Advertisement

Neural Computing and Applications

, Volume 32, Issue 1, pp 295–308 | Cite as

Evaluation of mechanical properties of concretes containing coarse recycled concrete aggregates using multivariate adaptive regression splines (MARS), M5 model tree (M5Tree), and least squares support vector regression (LSSVR) models

  • Aliakbar Gholampour
  • Iman Mansouri
  • Ozgur Kisi
  • Togay OzbakkalogluEmail author
Original Article

Abstract

This paper investigates the application of three artificial intelligence methods, including multivariate adaptive regression splines (MARS), M5 model tree (M5Tree), and least squares support vector regression (LSSVR) for the prediction of the mechanical behavior of recycled aggregate concrete (RAC). A large and reliable experimental test database containing the results of 650 compressive strength, 421 elastic modulus, 152 flexural strength, and 346 splitting tensile strength tests of RACs with no pozzolanic admixtures assembled from the published literature was used to train, test, and validate the three data-driven-based models. The results of the model assessment show that the LSSVR model provides improved accuracy over the existing models in the prediction of the compressive strength of RACs. The results also indicate that, although all three models provide higher accuracy than the existing models in the prediction of the splitting tensile strength of RACs, only the performance of the LSSVR model exceeds those of the best-performing existing models for the flexural strength of RACs. The results of this study indicate that MARS, M5Tree, and LSSVR models can provide close predictions of the mechanical properties of RACs by accurately capturing the influences of the key parameters. This points to the possibility of the application of these three models in the pre-design and modeling of structures manufactured with RACs.

Keywords

Recycled aggregate concrete (RAC) Mechanical properties Least squares support vector regression (LSSVR) M5 model tree (M5Tree) Multivariate adaptive regression splines (MARS) 

Notes

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References

  1. 1.
    Xie T, Gholampour A, Ozbakkaloglu T (2018) Toward the development of sustainable concretes with recycled concrete aggregates: comprehensive review of studies on mechanical properties. J Mater Civil Eng.  https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)MT.1943-5533.0002304 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ozbakkaloglu T, Gholampour A, Xie T (2017) Mechanical and durability properties of recycled aggregate concrete: effect of recycled aggregate properties and content. J Mater Civil Eng.  https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)MT.1943-5533.0002142 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Kou SC, Poon CS, Wan HW (2012) Properties of concrete prepared with low-grade recycled aggregates. Constr Build Mater 36:881–889Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Torgal FP, Ding Y, Miraldo S, Abdollahnejad Z, Labrincha JA (2012) Are geopolymers more suitable than portland cement to produce high volume recycled aggregates HPC. Constr Build Mater 36:1048–1052Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Gholampour A, Ozbakkaloglu T (2018) Time-dependent and long-term mechanical properties of concretes incorporating different grades of coarse recycled concrete aggregates. Eng Struct 157:224–234Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Limbachiya M, Meddah MS, Ouchagour Y (2012) Performance of Portland/silica fume cement concrete produced with recycled concrete aggregate. ACI Mater J 109(1):91–100Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Manzi S, Mazzotti C, Bignozzi MC (2013) Short and long-term behavior of structural concrete with recycled concrete aggregate. Cem Concr Compos 37:312–318Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    de Brito J, Ferreira J, Pacheco J, Soares D, Guerreiro M (2015) Structural, material, mechanical and durability properties and behaviour of recycled aggregates concrete. J Build Eng 6:1–16Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Afroughsabet V, Biolzi L, Ozbakkaloglu T (2017) Influence of double hooked-end steel fibers and slag on mechanical and durability properties of high-performance recycled aggregate concrete. Compos Struct 181:273–284Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kou SC, Poon CS (2015) Effect of the quality of parent concrete on the properties of high performance recycled aggregate concrete. Constr Build Mater 77:501–508Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Pedro D, de Brito J, Evangelista L (2017) Evaluation of high-performance concrete with recycled aggregates: use of densified silica fume as cement replacement. Constr Build Mater 147:803–814Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Dimitriou G, Savva P, Petrou MF (2018) Enhancing mechanical and durability properties of recycled aggregate concrete. Constr Build Mater 158:228–235Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ravindrarajah RS, Tam CT (1985) Properties of concrete made with crushed concrete as coarse aggregate. Mag Concr Res 37(130):29–38Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Zilch K, Roos F (2001) An equation to estimate the modulus of elasticity of concrete with recycled aggregates. Civil Eng 76(4):187–191Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Xiao JZ, Li JB, Zhang C (2006) On relationships between the mechanical properties of recycled aggregate concrete: an overview. Mater Struct 39(6):655–664MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Lovato PS, Possan E, Dal Molin DCC, Masuero AB, Ribeiro JLD (2012) Modeling of mechanical properties and durability of recycled aggregate concretes. Constr Build Mater 26(1):437–447Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Xuan DX, Houben LJM, Molenaar AAA, Shui ZH (2012) Mechanical properties of cement-treated aggregate material–a review. Mater Des 33:496–502Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Peng Y, Chu H, Pu J (2016) Numerical simulation of recycled concrete using convex aggregate model and base force element method. Adv Mater Sci Eng 2016:1–10Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Taffese WZ, Sistonen E (2017) Machine learning for durability and service-life assessment of reinforced concrete structures: recent advances and future directions. Automat Constr 77:1–14Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Hoang N, Chen C, Liao K (2017) Prediction of chloride diffusion in cement mortar using multi-gene genetic programming and multivariable adaptive regression splines. Measurement 112:141–149Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Yaseen ZM, Deo RC, Hilal A, Abd AM, Bueno LC, Salcedo-Sanz S, Nehdi ML (2018) Predicting compressive strength of lightweight foamed concrete using extreme learning machine model. Adv Eng Softw 115:112–125Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Naderpour H, Rafiean AH, Fakharian P (2018) Compressive strength prediction of environmentally friendly concrete using artificial neural networks. J Build Eng 16:213–219Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Younis KH, Pilakoutas K (2013) Strength prediction model and methods for improving recycled aggregate concrete. Constr Build Mater 49:688–701Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Duan ZH, Kou SC, Poon CS (2013) Prediction of compressive strength of recycled aggregate concrete using artificial neural networks. Constr Build Mater 40:1200–1206Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Sahoo K, Sarkar