularly for pattern recognition and data mining
problems), Padmini et al. (2008) used an Adaptive NeuroFuzzy Inference System (ANFIS), an
Artificial Neural Network (ANN) and a Fuzzy Inference System (FIS) to develop models that
establish correlations between the initial conditions of the soil-foundation system as the inputs
and ultimate bearing capacity as the output. Their study showed the high potential of soft
computing methods for modelling the ultimate bearing capacity of pile foundations.
The purpose of this study is to calculate the ultimate bearing capacity of the pile foundation
using artificial neural network both in cohesive as well as cohesionless soil samples. First, an
overview of the neural network methodology must be presented. This would be followed by
some practical guidelines for implementing back-propagation neural networks. Experimental
data sets for both cohesive and cohesion less soil sample will be provided. Finally analysis of the
results obtained from the back propagation neural network for both the soil sample will be
compared with the actual experimental data sets.

16
3. Overview of ANN and Procedures
3.1 Introduction
The Artificial Neural Network (ANN) is a machine learning method developed from the
idea of simulating the human brain. The capability of artificial neural network can model
complex non-linear relationship. ANN also has precise fault tolerance and it is fast and highly
scalable with parallel processing.
Recent advancements in the field of artificial intelligence include voice recognition,
robotics and image recognition. Artificial neural networks is meant to derive meaning from the
imprecise and complex data. This Neural network is capable to extract patterns in the given data
as inputs and detect the trends that are way too complex to be noticed by human beings or
other techniques. A trained neural network can be considered as an expert, to whom input can
be given and output can be expected. This neural network is based on creating the projection
from given sets of data and capable to answer ‘what if’ situations. This computational model
which is inspired by the human brain (Figure 3.1) can be considered as the next major
advancement in the Computing Industry.
Figure 3.1 – inter-connection in brain

17
3.2 Neural Network:

The term ‘Neural’ is derived from the ‘neuron’ or nerve cells (basic functional unit of
human nervous system) which are present in the brain and other parts of the body. A
comparison between the computer and human brain is shown in Figure 3.2. This clearly indicates
that the learning capability is directly related to the programming capability of the computer.
Figure 3.2 – Difference between computer and human brain (Ref: Xenonstack.com)
Human brains can recognise various patterns precisely, but the progress of machine pattern
recognition is commendable. For example, recent development in the cameras of the
smartphone or digital camera can able to recognise specific faces. But human brain can
recognise complex patterns and adapt to them.
3.2.1 Comparison between Artificial Neural Network (ANN) with Biological Neural
Network (BNN):
The artificial neural network functions similar to human body’s biological neural
network. A typical biological neuron is shown in Figure 3.3. The dendrites in Biological Neural
Network (BNN) are similar to the input (weighted inputs) based on their synaptic inter-
connection in the Artificial Neural Network (ANN).

18
Figure 3.3: Biological Neuron
The function of Biological Neural Network is presented in Figure 3.4. The task is commanded
from the left and through dendrites it goes to the cell body, where the summation of data and
threshold takes place. In the final step, the output comes from the axon (to the right) in
biological neuron network which can be compared to the output unit in artificial neuron
network. The artificial neuron unit in Artificial Neural Network (ANN) is similar to the cell body,
which also have basic task of summation and threshold unit.
Figure 3.4: Biological Neural Network

19
The comparative analysis of Biological Neural Network (BNN) and Artificial Neural Network
(ANN) has been tabulated in the Table 3.1.
Table 3.1 Comparative analysis of BNN and ANN
Characteristics Artificial Neural Network Biological(Real) Neural
Network
Speed Faster in processing the Slower in processing the
information as compared to information as compared to
biological neural network. The ANN. The response time of
response time of ANN is in BNN is in milliseconds.
nanoseconds.
Processing Processing is of serial type Processing is of massively
parallel type
Size & Complexity Size and complexity is less Higher size and complexity as
compared to ANN.
Storage The information storage is The information is of
editable, that means new data adaptable type.
can be added by deleting the
older one.
Fault tolerance Once the information is This processing is of natural
corrupted, it cannot be type rather than computing
retrieved in the case of type.
system failure.
Control Mechanism control unit is present for No specific control
controlling computing mechanism.
activities
3.2.2 Principle of Artificial Neural Network:

