Bull Eng Geol Environ (2015) 74:745–757
DOI 10.1007/s10064-014-0638-0
ORIGINAL PAPER
Prediction of the unconfined compressive strength of soft rocks:
a PSO-based ANN approach
Edy Tonnizam Mohamad • Danial Jahed Armaghani •
Ehsan Momeni • Seyed Vahid Alavi Nezhad Khalil Abad
Received: 4 March 2014 / Accepted: 15 June 2014 / Published online: 10 July 2014
Ó Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2014
Abstract Many studies have shown that artificial neural
networks (ANNs) are useful for predicting the unconfined
compressive strength (UCS) of rocks. However, ANNs do
have some deficiencies: they can get trapped in local
minima and they have a slow learning rate. It is widely
accepted that optimization algorithms such as particle
swarm optimization (PSO) can improve ANN perfor-
mance. This study investigated the application of a hybrid
PSO-based ANN model to the prediction of rock UCS. To
prepare a dataset for the predictive model, extensive lab-
oratory tests (i.e., 160 tests in total) were conducted on 40
soft rock sample sets (mostly shale) presenting various
weathering grades that were obtained from different
excavation sites in Johor, Malaysia. The laboratory tests
included the UCS test and other basic rock index tests (the
Brazilian tensile strength test, point load index test, and
ultrasonic test). When developing the predictive model of
UCS, the results of the basic rock tests as well as the bulk
densities of the samples were used as input parameters,
while the UCS was set as the output of the predictive
model. The value account for (VAF), root mean squared
error (RMSE), and adjusted R2 (coefficient of
E. T. Mohamad  D. Jahed Armaghani  E. Momeni (&) 
S. V. Alavi Nezhad Khalil Abad
Department of Geotechnics and Transportation, Faculty of Civil
Engineering, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia (UTM),
81310 Skudai, Johor, Malaysia
e-mail: mehsan23@live.utm.my
E. T. Mohamad
e-mail: edy@utm.my
D. Jahed Armaghani
e-mail: danialarmaghani@yahoo.com
S. V. Alavi Nezhad Khalil Abad
e-mail: vankaseyed2@live.utm.my
determination) were utilized to check the performances of
the predictive models. The high performance indices of the
proposed model highlight the superiority of the PSO-based
ANN model for UCS prediction.
Keywords Unconfined compressive strength  Rock
index tests  Artificial neural network  Particle swarm
optimization
Introduction
In rock engineering practice, determining the UCS is of
prime importance, mainly due to its essential role in the
design of geotechnical problems. The unconfined com-
pression test (UCT) is standardized by both the American
Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) and the Inter-
national Society for Rock Mechanics (ISRM). Not only is
the direct determination of the UCS in the laboratory a time-
consuming and expensive task, but it also requires well-
prepared cores (Bieniawski 1974). The latter requirement is
quite difficult to achieve if the rock of interest is weak,
thinly bedded, or densely fractured. In order to overcome
the aforementioned difficulties encountered during core
sample preparation or test execution, the use of indirect
methods of UCS prediction is recommended by many
researchers. Such tests are rapid, easy to perform, portable,
and inexpensive. Indirect tests such as the point load index
test (Is(50)), the Brazilian tensile strength test (BTS), and the
ultrasonic test (Vp) are often used to predict the UCS
(Kahraman et al. 2002; Sonmez et al. 2004, 2006). These
tests have less strict requirements for sample preparation
than the UCS test. These correlated index tests, especially
when coupled with engineering judgment, can provide a
good initial assessment of UCS.
123
746 E. T. Mohamad et al.

On the other hand, ANNs (artificial neural networks)
have recently been used to evaluate geotechnical problems
(Meulenkamp 1997; Meulenkamp and Grima 1999; Singh
et al. 2001; Kahraman and Alber 2006; Baykasoglu et al.
2008; Yilmaz and Yuksek 2008; Sarkar et al. 2010; Yagiz
et al. 2012; Rabbani et al. 2012). The ANN technique is
based on our understanding of the human brain and ner-
vous system (Ghaboussi et al. 1991). In essence, an ANN
attempts to find a nonlinear relationship between some
input and output parameters. A simulation technique of this
kind is useful when there is a complex highly nonlinear
relationship between input and output parameters (Deh-
ghan et al. 2010).
Although ANNs that approximate any complex nonlin-
ear function can be implemented, they do suffer from some
disadvantages: they can become trapped at local minima
and they learn rather slowly (Lee et al. 1991). Many studies
have shown the utility of particle swarm optimization
techniques for improving ANN performance (Eberhart and
Kennedy 1995; Jahed Armaghani et al. 2013; Hajihassani
et al. 2014). The aim of the study reported in this paper was
to develop a hybrid PSO-based ANN predictive model of
UCS. In addition, using laboratory-based observations, the
study also afforded insights into some new correlations
between the UCS and other rock index tests.
Background
Many studies have considered the possibility of a quick and
easy method of predicting the UCS of rock based on
Is(50),Vp, and BTS. The use of the point load test to indi-
rectly measure the compressive strength of the rock has
been highlighted in the literature. Table 1 presents several
established correlations between UCS and Is(50).The
coefficients of determination (R2) or correlation coeffi-
cients (R) of the equations shown in the table indicate their
reliabilities. Note that most of the proposed correlations are
linear. According to these investigations, UCS is linearly
related to Is(50) by a factor within the range 13–24. Such
wide variation is expected because various types of rocks
were used to develop the correlations and rock behavior is
site-specific.
A number of researchers have studied the relationship
between UCS and Vp. Table 2 lists some recent proposed
correlations between Vp and UCS. According to Table 2, as
the number of samples increases, the reliability of each
recommended correlation for UCS prediction decreases,
whereas the UCS–Is(50) correlations (see Table 1) are more
reliable and do not appear to be influenced by the number
of rock samples. This is expected because Is(50) can rep-
resent the compressive strength in a better way than Vp, due
to the destructive nature of Is(50).
It is also an established fact in the literature that the
tensile strength of rock is related to its compressive
strength. According to Sheorey (1997), the compressive
strength of rock is ten times higher than its tensile strength.
A study by Kahraman et al. (2012) shows a linear corre-
lation between UCS and BTS for different rock types. This
proposed correlation is in good agreement with Sheory’s
suggested strength ratio. Such linear relationships are also
proposed in other studies (Tugrul and Zarif 2000; Gupta
and Rao 1998). Din and Rafiq (1997) suggested that, for
limestone rocks in Pakistan, the UCS/BTS ratio is almost
7.5. Heidari et al. (2012) conducted Is(50), BTS, and UCS
tests on 90 core samples of gypsum rock in Iran. Based on
their results, they developed empirical equations which
relate UCS and BTS to Is(50). Their findings show that the
UCS–Is(50) correlation is more reliable. Other recently
proposed correlations are tabulated in Table 3. It is worth

