GENETIC-ALGORITHM PROGRAl\tIMING OF ROAD MAINTENANCE AND

REHABILITATION
By T. F. Fwa; Member, ASCE, W. T. Chan/ and C. Y. Tan3

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by GADJAH MADA UNIVERSITY on 10/18/16. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

(Reviewed by the Highway Division)

ABs",:RACT: . This paper ~e~cri~es the development of a computer model (known as PAVENET-R) based on
ge~etic algonthms,. ~ ?ptirmzatlOn tool capable of overcoming combinatorial explosion, to solve the pavement
~amtenance.rehabIlltation trade-off problem at the network level. The formulation of the PAVENET-R model
IS de~cribed ~n detail. An integer coding scheme is selected for parameter representation in the model. Two
gene~l,c-algonthm oper~tors, namely ~e cross?ver operat?r and the mutation operator, are used. A "change
table encodes constramts to the genetic-algonthm operatIOns to ensure that only valid offspring are generated
fro~ a parent pool. F?~r ~umerical e~amples of road networks of 30 pavement segments, each with different
relative costs of rehablht~?o~ and mamt~nance activi~i~s: are analyzed to demonstrate the trade-off relationship
between pavement rehabllltatlOn and mamtenance activities. The detailed maintenance and rehabilitation schedules of the solutions, and the convergence characteristics of each solution are presented.

INTRODUCTION
Pavement management at the network level involves programming of pavement and rehabilitation activities over a
multiyear planning horizon and is a highly complex problem.
The complexity of this problem has been discussed by the
writers elsewhere (Chan et al. 1994; Fwa et al. 1994a), where
they addressed different simplified versions of the problem that
considered only pavement-maintenance activities. They showed
that even for a small road network, with 20 pavement segments, and involving only 3 distress types, there would be a
total of about 1038 possible combinations of maintenance activities to be considered for a time span of 10 planning periods.
The writers have demonstrated the applications of genetic
algorithms (GAs) in their earlier work (Chan et al. 1994; Fwa
et al. 1994b) to obtain practical solutions for the multiyear
programming of routine pavement-maintenance activities at
the network level. A complete pavement-management program, however, requires the integration of routine maintenance
and rehabilitation planning (Sinha and Fwa 1989; Fwa et al.
1988). Although it is relatively simple to compare the relative
merits of different planned programs of maintenance-rehabilitation activities, it would be an entirely different matter altogether to identify the optimum combination of routine maintenance and rehabilitation activities to satisfy predetermined
system objectives. This paper presents the formulation and solutions of a genetic-algorithm (GA) program, known as
PAVENET-R, developed for the programming of pavement
maintenance and rehabilitation activities of a road network
over a multiple-period planning horizon.

CONSIDERATIONS IN ANALYSIS
Nature of Problem
The highway engineer responsible for maintaining a road
network is interested in identifying the pavement-management
'Assoc. Prof.. Ctr. for Transp. Res. Dept. of Civ. Engrg. Nat. Univ.
of Singapore. 10 Kent Ridge Crescent. Singapore 051l.
'Sr. Lect. Ctr. for Transp. Res., Dept. of Civ. Engrg., Nat. Univ. of
Singapore. 10 Kent Ridge Crescent. Singapore 0511.
'Res. Student, Ctr. for Transp. Res., Dept. of Civ. Engrg., Nat. Univ.
of Singapore, 10 Kent Ridge Crescent. Singapore 0511.
Note. Discussion open until November 1. 1996. To extend the closing
date one month. a written request must be filed with the ASCE Manager
of Journals. The manuscript for this paper was submitted for review and
possible publication on May 8. 1995. This paper is part of the ]ourlUll
of Transporliltion Engineering. Vol. 122. No.3, May/June, 1996.
ASCE. ISSN 0733-947X196/0003-0246-0253/$4.00 + $.50 per page.
Paper No. 10677.

program (i.e., the program of maintenance and rehabilitation

activities) that could best achieve a predetermined system objective for the road network. A pavement maintenance-rehabilitation program at the network level would contain the following information: (1) The time and type of maintenance or
rehabilitation (including the do-nothing option) for every
pavement segment over the entire planning time period; (2)
the resource allocation by time and pavement segment; and
(3) the total commitment of resources for each time period.
The optimal programming of rehabilitation and routine
maintenance activities is a combinatorial problem. The following example illustrates this point. Consider the operation of a
highway agency that has structural overlay as its rehabilitation
option, and three maintenance activities, namely crack sealing,
premix levelings, and pothole patching. A unit time period is
taken to be one year. It is assumed that a routine maintenance
activity would not be scheduled within the same year that an
overlay is planned for. However, two or more nonconflicting
maintenance activities could be performed within a given year.
With these assumptions, there are nine possible maintenancerehabilitation options for a given pavement segment in a unit
time period: (1) Do-nothing option; (2) structural overlay; (3)
crack sealing; (4) premix leveling; (5) pothole patching; (5)
crack sealing and premix leveling; (7) crack sealing and pothole patching; (8) premix leveling and pothole patching; and
(9) crack sealing, premix leveling, and pothole patching. Assuming that the highway agency has to manage a small network consisting of 20 pavement segments, a simplistic accounting of the number of possible strategies gives (92Q)~, or
approximately 2.6 X 1095 possibilities, if the total planning
time period chosen is five years.

System Objectives and Problem Parameters

The common road-network system objectives specified by
highway agencies include the following: (1) To minimize the
present worth of overall maintenance and rehabilitation expenditures over the planning horizon; (2) to minimize roaduser costs by selecting and programming maintenance and rehabilitation activities to reduce disruptions and delays to
traffic; and (3) to maintain the highest possible level of overall
network pavement condition with the resources available. It is
also possible to combine two or more of these objectives by
assigning an appropriate weighting factor to each.
The important parameters to the programming problem are
listed in Table 1. The road network is divided into an appropriate number of pavement segments. The pavement in each

246/ JOURNAL OF TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING / MAY/JUNE 1996

J. Transp. Eng., 1996, 122(3): 246-253

TABLE 1. Problem Parameters for Pavement MaintenanceRehabilitation Programming

Parameter
type
(1 )

Network parameters
Planning period

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by GADJAH MADA UNIVERSITY on 10/18/16. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Distress parameters
Maintenance parameters

Description
(2)

Number of pavement segments; age of each

pavement segment
Length of total planning period; length of unit
planning periods
Distress types; distress "deterioration functions
Warning levels by distress types; maintenance/repair methods; costs of repair by distress type

Rehabilitation parameters Warning level for rehabilitation; methods of

rehabilitation; costs of rehabilitation
Budget available; manpower available; mateResource parameters
rials available; equipment available
Current loading level; traffic growth function
Traffic loading

segment is uniform in material and structural properties, age,

maintenance-rehabilitation history, and traffic loading. The total length of the planning period (or study period) is usually
defined by the highway agency concerned. In addition, depending on the planning and operation requirements of the
highway agency, the unit planning period (a day, a week, a
month, or a year) must be selected.
Distress parameters include the types of distress considered
and their deterioration functions. The deterioration functions
predict distress development with time or traffic loading.
Maintenance and rehabilitation parameters identify the pavement repair methods used and their costs. It is also necessary
to specify the warning level for each repair type. A warning
level refers to the pavement condition level that the pavement
is not allowed to fall below. In other words, a maintenace or
rehabilitation activity must be performed before its specified
warning level is reached, or at the latest, when the warning
level is reached.
The resource parameters defines what are commonly known
as constraints in optimization problems. Typical planning constraints in pavement management are availability of resources
such as budget, manpower, materials, and equipment. Finally,
the traffic parameters provide the necessary information for
traffic loading to be computed for the entire planning period.
Applicability of Genetic Algorithms

mulations, the choice of repair method for a distress is

a straightforward issue. In the present problem, rehabilitation offers an additional alternative repair method to
be considered for all distresses.
These added dimensions of the problem requires a different
GA fonnulation to be developed for the analysis.
DESCRIPTION OF EXAMPLE PROBLEM
Problem Parameters

A hypothetical problem of a road network consisting of 30

3-km pavement segments is analyzed in this study to highlight
the main features of GA formulation in PAVENET-R and to
illustrate the proposed applications of GAs. The objective
function adopted is the minimization of the total present worth
of rehabilitation and maintenance costs over the planning horizon of 20 years. The discount rate used in the analysis is
5%.
The major problem parameters are summarized in Table 2.
The ages of the 30 pavement segments given in Fig. I are
randomly assigned by assuming a normal distribution. The age
of a pavement is computed from the time the last structural
TABLE 2.

Problem Parameters for Hypothetical Example

Parameter
category
(1 )

Parameter
adopted
(2)

Network parameters
Number of pavement segments
Age of pavement segments
Planning Period
Total length of study period
Unit planning period
Active planning period
Traffic parameters
Traffic loading
Waming levels
Cracking
Rutting
Surface disintegration
Structural damage
Maintenance costs
Cracking

1. A rehabilitation action such as the construction of an

overlay will correct practically all pavement distresses,
thereby redefining the time (or cumulative traffic loading) variables in all affected distress deterioration functions.
2. Trade-off between maintenance and rehabilitation is now
an important aspect of the analysis. In the earlier for-

20 years
One year
Five years

Constant 50,000 passes of equivalent 80 kN single-axle per year

0.8 m2 of cracks per km per lane
IS mm rut depth
20% of wheel-path area affected
Present serviceability index = 2.5
(Refer to Table 3 for cost details)
Crack sealing in unit cost per km
per lane
Premix leveling in unit cost per ton
of asphalt premix
Patching in unit cost of per ton of
asphalt premix

Rutting

The ability of GAs to handle combinatorial problems associated with the programming of pavement maintenance activities at the network level has been demonstrated by the writers in earlier works (Chan et al. 1994; Fwa et al. 1994).
However, the GA formulation developed in these earlier works
is not capable of solving the maintenance-rehabilitation programming problem that involves trade-off between rehabilitation and maintenance activities. It was assumed in those
early studies that the development of a pavement distress was
not affected by maintenance or repairs performed to correct
other distresses. This assumption is no longer valid when rehabilitation is included in the problem.
The inclusion of rehabilitation in the programming analysis
essentially complicates the problem in the following aspects:

30 (refer to Fig. 1)

Surface disintegration
Rehabilitation costs
Structural overlay

S$1251t of asphalt premix

.--

,....-

,....-

56789101112

AGE OF ROAD PAVEMENTS

FIG. 1. Age Distribution of Pavement Segments

JOURNAL OF TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING 1 MAYIJUNE 1996/247