The Artificial Neural Network receives information from the external world in the form
of pattern and image in vector form. Neural network (ANN) is provided with the individual
unique statements which are assigned to unique weights according to the priority. Figure 3.5
shows an ANN where x1, x2,….xn are the statements and W1, W2,….Wn are the assigned weights

20
and b = bias. Bias is used to increase the flexibility of the network, it fits the data in the case of
zero as the output.
Figure 3.5: Artificial Neuron Network
Each statement or input is multiplied with the respective weights. The weights are the crucial
part of the artificial neural network, it shows the strength of the interconnection between the
neuron inside the artificial neural network. These statements with assigned weights is
collectively fed to the individual unit of artificial neural network called neuron. If the weighted
sum value comes to zero, bias is added to make the output non-zero or set the system response.
Bias has the weights and inputs which always equal to ‘one’. It basically allows the shifting of the
activation function to the left or right. The sum of the inputs can be any numerical positive
value.
So to fix or limit the output, the threshold value is assigned. For this, the sum of the inputs has to
pass through the threshold value. This gate or activation function is set to transfer the sum to
get the desired output.
There are two types of activation function:
 Linear activation function: the function is a line or linear in nature as shown in Figure
3.6. Therefore, the output function won’t be confined between any ranges.

21
 Non-Linear Activation function: the function is scattered and parabolic in nature as

shown in Figure 3.7. This is the most used activation function. It helps the neural
network to learn and adapt with the variety of data
Figure 3.6: Linear activation function (ref: https://towardsdatascience.com)

Figure 3.7: Non- Linear activation function (ref: https://towardsdatascience.com)
3.3 Artificial Neural Network Architecture:
In the typical artificial neural network, large number of artificial neurons (which is called
as units) are arranged in a series of layers as shown in the Figure 3.8.
Figure 3.8: Layers in ANN (Ref: xenonstack.com)

22
These neural network layers can be divided into three main layers:
1. Input layer: Layer of neural network which receives input from the outside world. And
on this input, the neural network with progress and will work on
2. Hidden layer: Layer after input layer which is responsible for the transformation of the
inputs into something that output units can use.
3. Output layer: Last layer of neural network in which the units that respond to the
information processed are present.
3.4 Learning Techniques in Artificial Neural Networks:

The artificial neural network (ANN) learns by adjusting the assigned weights and bias to
give the desired output. This is known as free parameters. Before feeding the random input to
the neural network, the artificial neural network is trained using defined set of rules which is
also known as the learning algorithm. There are different training algorithms for Artificial Neural
Networks which are presented below:
Gradient Descent Algorithm: This algorithm is the simplest when used in case of supervised
training model. The error between the actual output and target output is calculated. This
algorithm change the weights assigned for the inputs in the network in order to minimize the
error.
Back Propagation Algorithm: This algorithm is the extension of the gradient based delta learning
rule. In the back propagation algorithm, after calculating the error between the output value and
calculated output, the error is back propagated from output layer to input layer through hidden
layer. This algorithm is used in case of multi-layer neural network.
Conjugate gradient Algorithm: In this algorithm, the search is performed along the conjugate
directions which results in the faster convergence than gradient descent.
Levenberg-Marquardt algorithm: This algorithm is also known as damped least squares method,
which has been designed to work with the loss functions which take the form of a sum of
squared errors. This algorithm makes use of gradient vector and the Jacobian Matrix instead of
Hessian Matrix.

23
3.5 Conclusion
The artificial neural networks have been applied successfully to many civil engineering
areas like hydrology, pile capacity prediction, tide level prediction and deflection of retaining
walls, etc. (referred article: Application of Artificial Neural Networks in Civil Engineering by Zode
Pramey Moreshwar) and it is evident that ANN perform even better than convention methods.
In many situations, a civil engineer encounters a complex issue and it consumes time. So, ANN
can be used to get the precise data in less amount of time. ANN have several significant benefits
that make it a powerful and practical tool for solving real life problems.

24
4. Experimental data
4.1 Introduction:
Foundation is the important part of any structure. While design of any foundation it is necessary
to know the type of soil, its behaviour and bearing capacity.
Bearing capacity of soil is the capacity of soil to bear the load applied by the structures
constructed
over it. It is perhaps the most important aspect of soil.
Various methods and efforts have been made to determine the ultimate bearing
capacity of foundation.
4.2 Prediction of ultimate bearing capacity in cohesionless soil:

Cohesionless Soil: Cohesionless soil is any free-running type of soil, such as sand or gravel,
whose strength depends on friction between particles Also may be referred to as frictional soil.
Figure 4.1: Cohesionless Soil

One of the most important steps in the model development for the estimation of bearing
capacity of foundations is identification of parameters that affect the bearing capacity. The
various parameters which affect the bearing capacity include:
1. Width of Footing (B)
2. Depth of Footing (D)
3. Footing Geometry (L/B)

25
4. Unit Weight Sand (γ)

5. Shearing Resistance (φ)
The data required for the study are collected from various sources. The collected data for
cohesionless soil as reported by : Dr. Khalid R. Mahmood Al-Janabi (Iraq) for the region is taken
for this study. Around 100 data is available of which a set is tabulated in Table 4.1. The data set
of 100 is provided.
Table 4.1 Data collected for cohesionless soil(Ref: Dr. Khalid R. Mahmood Al-Janabi : 2008)
Shearing Bearing
Footing Unit Weight
Width (B) Depth (D) Resistance φ Capacity qu
Geometry L/B Sand γd
(deg) (kPa)
0.6 0.3 2 9.85 34.9 270
0.6 0 2 10.2 37.7 200
0.6 0.3 2 10.2 37.7 570
0.6 0 2 10.85 44.8 860
0.6 0.3 2 10.85 44.8 1760
0.5 0 1 10.2 37.7 154
0.5 0 1 10.2 37.7 165
0.5 0 2 10.2 37.7 203
0.5 0 2 10.2 37.7 195
0.5 0 3 10.2 37.7 214
4.3 Prediction of ultimate bearing capacity in cohesive soil:

Cohesive Soil: Cohesive soil means clay (fine grained soil), or soil with a high clay
content, which has cohesive strength. Cohesive soil does not crumble, can be excavated with
vertical side slopes, and is plastic when moist. Cohesive soil is hard to break up when dry and
exhibits significant cohesion when submerged. Cohesive soils include clayey silt, sandy clay, silty
clay, clay and organic clay.

26
Figure 4.2: Cohesive Soil

One of the most important steps in the model development for the estimation of bearing
capacity of foundations is identification of parameters that affect the bearing capacity. The
various parameters which affect the bearing capacity include:
1. Depth (D)
2. Width (B)
3. Length (L)
4. Unit Wt (γ)
5. Internal Friction (φ)
6. Cohesion C
7. Bearing Capacity (Qu)
The data required for the study are collected from various sources. The collected data for
cohesive soil as reported by Harandizadeh, M. M. Toufigh and V. Toufigh (Iran, Mexico, India,
Alton-Illinois) for the region is taken for this study. Around 100 data is available of which a set is
tabulated in Table 4.2. The data set of 100 is provided.
Table 4.2 Data collected for cohesionless soil (Ref: Harandizadeh et al : 2017)
Friction Flap Bearing

Cohesion © Angle Weight Pile soil Friction Angle Number Area Length Capacity
63 5 6.69 11.2 40 0.1 19.4 1230
138 4.23 7.52 14 246 0.16 22.9 2500
142 4.14 7.55 14 210 0.16 23.4 2250

27
148 4.03 7.58 14 306 0.16 24 2700

51.4 0 11.19 14 361 0.16 24.5 2030
26 0 11.68 14 110 0.16 16 1145
54.8 0 11.15 14 482 0.16 25.9 2250
51.8 11.81 7.3 14.88 234 0.16 26.5 2920
51 12.24 7.36 15.02 263 0.16 27.2 2880
58.6 11.43 8.34 14.59 112 0.16 14.5 680
58.5 11.38 8.29 14.58 78 0.16 14.7 540
136 27.82 8.94 14 167 0.16 18.2 2100
137 27.1 8.84 14 94 0.16 19.5 1700
138 29.3 9.21 14 98 0.16 15.9 2200
45.8 31.11 11.23 10.14 406 0.78 20.5 2670
49.8 31.01 11.2 12.47 670 1.16 22.5 3350
45.8 31.11 11.23 10.14 730 0.78 20.5 3750
45.8 31.11 11.23 10.14 1236 0.78 20.5 4100

28
5. Analysis and Discussion
5.1 Analysis:
In most of the engineering streams, empirical relationships are often utilized to estimate design
parameters and engineering properties. Generally, this process involves several interacting
factors in which relationship between these factors is not precisely known. The procedure
utilized to calculate the output value follows a tedious process and demands human attention
along with the intuitions. These all errors can be minimized by utilizing artificial intelligence
techniques. Artificial Intelligence is “the science and engineering of making intelligent
machines”.
There are many techniques utilized in artificial intelligence as Artificial Neural Networks (ANNs),
Genetic Programming (GP), Evolutionary Polynomial Regression (EPR), Support Vector Machines
(SVM), M5 model trees, and k-nearest neighbors. ANN involves different techniques such as
Feedforward neural network, radial basis function, kohonen self-organizing, Recurrent,
conventional, back-propagation and modular neural network. In this study, the path followed
to arrive at the result is back-propagation neural networks. In back-propagation neural
networks, the mathematical relationships between various parameters are not specified.
Instead, they learn from the data fed to them. They can generalize responses that broadly
resemble the data in the learning phase.
Training of the neural network is essentially carried out through the presentation of a series of
example patterns of associated input and target (expected) output values. The hidden and the
intermediate output neurons process its inputs by multiplying each input by its weight, summing
the product and then passing the sum through a nonlinear transfer function to produce the
result. The neural network learns by modifying the weights of the neurons in response to the
errors between the actual output values and the target output values. The transfer function
translates the input signals to output signals. Some of the transfer functions are Unit step
(threshold), sigmoid, piecewise linear and gaussian. The S-shaped sigmoid curve is commonly
used as the transfer function. This is carried out through the gradient descent on the sum of
squares of the errors for all the training patterns. (Rumelhart et all, 1986) Training is carried out
by repeatedly presenting the entire set of training patterns (with the weights updated at the end

29
of each cycle) until the average sum squared error over all the training patterns are minimized
and within the tolerance. At the end of the training phase, the neural network should correctly
reproduce the target output values for the training data provided the errors are minimal, i.e.
convergence occurs. The associated trained weights of the neurons are then stored in the neural
network memory.
In the next phase, the trained neural network is fed a separate set of data. In this testing phase,
the neural network predictions (using the trained weights) are compared with the target output
values. This assesses the reliability of the neural network to generalize correct responses for the
testing patterns that broadly resemble the data in the training set. No additional learning or
weight adjustments occur during this phase. Once the training and testing phases are found to
be successful, the neural network can then be put to use in practical applications.
There are many paths such as C program, python, Java, R-language and MATLAB through which
back-propagation neural network can be triggered. The simplicity and the …… visual
representation of the output made MATLAB the best choice. MATLAB utilizes nntool to estimate
the output viz. ultimate bearing capacity of the pile foundation.
5.2 Methods adopted in this study:

Pile driving formulae are commonly used to estimate the load capacity of driven piles. These
formulae are essentially derived from impulse-momentum principles. The formulae assume that
there is a correlation between the driving resistance and the ultimate load capacity of the pile
Qu. The important factors influencing the load capacity include the hammer characteristics, the
properties of the pile and soil.
Several pile driving formulae are widely used in actual practice. These include the Engineering
News Record (ENR) (Wellington et al, 1892) formula, the Hiley formula (Hiley, 1922) and the
Janbu formula (Janbu, 1953). These are represented in Table 5.1
Table 5.1 Pile driving formulae
Formula Equation for 𝐐𝐮 Remarks

Engineering News WH c= 25mm (gravity hammer)
s+c
Record (ENR) c= 2.5mm (steam hammer)

30
Wp
c= 2.5× W
(steam hammer on
very heavy piles)

Hiley ef WH W + n2 Wp ef , c1 , c2 , c3 and n are
×
s + 0.5(c1 + c2 + c3 ) W + Wp tabulated by Chellis (Chellis,
1961)
Janbu WH λ 0.5
k u = Cd {1 + (1 + Ce ) }
kus d
WHL
λe =
AEs 2
Wp
Cd = 0.75 + 0.15
W
In table 1 W is the hammer weight, H is the hammer drop, sis the settlement, L is the pile length,
Wp is the pile weight, A is the pile cross-sectional area and E is the pile modulus of elasticity.
In back-propagation neural networks these formulae are neglected, only the data plays a critical
role. Thus, the data has been extracted from different experiments and case studies to estimate
the ultimate bearing capacity of the pile foundation. A summary of the source from which the
data has been extracted is presented in Table 2.
Table 5.2 List of data
Source Location NO. OF DATA SOIL TYPE

