Innovative Infrastructure Solutions (2020) 5:55

https://doi.org/10.1007/s41062-020-00304-z

TECHNICAL PAPER

A modified pavement condition rating index for flexible pavement

evaluation in Egypt
E. M. Ibrahim1,2 · S. M. El‑Badawy2   · M. H. Ibrahim2 · Emad Elbeltagi3

Received: 2 February 2020 / Accepted: 13 May 2020

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Abstract
Pavement evaluation is conducted to assess the functional and/or structural condition of existing pavement systems which
can be done on project or network levels. Through pavement condition assessment, pavement deterioration models can be
established and thus maintenance and rehabilitation alternatives can be proposed. The prediction of pavement performance
which is primarily based on the pavement evaluation results is a critical element of a successful pavement management sys-
tem (PMS). The main objective of this research is to revise and modify the current pavement condition rating (PCR) method
for pavement evaluation as a major component of an effective PMS for roads and transport directorates in Egypt. Pavement
condition data were collected from literature, General authority of roads, bridges and land transport in Egypt and the long-
term pavement performance (LTPP) database. Due to its accuracy, only the LTPP data were used to modify the current
PCR method to yield comparable values to the very well-known pavement condition index (PCI). The proposed modified
PCR was validated using pavement distress data collected from two rural roads in Egypt, and the data showed reasonable
accuracy as compared to the PCI method.

Keywords  PMS · Pavement condition index · Pavement condition rating · Deterioration · LTPP

Introduction part of any pavement management system (PMS). This is

to assess pavement performance in order to take the right
There is thousands of kilometres of paved roads in Egypt maintenance decisions to preserve the road network which is
that is travelled daily by millions of cars and trucks for trans- a very expensive asset. Due to the high cost associated with
porting people and goods. Traffic loading along with envi- constructing and maintaining road networks, it is imperative
ronmental conditions leads to pavement deterioration over to have an effective and reliable PMS. Pavement manage-
time. Thus, regular pavement evaluation is a very important ment started in the 1960s due to various unexpected pave-
ment failures in the United States Interstate and Canadian
highways [1].
* S. M. El‑Badawy
sbadawy@mans.edu.eg A pavement management system framework includes
condition assessment, pavement deterioration model, main-
E. M. Ibrahim
engemanmagdy@yahoo.com tenance alternatives and maintenance prioritization and
funds. To develop a successful PMS framework, factors
M. H. Ibrahim
mourad1252@gmail.com affecting pavement performance need to be identified. Due
to exposure to traffic and environmental factors, distresses
Emad Elbeltagi
eelbelta@mans.edu.eg show up. Thus, pavement performance is negatively affected
and if not treated at the right time, the service life will be
1
Civil Engineering Department, Delta Higher Institute shorter along with inferior ride quality. In order to assess
of Engineering and Technology, Mansoura 35516, Egypt pavement condition and thus its performance, a reliable
2
Public Works Engineering Department, Faculty pavement condition index is needed. This index is usually
of Engineering, Mansoura University, Mansoura 35516, based upon pavement condition surveys which can be con-
Egypt
ducted either manually (visual inspection) or automated by
3
Structural Engineering Department, Faculty of Engineering, an equipped van. Once the pavement condition is surveyed
Mansoura University, Mansoura 35516, Egypt

13
Vol.:(0123456789)
 55   Page 2 of 17 Innovative Infrastructure Solutions (2020) 5:55

and the distresses are determined, several indices are cur-
rently available to assess pavement performance (Table 1).
These indices may be divided into structural and/or func-
tional indices [2–8]. After selecting one or more index, pave-
ment performance can then be evaluated.
As indicated in Table 1, some of these indices only depend
on one type of distress such as the rutting index (RI) or com-
bination of distresses such as the pavement condition index
(PCI) and pavement condition rating (PCR). Moreover, some
of these indices are indicators of the pavement structural
condition such as those depending on the falling weight
deflectometer (FWD) data, while others are indicative of the
ride quality such as the international roughness index (IRI).
Of these pavement indices, the PCI was found to be the most
widely used index for pavement condition evaluation. PCI is
a numerical index between 0 (worst condition) and 100 (best
condition), which is used to indicate the condition of a specific
section of road pavement. The PCI is determined by a man-
ual or automated inspection process for 19 pavement distress
types (cracks, rutting and weathering), and it considers the

Table 1  Some of the current pavement performance indices

Index Scale\scale description Remarks References

Pavement condition index (PCI)
International roughness index
(IRI)
Present serviceability index (PSI)
Pavement condition rating (PCR)
Structural condition index (SCI)
Riding comfort index (RCI)
Pavement quality index (PQI)
Remaining service life index (RSI) (0–100) (good–fair–poor)
Pavement distress index (PDI)
Critical condition index (CCI)
Rutting index (RI)
Crack index (CI)
Pavement performance index (PPI) (0–5) (V. poor–V. Good)
Surface distresses index (SDI)
Distresses manifestation index
(DMI)
Urban distresses index (UDI)
Pavement structural condition
(PSC)
Overall pavement condition (OPC) (0–100) (poor–excellent)
(0–100) (failed to good)
(0.95–3.6) m\km Acceptable
(0–2.7) m\km, Less than accept-
able (> 2.7) m/km
(0–5) (poor to excellent)
(0–100) (very poor to very good)
(0–100) (worse–best)
(0–10) (V. poor–V. good)
(0–100) poor, fair, good, excellent
(0–100) (V. poor–V. Good)
(0–100) (V. poor–excellent)
(0–5) (acceptable–unacceptable)
(0.2–5.1) uncracked, slightly and
moderately cracked
(0–5) (good–poor)
(0–10) (poor–excellent)
(0–100) (poor–excellent)
(0–100) (poor–excellent)
Function of 19 different distresses ASTM [9]
such as rutting, cracks, bleeding
and potholes
Function of ride quality Hafez et al. [3], Smith et al. [8]
Function of smoothness, rutting, Hafez et al. [3]
cracking and patching
Function of 13 different distresses ODOT [10]
such as rutting, cracks, bleeding
and potholes
Function of FWD data Nam et al. [5]
Function of ride quality Jannat and Tighe [4]
Function of ride quality index [3]
(RQI), IRI and surface rating
(SR)
Function of IRI, rutting, fatigue Papagiannakis et al. [6]
cracking, transverse cracking and
longitudinal cracking
Based on the geographical charac- Hafez et al. [3]
teristics of each crack
Function of pavement age Papagiannakis et al. [6]
Function of rut depth Hafez et al. [3], Smith et al. [8]
Function of transverse, longitudi- Papagiannakis et al. [6]
nal, longitudinal wheel path and
alligator cracks
Function of levels of flexible pave- Papagiannakis et al. [6]
ment distress types
Function of fatigue cracking, Papagiannakis et al. [6]
patching, transverse cracking,
block cracking, rutting, and IRI
Support PCI at lower class roads, Smith et al. [8], Jannat and Tighe
DMI is used to support PCI and [4]
is favoured by regions that have
lower class roads
Function of segregation, alliga- Al-Mansour [2]
tor cracking, rutting, bleeding,
patching, and block cracking
Combined index of the various Hafez et al. [3]
distresses on the pavement
surface
Based on the PSI which in turn is Papagiannakis et al. [6]
derived from the IRI

