journal article·2022-10-15Open access

Efficient Machine Learning Models for the Uplift Behavior of Helical Anchors in Dense Sand for Wind Energy Harvesting

Le Wang, Mengting Wu, Hongzhen Chen, Dongxue Hao, Yinghui Tian, Chongchong Qi

Applied Sciences· Volume 12· Issue 20

Abstract

Helical anchors are widely used in engineering to resist tension, especially during offshore wind energy harvesting, and their uplift behavior in sand is influenced by many factors. Experimental studies are often used to investigate these anchors; however, scale effects are inevitable in 1× g model tests, soil conditions for in situ tests are challenging to control, and centrifuge tests are expensive and rare. To make full use of the limited valid data and to gain more knowledge about the uplift behaviors of helical anchors in sand, a prediction model integrating gradient-boosting decision trees (GBDT) and particle swarm optimization (PSO) was proposed in this study. Data obtained from a series of centrifuge tests formed the dataset of the prediction model. The relative density of soil, embedment ratio, helix spacing ratio, and the number of helices were used as input parameters, while the anchor mobilization distance and the ultimate monotonic uplift resistance were set as output parameters. A GBDT algorithm was used to construct the model, and a PSO algorithm was used for hyperparameter tuning. The results show that the optimal GBDT model accurately predicted the anchor mobilization distance and the ultimate monotonic uplift resistance of helical anchors in dense fine silica sand. By analyzing the relative importance of influencing variables, the embedment ratio was found to be the most significant variable in the model, while the relative density of the fine silica sand soil, the helix spacing ratio, and the number of helices had relatively minor influence. In particular, the helix spacing ratio was found to have no influence on the capacity of adjacent helices when S/D > 6.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Geotechnical Engineering and Soil Mechanics · Geotechnical Engineering and Soil Stabilization · Geotechnical Engineering and Analysis

SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.

Affiliations

State Key Laboratory of Hydraulic Engineering Simulation and Safety School of Civil Engineering, Tianjin University, Tianjin 300350, China

State Key Laboratory of Coastal and Offshore Engineering, Dalian University of Technology, Dalian 116081, China

School of Resources and Safety Engineering, Central South University, Changsha 410083, China

School of Civil Engineering and Architecture, Northeast Electric Power University, Jilin 132012, China

Department of Infrastructure Engineering, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne 3000, Australia

Funding

State Key Laboratory of Hydraulic Engineering Simulation and Safety, Tianjin University · State Key Laboratory of Coastal and Offshore Engineering, Dalian University of Technology · National Natural Science Foundation of China

References (61)

