Data-Driven Optimised XGBoost for Predicting the Performance of Axial Load Bearing Capacity of Fully Cementitious Grouted Rock Bolting Systems
Source abstract
Abstract
This article investigates the application of eXtreme gradient boosting (XGBoost) and hybrid metaheuristics optimisation techniques to predict the axial load bearing capacity of fully grouted rock bolting systems. For this purpose, a comprehensive dataset of 72 pull-out tests was built, considering various influential parameters such as three water-to-grout (W/G) ratios, five ranges of curing time (CT), three different grout admixtures with two different fly ash (FA) contents, and two different diameter confinements (DCs). Additionally, to find out the effect of the mechanical behaviour of grouts on the performance of fully grouted rock bolting systems, seventy-two uniaxial compression strength (UCS) samples were cast and tested simultaneously with pull-out samples. The UCS samples were prepared with the same details as the pull-out samples to avoid any inconsistency. The results highlight that peak load values generally increase with longer curing times, lower W/G, and higher UCS and DC values. The main novelty of this paper lies in its data-driven approach, using various XGBoost models. This method offers a time-, cost-, and labour-efficient alternative to traditional experimental methods for predicting rock bolt performance. For this purpose, after building the dataset and dividing it randomly into two training and testing datasets, five different XGBoost models were developed: a standalone XGBoost model and four hybrid models incorporating Harris hawk optimisation (HHO), the jellyfish search optimiser (JSO), the dragonfly algorithm (DA), and the firefly algorithm (FA). These models were subsequently evaluated for their ability to predict peak load values. The results demonstrate that all models effectively predicted peak load values, but the XGBoost-JSO hybrid model demonstrated superior performance, achieving the highest R-squared coefficients of 0.987 and 0.988 for the training and testing datasets, respectively. Sensitivity analysis revealed that UCS values were the most influential parameter, while FA content had the least impact on the maximum peak load values of fully cementitious grouted rock bolts.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Geotechnical Engineering and Underground Structures · Tunneling and Rock Mechanics · Drilling and Well Engineering
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
School of Engineering, University of Southern Queensland, Springfield Central, QLD 4300, Australia
Centre for Future Materials (CFM), University of Southern Queensland, Toowoomba, QLD 4350, Australia
School of Surveying and Built Environment, University of Southern Queensland, Toowoomba, QLD 4350, Australia
Faculty of Engineering, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran 14115-175, Iran
School of Civil, Mining & Environmental Engineering, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, NSW 2500, Australia
References (59)
Show source-provided references
1. Ground Support Terminology and Classification: An Update10.1007/s10706-012-9495-4 ↗
2. Failure characterization of fully grouted rock bolts under triaxial testing10.1016/j.jrmge.2023.08.013 ↗
3. Nourizadeh, H. (2024). Axial load transfer mechanism of rock bolts. School of Engineering, University of Southern Queensland.
4. Ultimate Capacity and Load Transfer Mechanism of Ground Anchors in Granular Soils: State-of-the-Art10.31026/j.eng.2024.09.08 ↗
5. Effect of bar shape on the pull-out capacity of fully-grouted rockbolts10.1016/S0886-7798(02)00077-9 ↗
6. Effect of grout properties on the pull-out load capacity of fully grouted rock bolt10.1016/S0886-7798(02)00038-X ↗
7. A study of rock bolting failure modes10.1016/j.ijmst.2013.01.012 ↗
8. Cao, C., Nemcik, J., Aziz, N., and Ren, T. (2013, January 24–26). Failure modes of rockbolting. Proceedings of the 12th Coal Operators’ Conference, Wollongong, Australia.
9. Wang, S., Hagan, P.C., and Cao, C. (2016). Rockbolting. Advances in Rock-Support and Geotechnical Engineering: Chapter 2: Rockbolting, Butterworth-Heinemann.10.1016/B978-0-12-810552-8.00002-7 ↗
10. Experimental and Numerical Study on the Interface Behaviour Between the Rock Bolt and Bond Material10.1007/s00603-018-1629-4 ↗
11. Full-range behavior of fiber reinforced cementitious matrix (FRCM)-concrete joints using a trilinear bond-slip relationship10.1016/j.compstruct.2020.112024 ↗
12. Nourizadeh, H., Williams, S., Mirzaghorbanali, A., McDougall, K., Aziz, N., and Serati, M. (2021, January 23–25). Axial behaviour of rock bolts—Part (A) Experimental study. Proceedings of the 2021 Resources Operators Conference, Wollongong, Australia.
13. Assessment of the bolt-grout interface behaviour of fully grouted rockbolts from laboratory experiments under axial loads10.1016/j.ijrmms.2013.06.007 ↗
14. Laboratory pull-out tests on fully grouted rock bolts and cable bolts: Results and lessons learned10.1016/j.jrmge.2017.04.005 ↗
15. Experimental and analytical investigation on bond-slip behaviour of deformed bars embedded in engineered cementitious composites10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2016.10.036 ↗
16. Effects of bolt profile and grout mixture on shearing behaviors of bolt-grout interface10.1016/j.jrmge.2019.10.004 ↗
17. Laboratory evaluation of cement-based grouts and grouted rock anchors10.1016/0148-9062(95)00021-8 ↗
18. Critical embedment length and bond strength of fully encapsulated rebar rockbolts10.1016/j.tust.2016.06.007 ↗
19. Effect of mineral admixture types on the grout strength of fully-grouted rockbolts10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2017.04.046 ↗
20. Effect of bolt configuration on the interface behaviour between a rock bolt and bond material: A comprehensive DDA investigation10.1016/j.compgeo.2018.09.017 ↗
21. Application of neural networks for the prediction of the unconfined compressive strength (UCS) from Equotip hardness10.1016/S0148-9062(98)00173-9 ↗
22. A novel systematic and evolved approach based on XGBoost-firefly algorithm to predict Young’s modulus and unconfined compressive strength of rock10.1007/s00366-020-01241-2 ↗
23. Unconfined compressive strength (UCS) prediction in real-time while drilling using artificial intelligence tools10.1007/s00521-020-05546-7 ↗
24. Xu, B., Tan, Y., Sun, W., Ma, T., Liu, H., and Wang, D. (2023). Study on the prediction of the uniaxial compressive strength of rock based on the SSA-XGBoost Model. Sustainability, 15.10.3390/su15065201 ↗
25. A novel artificial intelligence technique to predict compressive strength of recycled aggregate concrete using ICA-XGBoost model10.1007/s00366-020-01003-0 ↗
26. Developing an XGBoost model to predict blast-induced peak particle velocity in an open-pit mine: A case study10.1007/s11600-019-00268-4 ↗
27. Zhang, L., and Zhan, C. (2017, January 17–20). Machine learning in rock facies classification: An application of XGBoost. Proceedings of the International Geophysical Conference, Qingdao, China.10.1190/IGC2017-351 ↗
28. A Neural Network Model for Estimation of Failure Stresses and Strains in Cohesive Soils10.3390/geotechnics2040051 ↗
29. Predicting axial-bearing capacity of fully grouted rock bolting systems by applying an ensemble system10.1007/s00500-024-09828-3 ↗
30. Predicting grout’s uniaxial compressive strength (UCS) for fully grouted rock bolting system by applying ensemble machine learning techniques10.1007/s00521-024-10128-y ↗
31. (2023). Standard Test Method for Compressive Strength of Chemical-Resistant Mortars, Grouts, Monolithic Surfacings, and Polymer Concretes (Standard No. ASTM C579-18).
