Journals / ARI The Bulletin of the Istanbul Technical University / 2005 / Cilt: 54 - Sayı: 3

Comparison of multilayer perceptron and adaptive neuro-fuzzy system on backcalculating the mechanical properties of flexible pavements

Pages
65–77
Publication Date
2022-10-11
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Results indicated that, both techniques are valid and have certain advantages over each other and should be preferred with respect to quantity and quality of the data at hand.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Nondestructive testing (NDT) is the integral part of the performance evaluation of exible pavements.
📊
Key Findings & Data:In all NDT methods, Falling Weight Deectometer (FWD) is probably the most popular technique.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Results indicated that, both techniques are valid and have certain advantages over each other and should be preferred with respect to quantity and quality of the data at hand.
🔬Design:Modeling & Simulation
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Nondestructive testing (NDT) is the integral part of the performance evaluation of exible pavements. In all NDT methods, Falling Weight Deectometer (FWD) is probably the most popular technique. Basically, it measures time-domain de ections from numerous road sections emerging by the applied impulse load. In order to characterize the structural integrity of considered pavement system, it is required to make an inversion for the calculation of mechanical pavement properties using a backcalculation tool covering both a forward pavement response model and an optimization algorithm. On the other hand, backcalculation problem can also be solved by an adaptive system using a supervised learning algorithm. In this manner, multilayer perceptron (MLP) and adaptive neuro-fuzzy system (ANFIS) methodologies, popular universal functional approximating techniques of Artificial Intelligence (AI), are appropriate for pavement backcalculation problem. Therefore, two-phased (forward and backward) structure of traditional backcalculation approaches is reduced into one step with the help of the supervised learning mechanisms of MLP and ANFIS. In this study, these methodologies are both employed to backcalculate mechanical properties of exible pavements and compared in terms of modeling precision, uncertainty handling, computational expense, and data requirements. Results indicated that, both techniques are valid and have certain advantages over each other and should be preferred with respect to quantity and quality of the data at hand. In addition, AI-based supervised nonlinear mapping techniques not only exhibit precise backcalculation results, but also enable real-time pavement analyzing abilities.

🔖

Cite This Article

GÖKTEPE, A. B., AĞAR, E., LAV, A. H. (2022). Comparison of multilayer perceptron and adaptive neuro-fuzzy system on backcalculating the mechanical properties of flexible pavements. ARI The Bulletin of the Istanbul Technical University, Cilt: 54 - Sayı: 3, 65–77. https://ajindex.com/articles/448127

References (14)

  1. M. S. Hoffman and M. R. Thompson, Backcalculating nonlinear resilient moduli from de ection data, Transportation Research Record, 852, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, DC, 42 (1982)
  2. O. Tholen, J. Sharma, and R. L. Terrel, Comparison of FWD with other de ection testing devices, Transportation Research Record 1007, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, DC, 20 (1985)
  3. K. Tawfiq, J. Armaghani, and J. Sobanjo, Seismic pavement analyzer vs. FWD for pavement evaluation: comparative study, NDT of Pavements and Backcalculation of Moduli, 3, Special Technical Pub., STP 1375, 327-345, Eds. Tayabji, S. D. and Lukanen, E.O., ASTM Pub., PA. (2000)
  4. R. L. Lytton, Backcalculation of layer moduli, state of the art, NDT of Pavements and Backcalculation of Moduli, 1, Special Technical Pub., STP 1026, 7, Eds. Bush, A. J. and Baladi, G. Y., ASTM Pub., PA. (1989)
  5. J. Uzan, Advanced backcalculation techniques, NDT of Pavements and Backcalculation of Moduli, 2, Special Tech. Pub, STP 1198, 3, Eds. Von Quintus, H. L., Bush, A. J. and Baladi, G. Y., ASTM Pub, PA. (1994)
  6. A. C. Callop and D. Cebon, ASCE Journal of Transportation Engineering 122, 131 (1996)
  7. P. Ullidtz, Will nonlinear backcalculation help, NDT of Pavements and Backcalculation of Moduli, 3, Special Technical Pub., STP 1375, 14, Eds. Tayabji, S.D. and Lukanen, E.O., ASTM Pub., PA. (2000)
  8. S. Haykin, Neural Networks: A Comprehensive Foundation (Prentice-Hall Inc., New Jersey, 1999)
  9. R. W. Meier and G. J. Rix, Backcalculation of exible pavement moduli using artificial neural networks, Transportation Research Record, 1448, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, DC, 75 (1994)
  10. R. W. Meier and G. J. Rix, Backcalculation of exible pavement moduli from dynamic de- ection basins using artificial neural networks, Transportation Research Record, 1473, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, DC, 72 (1995)
  11. E. Tutumluer and R. W. Meier, Attempt at resilient modulus modeling using artificial neural networks, Transportation Research Record, 1560, TRB, Washington, DC, 1 (1996)
  12. R. W. Meier and G. J. Rix, ASTM Geotechnical Testing Journal 16, 425 (1993)
  13. E. Tutumluer and U. Seyhan, Neural network modeling of anisotropic aggregate behavior from repeated load triaxial tests, Transportation Research Record, 1615, National Research Council, Washington, DC, 86 (1998)
  14. Y. R. Kim, B. Xu, and Y. Kim, A new backcalculation procedure based on dispersion anal