13
Innovative Infrastructure Solutions (2020) 5:55 Page 3 of 17  55

extent and severity of each distress. It provides a measure of
the present condition of the pavement based on the distresses
observed on the surface of the pavement, which also indi-
cate the structural integrity and surface operational condition
(roughness and safety). The calculation of the PCI depends on
charts for each distress and correlation of deduct value. The
PCR method is based on visual examination of 13 pavement
distress types taking into account the extent and severity of
each distress. The PCR index is very simple in calculation and
can be directly calculated by simply multiplying the weight of
a given distress by its severity and extent as shown in Table 2
to determine the deduct values (DV) as given in Eq. (1). Then,
the PCR is computed by subtracting the sum of deduct values
from 100 according to Eq. (2). No corrections or underlying
calculations are required as in the PCI method.
DV = Distress Weight × Extent × Severity
∑ extent of the distresses based upon the IRC and Washington
PCR = 100 − DV
For example, if a section has rutting with low severity and
frequent extent, the deduct value = 10 × 0.3 × 0.8 = 2.4, and
thus the PCR = 100 − 2.4 = 97.6
Literature review
Many studies have been conducted focusing on investi-
gating the flexible pavement evaluation by using one or
more of the available pavement indices to select the opti-
mum maintenance techniques as part of a given PMS.
Reza et al. [7] developed a new pavement performance
index (pavement quality index, PQI) that incorporates
ride quality together with surface distresses for possible
implementation by Ohio department of transportation
(ODOT). PQI simply utilizes procedures that are already
in place and well established in Ohio. It is a function of
the IRI and the PCR as shown in Eq. 3. PQI treats the IRI
as a deduction from the PCR. It applies essentially zero
deduction when IRI is less than 0.95 m/km.
PQI = PCR − a(IRI)b (3)
where a and b are regression constants depending on the
road classification. Thus, ODOT is using the PQI instead of
the PCR alone for pavement management decision.
Tariq [11] conducted a physical survey for distress
analysis of 50 lanes of urban flexible roads as a part of a
comparative study of pavement condition rating methods
(PCRM) using the Indian Road Congress (IRC) method,
(1) and the highway preservation system (HPS). The lanes
were visually surveyed to detect the type, severity and
(2) Department of Transportation (WSDOT) guidelines (dis-
tresses identification manual). The distresses were investi-
gated by visual inspection and automatic instruments, and
then the PCI values were calculated by the two methods
(IRC and HPS) to suggest the most suitable one. This study
showed that the PCI is more accurate index for pavement
evaluation compared to the IRC and HPS methods.
In another attempt, two different systems of asphalt
pavement rating, pavement surface evaluation and rating
(PASER) and PCI were compared [12]. The PCI rating
was divided by 10 to provide a more direct correlation
with the PASER rating system. The results showed poor
correlation between PASER and PCI rating systems; this
is due to the different weights of the various distresses of
the two rating systems.

Table 2  PCR distress weights, Distresses Distress Severity Extent

severity and extent weight
L M H O F E

Ravelling 10 0.3 0.6 1 0.5 0.8 1

Bleeding 5 0.8 0.8 1 0.6 0.9 1
Patching 5 0.3 0.6 1 0.6 0.8 1
Potholes 10 0.4 0.7 1 0.5 0.8 1
Crack sealing 5 1 1 1 0.5 0.8 1
Rutting 10 0.3 0.7 1 0.6 0.8 1
Settlement 10 0.5 0.7 1 0.5 0.8 1
Corrugations 5 0.4 0.8 1 0.5 0.8 1
Wheel track crack 15 0.4 0.7 1 0.5 0.7 1
Block and transverse crack 10 0.4 0.7 1 0.5 0.7 1
Longitudinal joint crack 5 0.4 0.7 1 0.5 0.7 1
Edge crack 5 0.4 0.7 1 0.5 0.7 1
Random crack 5 0.4 0.7 1 0.5 0.7 1

L low severity; M medium severity; H high severity; O occasional; F frequent; E extensive

13
 55   Page 4 of 17 Innovative Infrastructure Solutions (2020) 5:55

Majority of previous studies used different indices

to evaluate pavement condition with the PCI being the
most common index used. In Egypt, for example, the PCI
(ASTM D-6433-07) is adopted by the general authority
for roads, bridges and land transport (GARBLT), while
currently no index is being used by the roads and trans-
port directorates (RTD). PCI is functional and structural
index that includes all common distresses. However, in
order to determine the PCI value of any pavement section,
the deduct value for each distress with its severity must
be determined from specific charts and then these deduct
values are adjusted and then corrected according to the
ASTM D-6433-07 [9]. Thus, when a section has more
than one distress, the PCI calculations become cumber-
some and time-consuming; otherwise, a software has to
be used. Furthermore, the available software is not free
and expensive. The PCR, on the other hand, is a simple
index in computation and can be easily calculated (Eqs. 1
and 2) compared to the PCI while having a very similar
rating scale as shown in Fig. 1.
It should be emphasized that both the PCI and PCR
are pavement evaluation systems rather than maintenance
decision tools used to express pavement performance
of an existing pavement network. On the project level
though, field testing such as FWD, ground penetrating
radar (GRP) and laboratory testing on field collected sam-
ples have to be conducted in order to assess the structural
capacity of the existing pavement system and select the
proper and effective maintenance decision. Thus, PCI and
PCR alone are not proper maintenance decision tools,
especially on the project level. However, they can be used,
on the network level, for proposing preliminary pavement
maintenance strategies for budget allocation purposes. A
recent study by Elhadidy et al. [13] identified the most
probable distresses for each pavement condition based Fig. 1  Scale state for both the PCI and PCR
on the international roughness index (IRI) ranges equiva-
lent to PCI ranges for the same pavement condition. This
might enable engineers to better identify the proper main- Research approach
tenance strategies on a network level for budget alloca-
tion. On the other hand, another index named Mainte- Figure  2 outlines the methodology followed in this
nance Unit “MU” was proposed by Abo-Hashema and research. First, a comprehensive questionnaire is designed
Sharaf [14] to determine M&R activities based on the to investigate the common flexible pavement distresses
density of the distress repair method not the density of in Egypt; current maintenance techniques and existing
the individual distress. PMS systems, if any. Then, PCI data are collected from
Thus, the main objective of this study is to modify the GARBLT for some roads and other sources as well (i.e.
current PCR method for easier application and implemen- long-term pavement performance: LTPP) to build a simple
tation by the RTD in Egypt while improving its accuracy. index for pavement condition evaluation to be used by the
This study suggests modifying the current PCR method RTDs in Egypt. The developed index is then verified using
by revising the weights of distresses used in PCR and data collected from the Egyptian highways.
incorporate new distresses, if warranted, in order to pro-
duce values similar to the more accurate and widely used
PCI method.