Muhs et al. (1969) Iraq 08 Cohesionless Soil
WeiB (1970) Iraq 18 Cohesionless Soil
Muhs and WeiB (1970) Iraq 23 Cohesionless Soil
Muhs and WeiB(1971) Iraq 15 Cohesionless Soil
Briaud and Gibbens (1999) Iraq 12 Cohesionless Soil
Gandhi (2003) Iraq 07 Cohesionless Soil
Muhs and WeiB (1971) Iraq 45 Cohesionless Soil
Total 128
Iran 16 Cohesive Soil
Gulf of Mexico 09 Cohesive Soil
1. Goh ATC. (1995, India 15 Cohesive Soil
1996)
Illinois 18 Cohesive Soil

31

Canada 18 Cohesive Soil
Saudi Arabia 10 Cohesive Soil
Saudi Arabia 08 Cohesive Soil
Total 164
(yet references have to be quoted)
Out of the 288 data for both the cohesive and cohesionless soil samples, 60% is utilized for
training and the remaining 40% is used for testing using nntool in MATLAB. Figure 5.1 shows the
nntool in MATLAB.
Figure 5.1: Neural network tool in MATLAB
The data set i.e., the input values, output values (for training phase) and testing values must be
imported to the nntool. Then the neural network must be created using the imported values and

32
changing the training parameters. Finally, in the testing phase will occur after attaining the
required regression values.
Generally, the reliability of the model improved as the number of valid input parameters
increased. Experiments were carried out using several combinations of input parameters to
determine the most reliable neural network model. The neural network model with seven input
neurons representing E, A, Wp , H, W, s, and the hammer type (H type) and two hidden neurons
was found to be most reliable. The corresponding neural network model is represented in figure
Figure 5.2 Neural network model

After creating the neural network in the training phase, the parameters have to be changed to
obtain the optimal results. At 1000 epochs and 1000 validation check the neural network
presented the optimal results. The training phase details are shown in Figure 5.3.

33
Figure 5.3 Training phase

Once the training phase is over, the testing phase is done by utilizing the remaining 40% data.
The regression obtained from the data for cohesive soil is shown in figure 4 and for cohesionless
soil is shown in figure 5.

34
Figure 5.4 Regression for cohesive soil

35
Figure 5.5 Regression for cohesionless soil

From figure 5.4 and 5.5 we can infer that the convergence has been achieved. The results
obtained from neural network is compared with the collected data of ultimate bearing capacity
and is shown in figure 5.6 for cohesive soils and figure 5.7 for cohesionless soil. The results
indicate that the values match well with a percentage variation of 12% for cohesion soil and 5%
for cohesionless soil.
Figure 5.6 Check for cohesive soil sample

36
Figure 5.7 Check for cohesionless soil

The results for both cohesion less and cohesive soil indicates that convergence was achieved for
the training phase. The scatter of the predicted Q, values versus the measured Q, values were
assessed using regression analysis. The results from the testing phase suggest that although the
model was not explicitly trained for these data, the neural network was capable of
generalization and generally gave reasonable predictions. The results indicate that the neural
network was successful in modelling the nonlinear relationship between Qu and the other
parameters.

37
6. Conclusion and future recommendations
Statistical methods are utilized in the development of standard relationships between various
factors. This is often complex and circuitous, particularly for nonlinear relationships. Also, to
formulate the statistical model, the important parameters must be known. By comparison, the
modelling process in back-propagation neural networks is more direct, as there is no necessity to
specify a mathematical relationship between the input and output variables. Neural networks
can be effective for analysing a system containing several variables, to establish patterns and
characteristics not previously known. In addition, it can generalize correct responses that only
broadly resemble the data in the training set. During training, irrelevant input variables are
assigned low connection weights. These variables can then be omitted from the model. In neural
networks, quantitative as well as qualitative information can be considered. As new data
become available, the neural network model can be readily updated by retraining with patterns
which include these new data.
From the analysis of the data it is observed that the back propagation neural network Adopted
in ANN is providing sufficiently good response of the system. The results can be improved by
adding more data of both cohesive and cohesionless soils from different parts of the world.
Since most of the data in cohesionless soils have been collected from Iran, the results are well
matching. However, if data from different soil types or regions are fed to the system, the
prediction will improve.