Table 1 Proposed correlations between UCS and Is(50)

References Correlation R or R2 Description

Broch and Franklin (1972) UCS = 23.7 Is(50) – –

Ghosh and Srivastava (1991) UCS = 16 Is(50) – 22 Granitic rock samples
Smith (1997) UCS = 14.3 Is(50) – 75 Samples (limestone and sandstone)
Kahraman (2001) UCS = 8.41 Is(50) ? 9.51 R = 0.85 27 Different rock samples
Sulukcu and Ulusay (2001) UCS = 15.31 Is(50) R = 0.83 23 Samples in different rock types
Tsiambaos and Sabatakakis (2004) UCS = 7.3 I1.71
s(50)
2
R = 0.82 188 Samples (limestone, sandstone, and marlstones)
Kahraman et al. (2005) UCS = 10.22 Is(50) ? 24.31 R2 = 0.75 38 Different rock samples
Basu and Aydin (2006) UCS = 18 Is(50) R2 = 0.97 40 Granitic rock samples
Agustawijaya (2007) UCS = 13.4 Is(50) R2 = 0.89 39 Samples in different rock types
Yilmaz and Yuksek (2008) UCS = 12.4 Is(50) - 9.0859 R2 = 0.81 39 Sets of gypsum samples
2
Diamantis et al. (2009) UCS = 19.79 Is(50) R = 0.74 32 Samples of serpentinite rock
Mishra and Basu (2012) UCS = 14.63 Is(50) R2 = 0.88 60 Samples (granite, schist, and sandstone)
Kohno and Maeda (2012) UCS = 16.4 Is(50) R = 0.92 44 Different rock samples

123
Predicting unconfined compressive strength of soft rocks 747

Table 2 Some established correlations between UCS and Vp

References Correlation R or R2 Description

Sharma and Singh (2008)
Kahraman (2001)
Yasar and Erdogan (2004)
Moradian and Behnia (2009)
Khandelwal (2013)
Khandelwal and singh (2009)
Minaeian and Ahangari (2011)
Diamantis et al. (2009)
Cobanglu and Celik (2008)
Entwisle et al. (2005)
UCS = 0.0642Vp - 117.99
UCS = 9.95V1.21
p R = 0.83
Vp = 0.0317UCS ? 2.0195
UCS = 165.05exp[-4.452/Vp]
UCS = 0.033Vp - 34.83
UCS = 0.1333Vp - 227.19
UCS = 0.005Vp
UCS = 0.11Vp - 515.56
UCS = 56.71Vp - 192.93
UCS = 0.78exp[0.88Vp]
R2 = 0.90 49 Samples in different rock types
27 Different rock samples
R = 0.8 13 Samples of various carbonate rock types
R2 = 0.7 64 Different rock samples
R2 = 0.87 12 Different rock samples
R2 = 0.96 12 Different rock samples
R2 = 0.94 Some samples of weak conglomeratic rock
R2 = 0.81 32 Samples of serpentinite rock
R2 = 0.67 150 Core samples of different rocks
2
R = 0.53 171 Samples of volcanic rock

