See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/320699591

Development of a methodology for road maintenance planning of low volume

roads based on roughness data

Conference Paper · October 2017

CITATION READS

1 4,057

2 authors, including:

H.R. Pasindu
University of Moratuwa
73 PUBLICATIONS   216 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Road Safety View project

Pavement Management for Low Volume Roads View project

All content following this page was uploaded by H.R. Pasindu on 05 July 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Development of a methodology for road maintenance
planning of low volume roads
based on roughness data

Abstract: Sri Lanka has one of the highest road densities in the region, with most regions in the
country having connectivity to a road network. Successive governments have invested billions of rupees
to upgrade or expand the national road network, especially at provincial or local government level to
improve the accessibility in rural areas. However, there is no systemic process in place to maintain these
roads. Often maintenance is done on ad-hoc basis and there is high political influence and other societal
pressure. The main reason is the lack of a maintenance management system, budgetary constraints and
lack of resources to evaluate the condition of the road and make objective decisions with regard to
implementing maintenance work. The study proposes a new methodology to assist local authorities
make decisions on maintenance works considering the existing condition and cost of repair works. The
existing condition is measured via smartphone based pavement roughness measurement method.
These roughness values are correlated to representative cost values using HSR based on distress and
roughness data. This can be used to select roads for maintenance works based on the current road
condition as well considering the budgetary constraints. Using a prioritizing criteria and optimization
methods such as integer programming, proposed in the study, candidate roads for maintenance can be
selected. The methodology will provide an objective process to make maintenance decision making
which allow the authorities to optimize their budget utilization and improve the network road
condition.

Keywords: Low volume roads, pavement roughness, pavement maintenance, decision support
system, maintenance budget

1. Introduction priorities, quantify disinvestment, or support

Low volume roads (LVR) provide the primary
links to the national highway network. They
provide connectivity from homes and farms to
markets, and they provide public access to
essential health, education, civic facilities etc.
These are critical to economies locally and
nationally in all countries of the world. Low
volume roads are defined as roads having an
average daily traffic (ADT) less than 400 vehicles
per day but typically roads with ADT up to 2000
is considered in this category [4]. Many low
volume roads consist of single lane with gravel
or even more native surfacing. In Sri Lanka there
are about 70% of low volume rural roads among
all the roads while 30% is the other highways.
Very few data concerning LVR performance,
use, cost and so forth is available within road
agencies [7]. Fewer the road users, lesser the
funding for LVR maintenance, restoration.
Insufficient funding and inconsistent fund
allocation is the most relevant issue associated
with LVRs. Another major issue with financing
and planning LVRs is the shortage of sufficient
data. With incomplete data, investment
strategies and funding justifications are fairly
weak, and agencies are unable to define
maintenance needs [4].
There is no adequate maintenance planning for
low volume roads in Sri Lanka. Most of the time
maintenance is carried out often on ad-hoc basis,
due to external influence, lack of proper plans,
and irregularity of funds. One reason for this is
the lack of consistent objective method to
evaluate the pavement condition and a simple
tool/guideline to help local agencies to make
decisions with regard to maintenance work.
In consideration of the above, road roughness,
can be considered as a good indicator of
pavement condition, provided that roughness
measurements can be gathered at a low expense
and with lesser manpower. Using the roughness
data, road agencies are able to decide on the
required mainteance operation for the road and
thus, perpare a prelimanry budget for the
M. A. D. De Silva, Undergraduate, Department of Civil
Engineering, University of Moratuwa
H. R. Pasindu, Senior Lecturer, Transportation Engineering
Division, Department of Civil Engineering, University of
Moratuwa, pasindu@uom.lk