38
References
1. Abu-Farsakh, M.Y., Titi, H.H., 2004. Assessment of direct cone penetration test
methods for predicting the ultimate capacity of friction driven piles. Journal of
Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering 130 (9), 935e944.
2. Abu-Kiefa, M.A., 1998. General regression neural networks for driven piles in
cohesionless soils. Journal of Geotechnical & Geoenvironmental Engineering 124
(12), 1177e1185.
3. Alkroosh, I., Nikraz, H., 2011a. Correlation of pile axial capacity and CPT data
using gene expression programming. Geotechnical and Geological Engineering
29, 725e748.
4. Alkroosh, I., Nikraz, H., 2011b. Simulating pile load-settlement behavior from CPT
data using intelligent computing. Central European Journal of Engineering 1 (3),
295e305.
5. Alkroosh, I., Nikraz, H., 2012. Predicting axial capacity of driven piles in cohesive
soils using intelligent computing. Engineering Applications of Artificial
Intelligence 25 (3), 618e627.
6. Bowles, J.E., 1997. Foundation Analysis and Design. McGraw-Hill, New York.
7. Broms, B.B., Lim, P.C., 1988. A simple pile driving formula based on stress-wave
measurements. In: Proc., Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on the
Application of Stress-wave Theory to Piles. BiTech Publishers, Vancouver, pp.
591e600.
8. Brown, M., Harris, C.J., 1995. A perspective and critique of adaptive neurofuzzy
systems used for modelling and control applications. International Journal of
Neural Systems 6 (2), 197e220.
9. Burland, J.B., 1973. Shaft friction of piles in clay. Ground Engineering 6 (3), 1e15.
10. Chan, W.T., Chow, Y.K., Liu, L.F., 1995. Neural network: an alternative to pile
driving formulas. Computers and Geotechnics 17, 135e156.

39
11. Chen, Y.J., Kulhawy, F.H., 1994. Case History Evaluation of the Behavior of Drilled
Shafts under Axial and Lateral Loading. Report No. TR-104601. Electric Power
Research Institute, Palo Alto, Calif.
12. Coyle, H.M., Castello, R.R., 1981. New design correlations for piles in sand.
Journal of Geotechnical Engineering 107 (7), 965e986.
13. Das, B.M., 1995. Principles of Foundation Engineering, third ed. PWS Publishing
Company, Boston, MA.
14. Das, S.K., Basudhar, P.K., 2006. Undrained lateral load capacity of piles in clay
using artificial neural network. Computers and Geotechnics 33 (8), 454e459.
15. Eberhart, R.C., Kennedy, J., 1995. A new optimizer using particle swarm theory.
In: Proc., Proceedings of the Sixth International Symposium on Micro-machine
and Human Science. IEEE, Nagoya, pp. 39e43.
16. Elshorbagy, A., Corzo, G., Srinivasulu, S., Solomatine, D.P., 2010. Experimental
investigation of the predictive capabilities of data driven modeling techniques in
hydrology-part 1: concepts and methodology. Hydrology and Earth System
Science 14, 1931e1941.
17. Flood, I., 2008. Towards the next generation of artificial neural networks for civil
engineering. Advanced Engineering Informatics 22 (1), 4e14.
18. Gandomi, A.H., Alavi, A.H., 2012. A new multi-gene genetic programming
approach to non-linear system modeling. Part II: geotechnical and earthquake
engineering problems. Neural Computing Applications 21, 189e201.
19. Gardner, M.W., Dorling, S.R., 1998. Artificial neural networks (the multilayer
perceptron) e a review of applications in the atmospheric sciences. Atmospheric
Environment 32 (14/15), 2627e2636.
20. Giustolisi, O., Savic, D.A., 2006. A symbolic data-driven technique based on
evolutionary polynomial regression. Journal of Hydroinformatics 8 (3), 207e222.