13
Innovative Infrastructure Solutions (2020) 5:55 Page 5 of 17  55
Data Collection
Questionnaire Formulation, Results and Analysis
PCI Data from GARBLT
LTPP Distresses Data Collection
Calculation of the PCR & PCI Based on LTPP Data
Revise the PCR to Distress, Weight to Yield Comparable Values to the PCI
Verification of the Proposed Modified PCR Method
Validation of the Proposed Modified PCR Method
Fig. 2  Research approach
Pavement management system questionnaire
(PMSQ)
The main purpose of the conducted PMSQ is to find out
the common flexible pavement distresses in Egypt, current
maintenance techniques used by GARBLT and RTDs and
existing PMS systems. The PMSQ consists of three parts.
The first part inquiries about agencies data inventory such
as age of the inventory database, data handling methods,
road classification, geometric characteristics of the road net-
work, traffic loading and composition, thickness of pavement
layers, properties of materials, construction cost, paved and
unpaved road network lengths, common distresses in paved
and unpaved roads, critical locations of the distresses, dis-
tress data collection method (visual, capture with camera or
use special van) and frequency, and finally the used pave-
ment performance index.
The second part of the PMSQ focuses on the maintenance
activities. It inquiries about the main maintenance types
(routine maintenance, preventative maintenance, rehabilita-
tion and reconstruction). It also investigates about the train-
ing of the individuals responsible for the maintenance deci-
sions in the directorates. The routine maintenance consists
of minor responsive maintenance actions planned to repair
localized defects before applying the more expensive repairs
[15]. Crack sealing is an example of the routine mainte-
nance. On the other hand, preventive maintenance comprises
planned maintenance activities to extend pavement life for
pavements that are already in good functional condition
which includes chip seal, slurry seal, microsurfacing, thin
overlays, etc. According to the Egyptian code of practice
(ECP), routine maintenance is recommended when the PCI
is between 85 and 100, while the preventive maintenance is
Roune Maintenance
Prevenve Maintenance
Rehabilitaon
Major rehabilitaon or Deferred Acon
Reconstrucon
Fig. 3  PCI versus age along with recommended maintenance types
[16]
recommended when the PCI is between 70 and 85 as shown
in Fig. 3 [16]. Also, the reconstruction is to rebuild the exist-
ing pavement to a new condition with the same or even bet-
ter criteria. This means the removal of the existing pavement
layers and reconstruction of the full pavement section again
(full depth removal and reconstruction). On the other hand,
the rehabilitation is to restore an existing pavement to near
original condition or extend its service life by improving the
structural capacity of an existing pavement structure [15].
This can be done by adding an asphalt overlay, for example,
or removal and replacement of the asphalt layer(s).
The third part inquiries about PMSs if available. It asks
about deterioration rate, maintenance decision criteria and
the department responsible for making the maintenance
decision, prioritization, remaining service life and dete-
rioration modelling.
It should be noted that the questionnaire is written in
the Arabic language and was conducted through face to
face interviews at five different RTD directorates as well
as GARBLT main office in Cairo, Egypt. Figure 4 pre-
sents the locations of the five different RTD directorates as
well as GARBLT that were surveyed. They were selected
to cover different geographical areas in Egypt, and they
administer the largest road networks.
Analysis and results of the PMSQ questionnaire
From the questionnaire results, it was found that the RTDs
in Egypt evaluate their pavement by visual survey only, no
automated surveys are conducted. They fail to calculate
the PCI or another index because of the difficulty in appli-
cation as well as lack of training of responsible engineers.
They make the maintenance decision only based on experi-
ence or received complaints from road users.
13
 55   Page 6 of 17 Innovative Infrastructure Solutions (2020) 5:55

sections with the same condition (i.e. good, satisfactory, fair,

etc.) and studying the change from one condition to another
in a short time (only 1 year) showed that only 30.6% of the
sections stayed in the same condition, while 69.4% of the
sections turned into another condition either worse or bet-
ter. In addition to that, the actual measured distresses are
not obtained from GARBLT. As such, it was not possible to
compute the PCR corresponding to each PCI value in order
to enable developing the proposed model. Filtering these
data and trying to get the deterioration behaviour was not
successful meaning that the quality of these data is question-
able. This observation agrees with other studies, Mohamed
[17]. Therefore, it was decided to use the LTPP data in this
research.

LTPP data collection and analysis

LTPP database is a reliable source for pavement perfor-

Damietta El Dakahlya El Sharkya
Cairo (GARBLT) El Fayoum El Minya
Fig. 4  Surveyed ITD directorates and GARBLT
GARBLT performance data analysis
PCI values for Cairo–Alexandria agriculture road (both
directions) and Cairo–Ismailia desert road (both directions)
were collected from GARBLT. Cairo–Alexandria (200 km
length each direction) were surveyed in 2013, 2014 and
2016. Cairo–Ismailia (length of 100 km each direction)
were surveyed in 2012, 2013 and 2014. Analysis of the col-
lected data as shown in Figs. 5 and 6 reveals erroneous and
irrational trends in the PCI values with time. The data in
both Figs. 5 and 6 show that the PCI values for all sections
decreased or increased irregularly. In addition, grouping the
mance data. It was used for the calibration of the distress
prediction models in the Mechanistic Empirical Pavement
Design Guide (MEPDG) [18]. It has, also, been used by
many researchers for developing pavement deterioration
models for pavement evaluation (e.g. [13, 19–22]). Pave-
ment performance data are updated regularly and can be
easily downloaded from (www.infop​ave.com). The LTPP
includes two main experiments, the general pavement
studies (GPS) and specific pavement studies (SPS). GPS
represent roads that were constructed before the launch
of the LTPP, whereas SPS represent roads that were con-
structed less than 20 years ago. The SPS sections were
constructed to investigate certain pavement engineering
factors, and their performance was monitored from the
initial date of construction. The LTPP data include general
inventory, information of test sections, material properties
and pavement distresses over time. In this research, data
from 137 sections belonging to GPS1, GPS6, SPS1 and