noting that weathering plays an important role in all of the
aforementioned correlations, as indicated in a study by
Arikan et al. (2007). They determined the strength prop-
erties of rock specimens with weathering states ranging
from 1 to 6 and found an inverse relationship between the
degree of weathering and the engineering properties of the
rock, such as its porosity and tensile and compressive
strengths.
Aside from the correlations mentioned above, some
researchers have also attempted to predict the UCS using
different simulation approaches such as ANN and fuzzy
logic. Gokceoglu and Zorlu (2004) predicted the UCS and
Young’s modulus of problematic rocks using a fuzzy
model and regression techniques. In their study, Is(50), the
block punch index, Vp, and the BTS values of 36 sample
sets were considered as input layers. They concluded that
the fuzzy model permitted more reliable predictions than
the simple and multiple regression models. Dehghan et al.
(2010) implemented a feedforward neural network, math-
ematical methods, and regression analysis in order to pre-
dict the UCS and Young’s modulus values of 30 travertine
rock samples. They considered rock strength parameters
such as Vp, Is(50), Schmidt hammer rebound number, and
porosity as input layers. They concluded that the UCS was
more reliably predicted by the ANN than by the other
methods. A similar conclusion was drawn by Jahanbakhshi
et al. (2011). They used a backpropagation neural network
to estimate the UCS values of sandstone samples. In their
study, Vp, density, and porosity were used as input layers to
predict UCS. Rabbani et al. (2012) developed an ANN-
based predictive model of UCS. In their study, porosity,
bulk density (BD), and water content (%) were considered
as network inputs and the UCS was set as the network
output layer. They demonstrated the feasibility of using an
ANN to predict the UCS. It is interesting to note that a
parameter can be used as an input for a predictive model so
long as it shows an acceptable correlation with the
output(s) (Ceryan et al. 2012).
Artificial neural networks
ANNs are mathematical models inspired by biological
neural networks. An ANN processes information using
simple interconnected elements known as neurons, which
are located in distinct layers of the network. The best type
of ANN, the multi-layer perceptron (MLP), consists of at
least three layers: an input layer, an output layer, and
intermediate or hidden layer(s) (Meulenkamp and Grima
1999). Each layer comprises one or more nodes (neurons).
The lines between the nodes indicate the flow of infor-
mation from one node to the next.
Prior to interpreting new information, the ANN model
has to be trained. Several learning algorithms for training
neural networks have been suggested. It has been
reported that the feedforward backpropagation (BP)
algorithm is the most proficient learning procedure for
MLP neural networks (Tawadrous and Katsabanis 2007).
In the BP algorithm, the neurons send the signals for-
ward, and the computed errors are then propagated
backwards to update the individual connection weights of
the network (Dreyfus 2005). In this process, both train-
ing and testing errors are reduced. This process is
repeated until the error has converged to a level defined
by a cost function such as the mean square error (MSE)
or root mean square error (RMSE) (Simpson 1990; Ko-
sko 1994; Singh et al. 2004).
Particle swarm optimization
The particle swarm optimization (PSO) algorithm is an
evolutionary population-based computation method for
solving optimization problems. The idea for PSO origi-
nated from the social behavior of organisms in a swarm,
such as a flock of birds. PSO was first introduced by Eb-
erhart and Kennedy (1995). The efficiency of PSO in
finding optimal solutions in large search spaces has been

123
748
Table 3 Recent proposed correlations between UCS and BTS
References Correlation
Kahraman et al. (2012) UCS = 10.61BTS
Farah (2011) UCS = 5.11BTS - 133.86
Gokceoglu and Zorlu (2004) UCS = 6.8BTS ? 13.5
Altindag and Guney (2010) UCS = 2.38BTS1.0725
Nazir et al. (2013) UCS = 9.25BTS0.947
established in the literature (Mendes et al. 2002). However,
the simple evolutionary process obtained using Eqs. 1 and
2 is the key advantage of PSO that separates it from other
optimization algorithms. This was highlighted in a study by
Victoire and Jeyakumar (2004), who recommended PSO as
an effective computational tool with a reduced memory
requirement compared to other similar algorithms.
   
v! ¼ ~þ
new v r C  p!  ~
1 1 best p þ r C  g!  ~
2 2 bestp ð1Þ
!
p þ v!
Pnew ¼ ~ new ; ð2Þ
where vnew, v, pnew, and p symbolize the new velocity,
current velocity, new position, and current position,
respectively, of a particular particle among a set of parti-
cles; c1and c2 denote acceleration constants; pbest repre-
sents the best position of that particle and gbest is the best
position of any of the particles in the set; r1 and r2 are
arbitrary values in the range [0, 1].
The first step in solving optimization problems using
PSO is to initialize some randomly selected particles (i.e.,
in the current context, this involves initializing the ANN
weights). Each particle (i.e., ANN weight) is assigned a
random position and velocity. In the next step, an iterative
procedure is used to search for the best solution; in other
words, the Pbest and gbest values of each particle during
each interation were recorded. Subsequently, using Eqs. 1
and 2, the positions of the particles change according to
their experiences and those of the other particles (Poli et al.
2007). The positions of the particles are updated until a
predefined ‘‘termination criterion’’ or the best solution is
achieved (Shi and Eberhart 1999). In geotechnical engi-
neering applications of PSO, the best solution is often
identified by searching for the minimum root mean square
error (RMSE). The termination criterion is usually defined
as a maximum number of iterations (selected using a
parametric study).
PSO-based ANN model
Cost function minimization through the adjustment of a set
of weights and biases is the main objective of an ANN. The
RMSE is often employed as the cost function in ANNs.
Nevertheless, one drawback of ANNs—that they can get
123
E. T. Mohamad et al.
R or R2 Description
R2 = 0.54 Different rock types including limestone
R2 = 0.68 Weathered limestone
R = 0.65 –
R = 0.89 Different rock types including limestone
R2 = 0.90 20 Limestone samples
trapped in local minima—has encouraged the implemen-
tation of hybrid techniques such as PSO-based ANN. The
PSO component of such a hybrid system is able to find a
global minimum and continue searching. Therefore, a
hybrid PSO-based ANN model possesses advantages of
both PSO and ANN: PSO will search for all of the minima
in the search space and ANN will then use them to find the
best solution. In a PSO-based ANN, each particle (i.e.,
ANN weight) is a candidate solution for minimizing the
RMSE. After optimizing the problem, the optimized
weights are used to train the network. In essence, the
objective of implementing PSO in an ANN is to improve
the ANN’s training procedure.
Case study and laboratory test results
This study represents part of a research project on the
excavation of soft rocks (i.e., shale, old alluvium, and iron
pan), as there are many issues that must be considered
when attempting to determine the most efficient excavation
method for such rocks. The excavation sites considered in
this paper are located at Nusajaya, Desa Tebrau and
Mersing, Johor, Malaysia. Figure 1 shows a geological
map and the locations of these sites.
A total number of 160 laboratory tests, including BTS,
Is(50), Vp, and UCS, were conducted on 40 good-quality
rock specimens. The bulk densities of the rock specimens
were also measured. The test procedure suggested by the
ISRM (Ulusay and Hudson 2007) was applied. The results
of the aforementioned laboratory tests are tabulated in
Table 4. Besides laboratory test findings, the weathering
grades of the samples are also listed in Table 4. The
weathering grade classification used is in accord with the
method suggested by the ISRM (Ulusay and Hudson 2007).
As shown in this table, the samples range from slightly
weathered to highly weathered. Table 4 illustrates that the
BD values of the rock samples range from 2,089 to
3,534 kg/m3. The indirect tensile strengths or BTSs of the
rock samples in this study range from almost 0.7 to
4.2 MPa. The UCS results, on the other hand, range from
5.5 to 61.1 MPa. As expected, the UCS decreases as the
weathering effect increases. For instance, the UCS is
Predicting unconfined compressive strength of soft rocks
Fig. 1 Geological map and the
locations of the excavation sites
considered in the present paper
10.6 MPa on average for grade IV, while this value
increases up to 60 MPa for grade II. Results for Vp indicate
that the Vp is higher for denser and less porous shales.
Nevertheless, the Vp results range from 1,247 m/s for
highly weathered rock samples to 2,910 m/s for slightly
weathered rock samples. The Is(50) results show that, for
grade II, the maximum compressive strength of the rock
samples is 4.1 MPa, while this value decreases to 0.1 MPa
for highly weathered shale rock samples (i.e., grade IV).
749
Network design
In this section we discuss the identification of PSO-based
ANN parameters, including the number of particles in the
swarm (swarm size), the number of iterations, and the
network architecture. A parametric study was performed to
find the optimum swarm size and number of iterations. The
optimum network architecture was subsequently deter-
mined using the trial and error method.
123
750 E. T. Mohamad et al.