P, Davis R (2016) Artificial neural networks for prediction of compressive strength of recycled aggregate concrete. Inter J Chem Metall Civil Eng 3(1):81–85Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Deshpande N, Londhe S, Kulkarni S (2014) Modeling compressive strength of recycled aggregate concrete by artificial neural network, model tree and non-linear regression. Inter J Sustain Built Environ 3:187–198Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Duan ZH, Kou SC, Poon CS (2013) Using artificial neural networks for predicting the elastic modulus of recycled aggregate concrete. Constr Build Mater 44:524–532Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Behnood A, Olek J, Glinicki MA (2015) Predicting modulus elasticity of recycled aggregate concrete using M5’ model tree algorithm. Constr Build Mater 94:137–147Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Gonzalez-Taboada I, Gonzalez-Fonteboa B, Martinez-Abella F, Perez-Ordonez J (2016) Prediction of the mechanical properties of structural recycled concrete using multivariable regression and genetic programming. Constr Build Mater 106:480–499Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Gholampour A, Gandomi AH, Ozbakkaloglu T (2017) New formulations for mechanical properties of recycled aggregate concrete using gene expression programming. Constr Build Mater 130:122–145Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Friedman JH (1991) Multivariate adaptive regression splines (with discussion). Ann Stat 19(1):1–141zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Quinlan JR (1992) Learning with continuous classes. In: Proceedings of the fifth Australian joint conference on artificial intelligence, Hobart, Australia, 16–18 November. World Scientific, Singapore, pp 343–348Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Suykens JAK, Vandewalle J (1999) Least squares support vector machine classifiers. Neural Process Lett 9(3):293–300Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Cheng M, Cao M (2014) Evolutionary multivariate adaptive regression splines for estimating shear strength in reinforced-concrete deep beams. Eng Appl Artif Intell 28:86–96Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Aiyer BG, Kim D, Karingattikkal N, Samui P, Rao PR (2014) Prediction of compressive strength of self-compacting concrete using least square support vector machine and relevance vector machine. KSCE J Civil Eng 18(6):1753–1758Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Pham A, Hoang N, Nguyen Q (2016) Predicting compressive strength of high-performance concrete using metaheuristic-optimized least squares support vector regression. J Comput Civil Eng 30(3):06015002Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Sriravindrarajah R, Wang NDH, Ervin LJW (2012) Mix design for pervious recycled aggregate concrete. Inter J Concr Struct Mater 6(4):239–246Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Pereira P, Evangelista L, de Brito J (2012) The effect of superplasticisers on the workability and compressive strength of concrete made with fine recycled concrete aggregates. Constr Build Mater 28(1):722–729Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Thomas C, Setién J, Polanco JA, Alaejos P, de Juan MS (2013) Durability of recycled aggregate concrete. Constr Build Mater 40:1054–1065Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Rahal K (2007) Mechanical properties of concrete with recycled coarse aggregate. Build Environ 42(1):407–415Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Corinaldesi V (2010) Mechanical and elastic behaviour of concretes made of recycled-concrete coarse aggregates. Constr Build Mater 24(9):1616–1620Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Hoffmann C, Schubert S, Leemann A, Motavalli M (2012) Recycled concrete and mixed rubble as aggregates: influence of variations in composition on the concrete properties and their use as structural material. Constr Build Mater 35:701–709Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Pereira P, Evangelista L, de Brito J (2012) The effect of superplasticizers on the mechanical performance of concrete made with fine recycled concrete aggregates. Cem Concr Compos 34(9):1044–1052Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Wardeh G, Ghorbel E, Gomart H (2014) Mix design and properties of recycled aggregate concretes: applicability of Eurocode 2. Inter J Concr Struct Mater 9:1–20Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Bairagi NK, Ravande K, Pareek VK (1993) Behaviour of concrete with different proportions of natural and recycled aggregates. Resour Conserv Recycl 9(1):109–126Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Tavakoli M, Soroushian P (1996) Strengths of recycled aggregate concrete made using field-demolished concrete as aggregate. ACI Mater J 93(2):182–190Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Kheder GF, Al-Windawi SA (2005) Variation in mechanical properties of natural and recycled aggregate concrete as related to the strength of their binding mortar. Mater Struct 38(7):701–709Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Xiao J, Li P, Qin W (2006) Study on bond-slip between recycled concrete and rebars. J Tongji Univ 34(1):13Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Andres JD, Lorca P, de Cos Juez FJ, Sanchez-Lasheras F (2010) Bankruptcy forecasting: a hybrid approach using fuzzy c-means clustering and multivariate adaptive regression splines (MARS). Expert Syst Appl 38:1866–1875Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    