100
90
80
70
60
PCI

50
40
30
20
10
0

(km) 2013 2014 2016

Fig. 5  Cairo–Alexandria agriculture road

13
Innovative Infrastructure Solutions (2020) 5:55 Page 7 of 17  55

100
90
80
70
60
PCI

50
40
30
20
10
0
99-100 97-99 95-97 93-95 91-93 89-91 87-89 85-87 83-85 81-83 79-81 67-69 65-67 61-63

(Km) 2012 2013 2014

Fig. 6  Cairo–Ismailia desert road

SPS5 were used. GPS1 is conventional asphalt concrete
pavement over granular base, while GPS6 is asphalt con-
crete overlay over asphalt concrete, SPS1 is the strategic
study of structural factors for flexible pavements and SPS5
is asphalt overlay of asphalt pavement. Table 3 shows the
studied SPS and GPS climatic and geographical locations
in the USA. According to LTPP, the test section is 152 m
long and 3.7 m width. Table 4 presents the LTPP data
modules and tables used for data extraction.
LTPP data description
The road functional classes in the collected data are rural
principle arterial interstate and others. The thickness of the
asphalt layer(s) ranges between 6.86 and 21.1 cm, while the
unbounded granular base thickness ranges between 8.9 and
79.76 cm and the subbase thickness between 8.1 and 42.7 cm
and finally the thickness of subgrade soil fine or course is
between 15.24 and 502.9 cm. The annual average daily traf-
fic (AADT) on these roads ranges from 984 to 14,269. The

Table 3  Geographical locations and climatic regions of the LTPP sections used in this study
State/province Climatic region Experiment type County Region

Alabama Wet, non-freeze SPS1, SPS5, GPS1, GPS6B, GPS6S Huston 3-Southern
Arizona Dry, non-freeze SPS1, GPS1, GPS6A, GPS6C, GPS6S Mohave 4-Western
Wet, non-freeze
California Dry, non-freeze GPS1, GPS6B, GPS6C Imperial 4-Western
Delaware Wet, non-freeze SPS1, GPS6B Sussex 1-North Atlantic
Florida Wet, non-freeze GPS1, GPS6B, GPS6S Palm beach 3-Southern
Georgia Wet, non-freeze GPS1 Dawson 3-Southern
Kentucky Wet, non-freeze GPS1, GPS6A Clay 2-North Central
Missouri Wet, non-freeze GPS1 Jasper 2-North Central
Nevada Dry, non-freeze GPS1, GPS6S Mingral 4-Western
New-Jersey Wet, non-freeze SPS5 Monmouth 1-North Atlantic
New Mexico Dry, non-freeze SPS1, GPS1, GPS6D, GPS6S Grant 3-Southern
North Carolina Wet, non-freeze GPS1, GPS6B, GPS6C, GPS6S Stanly 1-North Atlantic
Oregon Wet, non-freeze GPS6A, GPS6S Linn 4-Western
Texas Wet, non-freeze SPS1, GPS1, GPS6A, GPS6B, GPS6C, GPS6S Ellis 3-Southern
Virginia Wet, non-freeze SPS1, GPS6C Pittsylvania 1-North Atlantic
Washington Dry, non-freeze GPS1, GPS6A, GPS6B, GPS6C, GPS6D, GPS6S Columbia 4-Western
Tennessee Wet, non-freeze GPS6B, GPS6D, GPS6S Dyer 3-Southern
Arkansas Wet, non-freeze GPS6S Ashley 3-Southern
Oklahoma Wet, non-freeze GPS6S Blaine 3-Southern

13
 55   Page 8 of 17 Innovative Infrastructure Solutions (2020) 5:55

Table 4  LTPP modules and Data LTPP module LTPP table

tables used for data collection
General section information ADM EXPERIMENT_SECTION
Climate CLM MERRA PRECIP ANNUAL
MERRA PRECIP MONTH
MERRA TEMP ANNUAL
Pavement distresses MON MON_DISC_AC_REV
Rutting MON_T_PROFILE_INDEX_SECTION
Dates INV INV_AGE
Maintenance MNT MNT_HIST and MNT_IMP
SPS general information SPS SPS_ID

performance data used were the distresses for each section,
sample area and survey date. The collected distresses are rut-
ting, block and transverse cracking, fatigue and wheel path
cracking, non-wheel path cracking, crack sealing, patching,
potholes, bleeding, ravelling, shoving and polished aggregate.
The LTPP data from sites with environmental conditions
that are relatively similar to the climate in Egypt are selected
in order to have similar environmental distresses. For exam-
ple, as the temperatures in Egypt are mostly moderate to high,
the thermal cracking may not be of great interest. Thus, the
selection criterion was based on the dry and wet non-freeze
locations to avoid the distresses that are pertinent to the very
cold climates. The mean annual air temperature (MAAT) in
Egypt ranges from 21.3 to 25.2 °C as indicated by Elshaeb

Table 5  Distresses, PCI and PCR descriptive statistics

Number of Mean Minimum value Maximum value Standard
samples deviation

Rutting (L) (mm) 1213 0.46 0 2.35 0.7

Rutting (M) (mm) 1213 0.49 0 445.9 12.8
Edge crack (L) (m) 1213 0.2 0 27.12 2.04
Block and transverse cracks (L) ­(m2) 1213 2.5 0 95.4 5.7
Block and transverse cracks (M) ­(m2) 1213 1.005 0 74.45 4.02
Block and transverse cracks (H) (­ m2) 1213 0.23 0 30.12 1.69
Fatigue and wheel path cracks (L) ­(m2) 1213 4.46 0 72.03 7.72
Fatigue and wheel path cracks (M) ­(m2) 1213 2.3 0 55.8 7.14
Fatigue and wheel path cracks (H) ­(m2) 1213 1.7 0 86.7 8.2
Non-wheel path cracks (L) (m) 1213 5.83 0 57.8 10.72
Non-wheel path cracks (M) (m) 1213 3.25 0 60.54 8.67
Non-wheel path cracks (H) (m) 1213 0.8 0 54.2 4.79
Crack seal (L) (m) 1213 2.34 0 78.4 8.63
Crack seal (M) (m) 1213 0.1 0 26.6 1.25
Crack seal (H) (m) 1213 0.055 0 36.06 1.24
Patch (L) (­ m2) 1213 0.67 0 73.17 4.24
Patch (M) (­ m2) 1213 0.155 0 25.7 1.56
Patch (H) ­(m2) 1213 0.24 0 49.3 2.92
Potholes (L) (­ m2) 1213 0.00012 0 0.055 0.002
Potholes (M) ­(m2) 1213 0.00038 0 0.12 0.0058
Potholes (H) (­ m2) 1213 0.000095 0 0.33 0.012
Bleeding(M) ­(m2) 1213 2.74 0 102.9 11.92
Ravelling(M) ­(m2) 1213 5.44 0 102.9 17.5
Shoving (M) (­ m2) 1213 0.0015 0 0.996 0.038
Polished aggregate(M) ­(m2) 1213 0.088 0 57.79 2.18
PCI 1213 70.2 0.39 100 26.1
PCR 1213 88.6 53.4 100 10.1

13
Innovative Infrastructure Solutions (2020) 5:55 Page 9 of 17  55

Fig. 7  PCI–PCR relationship 100

for all sections

80

60

PCR
40

20
y = 0.3264x + 65.935
R² = 0.7064
0
0 20 40 60 80 100
PCI

Fig. 8  Arizona and Alabama Arizona Sec 0113 PCI PCR

PCI, PCR and survey date 100
relationship
90

80
Pavement Condition Index

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0
06/15/1994

10/28/1995

03/11/1997

07/24/1998

12/06/1999

04/19/2001

09/01/2002

01/14/2004

05/28/2005

10/10/2006
Survey Date

(a) PCI & PCR Versus Survey Date SPS Section 0113, Arizona

Alabama 0563 PCI PCR

100
Pavement Condition Index

80

60

40

20

0
12/27/2014

09/22/2017
01/31/1993

10/28/1995

07/24/1998

04/19/2001

01/14/2004

10/10/2006

07/06/2009

04/01/2012

Survey Date

(b) PCI & PCR Versus Survey Date GPS Section 0563, Alabama

13
 55   Page 10 of 17 Innovative Infrastructure Solutions (2020) 5:55

Table 6  Comparison of the PCI and PCR distresses may be more prominent which can be found as the main
Distresses of PCI Distresses of PCR
distress in some US states and in Egypt, as well. In other US
states, fatigue cracking is more pronounced which is also a
Alligator crack Wheal track cracking common distress in Egypt. In addition, the studied sections
Bleeding Bleeding showed the same major types of distresses found in Egypt.
Block crack Block and transverse cracking
Bumps and sags Random cracking Data analysis
Corrugation Corrugation
Depression Settlement From the collected distress data, the PCI was calculated
Edge crack Edge cracking based on the severity and density of each distress according
Reflection crack Crack sealing to the ASTM D-6433-07, [9]. A spreadsheet was designed
Ravelling Ravelling to calculate the PCI through implementing the formulas
Rutting Rutting developed by Wu [26] to determine the deduct values, cor-
Potholes Potholes rected deduct values and finally the PCI. The PCR was
Longitudinal and transverse cracks Longitudinal joint cracking also calculated for each section as a function of the distress
Patching Patching weight, severity and extent as explained in ODOT [10].
Polished aggregate The descriptive statistics of the distress data, PCI and PCR
Lane\shoulder drop off is summarized in Table 5. Even though both indices have
Shoving almost the same rating scale and yielded similar trends, the
Slippage cracking computed values for the same sections were mostly different
Swell as shown in Fig. 7. Results show that the PCR values are
Railroad crossing usually much higher than the PCI values leading to different
pavement conditions as they have very similar rating scale
as shown before. Figure 8a, b show that both indices have
et al. [23]. The majority of the selected locations have MAAT very similar trends for Arizona and Alabama sections, as
in the range of 18–24 °C. Other literature studies also reported examples, while the values are dramatically different. This
that the wet and dry non-freeze locations in the USA matches difference is due to the different weights of each distress in
the climate in the Middle East and Egypt [13, 24, 25]. each method. For example, the deduct value for rutting with
As for the load-associated distresses (e.g. rutting and low severity in the PCI method with 2% density and in the
fatigue cracking) or the moisture-related distresses (e.g. rav- PCR method with frequent extent is equal to 13 and 1.8,
elling and stripping), these distresses are found in the LTPP respectively. Another example is the ravelling, the deduct
data and also exist in Egypt. For the hot climates, rutting value for ravelling with medium severity and 50% density

Table 7  MPCR distress Distresses Distress Severity Extent

weights, severity and extent weight
L M H O F E

Ravelling 40 0.3 0.6 1 0.5 0.8 1

Bleeding 20 0.8 0.8 1 0.6 0.9 1
Patching 15 0.3 0.6 1 0.6 0.8 1
Potholes 60 0.4 0.7 1 0.5 0.8 1
Crack sealing 5 1 1 1 0.5 0.8 1
Rutting 50 0.3 0.7 1 0.6 0.8 1
Settlement\collapse of roads side 10 0.5 0.7 1 0.5 0.8 1
slopes
Corrugations 5 0.4 0.8 1 0.5 0.8 1
Wheel track crack 45 0.4 0.7 1 0.5 0.7 1
Block and transverse crack 10 0.4 0.7 1 0.5 0.7 1
Longitudinal joint crack 5 0.4 0.7 1 0.5 0.7 1
Edge crack 20 0.4 0.7 1 0.5 0.7 1
Random crack 5 0.4 0.7 1 0.5 0.7 1
Polished aggregate 40 1 1 1 0.5 0.8 1
Shoving 30 0.3 0.7 1 0.6 0.8 1

13
Innovative Infrastructure Solutions (2020) 5:55 Page 11 of 17  55

Table 8  Identification of distress extent and severity for the MPCR method

Distresses Suggested Severity Extent
distresses
weight L M H O F E

Ravelling 40 Slight loss of sand Open texture Rough or bitted < 20% 20–50% > 50%
Bleeding 20 Not rated Bit and aggregate Black surface < 10% 10–30% > 30%
visible
Patching 15 < 0.093 m2 < 0.84 m2 > 0.84 m2 < 0.94 0.94:1.89 > 1.89
Potholes 60 Depth < 25.4 mm, Depth > 25.4 mm, Depth > 25.4 mm and < 0.47 0.47:0.94 > 0.94
area < 0.84 m2 Area < 0.84 m2 area > 0.84 m2
Depth > 25.4 mm,
Area < 0.84 m2
Crack sealing 5 Not considered < 20% 20–50% > 50% 20–50% > 50%
Rutting 50 < 6.4 mm > 6.4 mm > 25.4 mm < 20% 20–50% > 50%
and < 25.4 mm
Settlement 10 Noticeable effect on Some discomfort Poor ride < 0.19 0.19:0.38 > 0.38
ride
Collapse of road side 10 maximum depth of Depth of failure Depth of fail- < 30% 30–50% > 50%
slope failure < 30 mm 30–50 mm, some ure > 50 mm, with
cracks cracks
Corrugations 5 Noticeable effect on Some discomfort Poor ride < 10% 10–30% > 30%
ride
Wheel track crack 45 < 6.4 mm Multiple alligator > 6.4 mm < 20% 20–50% > 50%
cracks > 6.4 mm spalling
Block and transverse 10 < 6.4 mm wide no 6.4 mm: 25.4 mm along > 25.4 mm along min. < 20% 20–50% > 50%
crack spalling min. 5 m length 5 m length
Longitudinal joint 5 < 6.4 mm 6.4 mm: 25.4 mm some Multiple > 25.4 mm < 20% 20–50% > 50%
crack spalling spalling
Edge crack 20 < 6.4 mm > 6.4 mm some spalling > 6.4 mm moderate < 20% 20–50% > 50%
spalling
Random crack 5 < 6.4 mm 6.4 mm: 25.4 mm > 25.4 mm < 20% 20–50% > 50%
Polished aggregate 40 Not considered < 20% 20–50% > 50% 20–50% > 50%
Shoving 30 Low ride quality Medium ride quality High ride quality < 20% 20–50% > 50%

L low severity, M medium severity, H high severity, O occasional, F frequent and E extensive

Fig. 9  Comparison of modified 100

PCR and PCI

80
Modified PCR

60

40

20
y = 0.8131x + 15.197
R² = 0.7407
0
0 20 40 60 80 100
PCI

in the PCI and PCR with frequent extent is 30 and 4.8, shoving, depression, and slippage cracks and swell. Table 6
respectively. Another reason is that some of the distresses shows a comparison of the distresses in both the PCI and
are not considered in both methods such polished aggregate, PCR methods.

13
 55   Page 12 of 17 Innovative Infrastructure Solutions (2020) 5:55

Table 9  PCI and MPCR statistical description
Number of Mean Minimum Maximum
sample value value
70% of data (model)
PCI 851 70.3 0.73 100
MPCR 851 72.4 0 100
30% of data (verification model)
PCI 362 70.6 0.398 100
MPCR 362 71.7 0 100
Development of a modified PCR (MPCR)
The comparison between the two pavement condition evalu-
ation methods revealed different ratings for the same condi-
tion. Because the PCI method is more accurate, reliable and
most common, this warranted the modification of the PCR
method in order to produce pavement conditions similar
to the PCI while maintaining the benefit of the simplic-
ity of the PCR method. Thus, modification of the distress
weights of the PCR method is warranted. The least square
method was used to optimize the current distress weights
in the PCR method to produce comparable values to the
PCI method. Table 7 presents the modified weights of the
MPCR method as well as the newly added distresses with
their weights. In addition, new distresses were also incor-
porated in the MPCR method which are the collapse of the
roads side slopes, polished aggregate and shoving based
on the recommendation of the RTD engineers. Collapse of
the roads side slopes is usually observed in roads running
beside irrigation canals which are frequent, especially in
the delta area in Egypt. This distress is due to slope stabil-
ity shear failure which is manifested in terms of settlement/
cracking in the pavement. The new distress is measured
by three severity levels (as per the discussion with the
RTD practicing engineers): low severity measured when
the maximum depth of failure is less than 30 mm, medium
severity when the depth of failure is between (30–50 mm)
Standard and the settlement might be accompanied also by cracks in
deviation the pavement and high severity when the depth of failure
is more than 50 mm and the settlement is accompanied by
cracks in the pavement. This frequency of the distress is
25.9
measured in square metres. Table 8 shows how to measure
24.2
the extent and severity of each distress including the newly
added distresses.
26.8
To find the modified weights, a total of 851 data points
25.8
(70% of the GPS and SPS LTPP data) were randomly
selected while 362 data points (30% of the data) were left
for verification of the suggested weights. Tables 2 and 7
show the order of the suggested weights of the distresses
which is different from the order of the current PCR weights
for most of the distresses. However, the modified weights
are rational as the distresses with the highest weights such
as potholes, rutting and wheel track cracking are structural
distresses. Figure 9 presents the results of the comparison
between the PCI and the MPCR methods using the modified
distress weights. From this figure, it can be concluded that
the MPCR method yields reasonable values which are com-
parable to the PCI values with a coefficient of determination
­R2 of 0.741 and relatively minimal bias.
MPCR method verification
The remaining 30% of the GPS and SPS of the collected
LTPP data was used to verify the developed method. Table 9
illustrates the descriptive statistics of the data used for the
model development and verification which is very similar.
Figure 10 compares the PCI and the MPCR based on the
data used for verification. The figure shows similar and even
slightly better accuracy compared to the data used for devel-
opment with ­R2 of 0.82.
Furthermore, Fig. 11a, b shows that the values of the
MPCR are very close to the PCI values for Arizona and
Alabama sections, as examples. Thus, the new method with
suggested weights is more reliable and rational.

Fig. 10  Verification results of 100

the modified PCR method
80

60
Modified PCR

40

20
y = 0.8727x + 10.036
R² = 0.8212
0
0 20 40 PCI 60 80 100

13
Innovative Infrastructure Solutions (2020) 5:55 Page 13 of 17  55

Fig. 11  Arizona and Alabama Arizona Sec 0113 PCI Modified PCR

PCI, modified PCR and survey 100
date relationship
90

80

Pavement Condition Index

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

10/28/1995

03/11/1997

07/24/1998

04/19/2001

09/01/2002

01/14/2004

05/28/2005

10/10/2006
06/15/1994

12/06/1999
Survey Date

(a) PCI and Modified PCR Versus Survey Date for SPS Section 0113, Arizona

Alabama 0563 PCI Modified PCR

100
Pavement Condition Index

80

60

40

20

0
01/31/1993

10/28/1995

07/24/1998

04/19/2001

01/14/2004

10/10/2006

07/06/2009

04/01/2012

12/27/2014

09/22/2017
Survey Date

(b) PCI and Modified PCR Versus Survey Date for GPS Section 0563, Alabama

In order to further evaluate the accuracy of the pro- that for the good pavement sections, the severity and
posed MPCR method, different LTPP sections were density of the distress are low meaning that the affected
selected and both the MPCR and PCI values were com- areas in the section as well as the severity (for example
puted for each section based on the severity and extent the width of the crack or rut depth) are low which is the
of the existing distresses as shown in Table 10. The table reason for the good pavement condition (less effect on
also shows the corresponding pavement condition based the structural and functional condition of the pavement).
on the rating scale of both methods. The methods yielded On the contrary, for the failed pavement sections, the dis-
the same pavement condition. Furthermore, by comparing tresses are widely spread all over the pavement section
the pavement condition status of the two methods with and covers large area (medium to high density) with the
the distress types and severity levels, it is noted that the distresses at their worst case dramatically affecting the
pavement conditions rationally reflect their status. The pavement performance structurally and functionally as
weights assigned for the distresses in the MPCR method well as the pavement users. As one would surmise, as the
are found to better express the pavement condition com- pavement condition becomes wore, the severity of the
pared to the current PCR method. These examples show distress gets higher.

13
 55   Page 14 of 17 Innovative Infrastructure Solutions (2020) 5:55

Table 10  Comparison of PCI, MPCR along with pavement condition for different LTPP sections
State code SHRP_ID Survey date ­ 2
Sample area m Distresses Severity Density PCI MPCR Pavement condition

12 4135 5/15/2002 562.4 Alligator cracks Low 1.96 85 88 Good

*LC + TC Low 0.87
1 0563 9/18/1991 547.2 Alligator cracks Low 4.73 70 75 Satisfactory
Alligator cracks Medium 0.84
1 0102 10/30/1997 562.4 Alligator cracks Low 3.75 61.4 69.3 Fair
LC + TC Low 2.68
Ravelling Medium 28.09
12 1370 4/18/1997 532 Rutting Medium 3.2 50.7 48.5 Poor
Alligator cracks Low 5.6
Alligator cracks Medium 0.77
LC + TC Low 2.7
Patch Low 0.28
4 1024 4/22/1998 562.4 Alligator cracks Medium 6.6 27.7 30.5 Very poor
Alligator cracks High 8.7
LC + TC Low 10.7
LC + TC High 0.39
Patch Low 0.12
Patch High 0.14
4 1022 11/5/2014 577.6 Rutting Low 1.04 11.34 24.5 Serious
Alligator cracks Low 1.75
Alligator cracks Medium 0.52
Alligator cracks High 18.5
LC + TC Low 35.3
LC + TC Medium 30.9
LC + TC High 26.4
37 1801 4/7/2010 562.4 Alligator cracks Low 16.6 1 9.2 Failed
Alligator cracks Medium 7.9
Alligator cracks High 20.9
LC + TC Low 1.03
LC + TC Medium 0.82
LC + TC High 43.5
Ravelling Medium 55.03

*LC + TC longitudinal and transverse cracks

Table 11  Percent sections V. good Good Satisfactory Fair Fair to poor Poor V. poor Serious Failed
within each condition state
using PCI and PCR V. good 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Good 43.8 1.9 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Satisfactory 15.4 9.8 0.0 0.3 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Fair 6.5 12.2 0.0 1.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Fair to poor 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Poor 1.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
V. poor 0.0 5.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Serious 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0
Failed 0.4 0.4 0.0 1.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

13
Innovative Infrastructure Solutions (2020) 5:55 Page 15 of 17  55

Table 12  Percent sections V. good Good Satisfactory Fair Fair to poor Poor V. poor Serious Failed
within each condition state
using PCI and MPCR V. good 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Good 0.0 39.1 6.6 0.5 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0
Satisfactory 0.0 6.3 14.7 3.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Fair 0.0 1.9 6.4 8.1 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0
Fair to poor 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1
Poor 0.0 0.0 1.5 0.0 0.0 3.5 0.0 0.0 0.0
V. poor 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.7 0.0 0.0
Serious 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.7 0.7
Failed 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.9 0.0 1.3

Table 13  Main distresses in the Distresses Severity Moreover, the number of sections with similar states
evaluated Mansoura roads based on the PCI and the original PCR methods is sum-
Alligator crack L, M, H marized in Table 11. This table shows that only 3% of the
Bleeding L, M, H sections showed similar states. After modifying the PCR
Block crack L, M method, more than 70% of the sections showed similar states
Edge crack L, M, H as shown in Table 12. The majority of the remaining sections
Ravelling L, M, H were found only one state higher or lower.
Rutting L, M, H
Potholes L, M, H Validation of the modified PCR (MPCR) method
Longitudinal and L, M, H
transverse cracks
In order to validate the developed MPCR method, a visual
Patching L, M, H
condition survey was conducted on Mansoura ring road
Polished aggregate L, M, H
from Misr Engineering and Technology Higher Institute
Settlement L, M
to Mnsoura University bridge. This road is a rural road
Shoving L, M, H
that consists of two lanes in each direction with a total
Corrugation M
width of 7.5 metres, median width of 0.6 m and outside
L low severity, M medium shoulders of 0.60 m. In addition, Mansoura–El-Mahla
severity, H high severity road was also surveyed. This road consists of two lanes
in each direction (7.5 m width per direction), median of
0.6 m and outside shoulder of 0.5 m. The collected data
100 include the distresses (severity, extent and quantity).
Table 13 summarizes the major distresses found in these
80 roads. The PCI and the MPCR were computed based on
Modified PCR

the results of the conducted visual survey. Figure 12 illus-

60
trates the relationship between the PCI and the MPCR.
40
The figure shows that the MPCR of the 53 investigated
sections is in good agreement with the PCI with ­R 2 of
20 0.87. Both Tables 14 and 15 present example on the appli-
y = 1.0491x - 6.6167
R² = 0.8672
cation of the MPCR showing the simplicity of the method.
0 Table 14 shows some assumed distresses in a hypothetical
0 20 40 60 80 100
PCI pavement section, while Table 15 shows the computed
DV of each distress and the MPCR of the section using
Fig. 12  PCI-modified PCR relationship Eqs. 1 and 2.

Table 14  Distresses existing in Distress Rutting collapse of the roads Wheal track Longitudinal joint Ravelling
a hypothetical pavement section side slopes cracking cracking

Severity L L L M L L
Extent O F O O E F

13
 55   Page 16 of 17 Innovative Infrastructure Solutions (2020) 5:55

Table 15  Calculation of the Distresses Distress Severity (B) Extent (C) Deduct value
MPCR of the hypothetical weight DV = A × B×C
pavement section (A) L M H O F E

Ravelling 40 0.3 0.6 1 0.5 0.8 1 19.2

Bleeding 20 0.8 0.8 1 0.6 0.9 1
Patching 15 0.3 0.6 1 0.6 0.8 1
Potholes 60 0.4 0.7 1 0.5 0.8 1
Crack sealing 5 1 1 1 0.5 0.8 1
Rutting 50 0.3 0.7 1 0.6 0.8 1 9
Settlement\collapse of the 10 0.5 0.7 1 0.5 0.8 1 4
roads side slopes
Corrugations 5 0.4 0.8 1 0.5 0.8 1
Wheel track crack 45 0.4 0.7 1 0.5 0.7 1 24.75
Block and transverse crack 10 0.4 0.7 1 0.5 0.7 1
Longitudinal joint crack 5 0.4 0.7 1 0.5 0.7 1 2
Edge crack 20 0.4 0.7 1 0.5 0.7 1
Random crack 5 0.4 0.7 1 0.5 0.7 1
Polished aggregate 40 1 1 1 0.5 0.8 1
Shoving 30 0.3 0.7 1 0.6 0.8 1
Sum of DV 58.95
PCI = 100 − ∑DV 41.05 (poor)

Summary and conclusions References

A questionnaire was designed and handed to the general
authority for roads, bridges and land transport (GARBLT)
as well as different roads and transport directorates to assess
the current state of practice with respect to PMS and the
utilized pavement condition index, if any. The questionnaire
results revealed that currently no effective PMS is being used
by roads and transport directorates in Egypt. In order to help
implement an effective PMS in the RTD, a simple but reli-
able MPCR index is proposed. The following conclusions
can be drawn from the results of the current study:
• A modified PCR method is suggested which produces
similar values and conditions to the well-known PCI
method with reasonable accuracy (­ R2 = 0.741), by chang-
ing the weight of each distress.
• The weights of the MPCR distresses are rational and
valid as the distresses which significantly affect the struc-
tural capacity of the pavement system and/or the user
comfort were found to have the highest weights.
• The LTPP database was used for the development (851
points) and verification (362 points) of the new weights,
and then the MPCR was validated using the results of
pavement condition surveys of two different rural roads
in Egypt. The validation results based on 53 points
showed reasonable agreement between the MPCR and
PCI with ­R2 of 0.87.
1. Haas R, Hudson WR (1978) Pavement management systems.
Transport and Road Research Laboratory (TRRL), ISBN: 0-07-
025391-9. Report/Paper Numbers: Monograph, Files: ITRD,
TRIS, 00184537
2. Al-Mansour A (2004) Flexible pavement distress prediction
model for the city of Riyadh, Saudi Arabia Emirates. J Eng Res
9(1):81–88
3. Hafez M, Ksaibati K, Atadero R (2019) Best practices to sup-
port and improve pavement management systems for low-vol-
ume paved roads. Int J Pavement Eng 20(5):592–599
4. Jannat GE, Tighe SL (2015) Performance based evaluation of
overall pavement condition indices for Ontario highway sys-
tems. In: TAC 2015: Getting you there safely-2015 conference
and exhibition of the transportation association of Canada//
ATC: session of the 2015 conference of the transportation, EKP,
vol 13, no 3, pp 1576–1580
5. Nam BH, An J, Kim M, Murphy MR, Zhang Z (2016) Improve-
ments to the structural condition index (SCI) for pavement
structural evaluation at network level. Int J Pavement Eng
17(8):680–697
6. Papagiannakis A, Gharaibeh N, Weissmann J, Wimsatt A (2009)
Pavement scores synthesis. Project FHWA 0-6386 Report No.
FHWA/TX-09/0-6386-1, 7(2), 152. http://tti.tamu.edu/docum​
ents/0-6386-1.pdf
7. Reza F, Boriboonsomsin K, Bazlamit S (2006) Development of
a pavement quality index for the state of Ohio. In: 85th annual
meeting of the transportation research board, Washington D.C
8. Smith KL, Titus-Glover L, Evans LD (2002) Pavement smooth-
ness index relationships: final report. Retrieved from http://www.
fhwa.dot.gov/public​ ation​ s/resear​ ch/infras​ truct​ ure/paveme​ nts/ltpp/
repor ​ts/02057​/02057​.pdf%5Cnht​tp://www.fhwa.dot.gov/pavem​
ent/pub_listi​ng.cfm?areas​=Smoot​hness​

13
Innovative Infrastructure Solutions (2020) 5:55 Page 17 of 17  55
9. ASTM D-6433-07 (2007) Standard practice for roads and parking
lots pavement condition index surveys. In: Annual book of ASTM
standards, 97 (Reapproved), pp 1–7. https​://doi.org/10.1520/
B0117​-16
10. ODOT (The Ohio Department of Transportation) (2004) Pave-
ment condition rating system 4(10):1–3
11. Tariq M (2017) A comparative study on pavement condition rating
methods for flexible roads. IJEDR 5(3):1255–1260
12. Barrette TP (2011) Comparison of PASER and PCI pavement
distress indices. Master’s report, Michigan Technological Uni-
versity, 2011. http://digit​alcom​mons.mtu.edu/etds/502
13. Elhadidy AA, El-Badawy SM, Elbeltagi E (2019) A simpli-
fied pavement condition index regression model for pavement
evaluation. Int J Pavement Eng. https​://doi.org/10.1080/10298​
436.2019.16335​79
14. Abo-Hashema M, Sharaf E (2009) Development of mainte-
nance decision model for flexible pavement. Int J Pavement Eng
10(3):173–187. https​://doi.org/10.1080/10298​43080​21694​57
15. Pavement Interactive. https​://pavem​entin​terac​tive.org/ Accessed
May 2020
16. ECP (2008) Egyptian Code of Practice for Design and Construc-
tion of Urban and Rural Roads (ECP-104), Road Maintenance
Work (Part 10), edn 1. Ministry of Housing, Utilities and Urban
Communities, Housing and Building National Research Center,
Cairo, Egypt
17. Mohamed S (2017) Development a pavement maintenance
management system framework using Markov chains theory
for Egyptian highway networks. Ph.D. Thesis, Structural Eng.
Dept., Alexandria University, Alexandria, Egypt
18. ARA Inc(2004) ERES Consultants division. appendix QQ:
structural response models for rigid pavements. guide for mech-
anistic–empirical design of new and rehabilitated pavement
structures. Final Report, NCHRP Project 1-37A. Transportation
Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C
19. Abd El-Raof S, Abd El-Hakim R, El-Badawy S, Afify H (2018)
A simplified closed-form procedure for network-level determi-
nation of pavement layers moduli from falling weight deflec-
tometer data. J Transp Eng Part B Pavements 144(4):04018052.
https​://doi.org/10.1061/jpeod​x.00000​80
20. Abd El-Raof S, Abd El-Hakim R, El-Badawy S, Afify H (2018)
Structural number prediction for flexible pavements using the
long-term pavement performance data. Int J Pavement Eng.
https​://doi.org/10.1080/10298​436.2018.15117​86
21. Abd El-Hakim R, El-Badawy S (2013) International roughness
index prediction for rigid pavements: an artificial neural net-
work application. Adv Mater Res 723:854–860
22. Abdelaziz N, Abd El-Hakim RT, El-Badawy SM, Afify HA
(2018) International Roughness Index prediction model for
flexible pavements. Int J Pavement Eng 21(1):88–99. https​://
doi.org/10.1080/10298​436.2018.14414​14
23. Elshaeb M, El-Badawy S, Shawaly E (2014) Development and
impact of the Egyptian climatic conditions on flexible pavement
performance. Am J Civ Eng Archit 2(3):115–121. https​://doi.
org/10.12691​/ajcea​-2-3-4
24. El Ashwah A (2018) A simplified mechanistic empirical flexible
pavement design method for moderate to hot climate regions.
M.Sc. Thesis, Mansoura University, Egypt
25. Radwan M, Abo-Hashema M, Faheem H, Hashem M (2020) Mod-
elling pavement performance based on LTPP database for flexible
pavements. Tek Dergi. https​://doi.org/10.18400​/tekde​rg.47660​6
26. Wu K (2015) Development of PCI-based pavement performance
model for management of road infrastructure system. M.Sc. The-
sis, Arizona State University
13