Table 4 Laboratory test results Sample Rock type Weathering BD (kg/m3) BTS (MPa) Is(50) (MPa) Vp (m/s) UCS (MPa)
number grade

1 Shale II 3,516 3.8 3.9 2,897 55.9

2 Shale II 3,435 3.7 3.7 2,857 47.3
3 Shale III 2,699 1.7 1.0 2,134 16.4
4 Shale III 2,808 3.5 2.3 2,320 34.5
5 Shale III 2,745 2.1 2.0 2,194 25.6
6 Shale III 2,664 3.6 2.7 2,717 41.4
7 Shale IV 2,156 0.8 0.3 1,247 9.5
8 Shale IV 2,654 1.6 0.6 1,417 9.9
9 Shale IV 2,309 0.9 0.4 1,596 10.3
10 Shale IV 2,468 1.7 0.7 1,634 12.2
11 Shale IV 2,177 0.8 0.3 1,297 5.5
12 Shale IV 2,089 1.3 0.5 1,776 6.7
13 Shale IV 2,605 1.6 0.6 1,406 8.8
14 Shale IV 2,501 1.5 0.5 1,754 9.1
15 Shale IV 2,327 1.3 0.5 1,330 9.9
16 Shale III 2,646 2.3 1.9 2,356 28.5
17 Shale III 2,717 2.9 2.3 2,275 34.7
18 Shale III 2,677 2.5 2.7 2,489 38.9
19 Shale II 3,423 4.1 3.6 2,910 51.4
20 Shale II 3,466 3.5 3.9 2,832 56.7
21 Shale II 3,535 4.2 4.1 2,847 61.1
22 Shale III 2,712 2.2 1.7 2,167 21.5
23 Shale III 2,799 2.1 2.4 2,344 36.8
24 Shale III 2,832 2.6 2.9 2,378 32.1
25 Old alluvium IV 2,236 2.7 0.2 1,909 14.5
26 Old alluvium IV 2,224 1.9 0.2 1,988 10.0
27 Old alluvium IV 2,156 1.7 0.2 1,967 12.4
28 Old alluvium IV 2,211 2.0 0.2 1,901 10.8
29 Old alluvium IV 2,235 2.4 0.2 1,912 14.2
30 Old alluvium IV 2,196 1.4 0.2 1,947 9.2
31 Old alluvium IV 2,175 1.4 0.1 2,030 9.1
32 Old alluvium IV 2,225 1.9 0.1 1,928 8.5
33 Old alluvium IV 2,225 1.0 0.2 1,871 10.7
34 Old alluvium IV 2,262 0.7 0.1 1,928 8.4
35 Iron pan II 2,530 3.8 3.4 2,857 52.4
36 Iron pan III 2,505 2.0 1.5 2,417 28.6
37 Iron pan III 2,280 3.5 2.7 2,576 36.5
38 Iron pan IV 2,391 1.7 1.0 1,820 19.7
39 Iron pan IV 2,455 1.7 0.4 1,820 8.4
40 Iron pan IV 2,522 1.6 0.5 1,852 14.4

