PER PERFO FORMA RMANCE CE BAS ASED ED ON PAVE VEMEN MENT T - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

4th INTE INTERN RNATIO TIONAL L CONF CONFERE ERENC NCE E ON ON REHABIL REHABILIT ITATIO TION N AND AND MAINT MAINTEN ENANC NCE E IN IN CIVIL CIVIL ENGINE ENGINEERIN ERING

ASS ASSESSMEN ESSMENT T OF OF MA MAGE GETAN AN REGENCY’S ROAD PER PERFO FORMA RMANCE CE BAS ASED ED ON PAVE VEMEN MENT T AN AND D OFF OFF PAVEMEN VEMENT T CO COMPON MPONENTS ENTS By By : Jok

• ko T
• Tri

ri Har Haryanta anta

• 1. INTRODUCTION

• Roa
• ad

d plays plays a f a fund undamenta amental role in a

• le in a

nation’s economic and social well- being ing.

• A

A co common mmon pr prob

• blem, h

lem, however er, , is th is that t roa

• ads de

ds dete terior riorate te in in qu quality a ality after fter ext xten ende ded d pe period riods of s of use use.

• Thu

hus, , rou

• utine

tine and and susta sustaina inable r ble roa

• ad

d maint mainten enan ance ce ac activi tivities ties ar are alw e always ays ne need eded ed to to k kee eep p roa

• ads

ds mot motor

• rable

ble and and saf safe f e for

• r use

users.

• The

he pur purpo pose se of

• f th

this r is rese esear arch h is is to to dete termine mine road pe perf rforma mance sta statu tus s afte after an r anal alysis u ysis using KRMS sing KRMS soft softwar are e an and d also also to to pr prese esent nt nec necessa essary y rec ecomme

• mmend

ndation tions s for

• r roa
• ad ha

d hand ndli ling ng ba based sed on

• n r

roa

• ad pe

d perf rfor

• rman

mance ce resu esults lts

2. . LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 2.1 Fu Func nction tional al co cond nditi ition

• ns of

s of r roa

• ads

ds

Suw Suwar ardo do and and Sugiha Sugiharto to [1] ar argu gue th that Rou

• ugh

ghness ess Ind Index (RI RI) is is one

• ne of
• f ma

many factors with with great influe influence on

• n comf
• mfort of
• f

dr driv iver ers when en on

• n th

the roa

• ad. Ad

Addit itiona ionall lly, Suhe Suherma man [2] po posits sits th that roa

• ad rou
• ughne

ghness dir direc ectl tly affec ects ts div diver er co comf mfor

• rt. Hen

Hence ce th the ne need to to co conduc nduct pe period riodical ical road

• ad inspe

inspect ction ion for

• r be

bette tter roa

• ad pe

perf rfor

• rman

mance ce Assessme Assessment nt of

• f fun

funct ctiona ional l co cond nditi ition

• ns of

s of roa

• ads ca

ds can n be be don done e by ph y physic ysical e l eva valua luation tion th through field field eva valua luation tion an and

• b
• bser

serva vation tion. . Resu esults a lts are th e then en doc docume ument nted ed for

• r visual

visual asse assessmen ssment. t.

2.2 2.2 Roa

• ad pe

d perf rfor

• rman

mance ce

• Road perf

rforma mance is is th the r rela lativ tive fu function tion an and a abil ility ity of roa

• ad pa

d paveme ement nts s to to opt

• ptimall

imally y mee meet t tr traf affic fic de deman mands ds wi with thin in a ce a certa tain per in period. T

• iod. To
• de

dete termine th mine the sta e state te of

• f roa
• ad

d co cond nditi ition

• ns,

s, th the Inte e Interna nation tional R al Rou

• ugh

ghne ness ss Ind Index x (IRI (IRI), ), th the e Paveme ement nt Con Condition dition Ind Index (PC x (PCI)

• Thus, r

s, road pe perf rforma mance can be de dete termine mined using sing the the value values of s of IRI, IRI, PCI PCI an and d SDI SDI [6] [6] as as well ell as th as the co e combina mbination tion

• f
• f th

the th e three ee meth method

• ds

s [7]. [7].

• To
• in

invest estiga igate te r roa

• ad pe

d perf rfor

• rman

mance ce ba based sed on

• n the

the func function tional al and str structu tural c l condition itions s of roads, the s, the met method use sed by by Bina Bina Mar arga ga an and AAS d AASHT HTO O 19 1993 93 ca can be n be ado adopt pted ed

• A

A ne new w met metho hod using d using a spec a special ial soft softwar are e - Ka Kabu bupa pate ten Roa

• ad

d Mana Manage gemen ment t System System (KRMS (KRMS)

• 3. RESEARCH METHOD AND

DATA COLLECTION TECHNIQUE

Ma Map p of

• f rese

esear arch h loca location tion

Name Name of

• f roa
• ad sec

d section tion loca location tion

No. Name of Road Section Sub-district Traversed Length (km) Type of pavement 1. Takeran-Mardigondo Takeran 5,50 Asphalt 2. Maospati-Karangsono Maospati-Barat 4,50 Asphalt 3. Tebon-Karangmojo Barat-Kartoharjo 3,60 Asphalt 4. Tebon-Batur Barat 4,00 Asphalt 5. Karangsono-Teguhan Barat-Maospati 5,50 Asphalt 6. Purwodadi-Grabahan Barat-Karangrejo 2,30 Asphalt 7. Genengan-Lembeyan Kawedanan-Lembeyan 10,30 Asphalt 8. Tamanarum-Lembeyan Parang-Lembeyan 7,40 Asphalt 9. Parang-Turus Parang-Poncol 11,60 Asphalt 10. Ringinagung-Bangsri Ngariboyo 1,10 Asphalt 11. Tulung-Kenongomulya Kawedanan-Takeran 5,50 Asphalt 12. Panekan-Jabung Panekan 4,40 Asphalt 13. Tinap-Jongke Sukomoro-Karas 5,70 Asphalt 14. Takeran-Kenongomulya Takeran 3,40 Asphalt 15. Pupus-Tapen Lembeyan 3,70 Asphalt 16. Pupus-Semen Lembeyan-Takeran 7,10 Asphalt TOTAL 85,60

Da Data ta on

• n road and

and road

• ad comp

mpone nent dama mages es collec lected ted in in th the sur survey ey wer ere in in a video ideo for

• rma
• mat. The

he visu visual al asse assessment ssment

• f
• f

th the video ideo was as afte afterw rwar ards ds do done to to det eter ermine mine th the da dama mages es of

• f th

the roa

• ad and

and its its compleme complementar ntary fac acil ilit ities ies. For

• r

mor more ext xten ensiv sive resu esults lts, sec secon

• ndary

da data ta wer ere

• bta

tained ined fr from the the Office ice

• f
• f

Pub Public ic Wor

• rks

ks and nd De Develop elopmen ment Plann lanning ing Age Agenc ncy at at Sub Sub-Na Nationa ional Le Level of

• f

Ma Mage geta tan Regenc

• ency. These

hese da data ta inc include luded Ma Mage getan tan Rege gency ad administr ministrativ tive ma map, roa

• ad se

sect ction ion ma map, and and Aver erage ge Dail aily Traf affic fic (ADT (ADT) da data ta. The he full full met metho hodo dolog logy y an and d ste steps emp ps emplo loyed ed in in th this is rese esear arch h ar are sho e shown i wn in n Figu Figure 2. e 2.

• In

In th this r is rese esear arch, h, KRMS KRMS met metho hod w d was as use used d to to det deter ermine mine roa

• ad pe

d perf rfor

• rman

mance ce wi with thou

• ut

t using using the the IRI IRI value

• value. Using

. Using th this is met metho hod, dama d, damage ge asse assessmen ssment t of

• f pa

paveme ement nt an and r d roa

• ad

d co compo mpone nent nts s was as do done ne wi with th th the e use user-friend friendly y KRMS KRMS so softw ftware whic ich provide vided in in-depth th r resu sults lts on S SLD D Reports ts (Str (Straigh aight t Line Line Di Diagram) am) an and d Ma Map p Rep epor

• rt Di

t Diagram am (Stri (Strip p Ma Map p Dia Diagram). am).

