Developing Some Models to Predict the Uniaxial Compressive Strength of Various Sedimentary Rocks (case Studies: Large Dam Site and Mine in Southeast China)
Zhe Wang,Zhou,Tao Sun,Jiabao Wang,Na Liu,Lei Weng
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cscm.2024.e03817
IF: 4.934
2024-01-01
Case Studies in Construction Materials
Abstract:Direct determination of uniaxial compressive strength (UCS) is time-consuming, expensive, and challenging. Therefore, this study aims to indirectly predict UCS using statistical and machine learning methods. First, laboratory measurements were conducted to determine carbonate percentage, water absorption percentage, moisture content, porosity percentage, P-wave velocity, and UCS of sandstone, dolomite, dolomitic limestone, marl limestone, and limestone samples. Subsequently, various models were established to predict UCS using multivariate linear regression (MVLR), random forest regression (RFR), Gaussian process regression (GPR) based on squared exponential kernel function, and adaptive neuro-fuzzy inference system (ANFIS). The influence of Jurassic limestone texture on physical and mechanical properties in stable and unstable slopes in the Three Gorges Dam site and reservoir (TGDSR) showed that the percentage of mudstone texture in unstable slopes is higher than in stable slopes. The UCS, density, compressional wave velocity, and percentage of carbonate in unstable slopes is less than stable slopes. The results indicated that the average measured UCS is 60.60 MPa. Moreover, the average predicted UCS based on the three intelligent methods was 60.55 MPa. The percentage difference between the measured and predicted UCS was -0.09 %, demonstrating that the average error of the three employed methods is less than one percent, highlighting the high accuracy of these methods in estimating rock UCS. Notably, based on error level, Taylor diagram, Wilmot agreement index (WAI), A10 and A20 indices, Nash-Sutcliffe efficiency (NSE), and PM (performance metric) criteria the RFR exhibited superior precision (R2=99 %, and RMSE= 0.06 MPa) compared to the other used methods. The Kruskal-Wallis test (KWT) results showed that there is no significant difference between the measured and predicted values.