In order to conduct a parametric study, a MATLAB
code was prepared. Based on an educated guess, an ANN
model consisting of one hidden layer with five nodes was
selected as an initial model. The dataset was divided into
two subsets: training and testing datasets. Eighty percent of
the data was used for training purposes and the other 20 %
was used to test the model’s performance.
The first step in the parametric study was to determine
the swarm size. Although the optimum swarm size depends
on the problem of interest, applying more particles
increases the computational complexity and training time,
while reducing the number particles may negatively affect
the model’s performance. Hence, in order to find the
optimum swarm size, a wide range of swarm sizes (from

123
Predicting unconfined compressive strength of soft rocks
Fig. 2 Effect of swarm size on
network performance in terms
of R2
Fig. 3 Effect of swarm size on
network performance in terms
of RMSE
small to large, i.e., 25–300) were examined, and the
coefficient of determination (R2) as well as the RMSE were
measured in each analysis. It is worth mentioning that other
PSO parameters were kept constant during this step. Fig-
ures 2 and 3 show the values of R2 and RMSE obtained for
different swarm sizes. The results from the testing dataset
indicate that a swarm size of 125 yields the best perfor-
mance in terms of both R2 (0.991) and RMSE (0.077). A
swarm size of 125 was chosen as the optimum number of
particles for subsequent analyses. It is worth mentioning
that, when developing the predictive model, the data were
normalized to values between -1 and 1.
The second step of the parametric study involved
determining a termination criterion for the analysis. The
termination criterion is a condition that, when met, ends the
iterative procedure. For the problem at hand, the termina-
tion criterion was considered to be a maximum number of
iterations. A series of analyses were performed to find the
optimal maximum number of iterations. For this reason, a
model similar to that used in the first step was used, except
751
that the maximum number of iterations was fixed at 800.
Figure 4 suggests that there was no significant change in
the RMSE after 450 iterations, so 450 iterations was
selected as the maximum number of iterations and thus the
termination criterion. It is worth mentioning that in all of
the analyses conducted in this study, acceleration constants
(C1 and C2) equal to 2 were used to find the optimum PSO
structure (Shi and Eberhart 1998; Mendes 2002).
After obtaining the appropriate PSO parameters, the
network structure was designed. To determine the optimum
network architecture, ten hybrid models were considered
with various numbers of nodes in different hidden layers.
Each model was trained and tested five times to find the
average values of R2 and RMSE. However, the R2 values of
the testing dataset were considered when evaluating the
model’s performance. Although an ANN model with one
hidden layer can approximate any continuous function, the
effect of two hidden layers on network performance was
also investigated in this study. Either 6, 9, 12, or 15 nodes
were trialled in each hidden layer in order to determine the
123
752 E. T. Mohamad et al.

Fig. 4 Determining the optimal

maximum number of iterations

Table 5 Model configuration Model Network structure Training Testing

2
Hidden Node in hidden Average R Average Average R2 Average
layer(s) layer(s) RMSE RMSE

1 1 3 0.976 0.089 0.954 0.155

2 1 6 0.973 0.101 0.954 0.122
3 1 9 0.981 0.083 0.854 0.179
4 1 12 0.972 0.094 0.979 0.130
5 1 15 0.982 0.083 0.928 0.148
6 2 3 0.968 0.089 0.957 0.055
7 2 6 0.981 0.084 0.958 0.167
8 2 9 0.981 0.078 0.905 0.214
9 2 12 0.982 0.077 0.957 0.155
10 2 15 0.980 0.077 0.941 0.295

optimum number of nodes. The results of the analyses are
tabulated in Table 5. The results presented in this table
suggest that the fourth PSO-based ANN model (with 12
nodes in the hidden layer) outperformed the other models.
Hence, the architecture of this model was considered to be
optimum for UCS prediction.
Results and discussion
Tables 1, 2, 3 show that there are many correlations
between the UCS and other rock index tests. However, due
to the fact that such relationships are site-specific, the
identification of new correlations for UCS prediction is
always of interest, as they are based on real data. Hence,
based on the laboratory findings, some new correlations for
UCS prediction are proposed in the following paragraphs.
Based on laboratory observations, a new correlation
between UCS and Vp is proposed (Eq. 3). It is shown
schematically in Fig. 5. The R2 of the proposed correlation
demonstrates its reliability.
UCS ¼ 0:032Vp  44:227: ð3Þ
A linear correlation between UCS and Is(50) is proposed,
as shown in Fig. 6. A comparison between the proposed
correlation and previously established correlations shows
that the new correlation, with R2 = 0.958, is highly reliable
and can be used to predict the UCS values of the tested
rock samples. This correlation is shown below.
UCS = 12:291Isð50Þ þ 5:892: ð4Þ
In addition to the previous correlations, a new corre-
lation between UCS and BTS is also proposed, as dis-
played in Fig. 7. In comparison with the correlations
highlighted in the literature, the new proposed correlation,
with R2 = 0.821, is quite reliable. This correlation is as
follows:
UCS ¼ 15:361 BTS  10:303: ð5Þ

123
Predicting unconfined compressive strength of soft rocks 753

Fig. 5 Determined Vp versus

UCS values

Fig. 6 Determined UCS versus

Is(50) values

Fig. 7 Determined BTS versus

UCS values

123
754
The relatively high reliability of the newly proposed
correlations coupled with the fact that these correlations
cover different rock weathering grades may be considered
the advantages of using the proposed correlations for UCS
prediction. Nevertheless, as shown in the aforementioned
equations, the UCS is much more strongly correlated with
Is(50) than with BTS and Vp. This may be attributed to the
fact that both UCS and Is(50) are destructive tests which
show the ultimate axial bearing capacities of the rock
samples under compressive load. However, in the case of
Vp, the test is nondestructive. In BTS, the mode of failure is
different from the UCS. Therefore, as suggested by Heidari
et al. (2012), we would expect the UCS to be more strongly
correlated with Is(50) than with Vp or BTS.
It is worth mentioning that, strictly speaking, the sug-
gested reliabilities of the proposed equations only apply
when the data fall within the range of the data used in this
study. Although the proposed equations can yield reason-
able UCS estimates for other rock types, such generaliza-
tion of the proposed equations may decrease the confidence
level of the estimated UCS, due to the site-specific behavior
of rock. While the use of correlations to predict the UCS is a
Fig. 8 Predictive performance
of the proposed PSO-based
ANN model
Fig. 9 R2 obtained from a
comparison of measured UCS
values with those predicted by
the PSO-based ANN technique
123
E. T. Mohamad et al.
popular approach, and one that still attracts much interest, it
does have a major drawback: the correlation equations
should be updated whenever new data become available.
Aside from the proposed correlations, the PSO-based
ANN technique was also employed to further analyze the
nonlinear relationship between the UCS and the afore-
mentioned rock strength parameters. In order to gain a
better understanding of the predictive power of the PSO-
based ANN, normalized predicted UCS values for all 40
datasets (both training and testing) were plotted against
their normalized measured values determined in the labo-
ratory, as shown in Fig. 8.
As shown schematically in this figure, the predicted
UCS is close to the actual UCS, which shows the accuracy
of the hybrid PSO-based ANN technique. Figure 9 shows
the R2 value obtained from a comparison of the measured
and predicted UCS values for all rock samples. This R2
value of 0.971 reveals that the established model can pre-
dict the UCS with high degree of accuracy; it is higher than
the coefficients of determination obtained for other pro-
posed correlations. It is worth mentioning that the results
obtained from the optimum PSO-based ANN model (model
Predicting unconfined compressive strength of soft rocks 755

Table 6 Performance indices of different models used for UCS BTS were 0.832, 0.958, and 0.821, respectively. However,
prediction in order to achieve better predictions of the UCS in sub-
Predictor/method RMSE VAF (%) R2 Adj R2 sequent works, care must be taken in relation to the range
of values associated with laboratory data. Feeding the
Vp 6.804 83.176 0.832 0.827
predictive model established here with input data that
Is(50) 3.367 95.863 0.958 0.957 include values that are outside of the range of values
BTS 7.005 82.099 0.821 0.816 employed in the present study may result in misleading
PSO-based ANN 2.841 97.087 0.971 0.967 predictions of the UCS.

no. 4), as presented in Figs. 8 and 9, are the best results
obtained, whereas the tabulated results listed in Table 5 are
the average values of five repeated runs.
In order to achieve a better comparison, the RMSE, the
value account for (VAF), and the adjusted R2 were calculated
for all of the proposed predictive models (Alvarez and
Babuska 1999):
vffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
u N
u1 X
RMSE ¼ t ðy  y0 Þ2 ð6Þ
N i¼1
 
var ðy  y0 Þ
VAF ¼ 1   100 ð7Þ
var ðyÞ
ð1  R2 ÞðN  1Þ
Adj R2 ¼ 1  ; ð8Þ
N P1
where y and y0 are the measured and predicted values,
respectively; N is the total number of data values; and P is
the number of predictors. A model is excellent if the VAF
is 100 and the RMSE is zero. The computed values of these
performance indices are shown in Table 6. These values
reveal that the predictive performance of the PSO-based
ANN model is better than those of empirical models.
Summary and conclusion
In order to develop an improved predictive model of UCS,
160 laboratory tests were conducted on 40 sets of soft rock
samples. The core samples (of various grades) were taken
from the Nusajaya, Desa Tebrau, and Mersing excavation
sites in Johor, Malaysia. Based on the laboratory findings,
some new highly reliable correlations between the UCS
and other rock index tests such as Is(50), BTS, and Vp were
elucidated. The R2 values of the proposed correlations
revealed that the UCS is more strongly correlated with
Is(50) than with BTS or Vp. Based on the experimental
dataset, a hybrid PSO-based ANN technique was imple-
mented for UCS prediction. BD, Is(50), BTS, and Vp were
considered as input parameters for the ANN. An R2 of
0.971 suggested that a PSO-based ANN predictive model
with 1 hidden layer and 12 nodes can predict the UCS
much better than other proposed correlations. The R2 val-
ues obtained for correlations of the UCS with Vp, Is(50), and
Acknowledgments The authors would like to extend their gratitude
to Universiti Teknologi Malaysia and the Government of Malaysia for
financial aid and support through vote 01H88, and to all parties that
made this study possible.
References
Agustawijaya DS (2007) The uniaxial compressive strength of soft
rock. Civil Eng Dimen 9:9–14
Altindag R, Guney A (2010) Predicting the relationships between
brittleness and mechanical properties (UCS, TS and SH) of
rocks. Sci Res Essays 5:2107–2118
Alvarez GM, Babuska R (1999) Fuzzy model for the prediction of
unconfined compressive strength of rock samples. Int J Rock
Mech Min Sci 36:339–349
Arikan F, Ulusay R, Aydin N (2007) Characterization of weathered
acidic volcanic rocks and a weathering classification based on a
rating system. Bull Eng Geol Environ 66(4):415–430
Basu A, Aydin A (2006) Predicting uniaxial compressive strength by
point load test: significance of cone penetration. Rock Mech
Rock Eng 39:483–490
Baykasoglu A, Gullu H, Canakci H, Ozbakir L (2008) Predicting of
compressive and tensile strength of limestone via genetic
programming. Expert Syst Appl 35:111–123
Bieniawski ZT (1974) Estimating the strength of rock materials. J S
Afr Inst Min Metall 74:312–320
Broch E, Franklin JA (1972) Point-load strength test. Int J Rock Mech
Min Sci Geom 9(6):241–246
Ceryan N, Okkan U, Kesimal A (2012) Prediction of unconfined
compressive strength of carbonate rocks using artificial neural
networks. Environ Earth Sci 68(3):807–819
Cobanglu I, Celik S (2008) Estimation of uniaxial compressive
strength from point load strength, Schmidt hardness and P-wave
velocity. Bull Eng Geol Environ 67:491–498
Dehghan S, Sattari GH, Chehreh CS, Aliabadi MA (2010) Prediction
of unconfined compressive strength and modulus of elasticity for
travertine samples using regression and artificial neural net-
works. Min Sci Technol 20:0041–0046
Diamantis K, Gartzos E, Migiros G (2009) Study on uniaxial
compressive strength, point load strength index, dynamic and
physical properties of serpentinites from Central Greece: test
results and empirical relations. Eng Geol 108:199–207
Din F, Rafiq M (1997) Correlation between compressive strength
and tensile strength/index strength of some rocks of North-
West Frontier Province (limestone and granite). Geol Bull
30:183–193
Dreyfus G (2005) Neural networks: methodology and application, 2nd
edn. Springer, Berlin
Eberhart R, Kennedy J (1995) A new optimizer using particle swarm
theory. Proc 6th Int Symp on Micro Machine and Human
Science, Nagoya, Japan, 4–6 Oct 1995, pp 39–43
Entwisle DC, Hobbs RN, Jones LD, Gunn D, Raines MG (2005) The
relationship between effective porosity, uniaxial compressive

