| Literature DB >> 31978993 |
Ting-Yu Liu1, Peng Zhang1, Juan Wang1, Yi-Feng Ling2.
Abstract
In this study, a method to optimize the mixing proportion of polyvinyl alcohol (PVA) fiber-reinforced cementitious composites and improve its compressive strength based on the Levenberg-Marquardt backpropagation (BP) neural network algorithm and genetic algorithm is proposed by adopting a three-layer neural network (TLNN) as a model and the genetic algorithm as an optimization tool. A TLNN was established to implement the complicated nonlinear relationship between the input (factors affecting the compressive strength of cementitious composite) and output (compressive strength). An orthogonal experiment was conducted to optimize the parameters of the BP neural network. Subsequently, the optimal BP neural network model was obtained. The genetic algorithm was used to obtain the optimum mix proportion of the cementitious composite. The optimization results were predicted by the trained neural network and verified. Mathematical calculations indicated that the BP neural network can precisely and practically demonstrate the nonlinear relationship between the cementitious composite and its mixture proportion and predict the compressive strength. The optimal mixing proportion of the PVA fiber-reinforced cementitious composites containing nano-SiO2 was obtained. The results indicate that the method used in this study can effectively predict and optimize the compressive strength of PVA fiber-reinforced cementitious composites containing nano-SiO2.Entities:
Keywords: BP neural network; PVA fiber; cementitious composite; genetic algorithm; nano-SiO2
Year: 2020 PMID: 31978993 PMCID: PMC7040740 DOI: 10.3390/ma13030521
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Materials (Basel) ISSN: 1996-1944 Impact factor: 3.623
Mix proportions of polyvinyl alcohol (PVA) fiber cementitious composites.
| Mix No. | Water | Cement | Quartz Sand | Fly Ash | PVA Fiber | Nano-SiO2 | Water | Compressive Strength |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| kg/m3 | kg/m3 | kg/m3 | kg/m3 | kg/m3 | kg/m3 | kg/m3 | MPa | |
| 1 | 380 | 650 | 500 | 350 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 62.3 |
| 2 | 380 | 650 | 500 | 350 | 2.73 | 0 | 3 | 64.8 |
| 3 | 380 | 650 | 500 | 350 | 5.46 | 0 | 3 | 67.3 |
| 4 | 380 | 650 | 500 | 350 | 8.19 | 0 | 3 | 61.8 |
| 5 | 380 | 650 | 500 | 350 | 10.92 | 0 | 3 | 64.2 |
| 6 | 380 | 650 | 500 | 350 | 13.65 | 0 | 3 | 62.7 |
| 7 | 380 | 637 | 500 | 350 | 0 | 13 | 3 | 59.5 |
| 8 | 380 | 637 | 500 | 350 | 2.73 | 13 | 3 | 61.8 |
| 9 | 380 | 637 | 500 | 350 | 5.46 | 13 | 3 | 64.3 |
| 10 | 380 | 637 | 500 | 350 | 8.19 | 13 | 3 | 56.3 |
| 11 | 380 | 637 | 500 | 350 | 10.92 | 13 | 3 | 58.0 |
| 12 | 380 | 637 | 500 | 350 | 13.65 | 13 | 3 | 54.9 |
| 13 | 380 | 643.5 | 500 | 350 | 8.19 | 6.5 | 3 | 71.7 |
| 14 | 380 | 640.25 | 500 | 350 | 8.19 | 9.75 | 3 | 69.5 |
| 15 | 380 | 633.75 | 500 | 350 | 8.19 | 16.25 | 3 | 55.4 |
| 16 | 380 | 637 | 500 | 350 | 8.19 | 13 | 3 | 70.6 |
| 17 | 380 | 637 | 500 | 350 | 8.19 | 13 | 3 | 57.5 |
| 18 | 380 | 637 | 500 | 350 | 8.19 | 13 | 3 | 57.3 |
| 19 | 380 | 637 | 500 | 350 | 0 | 13 | 3 | 58.2 |
Figure 1A multiple linear regression model constructed using the stepwise regression method. (a) First step, (b) Second step, (c) Third step.
The prediction results of the linear regression equation.
| Mix No. | Compressive Strength | Predicted Compressive Strength | Relative Error |
|---|---|---|---|
| MPa | MPa | % | |
| 16 | 70.6 | 143.2 | 102.9378 |
| 17 | 57.5 | 143.2 | 149.1723 |
| 18 | 57.3 | 143.2 | 150.0421 |
| 19 | 58.2 | 143.8 | 147.1125 |
The prediction results of the linear regression equation.
| Project | Correlation Coefficient | Saliency | Number of Cases |
|---|---|---|---|
| Y1 | 1.0 | 0.652 | 19 |
| Y | 1.0 | 0.652 | 19 |
Variance analysis results of regression equation.
| Project | Sum of Squares | Freedom | Mean Square | F | Saliency |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Inter group combination | 1.517 | 14 | 0.108 | 0.277 | 0.974 |
| Weighting (between groups) | 0.583 | 1 | 0.583 | 1.494 | 0.276 |
| Variance (between groups) | 0.933 | 13 | 0.072 | 0.184 | 0.994 |
| In group | 1.952 | 5 | 0.390 | 0 | 0 |
Predicted results of the linear regression equation.
| Mix no. | Compressive Strength | Predicted Compressive Strength | Relative Error |
|---|---|---|---|
| MPa | MPa | % | |
| 16 | 70.6 | 50.2 | 0.2895 |
| 17 | 57.5 | 50.2 | 0.1276 |
| 18 | 57.3 | 50.2 | 0.1246 |
| 19 | 58.2 | 47.4 | 0.1855 |
Predicted results of the linear regression equation.
| Project | Correlation Coefficient | Saliency | Number of Cases |
|---|---|---|---|
| Y1 | 1.0 | 0.770 | 19 |
| Y | 1.0 | 0.770 | 19 |
Figure 2A flow chart of Levenberg–Marquardt algorithm.
Figure 3Architecture of three-layer backpropagation (BP) neural network model.
The initial parameter setting of the model.
| No. | Number of Neurons in Saphenous layer | Training Times | Mean Square Error (MSE) | Learning Rate
| Momentum Factor
| Display Interval Times |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| P-4c-k | 4 | 10000 | 0.0000001 | 0.005 | 0.1 | 10 |
| P-7c-k | 7 | 10000 | 0.0000001 | 0.007 | 0.5 | 19 |
| P-10c-k | 10 | 10000 | 0.0000001 | 0.01 | 0.9 | 25 |
| P-13c-k | 13 | 10000 | 0.0000001 | 0.1 | 1.2 | 35 |
Figure 4Results of the BP neural network trial test. (a) P-4c-k; (b) P-7c-k; (c) P-10c-k; (d) P-13c-k.
Figure 5The relationship between gradient and learning times.(a) P-4c-k; (b) P-7c-k; (c) P-10c-k; (d) P-13c-k.
Figure 6The relationship between gradient and mean square error of training data. (a) P-4c-k; (b) P-7c-k; (c) P-10c-k; (d) P-13c-k.
The corresponding parameter values of each test level.
| No. | Number of Neurons in the Saphenous Layer | Training Times | Mean Square Error (MSE) | Learning Rate
| Momentum Factor
| Display Interval Times |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Level 1 | 2 | 100 | 0.001 | 0.0010 | 0.0110 | 3 |
| Level 2 | 16 | 500 | 0.00001 | 0.5006 | 0.5030 | 52 |
| Level 3 | 32 | 1000 | 0.0000001 | 1.0001 | 0.1000 | 101 |
The head of the orthogonal test considering the interaction.
| Level | A | M | N | B | (A × B)1 | (A × B)2 | C | (A × C)1 | (A × C)2 | (B × C)1 | D | (B × C)2 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Column number | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 13 |
The sample deviation analysis results of each interaction test.
| NO. | A | M | N | B | A × B | C | A × C | B × C | D | B × C | R | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | ||
| 1 | 2 | 100 | 0.001 | 0.0010 | (1) | (1) | 0.0110 | (1) | (1) | (1) | 3 | (1) | 64.4 |
| 2 | 2 | 500 | 0.00001 | 0.5006 | (1) | (1) | 0.5030 | (2) | (2) | (2) | 52 | (2) | 60.3 |
| 3 | 2 | 1000 | 0.0000001 | 1.0001 | (1) | (1) | 0.1000 | (3) | (3) | (3) | 101 | (3) | 62.9 |
| 4 | 2 | 100 | 0.001 | 0.0010 | (2) | (2) | 0.0110 | (1) | (1) | (1) | 3 | (1) | 59.9 |
| 5 | 2 | 500 | 0.00001 | 0.5006 | (2) | (2) | 0.5030 | (2) | (2) | (2) | 52 | (2) | 60.9 |
| 6 | 2 | 1000 | 0.0000001 | 1.0001 | (2) | (2) | 0.1000 | (3) | (3) | (3) | 101 | (3) | 63.0 |
| 7 | 2 | 100 | 0.001 | 0.0010 | (3) | (3) | 0.0110 | (1) | (1) | (1) | 3 | (1) | 62.9 |
| 8 | 2 | 500 | 0.00001 | 0.5006 | (3) | (3) | 0.5030 | (2) | (2) | (2) | 52 | (2) | 63.6 |
| 9 | 2 | 1000 | 0.0000001 | 1.0001 | (3) | (3) | 0.1000 | (3) | (3) | (3) | 101 | (3) | 64.7 |