40
21. Goh, A.T., Kulhawy, F.H., Chua, C.G., 2005. Bayesian neural network analysis of
undrained side resistance of drilled shafts. Journal of Geotechnical and
Geoenvironmental Engineering 131 (1), 84e93.
22. Goh, A.T.C., 1994. Nonlinear modelling in geotechnical engineering using neural
networks. Australian Civil Engineering Transactions CE36 (4), 293e297.
23. Goh, A.T.C., 1995a. Back-propagation neural networks for modeling complex
systems. Artificial Intelligence in Engineering 9, 143e151.
24. Goh, A.T.C., 1995b. Empirical design in geotechnics using neural networks.
Geotechnique 45 (4), 709e714.
25. Goh, A.T.C., 1996. Pile driving records reanalyzed using neural networks. Journal
of Geotechnical Engineering 122 (6), 492e495.
26. Goldberg, D.E., 1989. Genetic Algorithms in Search Optimization and Machine
Learning. Addison e Wesley, Mass.
27. Hiley, A., 1922. The efficiency of the hammer blow, and its effects with reference
to piling. Engineering 2, 673.
28. Koza, J.R., 1992. Genetic Programming: on the Programming of Computers by
Natural Selection. MIT Press, Cambridge (MA).
29. Lee, I.M., Lee, J.H., 1996. Prediction of pile bearing capacity using artificial neural
networks. Computers and Geotechnics 18 (3), 189e200.
30. Maier, H.R., Dandy, G.C., 2000. Applications of artificial neural networks to
forecasting of surface water quality variables: issues, applications and challenges.
In: Govindaraju, R.S., Rao, A.R. (Eds.), Artificial Neural Networks in Hydrology.
Kluwer, Dordrecht, The Netherlands, pp. 287e309.
31. McCulloch, W.S., Pitts, W., 1943. A logical calculus of ideas imminent in nervous
activity. Bulletin and Mathematical Biophysics 5, 115e133.
32. Meyerhof, G.G., 1976. Bearing capacity and settlement of pile foundations.
Journal of Geotechnical Engineering 102 (3), 196e228.

41
33. Nawari, N.O., Liang, R., Nusairat, J., 1999. Artificial intelligence techniques for the
design and analysis of deep foundations. Electronic Journal of Geotechnical
Engineering 4. http://geotech.civeng.okstate.edu/ejge/ppr9909/index.html.
34. Rezania, M., Faramarzi, A., Javadi, A., 2011. An evolutionary based approach
for assessment of earthquake-induced soil liquefaction and lateral
displacement. Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence 24 (1),
142e153.
35. de Ruiter, J., Beringen, F.L., 1979. Pile foundation for large North Sea structures.
Marine Geotechnology 3 (3), 267e314.
36. Rumelhart, D.E., Hinton, G.E., Williams, R.J., 1986. Learning internal
representation by error propagation. In: Rumelhart, D.E., McClelland, J.L.
(Eds.), Parallel Distributed Processing. MIT Press, Cambridge, pp. 318e362.
37. Savic, D.A., Giutolisi, O., Berardi, L., Shepherd, W., Djordjevic, S., Saul, A., 2006.
Modelling sewer failure by evolutionary computing. Proceedings of the
Institution of Engineers, Water Management 159 (WM2), 111e118.
38. Schmertmann, J.H., 1978. Guidelines for Cone Penetration Test, Performance
and Design. FHWA-TS-78e209. U. S. Department of Transportation,
Washington, D. C., p. 145
39. Semple, R.M., Rigden, W.J., 1986. Shaft capacity of driven pipe piles in clay.
Ground Engineering 19 (1), 11e17.
40. Shahin, M.A., 2010. Intelligent computing for modelling axial capacity of pile
foundations. Canadian Geotechnical Journal 47 (2), 230e243.
41. Shahin, M.A., 2013. Artificial intelligence in geotechnical engineering:
applications, modeling aspects, and future directions. In: Yang, X., Gandomi,
A.H., Talatahari, S., Alavi, A.H. (Eds.), Metaheuristics in Water, Geotechnical
and Transport Engineering. Elsevier Inc., London, pp. 169e204.
42. Shahin, M.A., 2014a. Load-settlement modeling of axially loaded drilled shafts
using CPT-based recurrent neural networks. International Journal of