123
756
strength and sonic velocity of intact Borrowdale volcanic group
core samples from Sellafield. Geotech Geol Eng 23:793–809
Farah R (2011) Correlations between index properties and unconfined
compressive strength of weathered Ocala limestone. University
of North Florida, Jacksonville, p 142
Ghaboussi JH, Garrett JH, Wu X (1991) Knowledge-based model of
material behaviour with neural networks. J Eng Mech
117(1):132–153
Ghosh DK, Srivastava M (1991) Point-load strength: an index for
classification of rock material. Bull Int Assoc Eng Geol
44:27–33
Gokceoglu C, Zorlu K (2004) A fuzzy model to predict the
unconfined compressive strength and modulus of elasticity of a
problematic rock. Eng Appl Artif Intell 17:61–72
Gupta AS, Rao KS (1998) Index properties of weathered rocks: inter-
relationships and applicability. Bull Eng Geol Environ
57(2):161–172
Hajihassani M, Jahed Armaghani D, Sohaei H, Tonnizam Mohamad
E, Marto A (2014) Prediction of airblast-overpressure induced
by blasting using a hybrid artificial neural network and particle
swarm optimization. Appl Acoust 80:57–67
Heidari M, Khanlari GR, Torabi Kaveh M, Kargarian S (2012)
Predicting the uniaxial compressive and tensile strengths of
gypsum rock by point load testing. Rock Mech Rock Eng
45:265–273
Jahanbakhshi R, Keshavarzi R (2011) Intelligent prediction of
uniaxial compressive strength for sandstone. In: Proc 45th US
Rock Mechanics/Geomechanics Symp, San Francisco, CA,
USA, 26–29 June 2011, pp 181–189
Jahed Armaghani D, Hajihassani M, Mohamad ET, Marto A, Noorani
SA (2013) Blasting-induced flyrock and ground vibration
prediction through an expert artificial neural network based on
particle swarm optimization. Arab J Geosci. doi:10.1007/
s12517-013-1174-0
Kahraman S (2001) Evaluation of simple methods for assessing the
uniaxial compressive strength of rock. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci
38:981–994
Kahraman S, Alber M (2006) Estimating the unconfined compressive
strength and elastic modulus of a fault breccia mixture of weak
rocks and strong matrix. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 43:1277–1287
Kahraman S, Fener M, Gunaydin O (2002) Predicting the Schmidt
hammer values of in situ intact rock from core samples values.
Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 39(3):395–399
Kahraman S, Gunaydin O, Fener M (2005) The effect of porosity on
the relation between uniaxial compressive strength and point
load index. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 42:584–589
Kahraman S, Fener M, Kozman E (2012) Predicting the compressive
and tensile strength of rocks from indentation hardness index. J S
Afr Ins Min Metall 112(5):331–339
Khandelwal M (2013) Correlating P-wave velocity with the physico-
mechanical properties of different rocks. Pure Appl Geophys
170:507–514
Khandelwal M, Singh TN (2009) Correlating static properties of coal
measures rocks with P-wave velocity. Int J Coal Geol 79:55–60
Kohno M, Maeda H (2012) Relationship between point load strength
index and uniaxial compressive strength of hydrothermally
altered soft rocks. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 50:147–157
Kosko B (1994) Neural networks and fuzzy systems: a dynamical
systems approach to machine intelligence. Prentice-Hall, New
Delhi, pp 12–17
Lee Y, Oh SH, Kim MW (1991) The effect of initial weights on
premature saturation in back-propagation learning. In: Proc
IEEE Int Joint Conf on Neural Networks, Seattle, WA, USA,
18–21 Nov 1991, pp 765–770
Mendes R, Cortes P, Rocha M, Neves J (2002) Particle swarms for
feed forward neural net training. In: Proc IEEE Int Joint Conf on
123
E. T. Mohamad et al.
Neural Networks, Honolulu, HI, USA, 12–17 May 2002,
pp 1895–1899
Meulenkamp F (1997) Improving the prediction of the UCS by
Equotip readings using statistical and neural network models.
Mem Centre Eng Geol Neth 162:127
Meulenkamp F, Grima MA (1999) Application of neural networks for
the prediction of the unconfined compressive strength (UCS)
from Equotip hardness. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 36(1):29–39
Minaeian B, Ahangari K (2011) Estimation of uniaxial compressive
strength based on P-wave and Schmidt hammer rebound using
statistical method. Arab J Geosci. doi:10.1007/s12517-011-
0460-y
Mishra DA, Basu A (2012) Use of the block punch test to predict the