Sharda V, Prasher SO, Patel RM, Ojavasi PR, Prakash C (2006) Modeling runoff from middle Himalayan watersheds employing artificial intelligence techniques. Agric Water Manag 83:233–242Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Pal M, Deswal S (2009) M5 model tree based modelling of reference evapotranspiration. Hydrol Process 23:1437–1443Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Adnan RM, Yuan X, Kisi O, Anam R (2017) Improving accuracy of river flow forecasting using LSSVR with gravitational search algorithm. Adv Meteorol 2017:1–23Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    Suykens JAK, Van Gestel T, De Brabanter J, De Moor B, Vandewalle J (2002) Least squares support vector machines. Word Scientific, SingaporezbMATHGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Cawley GC, Talbot NLC (2010) On over-fitting in model selection and subsequent selection bias in performance evaluation. J Mach Learn Res 11:2079–2107MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Kumutha R, Vijai K (2010) Strength of concrete incorporating aggregates recycled from demolition waste. ARPN J Eng Appl Sci 5(5):64–71Google Scholar
  56. 56.
    Hou YL, Zheng G (2013) Mechanical properties of recycled aggregate concrete in different age. J Build Mater 16(4):683–687Google Scholar
  57. 57.
    Ismail S, Ramli M (2013) Engineering properties of treated recycled concrete aggregate (RCA) for structural applications. Constr Build Mater 44:464–476Google Scholar
  58. 58.
    Andreu G, Miren E (2014) Experimental analysis of properties of high performance recycled aggregate concrete. Constr Build Mater 52:227–235Google Scholar
  59. 59.
    Duan ZH, Poon CS (2014) Properties of recycled aggregate concrete made with recycled aggregates with different amounts of old adhered mortars. Mater Des 58:19–29Google Scholar
  60. 60.
    Casuccio M, Torrijos MC, Giaccio G, Zerbino R (2008) Failure mechanism of recycled aggregate concrete. Constr Build Mater 22(7):1500–1506Google Scholar
  61. 61.
    Yang KH, Chung HS, Ashour AF (2008) Influence of type and replacement level of recycled aggregates on concrete properties. ACI Mater J 105(3):289–296Google Scholar
  62. 62.
    Fathifazl G, Razaqpur AG, Isgor OB, Abbas A, Fournier B, Foo S (2011) Creep and drying shrinkage characteristics of concrete produced with coarse recycled concrete aggregate. Cem Concr Compos 33(10):1026–1037Google Scholar
  63. 63.
    Dilbas H, Simsek M, Çakır Ö (2014) An investigation on mechanical and physical properties of recycled aggregate concrete (RAC) with and without silica fume. Constr Build Mater 61:50–59Google Scholar
  64. 64.
    Ajdukiewicz A, Kliszczewicz A (2002) Influence of recycled aggregates on mechanical properties of HS/HPC. Cem Concr Compos 24(2):269–279Google Scholar
  65. 65.
    Kakizaki M, Harada M, Soshiroda T, Kubota S, Ikeda T, Kasai Y (1988) Strength and elastic modulus of recycled aggregate concrete. In: Proceedings of the second international RILEM symposium on demolition and reuse of concrete and masonry, vol 2, pp 565–574Google Scholar
  66. 66.
    de Oliveira MB, Vazquez E (1996) The influence of retained moisture in aggregates from recycling on the properties of new hardened concrete. Waste Manag 16(1):113–117Google Scholar
  67. 67.
    Dillmann R (1998) Concrete with recycled concrete aggregate. In: Sustainable construction: use of recycled concrete aggregate-producing of the international symposium held at department of trade and industry conference Centre, London, UK, pp 11–12Google Scholar
  68. 68.
    Dhir RK (1999) Sustainability of recycled concrete aggregate for use IN BS 5328 designated mixes. Proc ICE Struct Build 134(3):257–274Google Scholar
  69. 69.
    Serifou M, Sbartai ZM, Yotte S, Boffoue MO, Emeruwa E, Bos F (2013) A study of concrete made with fine and coarse aggregates recycled from fresh concrete waste. J Constr Eng 2013:1–5Google Scholar
  70. 70.
    AS3600-2009 (2009) Australian standard for concrete structures. SA, North SydneyGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    ACI 318-11 (2011) Building code requirements for structural concrete and commentary, PCA notes on ACI 318-11: with design applications. ACI International, Farmington HillsGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    Canadian Standard. C S A. A23.3-04 (2004) Design of concrete structures, Canadian Standard AssociationGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    British Standards Institution (2004) Eurocode 2: design of concrete structures: part 1–1: general rules and rules for buildings. British Standards InstitutionGoogle Scholar
  74. 74.
    Japan Society of Civil Engineers (2007) Standard specification for concrete structure. JSCE No. 15, Tokyo, JapanGoogle Scholar
  75. 75.
    Japanese Civil Institute (2008) Guidelines for control of cracking of mass concrete 2008, Japan Concrete InstituteGoogle Scholar
  76. 76.
    New Zealand Standard (2006) Concrete structures standard. NZS 3101:2006. The design of concrete structures, Wellington, New ZealandGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Natural Computing Applications Forum 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Civil, Environmental and Mining EngineeringUniversity of AdelaideAdelaideAustralia
  2. 2.Department of Civil EngineeringBirjand University of TechnologyBirjandIran
  3. 3.Faculty of Natural Sciences and EngineeringIlia State UniversityTbilisiGeorgia
  4. 4.School of Engineering and TechnologyUniversity of HertfordshireHatfieldUnited Kingdom

Personalised recommendations