| 10 | 16 | 100 | 0.001 | 0.0010 | (2) | (2) | 0.0110 | (1) | (1) | (1) | 3 | (1) | 62.0 |
| 11 | 16 | 500 | 0.00001 | 0.5006 | (2) | (2) | 0.5030 | (2) | (2) | (2) | 52 | (2) | 60.6 |
| 12 | 16 | 1000 | 0.0000001 | 1.0001 | (2) | (2) | 0.1000 | (3) | (3) | (3) | 101 | (3) | 61.2 |
| 13 | 16 | 100 | 0.001 | 0.0010 | (3) | (3) | 0.0110 | (1) | (1) | (1) | 3 | (1) | 62.5 |
| 14 | 16 | 500 | 0.00001 | 0.5006 | (3) | (3) | 0.5030 | (2) | (2) | (2) | 52 | (2) | 64.1 |
| 15 | 16 | 1000 | 0.0000001 | 1.0001 | (3) | (3) | 0.1000 | (3) | (3) | (3) | 101 | (3) | 61.1 |
| 16 | 16 | 100 | 0.001 | 0.0010 | (1) | (1) | 0.0110 | (1) | (1) | (1) | 3 | (1) | 60.7 |
| 17 | 16 | 500 | 0.00001 | 0.5006 | (1) | (1) | 0.5030 | (2) | (2) | (2) | 52 | (2) | 61.1 |
| 18 | 16 | 1000 | 0.0000001 | 1.0001 | (1) | (1) | 0.1000 | (3) | (3) | (3) | 101 | (3) | 63.7 |
| 19 | 32 | 100 | 0.001 | 0.0010 | (3) | (3) | 0.0110 | (1) | (1) | (1) | 3 | (1) | 61.7 |
| 19 | 32 | 500 | 0.00001 | 0.5006 | (3) | (3) | 0.5030 | (2) | (2) | (2) | 52 | (2) | 60.5 |
| 21 | 32 | 1000 | 0.0000001 | 1.0001 | (3) | (3) | 0.1000 | (3) | (3) | (3) | 101 | (3) | 60.3 |
| 22 | 32 | 100 | 0.001 | 0.0010 | (1) | (1) | 0.0110 | (1) | (1) | (1) | 3 | (1) | 62.4 |
| 23 | 32 | 500 | 0.00001 | 0.5006 | (1) | (1) | 0.5030 | (2) | (2) | (2) | 52 | (2) | 61.5 |
| 24 | 32 | 1000 | 0.0000001 | 1.0001 | (1) | (1) | 0.1000 | (3) | (3) | (3) | 101 | (3) | 62.8 |
| 25 | 32 | 100 | 0.001 | 0.0010 | (2) | (2) | 0.0110 | (1) | (1) | (1) | 3 | (1) | 61.8 |
| 26 | 32 | 500 | 0.00001 | 0.5006 | (2) | (2) | 0.5030 | (2) | (2) | (2) | 52 | (2) | 64.5 |
| 27 | 32 | 1000 | 0.0000001 | 1.0001 | (2) | (2) | 0.1000 | (3) | (3) | (3) | 101 | (3) | 62.9 |
Results of sample regression variance analysis.
| Interfering Factor | Sum of Squares of Sample Regression | Freedom | Sum of Mean Regression Squares
|
| Saliency |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| 2.060 | 2 | 1.030 | 0.391 | 0.683 |
|
| 0.828 | 1 | 0.828 | 0.314 | 0.582 |
|
| 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
|
| 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
|
| 0.112 | 1 | 0.112 | 0.043 | 0.839 |
|
| 0.000 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
|
| 1.023 | 1 | 1.023 | 0.388 | 0.542 |
|
| 1.023 | 1 | 1.023 | 0.388 | 0.542 |
|
| 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
|
| 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
The results of the range analysis.
| Project | A | M | N | B | C | D |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| F1 | 62.54277 | 62.04506 | 62.04506 | 62.04506 | 62.04506 | 62.04506 |
| F2 | 62.18327 | 61.91194 | 61.91194 | 61.91194 | 61.91194 | 61.91194 |
| F3 | 62.03376 | 62.52182 | 62.52182 | 62.52182 | 62.52182 | 62.52182 |
| Range R | 3.426 | 2.284 | 2.284 | 2.284 | 2.284 | 2.284 |
The results of the BP neural network generalization ability test.
| Mix No. | Compressive Strength | Predicted Compressive Strength | Relative Error |
|---|---|---|---|
| MPa | MPa | % | |
| 16 | 70.6 | 63.2 | 10.522 |
| 17 | 57.5 | 60.8 | 5.7005 |
| 18 | 57.3 | 58.9 | 2.7342 |
| 19 | 58.2 | 59.2 | 1.7765 |
Optimum mix of PVA fiber-reinforced cementitious composites containing nano-SiO2.
| Source | Water-Cement Ratio | Cement-Sand Ratio | Volume Content of PVA Fiber | Content of Nano-SiO2 | Compressive Strength |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| % | % | % | % | MPa | |
| Prediction model | 0.59 | 1.28 | 1.0 | 0.9 | 68.7 |
| Literature [ | 0.60 | 1.29 | 0.9 | 1.0 | 71.7 |