J. Transp. Eng., 1996, 122(3): 246-253

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by GADJAH MADA UNIVERSITY on 10/18/16. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

overlay was laid, or from the time of construction if the pavement has never been overlaid.
The total length of the study period is 20 years. The unit
planning period is one year. In this problem, the first five years
are defined as the active planning period during which both
corrective and preventive maintenance or rehabilitation measures are considered. In the remaining 15 years, only preventive measures will be taken. A corrective maintenance or rehabilitation measure refers to a repair activity, which is
performed when the corresponding predefined warning level
is reached, whereas a preventive measure is one that is performed while the condition of the pavement concerned is still
at a level above the predefined warning level. The length of
active period is an input variable to be decided by the pavement-management authority. The traffic loading is assumed to
be constant over the period of analysis.
For simplicity, only three main pavement distress types are
considered. They are cracking, rutting, and disintegration of
pavement surface materials. Disintegration of pavement surface materials includes stripping and raveling. From a review
of the distress deterioration functions reported in Hudson
et al. (1981), Rauhut et al. (1982), Gschwendt et al. (1987),
and Hill (1987), the following distress deterioration models
are assumed for this study:
Cracking

C = 2I,600(N)(SN)-sN

(1)

= 4.98(y)O.166(SN)-o.\N)0.13
Surface disintegration S = 80(e2.2677N - 1)
Rutting

(2)

(3)

where C = total area cracked in m 2lkm1lane; N = traffic loading

in million passes of equivalent 80 kN single axle; SN = structural number; R = rut depth in mm; Y = age of pavement in
years; and S = total surface disintegrated in m 2lkm1lane.
The warning levels for these three distresses and structural
damage are shown in Table 2. For the case of structural damage requiring rehabilitation, the decision to trigger overlay
construction is dependent on the value of the present serviceability index (PSI). A PSI value of 2.5 is selected for this
purpose. Adopted for this study are the following PSI deterioration functions modeled after relationships developed by the
American Association of State Highway Officials (AASHO)
road test (HRB 1962) and Rauhut et al. (1982)
PSI

= 5.10

- 1.9Iog(l

SV) -

omcO.3-

0.OO2I4R2
(4a)

where
SV = 68.5 (N .;06r

+ 1.83

= 9.36 10g(SN + 1) - 0.20

13 = 0.4 + I,094/(SN + 1)319

Iog(p)

(4b)
(4c)

(4d)

Maintenance and Rehabilitation Costs

A factor that directly influences the outcome of the maintenance-rehabilitation trade-off analysis is the relative costs of
rehabilitation and maintenance activities. Since there are three
maintenance activities considered in this study, the following
situations can occur:
Case I
Case II

v > (AI + A2 + A3)

V < (AI + A2 + A3), but

V > (AI + A2), V > (A2 + A3), and V >

(AI + A3)

TABLE 3. Repair Costs per Pavement Segment for Rehabilitation and Maintenance Activities
Case
(1 )
I
II
III

IV

Crack
sealing

Patching

Premix
leveling

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

250
257
275
443

53
65
200
440

110
127
235
432

430
430
430
430

Overlay

Note: All cost values are in Singapore dollars (S$).

Case III
Case IV

V < (AI + A2), V < (A2 + A3), and V <

(AI + A3), but
V > AI, V > A2, and V > A3
V < AI, V < A2, and V < A3

where V = unit cost of overlay construction per km per lane;

Al = unit cost of crack sealing per km per lane; A2 = unit
cost of premix leveling; and A3 = unit cost of patching per
km per lane.
In case I, the cost of performing any combination of the
three maintenance activities on a pavement segment is less
than that of applying a structural overlay on the pavement
segment. In case II, structural rehabilitation is less expensive
than performing all three maintenance types, but is more costly
than performing any two of the three maintenance activities.
In case III, the cost of rehabilitation is higher than an individual maintenance activity, but is more economic when more
than one maintenance activity is required. Case IV represents
a situation where the cost of rehabilitation is lower than each
of the three maintenance activities. While some of these four
cases are more likely to take place, in reality, than others, it
is of interest in this study to examine how they would affect
the results of maintenance-rehabilitation trade-off analysis.
Table 3 shows the cost values of rehabilitation and maintenance activities for the four cases analyzed in here.
GENETIC-ALGORITHM FORMULATION IN PAVENET-R

The overall scheme of the genetic algorithm in the computer

program PAVENET-R is depicted by the flowchart in Fig. 2.
It begins with coding representation of the problem parameters
and selection of an initial pool of parent genotypes. The subsequent genetic process includes the evaluation of parent genotypes, generation of offspring genotypes, and formation of the
next parent pool. The process will be repeated until a preselected stopping criterion is satisfied. The following subsections
describe the major aspects of the GA formulation in PAVENET-R.
Coding of Problem Parameters

There are many possible ways of GA coding of parameters

for a given problem. In the GA formulation in PAVENET-R,
two methods of coding were considered. The binary coding
scheme was examined first. As mentioned earlier, for three
maintenance activities and a rehabilitation option, there are
nine possible repair strategies for each pavement segment in
a unit time period. This would require four-bit binary code to
accommodate the nine possible strategies. Since the four-bit
binary code can represent up to 16 strategies, seven cells of
the four-bit binary representation would be empty. This would
present major problems in GA operations as many invalid representations (Le., coding with either more than seven or less
than seven empty cells) would be generated in the process.
Hence, the binary coding adopted by the writers in their early
work (Chan et al. 1994; Fwa et al. 1994b) for maintenanceactivities programming is inappropriate in the present application.