32. Chen, T., and Guestrin, C. (2016, January 13–17). XGBoost: A scaleble tree boosting system. Proceedings of the 22nd ACM SIGKDD International Conference, San Francisco, CA, USA.10.1145/2939672.2939785 ↗
33. Application of a new machine learning model to improve earthquake ground motion predictions10.1007/s11069-023-06230-4 ↗
34. Battery safety: Machine learning-based prognostics10.1016/j.pecs.2023.101142 ↗
35. Research progress in fault detection of battery systems: A review10.1016/j.est.2024.113079 ↗
36. Ensemble Extreme Gradient Boosting based models to predict the bearing capacity of micropile group10.1016/j.apor.2024.104149 ↗
37. Leveraging large language models for predictive chemistry10.1038/s42256-023-00788-1 ↗
38. Bhattacharya, S., Maddikunta PK, R., Kaluri, R., Singh, S., Gadekallu, T.R., Alazab, M., and Tariq, U. (2020). A Novel PCA-Firefly Based XGBoost Classification Model for Intrusion Detection in Networks Using GPU. Electronics, 9.10.3390/electronics9020219 ↗
39. Super learner ensemble model: A novel approach for predicting monthly copper price in future10.1016/j.resourpol.2023.103903 ↗
40. Slope Stability Analysis Using Rf, Gbm, Cart, Bt and Xgboost10.1007/s10706-021-01721-2 ↗
41. An XGBOOST predictive model of void ratio in sandy soils with shear-wave velocity as major input10.1016/j.trgeo.2023.101100 ↗
42. An Optimized XGBoost Model for Predicting Tunneling-Induced Ground Settlement10.1007/s10706-023-02619-x ↗
43. Harris hawks optimization: Algorithm and applications10.1016/j.future.2019.02.028 ↗
44. Improved Harris Hawks optimization for global optimization and engineering design10.1007/s10586-023-04020-y ↗
45. Comparison of dragonfly algorithm and Harris hawks optimization evolutionary data mining techniques for the assessment of bearing capacity of footings over two-layer foundation soils10.1007/s00366-019-00834-w ↗
46. Novel integration of extreme learning machine and improved Harris hawks optimization with particle swarm optimization-based mutation for predicting soil consolidation parameter10.1016/j.jrmge.2021.12.018 ↗
47. Optimization of an Artificial Neural Network Using Three Novel Meta-heuristic Algorithms for Predicting the Shear Strength of Soil10.1007/s40515-023-00343-w ↗
48. A novel metaheuristic optimizer inspired by behavior of jellyfish in ocean
49. Jellyfish Search-Optimized Deep Learning for Compressive Strength Prediction in Images of Ready-Mixed Concrete10.1155/2022/9541115 ↗
50. Ghani, S., and Kumari, S. (2024). A novel tool for probabilistic modeling of liquefaction behavior in alluvial soil. Georisk Assess. Manag. Risk Eng. Syst. Geohazards, 1–24.10.1080/17499518.2024.2395560 ↗
51. Dragonfly algorithm: A new meta-heuristic optimization technique for solving single-objective, discrete, and multi-objective problems10.1007/s00521-015-1920-1 ↗
52. Optimization of reactive power using dragonfly algorithm in DG integrated distribution system10.1016/j.epsr.2023.109351 ↗
53. Moayedi, H., Tien Bui, D., Dounis, A., Kok Foong, L., and Kalantar, B. (2019). Novel Nature-Inspired Hybrids of Neural Computing for Estimating Soil Shear Strength. Appl. Sci., 9.10.3390/app9214643 ↗
54. Yang, X.-S. (2009). Firefly Algorithms for Multimodal Optimization. Stochastic Algorithms: Foundations and Applications, Springer.10.1007/978-3-642-04944-6_14 ↗
55. Martin, O., Nguyen, C., Sarfati, R., Chowdhury, M., Iuzzolino, M.L., Nguyen, D.M.T., Layer, R.M., and Peleg, O. (2024). Embracing firefly flash pattern variability with data-driven species classification. Sci. Rep., 14.10.1038/s41598-024-53671-3 ↗
56. Wang, X., Hosseini, S., Jahed Armaghani, D., and Tonnizam Mohamad, E. (2023). Data-Driven Optimized Artificial Neural Network Technique for Prediction of Flyrock Induced by Boulder Blasting. Mathematics, 11.10.3390/math11102358 ↗
57. Fostering sustainable mining practices in rock blasting: Assessment of blast toe volume prediction using comparative analysis of hybrid ensemble machine learning techniques
58. Hosseini, S., Khatti, J., Taiwo, B.O., Fissha, Y., Grover, K.S., Ikeda, H., Pushkarna, M., Berhanu, M., and Ali, M. (2023). Assessment of the ground vibration during blasting in mining projects using different computational approaches. Sci. Rep., 13.10.1038/s41598-023-46064-5 ↗
59. Influence of geological conditions on the powder factor for tunnel blasting10.1016/j.ijrmms.2004.03.095 ↗