Show source-provided references
1. Lutenegger, A. (2011, January 1–10). Behavior of multi-helix screw anchors in sand. Proceedings of the 2011 Pan-Am CGS Geotechnical Conference, Toronto, ON, Canada.
2. Ultimate Uplift Capacity of Multiplate Helical Type Anchors in Clay10.1061/(ASCE)GT.1943-5606.0000478 ↗
3. Investigation of pullout load capacity for helical anchors subjected to inclined loading conditions using coupled Eulerian-Lagrangian analyses10.1016/j.compgeo.2019.03.007 ↗
4. Tucker, K. (1987). Uplift capacity of drilled shafts and driven piles in granular materials. Foundations for Transmission Line Towers, ASCE. Geotechnical Special Publication 8.
5. Uplift resistance of soils10.1680/geot.1988.38.4.493 ↗
6. Pullout Load Capacity of a Circular Earth Anchor Buried in Sand
7. Uplift of Anchor Plates in Sand10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9410(1987)113:3(202) ↗
8. Uplift Behavior of Screw Anchors in Sand. I: Dry Sand10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9410(1991)117:5(773) ↗
9. Pullout Performance of Inclined Helical Screw Anchors in Sand10.1061/(ASCE)1090-0241(1998)124:7(617) ↗
10. Pullout Resistance of Buried Anchor in Sand10.3208/sandf1972.28.3_114 ↗
11. Experimental investigation of the uplift behaviour of circular plate anchors embedded in sand10.1139/t02-005 ↗
12. Sand Deformation around an Uplift Plate Anchor10.1061/(ASCE)GT.1943-5606.0000633 ↗
13. The uplift capacity of single-plate helical pile in shallow dense sand including the influence of installation10.1016/j.marstruc.2019.102697 ↗
14. Ovesen, N.K. (1981, January 15–19). Centrifuge tests of the uplift capacity of anchors. Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, Stockholm, Sweden.
15. Uplift Behavior of Horizontal Anchor Plates in Sand10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9410(1988)114:11(1300) ↗
16. Levesque, C.L. (2002). Centrifuge Modelling of Helical Anchors in Sand. [Ph.D. Thesis, The University of New Brunswick].
17. Evaluation of the efficiencies of helical anchor plates in sand by centrifuge model tests10.1139/t2012-064 ↗
18. Tensile monotonic capacity of helical anchors in sand: Interaction between helices10.1139/cgj-2018-0202 ↗
19. Neural Network Model for Predicting the Resistance of Driven Piles10.1080/1064119X.2010.514232 ↗
20. Prediction of pile bearing capacity using a hybrid genetic algorithm-based ANN10.1016/j.measurement.2014.08.007 ↗
21. Prediction of pile settlement based on cone penetration test results: An ANN approach10.1007/s12205-012-0628-3 ↗
22. Prediction of friction capacity of driven piles in clay using artificial intelligence techniques10.1080/19386362.2016.1169009 ↗
23. Evolutionary computing to determine the skin friction capacity of piles embedded in clay and evaluation of the available analytical methods10.1016/j.trgeo.2020.100372 ↗
24. Development of an optimized model to compute the undrained shaft friction adhesion factor of bored piles
25. Bayesian Neural Network Analysis of Undrained Side Resistance of Drilled Shafts10.1061/(ASCE)1090-0241(2005)131:1(84) ↗
26. Multivariate adaptive regression splines and neural network models for prediction of pile drivability10.1016/j.gsf.2014.10.003 ↗
27. Prediction of ultimate bearing capacity through various novel evolutionary and neural network models10.1007/s00366-019-00723-2 ↗
28. Developing hybrid artificial neural network model for predicting uplift resistance of screw piles10.1007/s12517-017-3285-5 ↗
29. Modelling stress–strain and volume change behaviour of unsaturated soils using an evolutionary based data mining technique, an incremental approach10.1016/j.engappai.2012.03.006 ↗
30. Scale effect in centrifuge tests of helical anchors in sand
31. Novel methods improve prediction of species’ distributions from occurrence data10.1111/j.2006.0906-7590.04596.x ↗
32. Olson, R.S., Cava, W.L., Mustahsan, Z., Varik, A., and Moore, J.H. (2018). Data-driven advice for applying machine learning to bioinformatics problems. Biocomputing 2018, World Scientific.10.1142/9789813235533_0018 ↗
33. Comparative performance of six supervised learning methods for the development of models of hard rock pillar stability prediction10.1007/s11069-015-1842-3 ↗
34. Helical piles: An innovative foundation design option for offshore wind turbines
35. Prediction of Compressive Strength of Concrete with Manufactured Sand by Ensemble Classification and Regression Tree Method10.1061/(ASCE)MT.1943-5533.0003741 ↗
36. Boosting algorithms in energy research: A systematic review10.1007/s00521-021-05995-8 ↗
37. Gradient Boosting Decision Tree for Lithology Identification with Well Logs: A Case Study of Zhaoxian Gold Deposit, Shandong Peninsula, China
38. Optimizing the Prediction Accuracy of Concrete Compressive Strength Based on a Comparison of Data-Mining Techniques10.1061/(ASCE)CP.1943-5487.0000088 ↗
39. A data mining method for structure design with uncertainty in design variables10.1016/j.compstruc.2020.106457 ↗
40. On the application of machine learning techniques to derive seismic fragility curves10.1016/j.compstruc.2019.03.004 ↗
41. Mathematical optimization in classification and regression trees10.1007/s11750-021-00594-1 ↗
42. Reliability-Based Optimal Design of Truss Structures Using Particle Swarm Optimization10.1061/(ASCE)0887-3801(2009)23:2(100) ↗
43. Optimisation of the finite-difference scheme based on an improved PSO algorithm for elastic modelling10.1080/08123985.2020.1835441 ↗
44. Yan, J., Gao, Y., Yu, Y., Xu, H., and Xu, Z. (2020). A Prediction Model Based on Deep Belief Network and Least Squares SVR Applied to Cross-Section Water Quality. Water, 12.10.3390/w12071929 ↗
45. A prediction model for the secure issuance scale of Chinese local government bonds10.1108/K-10-2019-0699 ↗
46. Drained cyclic capacity of plate anchors in dense sand: Experimental and theoretical observations10.1680/geolett.15.00019 ↗
47. Suction caisson foundations for offshore wind energy: Cyclic response in sand and sand over clay10.1680/jgeot.17.P.273 ↗
48. A strength prediction model using artificial intelligence for recycling waste tailings as cemented paste backfill10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.02.154 ↗
49. Geopolymer Concrete Compressive Strength via Artificial Neural Network, Adaptive Neuro Fuzzy Interface System, and Gene Expression Programming With K-Fold Cross Validation10.3389/fmats.2021.621163 ↗
50. Soft computing of the recompression index of fine-grained soils10.1007/s00500-021-06123-3 ↗
51. Evolutionary computing of the compression index of fine-grained soils10.1007/s12517-021-08319-1 ↗
52. Experimental Study and Soft Computing Modeling of the Unconfined Compressive Strength of Limestone Rocks Considering Dry and Saturation Conditions10.1007/s00603-022-02948-y ↗
53. Explicit soft computing model to predict the undrained bearing capacity of footing resting on aggregate pier reinforced cohesive ground10.1007/s41062-021-00706-7 ↗
54. Intelligent Approach to Estimation of Tunnel-Induced Ground Settlement Using Wavelet Packet and Support Vector Machines10.1061/(ASCE)CP.1943-5487.0000621 ↗
55. Predicting soil available phosphorus by hyperspectral regression method based on gradient boosting decision tree10.3788/LOP56.131102 ↗
56. Comparison of machine learning methods and conventional logistic regressions for predicting gestational diabetes using routine clinical data: A retrospective cohort study10.1155/2020/4168340 ↗
57. A comparison of a gradient boosting decision tree, random forests, and artificial neural networks to model urban land use changes: The case of the Seoul metropolitan area10.1080/13658816.2021.1887490 ↗
58. Breiman, L., Friedman, J., Olshen, R., and Stone, C.J. (1984). Classification and Regression Trees, Wadsworth Statistics, Wadsworth.
59. Greedy function approximation: A gradient boosting machine10.1214/aos/1013203451 ↗
60. Influence of Dilation Angle on Drained Shallow Circular Anchor Uplift Capacity
61. Mobilization Distance for Upheaval Buckling of Shallowly Buried Pipelines10.1061/(ASCE)PS.1949-1204.0000099 ↗