Gradient tree boosting machine learning on predicting the failure modes of the RC panels under impact loads

  • Duc-Kien ThaiEmail author
  • Tran Minh Tu
  • Tinh Quoc Bui
  • T.-T. Bui
Original Article


This paper proposed a new approach in predicting the local damage of reinforced concrete (RC) panels under impact loading using gradient boosting machine learning (GBML), one of the most powerful techniques in machine learning. A number of experimental data on the impact test of RC panels were collected for training and testing of the proposed model. With the lack of test data due to the high cost and complexity of the structural behavior of the panel under impact loading, it was a challenge to predict the failure mode accurately. To overcome this challenge, this study proposed a machine-learning model that uses a robust technique to solve the problem with a minimal amount of resources. Although the accuracy of the prediction result was not as high as expected due to the lack of data and the unbalance experimental output features, this paper provided a new approach that may alternatively replace the conventional method in predicting the failure mode of RC panel under impact loading. This approach is also expected to be widely used for predicting the structural behavior of component and structures under complex and extreme loads.


Impact loading Reinforced concrete Local damage Machine learning XGboost Gradient boosting 



This work was supported by the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) grant funded by the Korea government (MSIT) (No. 2018R1C1B5086385).

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.


  1. 1.
    Abdel-Kader M, Fouda A (2014) Effect of reinforcement on the response of concrete panels to impact of hard projectiles. Int J Impact Eng 63:1–17CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ali SA, Candra H, Pires JA (2011) Finite element simulation of soft missile impacts on reinforced concrete slabs. Transactions of the 21st SMiRT, New Delhi, India, NovemberGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Almusallam TH, Siddiqui NA, Iqbal RA, Abbas H (2013) Response of hybrid-fiber reinforced concrete slabs to hard projectile impact. Int J Impact Eng 58:17–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    American Concrete Institute (2001). Code Requirements of Nuclear Safety Related Concrete Structures (ACI 349-01)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ayaki T, Yanagimoto H, Yoshioka M (2017) Recommendation from access logs with ensemble learning. Artif Life Robotics 22(2):163–167CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bao YQ, Tang ZY, Li H, Zhang YF (2018) Computer vision and deep learning–based data anomaly detection method for structural health monitoring. Struct Health Monit 18:1–21Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bui TQ, Tran AV, Shah AA (2014) Improved knowledge-based neural network (KBNN) model for predicting spring-back angles in metal sheet bending. Int J Model, Simul, Sci Comput 5(2):1–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Cha YJ, Choi W (2017) Deep learning-based crack damage detection using convolutional neural networks. Comput Aided Civ Infrastruct Eng 32:361–378CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Chang WS (1981) Impact of solid missiles on concrete barries. J Struct Div (ASCE) 107(2):257–271Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Chen T, Guestrin C (2016) XGBoost: a scalable tree boosting system. arXiv preprint arXiv:1603.02754
  11. 11.
    Dancygier AN, Yankelevsky DZ, Jaegermann C (2007) Response of high performance concrete plates to impact of non-deforming projectiles. Int J Impact Eng 34:1768–1779CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Dunne RA, Campbell NA (1997) On the pairing of the softmax activation and cross-entropy penalty functions and the derivation of the softmax activation function. 8th Aust. Conf. on the Neural Networks, MelbourneGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Goutte C, Gaussier E (2005) A probabilistic interpretation of precision, recall and F-score, with implication for evaluation. LLNCS 3408 (Springer)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Güneyisi EM, D’Aniello M, Landolfo R, Mermerdaş K (2014) Prediction of the flexural overstrength factor for steel beams using artificial neural network. Steel Compos Struct 17(3):215–236CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Guyon I, Elisseeff A (2003) An introduction to variable and feature selection. J Mach Learn Res 3:1157–1182zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hanchak SJ, Forrestal MJ, Young ER, Ehrgott JQ (1992) Perforation of concrete slabs with 48 MPa (7 ksi) and 140 MPa (20 ksi) unconfined compressive strengths. Int J Impact Eng 12(1):1–7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Hashimoto J, Takiguchi K, Nishimura K, Matsuzawa K, Tsutsui M, Ohashi Y, Kojima I, Torita H (2005) Experimental study on behavior of RC panels covered with steel plates subjected to missile impact. Transactions of the 18th SMiRT, Beijing, China, AugustGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Hughes G (1984) Hard missile impact on reinforced concrete. Nucl Eng Des 77:23–35CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Kennedy RP (1975) A review of procedures for the analysis and design of concrete structures to resist missile impact effects. Nucl Eng Des 37(2):183–203CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Kosteski LE, Riera JD, Iturrioz I, Singh RK, Kant T (2015) Assessment of empirical formulas for prediction of the effects of projectile impact on concrete structures. Fatigue Fract Eng Metar Struct 38:948–959CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Kozlovskaia N, Zaytsev A (2017) Deep ensembles for imbalanced classification. In: 16th IEEE International Conference on Machine Learning and Applications (ICMLA). Cancun, pp 908–913Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Lee S, Ha J, Zokhirova M, Moon H, Lee J (2018) Background information of deep learning for structural engineering. Arch Comput Methods Eng 25(1):121–129MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Lee S, Kim G, Kim H, Son M, Choe G, Nam J (2018) Strain behavior of concrete panels subjected to different nose shapes of projectile impact. Mater (Basel) 11(3):409CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Li QM, Chen XW (2003) Dimensionless formulae for penetration depth of concrete target impacted by a non-deformable projectile. Int J Impact Eng 28(1):93–116CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Li QM, Tong DJ (2003) Perforation thickness and ballistic limit of concrete target subjected to rigid projectile impact. J Eng Mech 129(9):1083–1091CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Li QM, Reid SR, Wen HM, Telford AR (2005) Local impact effects of hard missiles on concrete targets. Int J Impact Eng 32:224–284CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Nachtsheim W, Stangenberg F (1982) Interpretation of results of MEPPEN slab tests-comparison with parametric investigations. Nucl Eng Des 75:283–290CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Novák D, Lehký D (2006) ANN inverse analysis based on stochastic small-sample training set simulation. Eng Appl Artif Intell 19:731–740CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Orbovic N, Blahoianu A (2011) Tests on concrete slabs under hard missile impact to evaluate the influence of the transverse reinforcement and pres-stressing on perforation velocity. Transactions of the 21st SMiRT, New Delhi, India, NovemberGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Orbovic N, Elgohary M, Lee NH, Blahoianu A (2009) Test on reinforced concrete slabs with pre-stressing and with transverse reinforcement under impact loading. Transactions of the 20st SMiRT, Espoo, Finland, AugustGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Orbovic N, Sagals G, Blahoianu A (2015) Influence of transverse reinforcement on perforation resistance of reinforced concrete slabs under hard missile impact. Nucl Eng Des 295:716–729CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Pires JA, Ali SA, Candra H (2011) Finite element simulation of hard missile impacts on reinforced concrete slabs. Transactions of the 21st SMiRT, New Delhi, India, NovemberGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Rajput A, Iqbal MA (2017) Ballistic performance of plain, reinforced and pre-stressed concrete slabs under normal impact by an ogival-nosed projectile. Int J Impact Eng 110:57–71CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Riera JD (1989) Penetration, scabbing and perforation of concrete structures hit by solid missiles. Nucl Eng Des 115:121–131CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Stephenson AE (1978) Full-scale Tornado-missile impact tests. Nucl Eng Des 46:123–143CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Sugano T, Tsubota H, Kasai Y, Koshika N, Ohnuma H, Von Riesemann WA, Bickel DC, Parks MB (1993) Local damage to reinforced concrete structures caused by impact of aircraft engine missiles-Part 1. Test program, method and results. Nucl Eng Des 140:387–405CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Thai DK, Kim SE, Bui TQ (2018) Modified empirical formulas for predicting the thickness of RC panels under impact loading. Constr Build Mater 169:261–275CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Tsubota H, Koshika N, Mizuno J, Sanai M, Peterson B, Saito H, Imamura A (1999) Scale model tests of multiple barriers against aircraft impact: part 1. experimental program and test results. Transactions of the 15th SMiRT, Seoul, Korea, AugustGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Vepsa A, Saarenheimo A, Tarallo F, Rambach J-M, Orbovic N (2011) IRIS_2010-Part II: experiment data. Transaction of the 21st SMiRT, New Delhi, India, NovemberGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Wu H, Fang Q, Peng Y, Gong ZM, Kong XZ (2015) Hard projectile perforation on the monolithic and segmented RC panels with a rear steel liner. Int J Impact Eng 76:232–250CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Xia Y, Liu C, Li YY, Liu N (2017) A boosted decision tree approach using Bayesian hyper-parameter optimization for credit scoring. Expert Syst Appl 78:225–241CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Yokoyama S, Matsumoto T (2017) Development of an automatic detector of cracks in concrete using machine learning. Procedia Egineering 171:1250–1255CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Zhang C, Liu C, Zhang X, Almpanidis G (2017) An up-to-date comparison of state-of-the-art classification algorithms. Expert Syst Appl 82:128–150CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Zhang MH, Shim VPW, Lu G, Chew CW (2005) Resistance of high-strength concrete to projectile impact. Int J Impact Eng 31:825–841CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Zhang Y, Huang Q, Ma X, Yang Z, Jiang J (2016) Using multi-features and ensemble learning method for imbalanced malware classification. IEEE Trust Com-Big DataSE-ISPA 2016:965–973Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London Ltd., part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Civil and Environmental EngineeringSejong UniversitySeoulSouth Korea
  2. 2.Faculty of Industrial and Civil EngineeringNational University of Civil EngineeringHanoiVietnam
  3. 3.Department of Civil and Environmental EngineeringTokyo Institute of TechnologyTokyoJapan
  4. 4.University of Lyon, GEOMAS, INSA LyonVilleurbanne CedexFrance

Personalised recommendations