1
maintenance work with prioritizing of the road
considering its condition.
2. Literature Review
2.1 Pavement Roughness
Pavement roughness is generally defined as an
expression of irregularities in the pavement
surface such as potholes, depressions, cracking,
rutting, ravelling etc. Pavement roughness
affects in many ways such as ride quality,
vehicle delay cost, safety, asset management,
fuel consumption and maintenance cost etc.
Globally accepted indicator to measure
pavement roughness is International Roughness
Index (IRI). It is also possible that future
pavement conditions might be more accurately
predicted from the components of the index [3].
International Roughness Index was developed
by World Bank in 1982. The IRI was first
recommended as a standard for roughness
measurements at the International Road
Roughness Experiment conducted in 1982 [12].
International Roughness Index (IRI) is a scale for
roughness based on the simulated response of a
generic motor vehicle to the roughness in a
single wheel path of the road surface. Its true
value is determined by obtaining a suitably
accurate measurement of the profile of the road,
processing it through an algorithm that
simulates the way a reference vehicle would
respond to the roughness inputs, and
accumulating the suspension travel.
Roughness can be measured in several ways
depending on the accuracy of the measurement.
Profilometers, Response type road roughness
meters (RTRRMs) are examples that require high
capital cost and high maintenance cost, but these
methods produce very accurate measures.
Profiling devices are used to provide accurate,
scaled, and complete reproductions of the
pavement profile within a certain range. They
are available in several forms, and can be used
for calibration of RTRRMs [8]. But these
methods have few limitations when
implementing to low volume roads. These
devices are mounted on to a standard vehicle
and the vehicle has to travel in the respective
road to obtain the measures. Most of the time, it
is not practical to travel in such vehicles in low
volume roads as they do not provide sufficient
space for the vehicle to travel. For low volume
roads in Sri Lanka, a cost effective, more
accessible and simple method is applicable for
measurements.
2
As a solution to this, there are new methods
developed in order to obtain road roughness
data. One such popular example is using
smartphones for road roughness estimation [5].
Using smartphones to collect data is a promising
alternative because of its low cost and ese of use.
Moreover, smartphones are very popular
devices all over the country, thus the technology
easily accessible to any road agency.
Furthermore, a non-technical employee of an
organization can operate a simple mobile
application and collect the required roughness
data, thus reducing the burden on the technical
staff which is often in shortage in the provincial
level road agencies.
2.2 Low volume road maintenance
management
There are many issues when authorities try to
implement these maintenance works. Some of
the issues would be [2],
• Insufficient road maintenance funding
• Limited construction material
• Limited capacity and number of
qualified staff
• Inadequate maintenance
• Lack of decision supporting system.
Typical types of distresses that were observed on
the sample of roads selected for the study are
fatigue cracking, block cracking, edge cracking,
longitudinal and transverse cracks, potholes,
rutting, ravelling etc. The evaluation of current
condition of the pavement and selection of the
correct maintenance type is vital to ensure the
functionality of the roads. By introducing a
proper pavement management system, better
decisions can be made in order to optimize the
pavement condition with maintenance work.
Pavement management system performs an
analysis of the collected rating data and reports
on the current and projected condition of the
road system in order to evaluate the
effectiveness of the planning and funding
priority and provide guidance in decision
making process [9].
Using a pavement management system, there
will be effective and efficient directing of the
various activities involved in providing and
sustaining pavements in a condition acceptable
to the traveling public at the least life cycle cost.
[1] According to research, it has shown that it is
far less expensive to keep a road in good
condition than it is to repair it once it has
deteriorated. Pavement management system
performs the tasks of inventorying pavement
conditions, identifying good, fair and poor
pavements, assigning importance ratings for
road segments, based on traffic volumes, road
functional class, and community demand,
scheduling maintenance of good roads to keep
them in good condition and scheduling repairs
of poor and fair pavements as remaining
available funding allows.
There are key measures used to define the
condition of a pavement [13].
• Roughness
• Surface Distress
• Structural Capacity
• Surface Friction
Roughness is directly related to both user
satisfaction and user cost. It is an integral
component of the pavement quality assessment
in a PMS. In addition, as discussed earlier with
the smart phone base application, roughness
measurements can be gathered within a budget
constraint and less manpower in data collection.
3. Evaluation of roughness of low
volume roads and assessing road
condition
Roughness and distress data collection of low
volume roads were carried out covering few
districts in Sri Lanka such as Kandy, Galle,
Matara, Kurunegala, Kaluthara. Roads for data
collection were selected to include, low volume
roads with varying lengths, pavement
conditions and pavement types. 20 number of
roads were selected for the purpose of the study.
For the data collection the study follows the
method proposed by Gamage et.al., 2016 [6].
The android mobile application, “Roadroid
Classic” is used in getting roughness
measurements. Smartphone equipped with this
app is fixed on the windshield of the vehicle
keeping in a steady position. Thus, we assume
that the acceleration coordinates of the vehicle
and smartphone are the same. A Toyota Hilux
4WD cab is used in data collection as most of the
road agencies in Sri Lanka use such vehicles in
their field work.
3
Figure 2 - Capturing the
road condition using video
Figure 1 - Roughness
Measuring from
“Roadroid Classic”
Figure 3 - Accelerometer data transferred to
spread sheet
While traveling, the road surface is captured by
a video camera for cross checking a validation.
Roadroid Classic application is available in
Google Play Store for free. This app registers the
vibrations from the road and correlates to the
International Roughness Index. It displays eIRI,
cIRI and location data (speed of the vehicle,
longitude, latitude and Altitude). The
Application calculates eIRI for every 20-meter
road section. Roadroid application can only
calculate eIRI when driving speed of experiment
vehicle is 20 kmph or faster. After calibrating the
smartphone, accelerometer data from the app is
obtained and transferred to spread sheet. Then
those spreadsheets are thoroughly checked and
IRI values are matched to the location of the road
for the respective IRI using the images from the
video camera. This is done for assessing of the
current condition of the road. Table 1 shows how
sample roads are evaluated using Roadroid
Classic app, which shows that it gives
satisfactory roughness values.
Table 1 - Sample of estimated IRI from mobile
application and condition of the Kuliyapitiya
- Bowatta road
IRI from
Road
Road section mobile
Condition
application
1.5 Excellent
 (representing different road condition
categories), which is given in Table 3.
13.0 Very Poor
The information can be used to make
preliminary estimates on the maintenance
budget requirement for each road section, based
on its roughness value.
4. Determination of typical
maintenance cost for low volume roads

Along with the roughness of the road, the

distresses that are present in the road section are
recorded as well. Based on the existing
distresses, the corrective maintenance treatment
required can be decided by the maintenance
engineer or decision criteria as given in the Road
Development Authority National Road Master
Plan [10].
Figure 4 - IRI vs. Maintenance Cost (Rs. /sq.m)
The representative cost of the identified Plot
maintenance treatment for each road section is
estimated using the HSR (Highway Schedule of Table 3 - Cost per sq.m in Rs. for IRI ranges
Rates) [11]. Sample rates in HSR are as follows.
Avg.
Table 2 - Sample rates in HSR IRI Range
Cost
<2 6.43
Proposed HSR-2016 Cost (Rs.) 2 to 5 1,158.41
maintenance Item No
operation 5 to 7 2,172.57
Pothole MS1-002 209 per sq.m 7 to 10 3,097.85
patching >10 3,766.13
MS1-007 949 per sq.m
5. Selection of roads for
MS1-008 905 per sq.m
Patching MS1-011 1202 per sq.m
maintenance based on roughness data
ruts
MS1-010 1,433 + 24 5.1. Prioritizing roads based on pavement
+MS1- =1457per sq.m condition
010A
Sand S1-036 135 per sq.m In order to select the priority of a road to be
Sealing selected for maintenance work, there should be
Edge Repair MS1-015 1485 per sq.m a proper prioritization criteria. Roughness,
safety, importance of road and traffic etc. can be
(Road Development Authority, 2015) the criteria which are considered in
This will give representative corrective prioritization. Among them roughness data can
maintenance cost for each road section be used in the preliminary stage as data
evaluated, along with its roughness value. collection and analysis is rather easy and cost
Furthermore, sections are categorized into IRI effective. This is especially relevant for local
ranges such as IRI <2, 2-5, 5-7, 7-10, 10+ to authorities who have resource limitations to
indicate the condition of the roads that are implement large scale pavement evaluation
selected such as very good condition, schemes.
satisfactory, poor condition, very poor condition
respectively. Considering the IRI values of the road sections,
they are ranked from worst roads to best roads.
From the data available, the average The roads can be selected based on the three
maintenance cost variation with IRI is plotted in ranks until the budget is utilized.
Figure 4. The analysis also be extended to
estimate average cost for each IRI range

4
Table 4 - Maintenance Priority
IRI Range Condition Priority Rank
>10 Very Poor 1
7-10 Poor 2 6.
5-7 Fair 3
2-5 Good 4 To illustrate the proposed methodology the
<2 Excellent 5 following case study is presented using the
However, simple ranking of road sections based
on road condition alone does not accurately
represent the overall network condition, the
minimum standards that should be maintained
etc. Furthermore, this method may not be able to
account for other parameters that should be
incorporated in prioritizing roads.
5.2. Selection of candidate roads using
optimization methods
Optimization based approach alleviates some of
the problems identified in earlier section. For
example, the proposed Integer Programming
model can be used to select candidate roads for
maintenance. Lingo software was used as the
Integer Programming tool in this research. It is a
comprehensive tool designed to make building
and solving Linear, Nonlinear, Quadratic etc
and Integer optimizations models [14].
Objective function of the model is to minimize
the network roughness value, i.e. improve the
network road condition.
the maintenance treatment selected and B total
budget.
Illustrative Example
roads included in the study. There are 20 roads
selected for the sample, and they have varying
pavement conditions.
Total cost of maintenance for each road is
determined using the regression model
developed earlier. IRI after maintenance is
formulated by considering types of operations,
and the input of experienced highway engineers.
Table 4, shows the Worst first ranking of the
road network is formulated considering the
current average IRI of the road sections. The
selection of the roads for maintenance depends
on the budget available. For example, selecting
all roads for maintenance would require
approximately Rs. 950 mn. For the given budget
of Rs. 500 mn road sections 6, 19, 16, 4, 2 and 3 is
selected. Alternatively, the engineer could
propose alternative maintenance treatments
(which would change the cost) and change the
number of roads selected considering the
budgetary constraints

n
Objective function: min∑i=1 IRIi(2)*X(i)*L(i) + Table 5 - Worst first ranking of road sections
IRI(1)*(1-X(i))*L(i)) for a budget of Rs. 500 Mn.
where i is the road section no, n is number of all
road sections in the network, IRI(i) and IRIi(2) is
IRI before and after maintenance (to be defined
at the time of selecting the maintenance
treatment for road i), L(i) is the length of road
section i and X(i) is 1 if the road is selected for
repair and 0 if the road is not selected for repair.

Other aspects such as safety, road hierarchy

(roads used to access civic centres) can be
incorporated into the objective function with
priority factors.

Constraints can be included to represent the

other requirements the authority seeks to
implement. For the model proposed in this
section the following constraints are given.
IRIi(1)* Xi >= 4
∑ni=1 Xi*Ci <= B
The proposed optimization model is then
applied to select the roads. The selected and not
selected roads from the Integer Programming
model are given below.

where IRIi(1) is IRI before maintenance, Ci is the

cost of maintenance of road section i based on

5
Table 6 - Selected and not selected roads from
Integer Programming
Selected Roads Not Selected Roads
3*,4*,5,7,8,9,11,12,15,16* 1,2,6,10,13,14,171,18,19
*- roads selected under both methods
The results show that the both methods produce
different results and second method includes a
higher number of roads in the selected category.
The proposed methodology can also be adopted
to estimate the required budget to,
a) maintain all roads above a min IRI value –
using the first approach, i.e prioritizing based on
road condition;
b) considering the network road condition
(using a parameter such as network IRI)
As illustrated in Figure 6, as the budget
allocation is increased the network IRI value can
be reduced, thus indicating an overall
improvement to the road condition in the
network.
Figure 6 - Network IRI for various budget
7. Conclusion
The study has proposed a novel methodology to
prioritize roads for maintenance planning for a
low volume/provincial road network.
Pavement condition evaluation is based on road
roughness data that can be obtained easily using
mobile application. Estimating budget
requirement is based on the roughness value of
the roads. A simplified prioritization method is
given to select roads for maintenance planning
considering both the condition and the budget
availability. This can also be used to determine
budget requirement and other factors can be
incorporated to the optimization model to
represent variables such as importance of the
road, safety considerations etc.
This proposed approach provides a logical and
objective methodology which can be
implemented easily to select roads sections for
6
maintenance planning. This study presents a
decision support system for a maintenance
engineer or decision makers to implement
maintenance work in a local/ provincial road
network without any external influence but with
proper planning.
Acknowledgement
Assistance received from Mr. Lalith Sumanasiri
(Road Development Authority) and Mr. Ajith
Panagoda (Sabaragamuwa Provincial Road
Development Authority) is acknowledged.
References
1. AASHTO. (1985). Guidelines on Pavement
Management. American Association of State
Highway and Transportation Officials,
Washington D.C.
2. ADB. (2013). 2013 Annual Evaluation Review.
Asian Development Bank.
3. Camahan, J. V., ASCE, M., Davis, W. J., Shahin,
M. Y., Keane, P. L., & Wu, M. I. (n.d.).
4. Coghlan, G. T. (2000). Opportunities for Low-
Volume Roads. U.S. Department of Agriculture
Forest Service. Transportation Research Board.
5. Douangphachanh, V., & Oneyama, H. (2013). A
Study on the Use of Smartphones for Road
Roughness Condition Estimation. Proceedings of
the Eastern Asia Society for Transportation Studies,
9.
6. Gamage, D., Pasindu, H., & Bandara, S. (2016).
Pavement Roughness Evaluation Method for
Low Volume Roads. Proc. of the Eighth Intl. Conf.
on Maintenance and Rehabilitation of Pavements.
Research Publishing, Singapore.
7. Kinigama, G. (2010). Development of
methodology to estimate esal values for low
volume roads in provincial sector.
8. Pavia Systems, Inc. (n.d.). Roughness. Retrieved
from Pavement Interactive:
http://www.pavementinteractive.org/roughne
ss/
9. Public Works Maintenance, Eugene. (2015).
Pavement Management Report. Public Works
Maintenance, Eugene.
10. Road Development Authority. (2007). National
Road Master Plan 2007-2017.
11. Road Development Authority. (2015). Road
Development Authority – HSR Analysis (Metric).
 12. Sayers, M. W., Gillespie, T. D., & Queiroz, C. A.
(1986). The International Road Roughness
Experiment. Establishing Correlation and a
Calibration Standard for Measurements.

13. US Department of Transportation Federal

Highway Administration. (2002). Use of PMS
Data For Performance Monitoring. US Department
of Transportation Federal Highway
Administration.

14. Lindo Systems. (2017).

http://www.lindo.com/index.php/produc
ts/lingo-and-optimization-modeling ,
(Accessed 1.4.2017)

View publication stats