248/ JOURNAL OF TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING / MAY/JUNE 1996

J. Transp. Eng., 1996, 122(3): 246-253

TABLE 4.

BEGIN

Alternative Repair ActiVity

Required
activity

INPUT PROBLEM PAR..AME1:ERS AND

DEFINE OBJECITVE FUNCIlON

0
1
2
3
4
5
6

CODE PROBLEM PARAMETERS

AS STRING SfRUCTIJRES

GENERATE A NUMBER OF STRING

SfRUCI1JRES AS TIlE INmAL
POOL OF PARENT SOLUTIONS

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by GADJAH MADA UNIVERSITY on 10/18/16. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Feasible Altarnatlves for Recommended Activities

O'

1b

2"

3d

4'

5'

61

7h

8'

X
-.J
-.J
-.J
-.J
-.J
-.J
-.J
-.J

X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X

X
-.J
X
-.J
-.J
-.J
-.J

X
-.J
-.J
X
-.J
-.J
-.J
-.J
-.J

X
-.J
-.J
-.J
X
-.J
-.J
-.J
-.J

X
-.J
X
X

X
-.J
X
-.J
X
-.J
X
-.J
-.J

X
-.J
-.J
X
X
-.J
-.J
X
-.J

X
-.J
X
X
X
X
X
X
X

_J

_J

X
-.J
-.J
-.J

-.J
8
Note: X = permitted alternative for the required activity.
"No action required.
"Rehabilitation.
'Crack sealing.
"Premix leveling.
"Patching.
'Crack sealing and premix leveling.
'Crack sealing and patching.
bPremix leveling and patching.
ICrack sealing, premix leveling, and patching.
JInfeasible alternative for the required activity.

EVALUATE TIlE PARENT POOL

BY MEANS OF OBJECITVE FUNCIlON

GENERATE OFFSPRING

SELECf OFFSPRINGS BASED ON ATNESS

TO FORM NEXT PARENT POOL

NO

Generation of Offspring

FIG. 2.

Genetic Algorithm In PAVENET-R

_Is

Pij = 0 represeflts

10 repair
1 represents Overlay
2
Crm oeaIinli
3 ..,.. 1. Seol coating
, ..,.. ts Patdling
5 r""
ts Crack ...ling and seal C1IlIling
6
ts track ..aIing and patdling
7 ..,......1. Seal ClIlIling and patdling
8 reprmnts track ...Iing ..." c..ling and p"ching

The parent pool of genotypes is evaluated in terms of their

respective objective function values (Le., the respective total
present worth), and ranked according to these values. The
ranked parent genotypes are used to generate new genotypes
known as offspring, based on a weighting procedure by Baker
(1985) as explained by the writers in their earlier work (Chan
et al. 1994). The offspring pool size adopted in PAVENET-R
is 60. From these offspring, 30 best genotypes with the lowest
objective-function values are selected to form the next parent
pool.
c

r""

'or i

FIG. 3.
eters

.'.2.. . . . .

and j

.'.2.........

...,'.,--------==~-,

:! .'/.

Ii
Ii!

Col

~".,.

:.!U1

.1;

CASE I

:!-

C::

II

40

lilI

50

11

eo

CASE II

1:;40'/.

'.

20 J
II

DJ

20 "

... .~,...-::---=-~ ...,.~."-....,,"...,"~II:--:':II---,J,"

Generation

Generali..

...

...,..~------==>="-...,

,.r------=~....,

~II'J.

~rJ.'.

le)

!i

.!

CASE III

...~::;:

(d)

~601
.!
't:1.Q0/.

..... 101

CASE IV

~lOl.

::'

'10

JlI

5lI

I.ll

ro

rJ

0"0

10

2tl

JlI

I.ll

so

5lI

1D

II

III

1011

Generation

Generation

FIG. 4. Convergence Characteristics of Solutions Based on

Progression of ObJective-Function Value of Best Genotype

CASE I

" "

18

II

9lJ

WEll

111

6tneration

Generation of Initial Parent Pool of Solutions

The initial pool of 30 parent genotypes is randomly selected
by means of a procedure that ensures the inclusion of only
valid genotypes. This is achieved by first identifying valid
genotypes based on strategies that correspond to corrective
repairs, which are activated by their respective warning levels.
Additional valid genotypes are next generated following the
"change table" defined in Table 4. The so-called change table
identifies the alternatives permitted for a given repair activity.

..

~6DI.

Genetic Coding Representation of Problem Param-

A more appropriate GA representation would be one that

has no redundancy or empty cells. The integer coding is one
such possibility. Fig. 3 illustrates the integer coding for the
example problem studied. Each pavement segment is represented by a five-digit code, with each digit representing the
strategy assigned for the pavement segment for each of the
five active planning years. For the present problem with 30
pavement segments, the GA representation consists of a string
of 30 sets of five-digit codes. To avoid invalid cells, each digit
is constrained to assume an integer number from 0 to 8. Since
repair activities in the planning years are corrective maintenance or rehabilitation activated by warning levels, the fivedigit code provides adequate representation for the problem.

...,.,~--------=~-,

:;:: .Of

411

SlI

iI

10

II

9lJ

111I

Generali..

i-',.
.......
1i "'1.

eJ,SIY

.~

820'.

