Abstract
AbstractThe study of drainage behavior is essential for using waste material in geotechnical applications. In this study, sandy soil was replaced with waste foundry sand (WFS) at an incremental interval of 20% by weight. Permeability (k) for each mix was acquired at three relative densities (RD), i.e., 65%, 75% and 85%, by using the constant head method. Then the results were further processed with machine learning (ML) models to validate the experimental data. The experimental study demonstrated that k would decrease with the increase in relative density and WFS content. A rise in RD from 65% to 85% resulted in a substantial reduction of up to 140% in the value of k. Moreover, the complete replacement of sand with WFS reduced the value of k by 36%, 51% and 57% for RD of 65%, 75% and 85%, respectively. The total dataset of 90 observations was divided at a ratio of 63/13/15 into training/validation/testing datasets for ML-AI modeling. Input variables include percentage of sand (BS), replacement with WFS, total head (H), time interval (t) and outflow (Q); and k is the output variable. The methods of artificial neural network (ANN), random forest (RF), decision tree (DT) and multi-linear regression (MLR) are used for k prediction. It is found that the random forest approach performed outstandingly in these methods, with an R2 value of 0.9955. The performance of all the proposed methods was compared and verified with Taylor's diagram. Sensitivity analysis showed that Q and RD were the most influential parameters for predicting k values.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference81 articles.
1. Abichou, T., Benson, C. H., Edil, T. B., & Freber, B. W. (1998). Using waste foundry sand for hydraulic barriers. Proceedings of Recycled Materials in Geotechnical Applications, 86–99.
2. Abichou, T., Benson, C. H., & Edil, T. B. (2000). Foundry green sands as hydraulic barriers: Laboratory study. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, 126(12), 1174–1183. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)1090-0241(2000)126:12(1174)
3. Abichou, T., Benson, C. H., & Edil, T. B. (2002). Foundry green sands as hydraulic barriers: Field study. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, 128(3), 206–215.
4. Ahmad, M., Keawsawasvong, S., Bin Ibrahim, M. R., Waseem, M., Kashyzadeh, K. R., & Sabri, M. M. S. (2022). Novel approach to predicting soil permeability coefficient using Gaussian process regression. Sustainability, 14(14), 8781. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14148781
5. Alwosheel, A., van Cranenburgh, S., & Chorus, C. G. (2018). Is your dataset big enough? Sample size requirements when using artificial neural networks for discrete choice analysis. Journal of Choice Modelling, 28, 167–182. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jocm.2018.07.002