compressive and tensile strengths of rocks. Int J Rock Mech Min
Sci 51:119–127
Moradian ZA, Behnia M (2009) Predicting the uniaxial compressive
strength and static Young’s modulus of intact sedimentary rocks
using the ultrasonic test. Int J Geomech 9:1–14
Nazir R, Momeni E, Jahed Armaghani D (2013) Correlation between
unconfined compressive strength and indirect tensile strength of
limestone rock samples. Electr J Geotech Eng 18:1737–1746
Poli R, Kennedy J, Blackwell T (2007) Particle swarm optimization.
Swarm Intell 1(1):33–57
Rabbani E, Sharif F, Koolivand Salooki M, Moradzadeh A (2012)
Application of neural network technique for prediction of
uniaxial compressive strength using reservoir formation proper-
ties. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 56:100–111
Sarkar K, Tiwary A, Singh TN (2010) Estimation of strength
parameters of rock using artificial neural networks. Bull Eng
Geol Environ 69:599–606
Sharma PK, Singh TN (2008) A correlation between P-wave velocity,
impact strength index, slake durability index and uniaxial
compressive strength. Bull Eng Geol Environ 67:17–22
Sheorey PR (1997) Empirical rock failure criteria. AA Balkema,
Rotterdam
Shi Y, Eberhart R (1998) Parameter selection in particle swarm
optimization. In: Proceedings of the 7th International Conference
on Evolutionary Programming VII, LNCS vol. 1447. Springer,
New York, pp 591–600
Shi Y, Eberhart RC (1999) Empirical study of particle swarm
optimization. In: Proceedings of the 1999 IEEE Congress on
Evolutionary Computation. IEEE, New York, pp 1945–1950
Simpson PK (1990) Artificial neural system—foundation, paradigm,
application and implementations. Pergamon, New York
Singh VK, Singh D, Singh TN (2001) Prediction of strength
properties of some schistose rocks from petrographic properties
using artificial neural networks. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci
38(2):269–284
Singh TN, Kanchan R, Saigal K, Verma AK (2004) Prediction of
P-wave velocity and anisotropic properties of rock using artificial
neural networks technique. J Sci Ind Res India 63:32–38
Smith HJ (1997) The point load test for weak rock in dredging
applications. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 34(3):295e1–295e13
Sonmez H, Tuncay E, Gokceoglu C (2004) Models to predict the
uniaxial compressive strength and the modulus of elasticity for
Ankara agglomerate. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 41(5):717–729
Sonmez H, Gokceoglu C, Medley CEW, Tuncay E, Nefeslioglu HA
(2006) Estimating the uniaxial compressive strength of a
volcanic bimrock. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 43(4):554–561
Sulukcu S, Ulusay R (2001) Evaluation of the block punch index test
with particular reference to the size effect, failure mechanism
and its effectiveness in predicting rock strength. Int J Rock Mech
Min Sci 38:1091–1111
Tawadrous AS, Katsabanis PD (2007) Prediction of surface crown
pillar stability using artificial neural networks. Int J Numeric
Analyt Meth 31(7):917–931
Predicting unconfined compressive strength of soft rocks
Tsiambaos G, Sabatakakis N (2004) Considerations on strength of
intact sedimentary rocks. Eng Geol 72:261–273
Tugrul A, Zarif IH (2000) Engineering aspects of limestone
weathering in Istanbul, Turkey. Bull Eng Geol Environ
58(3):191–206
Ulusay R, Hudson JA (eds) (2007) The complete ISRM suggested
methods for rock characterization, testing and monitoring:
1974–2006. Suggested methods prepared by the ISRM Com-
mission on Testing Methods. International Society for Rock
Mechanics, Lisbon
Victoire T, Jeyakumar AE (2004) Hybrid PSO–SQP for economic
dispatch with valve-point effect. Electr Power Sys Res 71:51–59
757
Yagiz S, Sezer EA, Gokceoglu C (2012) Artificial neural networks
and nonlinear regression techniques to assess the influence of
slake durability cycles on the prediction of uniaxial compressive
strength and modulus of elasticity for carbonate rocks. Int J
Numer Anal Method Geomech 36(14):1636–1650
Yasar E, Erdogan Y (2004) Correlating sound velocity with the
density, compressive strength and Young’s modulus of carbonate
rocks. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 5:871–875
Yilmaz I, Yuksek AG (2008) An example of artificial neural network
(ANN) application for indirect estimation of rock parameters.
Rock Mech Rock Eng 41(5):781–795
123