'10

I.ll

SlI

&D

Generation

9lJ

111

10

'10

JlI

III

Generation

FIG. 5. Convergence Characteristics of Solutions Based on

Progression of Average ObJective-Function Value of: ParentPool Genotype and Offspring-Pool Genotype
JOURNAL OF TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING / MAY/JUNE 1996/249

J. Transp. Eng., 1996, 122(3): 246-253

TABLE 5.
Pavement
segment

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by GADJAH MADA UNIVERSITY on 10/18/16. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11

12
13

14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30

Scheduled Rehabilitation and Maintenance Activities for Solution to Case I of Example Problem
Year

A
D
A
C
A
A
E
I

I
A

G
G
A
A
I
A
C
C
A
H
A

G
A
A
A
C
A
A
C
0
F
A

G
A

G
B
H
A

G
A
0
B
A

G
C
G
A

G
G
A
B
C

G
A
A

G
A
A
E

B
B
A
A
H
A
A
A
A
A
H
A
A
A
E
H
C
A
A
A
H
C
A
A
H
A
A
H
E
A

G
A
C
A
H
A
C
F
A
A
H
I
A
A
A
B
C
A
A
A
H
A
A
B
A
A
A
A
A

5
A
A
A
H
E
A
A

G
H
H

G
C
E
A
H
G
A
A
E
H
A
A
A
B
A
A
H
A
H
H

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

A
A
D
A
A
A
B
A
A
A
A
A
A
0
A
A
A
A
0
A
A
A
0
A
A
0
A
A
A
A

A
D
A
A
A
A
A
D
A
A
A
A

D
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
B
A
A

A
A
A
B
B
D
A
A
A
B
B
D
B
A
B
B
0
A
A
B
A
A
A
A
A
A
B
A
B
B

A
A
B
A
A
C
A
A
B
A
A
A
A
B
A
A
A
A
B
A
F
A
B
A
0
B
A
A
A
A

A
B
A
A
A
A
A
B
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
B
A
A
A
A
A
D
C
A
A
A
A
A

B
A
A
A
A
A
D
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
C
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A

A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
C
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
0
A
C
A
A
A
A
A
A

A
A
A
A
A
A
C
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
0
A
A

A
A
A
D
D
B
A
A
A
D
D
B
D
A
D
0
H
A
A
0
A
C
A
A
A
A
D
A
0
D

A
A
D
A
A
A
A
A
D
A
A
A
A
0
A
A
A
A
0
A
B
A
0
A
B
D
A
C
A
A

A
D
A
C
C
A
A
D
A
C
C
A
C
A
C
C
A
0
A
C
A
A
A
H
A
A
C
A
C
C

D
A
C
A
A
A
H
A
C
A
A
A
A
C
A
A
A
A
C
A
A
A
C
A
A
C
A
A
A
A

A
C
A
A
A
A
A
C
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
B
C
A
A
A
H
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A

C
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
H
A
A

A
A
A
A
A
D
A
A
A
B
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A

Note: A = No action, B = overlay, C = crack sealing, 0 = premix leveling, E = patching, F = crack sealing and premix leveling, G
and patching, H = premix leveling and patching, and I = crack sealing, premix leveling, and patching.

TABLE 6.
Pavement
segment

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10

= crack sealing

Scheduled Rehabilitation and Maintenance Activities for Solution to Casen of Example Problem
Year

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

A
A
A
H
A
A
A
A
A
B
A
A
A
H
H
B
A
H
A
B
A
A
A
B
A
A
H
A
B
B

A
A
0
A
A
A
A
A
0
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
0
A
A
A
A
A
A
0
A
A
A
A

A
0
A
A
A
B
A
0
A
A
A
B
A
A
A
A
B
A
A
A
A
B
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A

0
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
B
A
A
A
B
A
A
B
A
A

A
A
A
B
A
A
D
A
A
A
A
A
B
A
B
B
A
A
A
A
A
A
B
A
A
A
B
A
A
A

B
A
A
A

A
B
A
A
A
A
C
B
A
D
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
D
A
A
A
D
A
A
A
A
D
D

B
A
A
A
C
A
A
A
A
A
C
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A

A
A
A
A
A
D
A
A
A
C
A
D
A
A
A
A
D
A
A
C
A
D
A
C
A
A
A
A
C
C

A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
D
A
A
A
0
A
A
0
A
A

A
A
A
D
A
C
B
A
A
A
A
C
D
A
D
D
C
A
A
A
A
C
D
A
A
A
0
A
A
A

A
A
D
A
H
A
A
A
D
A
H
A
A
D
A
A
A
D
D
A
C
A
A
A
C
D
A
C
A
A

A
D
A
C
A
A
A
D
A
H
A
A
C
A
C
C
A
A
A
H
A
A
C
H
A
A
C
A
H
H

D
A
C
A
A
A
A
A
C
A
A
A
A
C
A
A
A
C
C
A
A
A
A
A
A
C
A
A
A
A

A
C
A
A
A
H
A
C
A
A
A
H
A
A
A
A
H
A
A
A
A
H
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A

C
A
A
A
B
A
A
A
A
A
B
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
H
A
A
A
H
A
A
H
A
A

0
C
G
A
A
C
A
C
A
G
A
A
A
G
0
B
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
H
A
A
A
B
B
A
A
A
C
H
B
A
A
E
C
A
A
C
A
A
D
B
A
11
A
C
A
A
A
E
H
12
A
D
D
G
C
13
B
A
G
14
G
G
A
A
G
A
A
15
A
H
A
E
B
16
A
A
E
A
H
17
B
A
H
A
C
18
B
A
G
G
A
19
A
A
C
A
A
20
A
H
21
A
A
A
A
A
22
A
E
H
A
D
A
23
C
G
A
A
C
A
A
24
A
H
A
G
A
25
B
A
E
A
26
C
A
D
27
C
A
A
A
H
G
A
A
28
A
A
A
29
A
C
A
A
A
A
A
30
Note: A = No action, B = overlay, C = crack sealing, 0 = premix leveling, E = patching, F = crack sealing and premix leveling, G
and patching, H = premix leveling and patching, and I = crack sealing, premix leveling, and patching.

G
H

250/ JOURNAL OF TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING / MAY/JUNE 1996

J. Transp. Eng., 1996, 122(3): 246-253

= crack sealing

TABLE 7.
Pavement
segment

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by GADJAH MADA UNIVERSITY on 10/18/16. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11

12
13

14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30

Scheduled Rehabilitation and Maintenance Activities for Solution to Case III of Example Problem
Year

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

A
0
A
C
A
A
A
0
A
C
A
A
0
A
C
A
A
0
A
C
A
A
A
C
A
A
C
A
A
A

0
A
C
A
A
A
B
A
C
A
A
A
A
C
A
A
A
A
C
A
A
A
C
A
A
C
A
A
A
A

A
C
A
A
A
B
A
C
A
A
A
B
C
A
A
A
B
C
A
A
A
B
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A

C
A
A
A
B
A
A
A
A
A
B
A
A
A
A
B
A
A
A
A
B
A
A
A
B
A
A
B
A
A

A
A
A
B
A
A
A
A
A
B
A
A
A
A
B
A
A
A
A
B
A
A
A
B
A
A
B
A
B
B

A
A
B
A
A
A
A
A
B
A
A
A
A
B
A
A
A
A
B
A
A
A
B
A
A
B
A
A
A
A

A
B
A
A
A
A
A
B
A
A
A
A
B
A
A
A
A
B
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A

B
A
A
A
A
A
0
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A

A
A
A
A
A
0
A
A
A
A
A
0
A
A
A
A
0
A
A
A
A
0
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A

A
A
A
A
0
A
B
A
A
A
0
A
A
A
A
0
A
A
A
A
0
A
A
A
0
A
A
0
A
A

A
A
A
0
A
C
A
A
A
0
A
C
A
A
0
A
C
A
A
0
A
C
A
0
A
A
0
A
0
0

A
A
0
A
C
A
A
A
0
A
C
A
A
0
A
C
A
A
0
A
C
A
0
A
C
0
A
C
A
A

A
0
A
C
A
A
A
0
A
C
A
A
0
A
C
A
A
0
A
C
A
A
A
C
A
A
C
A
C
C

0
A
C
A
A
A
B
A
C
A
A
A
A
C
A
A
A
A
C
A
A
A
C
A
A
C
A
A
A
A

A
C
A
A
A
B
A
C
A
A
A
B
C
A
A
A
B
C
A
A
A
B
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A

C
A
A
A
B
A
A
A
A
A
E
A
A
A
A
B
A
A
A
A
B
A
A
A
B
A
A
B
A
A

A
A
A
B
A
A
A
A
A
B
A
A
A
A
B
A
A
A
A
B
A
A
A
B
A
A
B
A
B
B

A
A
B
A
A
A
A
A
B
A
A
A
A
B
A
A
A
A
B
A
A
A
B
A
A
B
A
A
A
A

A
B
A
A
A
A
A
B
A
A
A
A
B
A
A
A
A
B
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A

B
A
A
A
A
A
0
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A

Note: A = No action, B = overlay, C = crack sealing, 0 = premix leveling, E = patching, F = crack sealing and premix leveling, G
and patching, H = premix leveling and patching, and I = crack sealing, premix leveling, and patching.

TABLE 8.
Pavement
segment

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

9
10
11

12
13

14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24

25
26
27
28
29
30

= crack sealing

Scheduled Rehabilitation and Maintenance Activities for Solution to Case IV of Example Problem
Year

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

A
B
A
B
A
A
A
B
A
B
A
A
B
A
B
A
A
B
A
B
A
A
A
B
A
A
B
A
A
A

B
A
B
A
A
A
B
A
B
A
A
A
A
B
A
A
A
A
B
A
A
A
B
A
A
B
A
A
A
A

A
A
A
A
A
B
A
A
A
A
A
B
A
A
A
A
B
A
A
A
A
B
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A

A
A
A
A
B
A
A
A
A
A
B
A
A
A
A
B
A
A
A
A
B
A
A
A
B
A
A
B
A
A

A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
B
B

A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A

A
B
A
B
A
A
A
B
A
B
A
A
B
A
B
A
A
B
A
B
A
A
A
B
A
A
B
A
A
A

B
A
B
A
A
A
B
A
B
A
A
A
A
B
A
A
A
A
B
A
A
A
B
A
A
B
A
A
A
A

A
A
A
A
A
B
A
A
A
A
A
B
A
A
A
A
B
A
A
A
A
B
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A

A
A
A
A
B
A
A
A
A
A
B
A
A
A
A
B
A
A
A
A
B
A
A
A
B
A
A
B
A
A

A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
B
B

A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A

A
B
A
B
A
A
A
B
A
B
A
A
B
A
B
A
A
B
A
B
A
A
A
B
A
A
B
A
A
A

B
A
B
A
A
A
B
A
B
A
A
A
A
B
A
A
A
A
B
A
A
A
B
A
A
B
A
A
A
A

A
A
A
A
A
B
A
A
A
A
A
B
A
A
A
A
B
A
A
A
A
B
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A

A
A
A
A
B
A
A
A
A
A
B
A
A
A
A
B
A
A
A
A
B
A
A
A
B
A
A
B
A
A

A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
B
B

A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
.A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A

A
B
A
B
A
A
A
B
A
B
A
A
B
A
B
A
A
B
A
B
A
A
A
B
A
A
B
A
A
A

B
A
B
A
A
A
B
A
B
A
A
A
A
B
A
A
A
A
B
A
A
A
B
A
A
B
A
A
A
A

Note: A = No action, B = overlay, C = crack sealing, 0 = premix leveling, E = patching, F = crack sealing and premix leveling, G
and patching, H = premix leveling and patching, and I = crack sealing, premix leveling, and patching.

= crack sealing

JOURNAL OF TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING 1 MAYIJUNE 1996/251

J. Transp. Eng., 1996, 122(3): 246-253

16

r(0)- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - .
CASE I

J4

tives as given in the change table of Table 4 are adopted to

prevent the generation of invalid offspring.

12

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by GADJAH MADA UNIVERSITY on 10/18/16. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Evaluation of Solutions and Stopping Criteria

14 r : ( b : - : - ) - - - C - A S - E - n - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ,
12
10

The performance of the GA process can be judged by monitoring the progression of the following three measures: (1) The
objective-function value of the best genotype in each generation; (b) the average objective-function value of parent genotypes in each generation; and (c) the average objective-function value of offspring genotypes in each generation. Stopping
criteria can be established based on the convergence of any of
these measures. For this study, all analyses were performed up
to 100 generations to illustrate the convergence characteristics
of the three measures.

>~ 8

...

ANALYSIS OF EXAMPLE PROBLEM

:::I

...

~6

Performance of GA Solutions

Year

Legend:

r2I B, Crack S.oling

A, O",loy

Dc, Premix

L...lling

[j 0 = Pot- hal. Patching

10
(cl

CASE III

n
1

In

B
4 5

In
9 10

11

12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20

Year
12
(d)

CASE IV

10

1 2

I
5

9 10 11

12 JJ 14 15

16 17 18 19 20

Year
Legend:

A=Overlay
C=Premix L...Oing

21 B= Crack S.oling
fil 0 = Pot- hal. Patching

Yearly Distributions of Scheduled Rehabilitation and

Maintenance Activities by Genetic-Algorithm Solutions

FIG. 6.

Two genetic operators are used in the program PAVENETR. They are a crossover operator and a variant of the simple
mutation operator. Crossover arranges existing gene values in
different ways, while mutation involves changing the values
of one or more genes (Goldberg 1989). A crossover probability
of 0.8 is used in PAVENET-R. The genetic coding representation adopted in this study ensures that, as long as two parent
genotypes are valid representation of repair strategies, the
crossover operation will not create any invalid offspring. As
for the mutation operation, a mutation probability of 0.2 is
adopted with the probability of change for the alleles taken as
0.2x (Random-func), where random-func is a random function
that generates values between 0 and 1. The feasible altema-

The convergence characteristics of problem cases I, II, III,

and IV are summarized in Figs. 4 and 5. The four plots in Fig.
4 show the progression of the objective-function value of the
best genotype in each generation up to the lOOth generation.
Each data point is plotted as a percent of the best genotype of
the lOOth generation. The corresponding plots for the average
objective-function value of parent pool genotypes and the
average objective-function value of offspring pool genotypes
are shown in Fig. 5.
Using the objective-function value at the 100th generation
as reference, Figs. 4 and 5 show that convergence of solutions
to within 5% of the reference value is reached before the 75th
generation in all cases. Fig. 4 displays the characteristic
"jumps" of the convergence process, which is typical in GA
solutions. The plots in Fig. 5 are relatively smoother because
the curves are based on the average of objective-function values. The curves for offspring pool in Fig. 5 have been intentionally computed in terms of percent of the average parentpool objective-function value of the lOOth generation. The
parent-pool average objective-function values are always better than their offspring-pool values in the same generation because each parent pool represents the 30 best solutions selected
from the corresponding offspring pool. The curves for offspring pool in all the four plots display some degree of fluctuations at the top right-hand corner due to the explorative
effect of genetic operators (mutation operator in particular) for
better solutions.
Trade-Off between Maintenance and Rehabilitation

The solutions to the four cases of the example problem present interesting trade-off scenarios between rehabilitation and
maintenance activities. Tables 5, 6, 7, and 8 present detailed
solutions for cases I, II, III, and IV, respectively. These solutions provide the complete program of repair activities by year
and by pavement segment for the four cases. All solutions
satisfy the pavement performance requirements that distress
conditions and pavement serviceability are kept above their
respective warning levels throughout the 20-year analysis period.
In Fig. 6, the frequency distribution of repair activities by
year at the network level is presented for each of the four
cases. In case IV, where it is cheaper to construct overlay than
to perform any combination of the three maintenance activities, the solution contains the optimal schedule for overlay
construction and no maintenance activities are scheduled. As
the costs of maintenance become lower and lower when one
moves from case IV to case III, case II, and to case I, Fig. 6
shows that more and more maintenance activities are sched-

252/ JOURNAL OF TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING / MAY/JUNE 1996

J. Transp. Eng., 1996, 122(3): 246-253

TABLE 9. Number of Scheduled Rehabilitation and Maintenance Activities In Solutions to Example Problem

Case
(1)
I
II
III

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by GADJAH MADA UNIVERSITY on 10/18/16. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

IV

Number of
scheduled
maintenance
activities In
analysis
period
(2)

Number of
scheduled
rehabilitation
activities in
analysis
period
(3)

Number of
scheduled total
activities in
analysis
period
(4)

195
181
83
0

33
35
60
108

228
216
143
108

TABLE 10. Present Worth of Total Cost of Rehabilitation and

Maintenance for Solutions to Example Problem
Case
(1 )

Present worth of total cost over 20 years

(2)

I
II
III

22,904
23,549
30,405
30,935

IV

uled to arrive at better (i.e., lower cost) solutions. This pattern

of change is summarized in Tables 9 and 10.
Table 9 lists the respective number of maintenance and rehabilitation activities in the four cases. The number of maintenance activities increases from case IV to case I, while the
frequency of overlay construction decreases correspondingly,
reflecting the impact of the relative costs of maintenance and
rehabilitation activities. Table 10 gives the objective-function
values for the solutions to the four cases. The solution of case
IV is also a feasible solution for all the other three cases. The
results of the present worth of the four cases clearly indicate
that as the costs of maintenance activities decrease, better solutions can be obtained by performing more maintenance activities while simultaneously reducing the number of overlay
construction. In other words, the results correctly show that as
the costs of maintenance activities increase in relation to rehabilitation, it is more economic to rehabilitate more pavement
segments.
CONCLUSIONS
This paper presented the formulation of a genetic-algorithm
program PAVENET-R developed for programming pavement

maintenance and rehabilitation at the network level. The importance of selecting an efficient coding representation of
problem parameters was highlighted. An integer coding
scheme was found appropriate for the present problem. Genetic operations were programmed within the constraints of a
change table to ensure that only valid offspring are generated.
Numerical examples were presented using four cases of a
hypothetical problem, each with different relative costs of rehabilitation and maintenance activities, to demonstrate the
trade-off relationship between pavement rehabilitation and
maintenance activities. The analysis of the convergence characteristics and other details of the solutions to the four different cases of the problem suggests the GA approach is effective
in handling the difficult combinatorial problem of maintenance-rehabilitation trade-off analysis.
APPENDIX.

REFERENCES

Baker, J. E. (1985). "Adaptive selection methods for genetic algorithms."

Proc., Int. Con! on Genetic Algorithms, J. J. Grefenstette, ed., Carnegie-Mellon Univ., Pittsburgh, Pa., 101-111.
Chan, W. T., Fwa, T. E, and Tan, C. Y. (1994). "Road maintenance
planning using genetic algorithms. I: Formulation." J. Transp. Engrg.,
ASCE, 120(5),693-709.
Fwa, T. E, Sinha, K. C., and Riverson, J. D. N. (1988). "Highway routine
maintenance programming at network level." J. Transp. Engrg.,
ASCE, 114(5), 539-554.
Fwa, T. E, Chan, W. T., and Tan, C. Y. (1994a). "Optimal programming
by genetic algorithms for pavement management." Transp. Res. Rec.
No. /455, Transp. Res. Board, Washington, D.C., 31-41.
Fwa, T. E, Tan, C. Y., and Chan, W. T. (1994b). "Road maintenance
planning using genetic algorithms. I: Analysis." J. Transp. Engrg.,
ASCE, 120(5), 710-722.
Goldberg, D. E. (1989). Genetic algorithms in search. optimization and
machine learning. Addison-Wesley Publishing Co., Reading, Mass.
Gschwendt, I., Polliacek, I., Lehovac, F., and Prochadzka, M. (1987).
"Pavement performance prediction model." Proc. 2nd North Am.
Con! on Managing Pavements, Can. Ministry of Transp. and Federal
Hwy. Admin., Vol. 2, 101-112.
Hill, L. D. (1987). "Implementation of a pavement life prediction
model." Proc. 2nd North Am. Con! on Managing Pavements, Can.
Ministry of Transp. and Federal Hwy. Admin., Vol. 2, 113-122.
Highway Research Board (HRB). (1962). "The AASHO road test-report 5: pavement research." HRB Spec. Rep. 61E, Washington, D.C.
Hudson, W. R., Finn, EN. Pedigo, R. D., and Roberts, S. L. (1982).
"Relating pavement distress to serviceability and performance." Rep.
No. FHWAlRD-80/098, Federal Hwy. Admin., Washington, D.C.
Rauhut, J. B., Lytton, R. L., and Darter, M. I. (1982). "Pavement damage
functions for cost allocation." Rep. No. FHWAlRD-821126, Federal
Hwy. Admin., Washington, D.C.
Sinha, K. C., and Fwa, T. F. (1989). "On the concept of total highway
management system." Transp. Res. Rec. No. 1229, Transp. Res. Board,
Washington, D.C., 79-88.

JOURNAL OF TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING / MAY/JUNE 1996/253

J. Transp. Eng., 1996, 122(3): 246-253