2019
DOI: 10.28927/sr.421021
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Predicting the Shear Strength of Unfilled Rock Joints with the First-Order Takagi-Sugeno Fuzzy Approach

Abstract: As a result of a number of studies, some analytical models have been developed to predict the shear behavior of unfilled rock joints, but they all present a purely deterministic nature because their input variables are defined without considering the uncertainties inherent in the formation processes of the rock masses and related discontinuities. This work aims to present a model for predict the shear strength of unfilled rock joints by incorporating uncertainties in the variables that govern its shear behavio… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
3

Relationship

0
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 3 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 31 publications
(42 reference statements)
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The correlation coefficient between the shear stress and dilation output by the model and the test sample reached 0.99 which shows that the model had good capability of predicting the shear behavior of rock. Matos et al (Matos et al, 2019) pointed out the same problem. The author argued that previous analytical models that predicted the shear behavior of unfilled rock joints could not take into account the uncertainties inherent in the rock formation process.…”
Section: Methods Used Referencementioning
confidence: 83%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The correlation coefficient between the shear stress and dilation output by the model and the test sample reached 0.99 which shows that the model had good capability of predicting the shear behavior of rock. Matos et al (Matos et al, 2019) pointed out the same problem. The author argued that previous analytical models that predicted the shear behavior of unfilled rock joints could not take into account the uncertainties inherent in the rock formation process.…”
Section: Methods Used Referencementioning
confidence: 83%
“…Previous studies (Papaliangas et al, 1993;Sklavounos and Sakellariou, 1995;Indraratna et al, 1999;Wang et al, 2000;Jin et al, 2006;Vardakos. et al, 2007;Tiryaki, 2008;Zorlu et al, 2008;Ceryan et al, 2012;Samani and Bafghi, 2012;Yagiz et al, 2012;Rajesh Kumar et al, 2013;Zheng et al, 2013;Gu et al, 2015;Liu et al, 2015;Song et al, 2015;Wang et al, 2015;Raissi et al, 2018;Matos et al, 2019;Almajid and Abu-Alsaud, 2021;Dantas Neto et al, 2021;Deng and Pan, 2021;Haghighat et al, 2021;Hasanipanah et al, 2021;Fathipour-Azar, 2022;Garg et al, 2022;Li and Chen, 2022;Mahmoodzadeh et al, 2022) have shown that machine learning methods can provide new ideas for rock mechanics problems, and this issue is no exception (Ghaboussi and Sidarta, 1998;Jaksa. and Maier., 2009).…”
Section: Determining Constitutive Behaviorsmentioning
confidence: 99%