• Dete

Determina mination tion of

• f weigh

eight of t of roa

• ad co

d compo mpone nent nts s li like e its its physic ysical l and fun function tional l condition itions s was s done using sing a a qu quest estionn ionnair aire e whic hich h was as afte afterw rwar ards ds an anal alysed ysed using using the the Ana Analytica ytical l Hier Hierar archy hy Pr Proc

• cess

ess (AHP) (AHP) met metho hod. d.

• Dete

Determina mination tion of

• f pr

priority iority sca scale i le in n ha hand ndli ling ng Ma Mage geta tan distric istrict t road was s su subse sequentl tly y done using sing ANP ANP (Ana (Analysis ysis Net Networ

• rk

k Pr Proc

• cess) wi

ess) with th th the he e help of lp of Supe Super r Dec Decisi ision

• n soft

softwar are.

• e. The

he da data ta i inp nput ut meth method

• d an

and cr d criteria iteria wer ere e th then en use used to d to i inf nfor

• rm

m key ey pr priorities iorities of

• f th

the r e roa

• ad.

d.

Analysis

Visual isual

• bser
• bserva

vation tion

• f
• f sur

surface ace conditions conditions Regist gistration tion of

• f

ar area of ea of road

• ad

dam damage ge (For

• rm

m 1) 1) Visual isual

• bser
• bserva

vation tion of

• f

road in

• ad inventor

entory y conditions conditions Recor ecording ding of

• f r

road

• ad

dama damage in ge inventor entory y (For

• rm 2)

m 2) Per erfor

• rmance

mance appr ppraisal aisal with ith KRM KRMS S softw softwar are e Road

• ad

perf perfor

• rmance

mance and and handling handling recommenda ecommendations tions

• 4. THE OUTCOME OF

ANALYSIS AND REVIEWS

Figu Figure 3 e 3. . Tak aker eran an-Mar ardigo digond ndo Roa

• ad

d Section Section Doc Docume ument ntation tion

4 . 1 E VA L U AT I O N O F T H E P H YS I C A L S TAT E O F T H E R O A D

Table ble 2. SUMMAR ARY Y OF R F ROAD AD DAM AMAGES RE RECO CORDE RDED D FO FOR R EVE VERY Y SEGMENT OF T F THE R ROAD AD (M (M2). ).

Name of Road Section Bleed- ing (m2) Ravell- ing (m2) Dis- integra- tion (m2) Crack with Depres- sion (m2) Patching (m2) Crack- ing (m2) Pothole (m2) Rutting (m2) Edge Damage (m2) Takeran-Madigondo

• 137,5

30,0 57,0 80,4 39,0 60,3

• Maospati-Karangsono
• 3,7

146,4 19,2 6,9

• 6,6

Tebon-Karangmojo

• 9,0

11,3

• 8,0

Tebon-Batur 0,4 0,3

• 0,7

377,2 106,9 2,1

• 5,2

Tamanarum- Lembeyan 50,0 350,8 65,4

• 1.123,2

108,6 10,9

• 6,6

Genengan-Lembeyan 35,3 364,9 445,0 11,8 1.091,9 126,2 13,7 134,1 22,1 Purwodadi-Grabahan

• 70,5
• 86,2
• 9,1
• Karangsono-Teguhan

36,0 2,1 162,8

• 177,7

71,9 41,1

• 36,7

Parang-Turus

• 10,0

28,5

• 1.471,6

32,6 35,5

• 4,9

Pupus-Tapen

• 7,1

41,1 11,1 126,9 79,3 32,5

• 4,6

Takeran- Kenongomulyo

• 6,0
• Tinap-Jongke

73,1

• 1,6

1,6 167,7 8,8 25,8

• 0,9

Panekan-Jabung

• 376,1

62,0 2,5

• Tulung-

Kenongomulyo

• 28,1

92,4 3,1

• 0,6

Ringinagung-Bangsri

• 0,5
• 2,0
• 6,2
• Pupus-Semen
• 4,0

92,2 4,5

• 163,10

141,8

• 8,0

TABL ABLE E 2 INDICA INDICATES TES THE THE MA MAGN GNITU ITUDE DE OF OF DISFIG DISFIGUREM UREMEN ENT T PE PER R 10 100 0 ME METE TERS RS FOR FOR EA EACH CH PAR ART T OF OF THE THE ROAD AD. . TABLE ABLE 2 2 IS A IS ACCOM CCOMPANIED IED BY BY A A VIS VISUAL AL EXA EXAMIN MINATI TION ON OF OF THE THE DET DETERI ERIOR ORATI TION ON OF OF THE THE ROAD AD AS AS WELL WELL. AN AN AN ANAL ALYSIS SIS OF OF TABLE ABLE 2 2 SHO SHOWS WS THA THAT T PATCHES CHES, LOOSE OOSE AND AND CRA CRACK CKED ED GRAINS GRAINS (IN (IN THA THAT T ORDER) ORDER) REM REMAIN AIN THE THE HIGHES HIGHEST T FORM FORM OF OF ROAD AD DEGE DEGENER NERATIO TION.

• N. 52

5261 61.4M2 .4M2 IS IS THE THE SUM SUM OF R OF ROAD AD DAMA AMAGE E DUE DUE TO O PATCHES CHES WHILE WHILE THA THAT T CA CAUSED USED BY BY GRAIN GRAIN LOO OOSE SENIN NING G IS IS 947.17 .17 M2.

• M2. HO

HOWEVER, WEVER, 91 919 9 M2 M2 IS IS REC RECORD ORDED ED FOR FOR CRA CRACK K DEGE DEGENERA NERATI TION ONS. S.

4.2 4.2 ASCER ASCERTAIN AINMENT O MENT OF F WEIGH WEIGHT T REQUIREMENT REQUIREMENTS S OF OF ROAD AD COMPONENTS COMPONENTS

USING USING THE THE AN ANAL ALYTI YTICAL L HIERAR HIERARCHY PR PROCES OCESS S (AHP) (AHP) TE TECHNIQUE CHNIQUE VIA VIA A A QUES QUESTIONN TIONNAIR IRE, E, AN AN AN ANAL ALYSIS SIS OF OF THE THE ASC ASCERT ERTAINM NMENT ENT OF OF THE THE WEIGHT WEIGHT REQUIR REQUIREMENT EMENT OF OF ROAD AD COMP COMPONEN ONENTS TS WHICH WHICH CO COVER VERS THE THE UTILITY UTILITY AND AND PHY PHYSICA SICAL ST STATE TE OF OF ROADS ADS CAN CAN BE BE CARRI CARRIED ED OU OUT POS POST T AN ANAL ALYSIS SIS VIA VIA THE THE AHP AHP TE TECHNIQU CHNIQUE E RES RESUL ULTE TED D IN IN THE THE DET DETERM ERMINATIO TION N OF OF THE THE MAS MASS S OF OF EA EACH CH ROAD AD COMP COMPONEN ONENT T THE THESE SE ARE ARE –

• ROAD

AD ON ON PAVE VEME MENT T COMP COMPONENTS ONENTS 80%

• COM

COMPONE ONENTS OFF OFF P PAVE VEMENT ROAD AD 20 20%

• PHY

HYSICAL ICAL COND CONDIT ITION ON ON ON PAVE VEMENT 73 73% %

• COND

CONDIT ITION ON ON ON PAVE VEMENT FUNCT FUNCTION ION 27 27% %

• AND

AND COND CONDIT ITIO ION N OFF OFF PAVE VEMENT NT FUNCT FUNCTION ION 81 81%

OTHE THERS RS ARE ARE: :

• PHY

PHYSICA SICAL CON CONDITI DITION ONS S OF OFF P PAVEME VEMENT T 19%, %,

• ROAD

AD SHOULDE HOULDER R 36%, 36%,

• DRAIN

DRAINAGE GE EDGE EDGE 24 24%, %,

• EDGE

EDGE SLOP OPE 19%, 19%,

• SID

SIDEWALK EWALK 12 12%, %,

• ST

STREE REET T FIXTURE FIXTURES S 8%, 8%,

• RUT

UT DE DEPTH/MILD H/MILD EROS OSION ION 25 25%, %,

• AND

AND RUT UT DE DEPT PTH/ H/SE SEVE VERE E ER EROSION OSION 30%. %.

THE THE FOL FOLLOWING WING WAS WAS ALSO ALSO OBSE OBSERVED: VED:

• HIGHER

HIGHER THAN THAN ON ON PAVEM VEMEN ENT T 24 24%, %,

• LOWER

WER THAN THAN ON ON PAVEM VEMEN ENT T 11 11%, %,

• CONCRE

CONCRETE TE REB REBATE TE REQUIRE REQUIRED 9%, 9%,

• CL

CLOGGED OGGED DRAIN DRAIN 43 43%, ER %, ERODED ODED DRAIN DRAIN 23 23%, %,

• COLL

COLLAPS APSED ED DRAIN DRAIN 24 24%, %,

• NEEDING

NEEDING TO O ATT TTACH CH ST STON ONES ES 10%, %,

• ROAD

AD SIGN SIGN 41 41%, %,

• ROAD

AD SAFE SAFETY TY BARRIER ARRIER 26 26%, %,

• ROAD

AD MARKI MARKING NG SIGNS SIGNS 18 18%, AND %, AND

• ROAD

AD MARKI MARKING NG 14 14%. %.

4.3 4.3 M MODEL ODEL MAKING MAKING OF OF PRI PRIORITY ORITY FOR FOR ROAD AD HANDLIN HANDLING

FI FIGURE RE 4 4 IS T THE RE REPRE RESENTATION O OF T F THE P PRI RIORI RITY Y SCALE CALE MODE DEL ADO L ADOPTED I D IN THIS S STUDY . . NEVE VERTHELE LESS, , THE N NEXU XUS BE BETWE WEEN CR CRITERIA RIA ON P PRIO RIORIT RITY AN AND D AL ALTERN RNATIVE VES I IS DE DERI RIVE VED D FR FROM T THE P PRI RIORI RITY Y SCALE CALE DE DETERM RMINATION AP APPROACH CH.

Perform Input the mass value 1. The mass Value of Criteria

2. The mass Value of Sub Criteria

• 3. The mass Value Condition

The priority scale of Road Section

No Road Section Alternatif Ideal

The priority scale

027 Genengan lembeyan 0.25750 1 029 Tamanarum-lembeyan 0.16559 2 020 Karangsono-Teguhan 0.13182 3 008 Takeran-Mardigondo 0.09101 4 055 Tinap-Jongke 0.07461 5 030 Parang-Turus 0.06022 6 082 Pupus-Semen 0.05803 7 077 Pupus-Tapen 0.04100 8 019 Tebon Batur 0.03630 9 011 Maospati karangsono 0.02090 10 048 Panekan-jabung 0.02039 11 047 Tulung-Kenongomulyo 0.01598 12 013 Tebon Karangmojo 0.01353 13 021 Purwodadi-Grabahan 0.01266 14 058 Takeran-kenongomulyo 0.00024 15 034 Ringinagung-Bangsri 0.00022 16

Table 4. The priority scale of Road Section

USING USING THE THE AN ANAL ALYSIS SIS NE NETWORK ORK PR PROCES OCESS (ANP) (ANP) AL ALONGSIDE ONGSIDE THE THE SUP SUPER ER DEC DECISION ISION SOFTWARE SOFTWARE, , THE THE PRI PRIORITY ORITY OF OF DAM AMAGE HAND HANDLING LING LED LED TO O THE THE DETE DETERMIN RMINATIO TION OF OF THE F THE FIRST IRST PRIORIT PRIORITY ROAD AD SE SECTION CTION OF OF GENE GENENGAN NGAN-LEMB LEMBEY EYAN ROAD AD. . THA THAT T OF OF TAMAN AMANAR ARUM- LEMBE LEMBEYAN AN ROAD AD CAME CAME SE SECOND COND WHILE WHILE KARANG KARANGSO SONO NO- TE TEGUHAN GUHAN CAME CAME THIRD THIRD IN IN THE THE HANDLIN HANDLING G PRI PRIORIT ORITY . .

4.4 4.4 ROAD AD PERFOR PERFORMA MANCE CE EV EVAL ALUATIO TION

• Fig. 5: Straight Line Diagram of Takeran-Mardigondo Road Segment

The all-green color in the diagram above shows that the present HRS on the Takeran-Mardigondo road is in an excellent state.

• Fig. 6: Strip Map Diagram on Takeran-Mardigondo Road Segment

The Takeran-Mardigondo road demands periodic maintenance because the state of its present HRS is positive. The diagram above is self-explanatory.

4.5 4.5 ROAD AD MAI MAINTEN TENANC ANCE E HAN ANDL DLIN ING: G: SU SUGGEST ESTIONS ONS

Table 3. Performance-based District Road Maintenance Handling Recommendations No. Name of Road Section Performance Maintenance Recommendations 1. Takeran-Mardigondo Good Routine maintenance 2. Maospati-Karangsono Good Routine maintenance 3. Tebon-Karangmojo Good Routine maintenance 4. Tebon-Batur Good Routine maintenance 5. Karangsono-Teguhan Good Routine maintenance 6. Purwodadi-Grabahan Good Routine maintenance 7. Genengan-Lembeyan Good Routine maintenance 8. Tamanarum-Lembeyan Good Routine maintenance 9. Parang-Turus Good Routine maintenance 10. Ringinagung-Bangsri Good Routine maintenance 11. Tulung-Kenongomulya Good Routine maintenance 12. Panekan-Jabung Good Routine maintenance 13. Tinap-Jongke Good Routine maintenance 14. Takeran-Kenongomulya Good Routine maintenance 15. Pupus-Tapen Good Routine maintenance 16. Pupus-Semen Good Routine maintenance

5.

• 5. CO

CONC NCLUSIO USION

AS DETERMINED BY THE OUTCOME OF THE ANALYSIS, WE ARRIVE AT THE FOLLOWING CONCLUSIONS:

1. THE PHYSICAL EVALUATION OF ROADS USING THE KRMS SOFTWARE IS SUPPORTED BY THE FINDINGS IN 16 STRAIGHT LINE DIAGRAM. IT INDICATES THAT THE STATE OF 16 DISTRICT ROAD OF MAGETAN REGENCY IS IN EXCELLENT SHAPE. 2. THE BASIS OF THE ANALYSIS EMBRACED THE ENTIRE RANGE OF DISTRICT ROAD DETERIORATIONS DETERMINED BY VISUAL INSPECTION OF THE

• ROAD. WE RECOMMEND THAT ROUTINE MAINTENANCE OF ALL ROAD

SEGMENTS COVERED IN THE MAGETAN DISTRICT SHOULD BE CARRIED

• OUT. OUR SUGGESTION FLOWS FROM AN EVALUATION OF THE ROAD

USING KRMS SOFTWARE AND THE OUTCOME OF 16 STRIP MAP

• DIAGRAMS. ALSO, THE FIRST PRIORITY ROAD SEGMENT HANDLING IS

GENENGAN-LEMBEYAN ROAD FOLLOWED BY THAT OF TAMANARUM- LEMBEYAN ROAD AND KARANGSONO-TEGUHAN. THIS WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN POSSIBLE WITHOUT THE PRIORITY OF DAMAGE HANDLING ANALYSIS OF THE ANALYSIS NETWORK PROCESS (ANP) TECHNIQUE AND THE SUPER DECISION SOFTWARE.

Thank You