Neural Computing and Applications

, Volume 28, Supplement 1, pp 407–420 | Cite as

A novel approach to prediction of rheological characteristics of jet grout cement mixtures via genetic expression programming

  • Hamza Güllü
Original Article


Highly nonlinear flow behavior of cement-based grout mixtures has always become an important issue for experimenters during jet grouting applications. In this viewpoint, an investigation has been addressed in this paper on the applicability of a recent soft computing prediction tool, genetic expression programming (GEP), to the prediction of rheological characteristics (i.e., shear stress, viscosity) of the grout mixtures with various stabilizers (clay, sand, lime) for jet grouting purposes. The experimental data (shear stress versus shear rate with respect to stabilizer dosages) of grout mixtures obtained from rheometer tests have been collected from previous study conducted in a wide range of stabilizer dosage rates (0–100 %, by dry weight of binder). For predicting the shear stress and viscosity as the output variables during the train and testing stages, the input variables in the GEP models included shear rate and stabilizer dosage primarily. As a consequence of GEP modeling compared with measured data, this study reveals satisfactory GEP formulations in a good accuracy (R ≥ 0.86) for predictions of shear stress and viscosity regarding the stabilizer additions. The GEP formulas are also found adequate for modeling the flow behavior of the shear stress–shear rate, alternatively to conventional nonlinear regression and rheological models (Herschel–Bulkley, Robertson–Stiff). For assistance of preliminary evaluations, the derived GEP formulas could be potentially considered in practice for estimations of pumping pressure (shear stress), pumping rate (shear rate) and viscosity of jet grout mixtures.


Genetic expression programming Cement-based grout Jet grouting Rheological behavior Shear stress Shear rate Viscosity 



The Scientific Research Project Unit of University of Gaziantep offers financial support for this research. The author wishes to express his sincere thanks to the anonymous reviewers for their valuable comments and suggestions to improve the quality of the paper.


  1. 1.
    Nikbakhtan B, Ahangari K, Rahmani N (2010) Estimation of jet grouting parameters in Shahriar dam, Iran. Min Sci Technol 20:472–477Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Cristelo N, Soare E, Rosa I, Miranda T, Oliveira DV, Silva RA, Chaves A (2013) Rheological properties of alkaline activated fly ash used in jet grouting applications. Constr Build Mater 48:925–933CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Shen S, Wang Z, Horpibulsuk S, Kim Y (2013) Jet grouting with a newly developed technology: the twin-jet method. Eng Geol 152:87–95CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Tinoco J, Correia AG, Cortez P (2014) Support vector machines applied to uniaxial compressive strength prediction of jet grouting columns. Comput Geotech 55:132–140CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Tinoco J, Correia AG, Cortez P (2014) A novel approach to predicting Young’s modulus of jet grouting laboratory formulations over time using data mining techniques. Eng Geol 169:50–60CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Cyr M, Legrand C, Mouret M (2000) Study of the shear thickening effect of superplasticizers on the rheological behaviour of cement pastes containing or not mineral additives. Cem Concr Res 30:1477–1483CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Struble LJ, Ji X (2001) Rheology. In: Ramachandran VS, Beaudoin JJ (eds) Handbook of “analytical techniques in concrete science and technology”. William Andrew Publishing, New York, pp 333–367CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Güllü H (2015) On the viscous behavior of cement mixtures with clay, sand, lime and bottom ash for jet grouting. Constr Build Mater 93:891–910CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Warner J (2004) Practical handbook of grouting: soil, rock and structures. Wiley, HobokenGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kazemian S, Prasad A, Huat BK (2010) Rheological behavior of grout in context of newtonian and non-newtonian fluids. Electron J Geotech Eng (EJGE) 15:1103–1115Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Yahia A, Khayat KH (2001) Analytical models for estimating yield stress of high performance pseudoplastic grout. Cem Concr Res 31:731–738CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Yahia A, Khayat KH (2003) Applicability of rheological models to high-performance grouts containing supplementary cementitious materials and viscosity enhancing admixture. Mater Struct 36:402–412CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Nehdi M, Rahman MA (2004) Estimating rheological properties of cement pastes using various rheological models for different test geometry, gap and surface friction. Cem Concr Res 34:1993–2007CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Nguyen V-H, Remond R, Gallias J-L (2011) Influence of cement grouts composition on the rheological behaviour. Cem Concr Res 41:292–300CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Feys D, Wallevik JE, Yahia A, Khayat KH, Wallevik OH (2013) Extension of the Reiner–Riwlin equation to determine modified Bingham parameters measured in coaxial cylinders rheometers. Mater Struct 46:289–311CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Cevik A, Sonebi M (2008) Modelling the performance of self-compacting SIFCON of cement slurries using genetic programming technique. Comput Concr 5(5):475–490CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Ferreira C (2001) Gene expression programming: a new adaptive algorithm for solving problems. Complex Syst 13(2):87–129MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Goldberg D (1989) Genetic algorithms in search, optimization and machine learning. Addison-Welsley, BostonzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Koza JR (1992) Genetic programming: on the programming of computers by means of natural selection. MIT Press, CambridgezbMATHGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Güllü H (2012) Prediction of peak ground acceleration by genetic expression programming and regression: a comparison using likelihood-based measure. Eng Geol 141–142:92–113CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Güllü H (2013) On the prediction of shear wave velocity at local site of strong ground motion stations: an application using artificial intelligence. Bull Earthq Eng 11(4):969–997CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Güllü H (2014) Function finding via genetic expression programming for strength and elastic properties of clay treated with bottom ash. Eng Appl Artif Intell 35:143–157CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Sonebi M, Cevik A (2009) Genetic programming based formulation for fresh and hardened properties of self-compacting concrete containing pulverised fuel ash. Constr Build Mater 23:2614–2622CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Saridemir M (2010) Genetic programming approach for prediction of compressive strength of concretes containing rice husk ash. Constr Build Mater 24:1911–1919CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Baykasoglu A, Güllü H, Canakci H, Özbakır L (2008) Prediction of compressive and tensile strength of limestone via genetic programming. Expert Syst Appl 35:111–123CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Alavi AH, Gandomi AH (2011) A robust data mining approach for formulation of geotechnical engineering systems. Eng Comput 28(3):242–274CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Alavi AH, Hasni H, Lajnef N, Chatti K, Faridazar F (2016) Damage detection using self-powered wireless sensor data: an evolutionary approach. Measurement 82:254–283CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Dikmen E (2015) Gene expression programming strategy for estimation performance of LiBr–H2O absorption cooling system. Neural Comput Appl 26:409–415CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    GeneXproTools. Last Access on 4 Nov 2015
  30. 30.
    Walpole RE, Myers RH, Myers SL, Ye K (2007) Probability and statistics for engineers and scientists, 8th edn. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle RiverzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    SPSS Software (IBM). Last Access on 12 Apr 2016
  32. 32.
    Smith GN (1986) Probability and statistics in civil engineering: an introduction. Collins, LondonGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Natural Computing Applications Forum 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Civil EngineeringUniversity of GaziantepGaziantepTurkey

Personalised recommendations