42
Geomechanics 14 (6). http://dx.doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)GM.1943-

5622.0000370.
43. Shahin, M.A., 2014b. Load-settlement modeling of axially loaded steel driven
piles using CPT-based recurrent neural networks. Soils and Foundations 54 (3),
515e522.
44. Shahin, M.A., 2014c. Use of evolutionary computing for modelling some
complex problems in geotechnical engineering. Geomechanics and
Geoengineering: An International Journal.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17486025.2014.921333.
45. Shahin, M.A., Jaksa, M.B., 2005. Neural network prediction of pullout capacity of
marquee ground anchors. Computers and Geotechnics 32 (3), 153e163.
46. Shahin, M.A., Jaksa, M.B., 2006. Pullout capacity of small ground anchors by
direct cone penetration test methods and neural networks. Canadian
Geotechnical Journal 43 (6), 626e637.
47. Shahin, M.A., Jaksa, M.B., Maier, H.R., 2001. Artificial neural network
applications in geotechnical engineering. Australian Geomechanics 36 (1), 49e62.
48. Shahin, M.A., Jaksa, M.B., Maier, H.R., 2009. Recent advances and future
challenges for artificial neural systems in geotechnical engineering applications.
Journal of Advances in Artificial Neural Systems 2009. Article ID: 308239.
http://dx.doi. org/10.1155/2009/308239.
49. Tarawneh, B., Imam, R., 2014. Regression versus artificial neural networks:
predicting pile setup from empirical sata. KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering 18
(4), 1018e1027.
50. Teh, C.I., Wong, K.S., Goh, A.T.C., Jaritngam, S., 1997. Prediction of pile capacity
using neural networks. Journal of Computing in Civil Engineering 11 (2), 129e138.
51. Tian, X., Wei, W., Xiaoni, W., 2010. Artificial neural network model for
timedependent vertical beraing capacity of preformed concrete pile. Advanced
Materials Research 29-32 (Part 1), 226e230.

43
52. Vesic, A.S., 1977. Design of Pile Foundations. National Cooperative Highway
Research, Synthetic of Practice No. 42. Transportation Research Board,
Washington DC.
53. Wellington, A.M., 1892. The iron wharf at Fort Monroe, Va. ASCE Transactions
27,129e137.
54. Zurada, J.M., 1992. Introduction to Artificial Neural Systems. West Publishing
Company, St. Paul

44

Application of Artificial Intelligence in Pile Foundation: Project Team

Transféré par

Informations du document

Titre original

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Application of Artificial Intelligence in Pile Foundation: Project Team

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Application of Artificial Intelligence in Pile Foundation

Sl. No. Reg. No. Student Name

Supervisors: 1. Dr. S. D. Anitha kumari

B.Tech in Civil Engineering

Application of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in Pile foundation

Dr.S.D.Anitha kumari Mr. Abhishek Pulgur

Dr. H.M. Rajashekara Swamy Dr. M. Arulanantham

Application of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in Pile foundation

Application of Artificial Intelligence in Pile Foundation

Sl. No. Reg. No. Student Name Signature

Date : 21st May 2018

Application of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in Pile foundation

Application of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in Pile foundations

Artificial Intelligence (AI) is not based on making robots or machines, it is about

Application of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in Pile foundations

Application of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in Pile foundations

3.4 Learning Techniques in Artificial Neural Networks: .................................... 23

Application of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in Pile foundations

Table 3.1 Comparative analysis of BNN and ANN ………………….……………………20

Application of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in Pile foundations

Figure 1.1 Humanoid Robot Sophia ………………………………………………………………………9

Application of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in Pile foundations

B Width of Footing (m)

Application of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in Pile foundations

Figure 3.1: Humanoid Robot Sophia (www.electronicsmedia.info)

Application of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in Pile foundations

1.1 What is AI?

1.1.1 Moments that Shaped AI

Application of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in Pile foundations

1.1.2 Recent development in AI

The behaviour of a superintelligence cannot be predicted by human beings. For instance,

Application of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in Pile foundations

Application of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in Pile foundations

1.3 AI in Civil Engineering

Figure 1.4 Pile Foundation (www.civildigital.com)

Application of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in Pile foundations

Organisation of the report

Chapter 2: Literature Review

Chapter 3: Overview of ANN and Methodology

Chapter 4: Experimental Data

Chapter 5: Analysis and Discussion

Application of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in Pile foundations

Qu = qNqFqsFqd +0.5γBNγFγsFγd------------------------------------------- (1)

Application of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in Pile foundations

Application of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in Pile foundations

3. Overview of ANN and Procedures

Figure 3.1 – inter-connection in brain

Application of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in Pile foundations

3.2 Neural Network:

Application of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in Pile foundations

Figure 3.3: Biological Neuron

Figure 3.4: Biological Neural Network

Application of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in Pile foundations

3.2.2 Principle of Artificial Neural Network:

Application of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in Pile foundations

Figure 3.5: Artificial Neuron Network

Application of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in Pile foundations

 Non-Linear Activation function: the function is scattered and parabolic in nature as

Figure 3.6: Linear activation function (ref: https://towardsdatascience.com)

3.3 Artificial Neural Network Architecture:

Figure 3.8: Layers in ANN (Ref: xenonstack.com)

Application of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in Pile foundations

3.4 Learning Techniques in Artificial Neural Networks: