KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering (2010) 14(2):123-130 Construction Management

DOI 10.1007/s12205-010-0123-7
www.springer.com/12205

Analysis of Rigid Pavement Distresses on Interstate Highway Using

Decision Tree Algorithms
Myungook Kang*, Minkwan Kim**, and Joo Hyoung Lee***
Received June 9, 2009/Revised July 17, 2009/Accepted July 24, 2009

···································································································································································································································

Abstract

This paper describes the application of two decision tree algorithms, Logistic Regression Trees with Unbiased Selection (LOTUS)
and Classification Rule with Unbiased Interaction Selection and Estimation (CRUISE), to identify prevailing distress types that affect
pavement maintenance decision making. The maintenance history of the selected sections within Interstate highway I-90 in the State
of Wisconsin is modeled to build decision trees. The historical field distress survey data include the types, quantities, severities, and
locations of distresses. The primary objective of this paper is to present the decision tree algorithms that may be incorporated into the
decision making process and help state highway agencies make rational decisions during the course of pavement management. The
paper discusses the model development process and prevailing distress identification procedures employing the decision tree
algorithms. A case study is conducted on another Interstate highway, I-43, with a view to furthering the analysis of the results from
the two algorithms. These analysis models and the results will provide the state highway agencies and practitioners with a means to
identify prevailing distress types in a specific location and facilitate making decisions on future maintenance practices.
Keywords: Pavement Management System (PMS), maintenance decision support, highway maintenance factors, field distress
survey, decision tree algorithm
···································································································································································································································

1. Introduction determined, transportation agencies prioritize these activities

Pavement maintenance is an essential practice to preserving
and restoring pavement structural capacity and keeping the
pavement in good, safe condition in economical ways. Recently,
the importance of pavement maintenance has been on the rise as
the volume of vehicles and their wheel loads increase in the
highway system, particularly in the Interstate highways of the
United States. Thus, pavement maintenance must be accordingly
performed as these conditions of heavy traffic and increased
distresses may lead to critical impacts on the pavement struc-
tures. Typical maintenance consists of preventive and corrective
actions that slow down or recover the deterioration of pavement
structures. These actions include resurfacing, restoration, rehabi-
litation and reconstruction. As a rule of thumb, preventive main-
tenance involves an accurate condition assessment while correc-
tive maintenance entails a timely selection of a method that best
fits assessed conditions.
A generic process of pavement maintenance begins with a
condition assessment. The assessed conditions will then deter-
mine detailed maintenance plans and strategies depending on the
results of the assessment. Once the maintenance activities are
considering institutional and financial constraints. A detailed
schedule will then develop in accordance with the pre-deter-
mined priority with maximized benefits and minimized costs in
mind. Currently, most condition assessments are conducted
through observations of the focused areas by maintenance per-
sonnel. Thus, it is most likely subjective and inconsistent while
objectiveness and consistency are critical in assessing the defects
and the level of distress with accuracy. During the course of the
condition observation, a field distress survey is performed to de-
termine the types, quantities, severities, and locations of distresses.
Upon completion of the observation, each distress should be
accordingly recorded. These observations will then identify
several options for maintenance that base on the types and levels
of deterioration. In many cases, it is not uncommon that more
than one maintenance technique can apply to resolve the identified
problem.
By all means, there are many factors that affect the mainte-
nance practices depending on several failure modes considered
in the decision making process. These failure modes are physical
distress, deteriorated service, user backlash, and financial
constraint. Detailed factors that affect the maintenance method

*Graduate Research Assistant, Dept. of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI 53706, USA (E-mail:
myungookkang@wisc.edu)
**Member, Senior Staff Engineer, MMI Engineering, Houston, TX 77077, USA (E-mail: minkwank@gmail.com)
***Assistant Professor, Dept. of Construction Science and Organizational Leadership, Purdue University Calumet, Hammond, IN 46323, USA (Correspond-
ing Author, E-mail: leej@calumet.purdue.edu)

− 123 −
 Myungook Kang, Minkwan Kim, and Joo Hyoung Lee
selection process are then identified in accordance with each
failure mode. These days, many State agencies established their
own assessment system and evaluation criteria in order to judge
the level of distress and corresponding treatments. Some examples
include PASER (Pavement Surface Evaluation and Rating)
published by the State of Wisconsin (Walker, 2002) and OPI
(Organizational Performance Index) and Maintenance Quality
Survey Manual available in the States of Ohio and Indiana
(ODOT, 2001; INDOT, 2006). The State agencies specify the
treatments on the basis of existing pavement distresses, antici-
pated traffic loading, environmental conditions, cost of the treat-
ment, and the performance history of different treatments.
Generally, the distress types and the history of maintenance are
location specific in that it is essential to investigate prevailing
distress types in a specific segment of an Interstate highway. This
paper thus focuses on physical distresses on rigid pavement and
pavement condition assessment instruments in the State of
Wisconsin. According to Distress Identification Manual provided
by Federal Highway Administration (FHWA, 2003), typical
jointed concrete pavement has four distress categories: cracking,
joint deficiencies, surface defects, and miscellaneous distresses.
Considering the federal guideline, the State of Wisconsin uses
seven distress indicators for rigid pavement. The distress indi-
cators include roughened pavement, deteriorated joints, damaged
patching, and distressed surfaces such as cracks, faulting, and
rutting. In this study selected Interstate highway segments within
I-90 are modeled and analyzed using decision tree algorithms in
an effort to explore prevailing distress types based on the main-
tenance history. These analyses will support the state agency to
make decisions on future maintenance practices. A case study is
conducted on another Interstate highway, I-43, with a view to
furthering the analysis of the results from the two algorithms.
2. Pavement Evaluation Process for State High-
ways in Wisconsin
The State of Wisconsin has a dual pavement management
system: Pavement Information File (PIF) and Wisconsin Infor-
mation System for Local Road (WISLR). The PIF is for state
highways and the WISLR is for local roads. Both of them
archive the historical pavement performance data at specific
locations. Focused on the state highway system, this study
analyzes the PIF for further discussions.
Since the early 1980s, Wisconsin Department of Transporta-
tion (WisDOT) has monitored the pavement condition of the
state highway system. The assessed condition of 1.6-km (one-
mile) section is documented in the PIF. The collected historical
pavement performance data include distress type, the severity
and extent of each distress type, and Pavement Distress Index
(PDI) at each section. The PDI is a double digit index that
represents overall observable pavement surface distresses by
severity and extent (Friedrichs, 1999). The severity represents
how serious the damage is while the extent tells how much of the
section is affected. The extent and severity of the distresses were
− 124 −
weighted and factored in a formula to compute the PDI that
ranges from 0 to 100, with 0 representing an excellent condition
and 100 being worst (Shober and Friedrichs, 1998). Typically,
the PDI of a pavement gradually increases as the pavement ages;
it dramatically drops when maintenance on the pavement is
conducted.
3. Data Modeling
In an effort to explore prevailing distress types that triggered
maintenance activities, total 112 rigid pavement sections are
selected and 1,196 inspection data from 1985 to 2005 in the PIF
are analyzed. Table 1 shows detailed information of the collected
data and the descriptions of variables. In this study, the levels of
distresses, i.e. none, moderate and severe, are considered inde-
pendent variables. Maintenance is a dependent variable that tells
whether maintenance is conducted in the selected sections. This
is determined by abrupt drop of the PDI at a certain point in time.
Total seven observable distress indicators are recorded for
rigid pavement in the PIF. These are slab breakup (Sbkup),
distressed joint (Djt), patching (Ptch), surface distress (Sur),
longitudinal cracking (Ljt), transverse faulting (Flt), and Rutting
(Rut). Slab breakup is excluded in the analysis because none of
the selected segments exhibits this distress type. Instead, Inter-
national Roughness Index (IRI) is added. Although the IRI is
generally not considered as a distress measurement, it is one of
the indices considered during decision making process because it
affects riding quality as well as driver’s safety. The condition of
pavement section is represented by categorical values in accor-
dance with the severity and extent of a distress type, while the
IRI is expressed by a numerical value in meter per kilometer.
Table 2 shows the extent of distressed joint associated with
corresponding categorical values as an example. The variable
represents the extent of each distress type, while the category
refers to the severity of the distress type. The collected data are
then analyzed to determine whether there is a correlation
between certain distress types and the maintenance event. Fig. 1
shows the data distribution of each variable in the I-90 model to
be analyzed. IRI is expressed by a numerical value in meter per
kilometer.
One of the conventional techniques used to determine the
dependency between independent variables and a dependent
variable is a regression analysis. There exist, however, some
technical issues that limit the use of the traditional regression
analysis. First, the stepwise regression technique will find one
most significant variable and its dependency with the dependent
variable in terms of P-value (Montgomery and Runger, 2007),
whereas this study needs to rank the independent variables
according to the level of dependency with the dependent
variable. Second, the logistic regression analysis is known as a
powerful tool to handle data with binary response variables.
Nonetheless, it is difficult to interpret the result of the logistic
regression analysis when it involves a number of independent
variables. It is also known that the logistic regression analysis is
KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering