1.

Introduction
1.1 General

Roads, as one of the most significant infrastructures, are the basic and back bone of socio-
economic development of a nation/country. With due consideration of rural roads on the
economic growth and rural prosperity of communities, it can be suggested that improving and
expanding rural roads directly increases economic opportunities. In addition, good investment in
rural roads yield substantial socioeconomic benefits in terms of improved regional growth, as
they allow for the movement of agricultural and non-agricultural goods and services between
producers and markets in and out the communities. Having recognized this overall development
and future aspirations, pavements either paved or unpaved (gravel) are constructed intensively so
as to create and increase accessibility. Gravel surfaced roads, which provide the lowest level of
service, are referred to as low-type surfaces because they usually are expected to serve for low
traffic volumes. Due to the fact that, the thickness of the gravel layers generally depends on
traffic volume, quality of gravel available, and the existing soil or subgrade, they are deteriorated
faster than paved pavements. Thus, the basic principle in the thickness design of gravel roads is
to provide an adequate thickness based on traffic volume and the strength of the subgrade such
that the stress reaching the subgrade does not exceed the in-place strength of the subgrade,
provided that an appropriate maintenance intervention and periodic inspection is a mitigated
recommendation. In fact, nature and traffic, as they dramatically changes with time, are the main
pavement deterioration causes and the ways to fix them are different. This would to mean that if
two pavements are constructed at the same time nature and traffic changes age them differently.
Specifically, weather, traffic loading, original construction quality, materials, and interim
maintenance tasks directly affect pavement deterioration rates. Considering this crucial issue,
Prioritization and improvement of rural infrastructures, in this particular case roads, is important
in developing countries, like Ethiopia, in order to uplift the socioeconomic conditions
experienced by communities. Indeed, the better approach of improving gravel road surfaces to
facilitate their services is paving with asphalt. However, due to economic constraints, gravel
roads can timely be maintained to prolong the road life cycle so that they can provide for longer
periods, with either grading and shaping or adding new gravel materials followed by proper
compaction and crown formation. Unless and other wise, timely and appropriate maintenances
are not attained, public facilities fail to provide better comfort, speed, and safety; minimum road
users and vehicle operating costs. This finally would result in risks of having major and
expensive maintenance and rehabilitation costs. In addition, proper maintenance of roads
circumvents the need of high capital investment for new road constructions. In view of this fact,
a number of comprehensive measures have been recommended by the Ethiopian Government, as
part of its development program in the road sector, to improve the existing roads condition
through intervention on the huge backlog of road maintenance.

According to several research findings, if defects are neglected, an entire road section may fail
completely and requires full reconstruction with a cost of three times or more than the cost of
maintenance, (World Bank Report, 2005)

The Office of Road fund, (ORF), which has been established by proclamation No. 66/1997 with
a motto of “Without Its Maintenance, a Road Vanishes” and with main objectives of financing
maintenance of roads and road safety measures has strengthened its endeavor towards meeting
its goal by conducting road inventory, condition survey and researches for further improvement
of its assets mainly of roads and road water conveying structures including bridge structures and
above all maximizing of safety.

Accordingly, the ORF has appointed the Bahir Dar University; Faculty of Civil and Water
Resources Engineering for Inventory, Condition survey and Technical & financial Audit of road
maintenance activities undertaken by Amhara Road Authority, considering all maintenance
offices represented by four Districts, namely; Gojjam, Gondar, Wollo and North Shoa.

1.2 Objectives

The main objective of the study is to undertake detailed road inventory and condition survey so
as to rate the current condition of roads for maintenance prioritization purpose. The detailed
condition assessment has been conducted for roads administered by Amhara Rural Roads
Authority. The purpose of the task is to include the following specific objectives:

 Establish an inventory for all type of roads network in Amhara National Regional State
using GIS
  Assigning numbers [naming] to the newly invented roads and integrate the new and the
existing Road Inventory data to have database system
 To assess the current conditions of roads for maintenance prioritization
 To recommend appropriate maintenance approaches to allocate resources/budgets

1.3 Scope of the Study

Detailed road inventory and condition survey is intended to record, for any damage in terms of
type, severity level and extents of the road section being distressed. Furthermore, the
methodology to be implemented to assess detail condition needs intensive time and procedural
approaches which should be reinforced with equipments and analysis techniques. The scope of
the inventory was carried out to all roads found in Amhara National Regional State and
Administered by Amhara Road and Transport Bureau. Yet the inventory of roads is to all roads,
the visual condition assessment survey and detailed condition survey is limited to roads which
are administered by Amhara Rural Roads Authority. The Detail Condition of ERA, MRA and
URRAP roads are not within the scope the task.

2. Approach and Methodology

It is necessary to have a cost-effective pavement treatment selection process that enables optimal
use of the limited available funding resource to address all the road asset management needs.
Besides, following an appropriate and current state of the art is a critical task so as to have proper
techniques of data collection, and condition rating, which can be used for database establishment
with GIS. For the sake of proper data collection and corresponding data analysis, a systematic
technique, specifically desk study and fixing the severity levels and condition extents as per
practical standards has been followed. Having finalized these parameters followed by desk
study, data collection formats and inspection checklists were prepared and all the crew members
have been discoursing to have a common understanding and consensus. The inspection
checklists and data collection formats have been prepared mainly referencing of ERA-PMS
formats and guide, and by supplementing and harmonizing it with the approaches, methodology,
concepts and practices used in other reference guides such as the South Dakota Manual and other
reference guides as appropriate. Having completed format and checklists preparation, trainings to
data collectors was given as per their related disciplines. The detail road condition assessment
and survey was made using inspection checklists and data collection formats, and taking sample
photo of each road segment that can help exhibiting the condition of the road. During the detail
road inventory and condition survey, the survey team measured, collected and recorded all
required information as per the formats and checklists. Besides the training given, the survey
teams relied on their experience, engineering judgment and the measured facts in identifying of
defects. Estimation of severity and extent of the defects was made on site based on the
measurements and visually inspected which then are recorded. These data collected from the
field has been processed, analyzed and interpreted from highway/road & transport engineering,
Geotechnical engineering and hydrology-hydraulic engineering perspective by the corresponding
assigned professionals from each of the disciplines respectively. Finally, the cumulative findings
which ultimately determine the current overall status of the roads, have been discussed from each
discipline point of view and each of the parameters having significant effects were identified.

3. Description of the Project Tasks

3.1 Road Inventory

A road inventory, which is to create a book store or computer disc containing information, is the
way of dealing with situations about the road to answer legal questions relating to roads and its
corresponding elements. It can also be kept for physical maintenance purposes that is to decide
relatively, which roads need, what type of repair having a detailed road network database. The
goal of a road inventory is to reduce problems and arguments associated with roads. In other
words, it should make it easier for the selectmen or road administrator to determine the status of
a road and respond to questions from the public. By collecting and compiling all road-related
information into a single volume/disc, quick and accurate answers can be provided to what may
now be thorny and time-consuming questions. As long as the road information rely on the road
administrator's memory for guidance, all the information are to be lost when the road
commissioner goes on. Hence, properly storing, managing and retrieving are critical to all road
agencies The main information contained in the inventory are type, length, width of road, width
of shoulders, width of medians, width of walkways, starting and end stations of the road, type
and dimension of structures, location of intersections and traffic signs etc. Thus, generally
speaking having such information in writing form can be stated below for future use.

 As a source of information for assisting and educating the public

 To help municipal officials to plan for the future
 To provide information relating to the legal liability (i.e. for potholes, and other defects,
accidents and so on) and legal rights.

3.2 Road Condition Survey/Detail Road Condition assessment

Condition surveys are essentially required to assess a pavement physical distress and form a
basis of a diagnosis regarding the maintenance or rehabilitation needs. The survey is intended to
record, for any damage in terms of type, severity level and extents of the road section being
distressed. It is evident that Gravel roads fall apart in a much less predictable manner than paved
roads because rain washes away the surface of the roads and traffic loading and repetition
deteriorates heavily. The main problems with gravel roads include wash boarding/corrugation,
potholes, stoniness and/or lack of gravels, loose aggregates/raveling, improper cross section and
rutting.

3.2.1 Criteria Setting for Road Condition Survey/Assessment

The parts of a gravel road that are considered when rating conditions include the crown,
drainage/ditches, gravel layer, deformations, and defects. These the aforementioned road
distresses need to be rated based on their type, severity and extent to rank the current condition
of the road following the collected data for any road section. As the roads are ranked using
condition ratings, it becomes easier to prioritize which road needs what type of
maintenance/intervention and how much budget is required for the corresponding intervention.
Thus, an optimal improvement option which is considered to be effective for improving the
condition of the existing gravel roads is to follow and implement the strategy of providing
periodic, recurrent, spot improvement maintenance works on a sustainable basis. Using the
pavement surface evaluation and rating (PASER) scaling which basically relies on rideability,
the surface condition collected data can be scaled into five extent condition (i.e. 1 to 5) where 1
represents a very good road or newly construction roads and 5 represents a very poor road which
is impassable by any vehicle. The extents designated above indicates the section of road length
being distressed/or non-distressed and this can be manifested by the corresponding rating words.
For example, if the extent condition corresponds to very good (81-100%), it does mean that a
maximum of 20% of the length is distressed or at least 80% of the length is not distressed as per
the total length of the road section being considered at one time interval (i.e. the interval may be
fixed as constant say at 500m in this case.) The remaining condition extents can be interpreted in
the same fashion. Similarly, the severity levels, expressing the depths/widths of distresses can be
set as low, medium and high. The following severity level and condition extent criteria with
respect to distress types were used to determine the rating condition, for this particular case
(South Dakota Report, 2017/18).

Table 1 Gravel Roadway Rating and Evaluation Extent Scheme

Condition Surface Typical Repair Distressed
Extent rating Length (%)
(%)
Very 81-100 "Little or no maintenance needed. Routine ≤ 20%
Good blading."
Good 61-80 "Routine blading. Cut out washboard areas and 20-40%
relay the gravel when moisture is present."

Fair 41-60 "Regrading of the surface is necessary to eliminate 40-60%

wash boarding and secondary ditch. The regrading
should be done when moisture is present. Some
areas may need additional gravel. Some ditch
improvement and culvert cleaning may be
necessary."

Poor 21-40 "Reshaping of the roadway surface and shoulders is 60-80%

necessary, along with the placement of additional
aggregate. Major ditch reconstruction and culvert
maintenance are also required."
Very Poor 0-20 "The entire roadway cross section must be ≥ 80%
reshaped, and a new gravel layer must be
constructed. Ditches must be reestablished, and
new culverts are typically needed."

Table 2 Gravel Roadway Rating Evaluation, Severity Scheme

Distress type Severity Level
Low medium High
Corrugation Ridges < 2.5cm Ridges 2.5 to 7.5 cm Ridges > 7.5 cm
depth depth depth
 Loose Loose < 5cm thick Loose 5cm to 10cm thick Loose > 10cm thick
Aggregate
Potholes < 5cm depth 5 to 10 cm depth > 10cm depth
Rutting < 2.5cm depth 2.5 to 7.5cm depth > 7.5 cm depth
Improper Cross Level Surface Bowl-shaped Surface Severe Surfaces
Section (Camber Depressions
Deformation)
The surface conditions which has been rated considering the severity level and extents can be
further combined so as to determine the overall damage rates with the following multi-criteria
analysis. This is attained through cross multiplication of the severity levels with condition
extents provided that the severity levels and condition extents are weighted differently as given
in parenthesis, that is, 1, 2 and 3 corresponds to low, medium and high severity levels
respectively and so does condition extents as given in brackets to have weighted average
techniques. From this multi-criteria analysis the corresponding damage percentages can be
obtained as per the combined effect. This would to mean that the one having high severity level
and very poor extent condition takes the highest percentage specifically, 100 percent and
indicates that the roads are under worst scenario which requires rehabilitation/full reconstruction.
The other severity level condition extent combination matrices, that shows the overall damage
level, can be proportioned with respect to this highest percentage as given below in table 4.

Table 3 Multi Criteria Analysi

Extent of the Condition

Severity

Very Poor
Very good (1) Good (2) Fair (3) Poor (4)
(5)
Low (1) 1 2 3 4 5
Medium
2 4 6 8 10
(2)
High (3) 3 6 9 12 15

Table 4 Percent of the severity and extent combined damage level

Seve

Extent of the Condition

rity
 Very good Very Poor
Good (2) Fair (3) Poor (4)
(1) (5)
Low (1) 6.7% 13.3% 20.0% 26.7% 33.3%
Medium
13.3% 26.7% 40.0% 53.3% 66.7%
(2)
High (3) 20.0% 40.0% 60.0% 80.0% 100.0%

4. Data Collection and Analysis

The road pavement distress types and density identification, pavement condition rating and
treatment type inspection/identification was carried out onsite and recorded on the format that
was prepared for the detailed inventory and condition survey tasks. The detail inventory and
condition survey was done by sub-dividing the road length into 5km segments assuming the
section relatively to have uniform road features and performance condition and identifying
defects with severity level and possible treatment type inspection on each 500m interval of the
road stretch. Each sub segment condition is further illustrated by sample photographs for more
clarification. Thus, the inventory and condition data have been collected as given in the format
below which represents 5km length of the road section (for Adet-Birakat road) and the other data
could be found in the appendix since it is cumbersome to put the whole section of the road at this
5km interval all in all.
 Road Inventory and Condition Survey Data Collection Form
[Road and Transport Perspective]
D ate of Survey 07/08/2011 E.C.
Existence of Existence of
Year of
Link N ame (Origin-Destination) Zone Woreda Road Class AADT (PCU) Safety Guards Traffic Sign
Construction
(Yes/ N o) and Lighting
Adet - Brakat West Gojjam Yilmana Densa no no
Carrigeway Width (m) Shoulder Width Median Width (m) Terrain type N o. of Sharp Curves N o.of Steep Grades Last Mainte. Type, Year
9 flat 0 0

E 333637 1333138.31 333458.201 332375.792 332133.921 331908.31 331130.51 330632.551 330142.621 329680.601 329227
Coordinates N 1244534 1244057.63 124461.111 1244213.681 1244373.41 1244393.341 1244299.31 1244370.77 1244291.72 1244191.8 1244025
Z 2258.53 2218.57 2210.581 2201.23 2200.79 2212.38 2224.77 2263.5 2261.6 2279.71 2320.57
S 0+000 to 0+500 to 1+ 000 to 1+ 500 to 2+ 000 to 2+ 500 to 3+ 000 to 3+ 500 to 4+ 000 to 4+ 500 to
e
v
0+500 1+ 000 1+ 500 2+ 000 2+ 500 3+ 000 3+ 500 4+ 000 4+ 500 5+ 000
Road conditions e
r Condition Extent
i
t y VG G F P VP VG G F P VP VG G F P VP VG G F P VP VG G F P VP VG G F P VP VG G F P VP VG G F P VP VG G F P VP VG G F P VP
L 1 1
Crown [Camber
M 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Deformation]
H
L 1 1 1
Shoulder Damage
M 1 1 1 1 1 1
/ Deformation
H 1
L 1 1 1 1
Raveling [Loss of
M 1 1 1 1 1 1
Aggregates]
H
L 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Potholes M 1
H
L 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Rutting M 1 1
H 1
L 1 1 1 1 1
Corrugation M 1 1 1 1 1
H

General Remarks
Surveyed By:____________________________________________ Checked By:___________________________________________
Name Signature Name Signature
 4.1 Road Inventory and Condition Data for Roads

Adet-Birakat Road Inventory and Condition Data

Road inventory Data (Adet-Birakat Road)

Existence
Media No. of No.of Existence
Star Cw+Sh of Traffic Surv Tea
Link Name Coordinates of Start Coordinates of End Wored End n Terrai Sharp Steep of Safety
Zone t Width Sign and ey m
(O-D) (E,N,) (E,N,) a (km) Width n Type Curve Grade Guards
(km) (m) Lighting Date No.
(m) s s (Yes/No)
(Yes/No)

Adet - 333636.5 1244534. Yilman 07/08/

329226.59 1244025.2 W/G 0 5 9 0 flat 0 0 no no 2
Birakat 7 2 a Densa 2011

Adet - 329226.5 1244025. Yilman 07/08/

325426.34 124591.75 W/G 5 10 9 0 flat 0 0 no no 2
Birakat 7 7 a Densa 2011

Adet - 325426.3 1245991. Yilman 07/08/

322654.9 1249781.2 W/G 10 15 9 0 flat 0 0 no no 2
Birakat 4 7 a Densa 2011

Adet - 322654.9 1249781. Yilman 07/08/

318328.51 1252074.9 W/G 15 20 9 0 flat 1 0 no no 2
Birakat 1 2 a Densa 2011

Adet - 318385.1 1252074. Yilman 07/08/

313767.03 1252521.6 W/G 20 25 9 0 flat 0 0 no no 2
Birakat 1 9 a Densa 2011

Note: Each row represents an inventory data of 5km road section length for all cases.
 Road Condition Data [From Road and Transport perspective]

Shoulde Shoulde Raveling Raveling

Camber
Camber r r [Loss of [Loss of Ruttin
Deform Potholes Potholes Rutting Corrugati Corrugation General remarks on
Deformatio Deforma Deforma Aggrega Aggrega g
ation Extent Severity Severity on Extent Severity the road section
n Extent tion tion tes] tes] Extent
Severity
Extent Severity Extent Severity

Fair Medium Fair Medium Fair Medium Good Low Fair Low Fair Medium 0

Poor Medium Poor Medium Fair Medium Fair Low Poor Medium Poor Medium 0

Fair Low Fair Medium Fair Medium Good Low Good Low Fair Medium 0

Fair Low Fair Medium Poor Medium Good Low Fair Low Fair Medium 0

Fair Low Fair Low Poor Medium Good Low Fair Low Fair Medium 0

Photos (To Be Inserted)

 Road Condition Data [From Geotechnical perspective]

Surface Thickne Longitu

Surface Material Material Transve Transve Longitud
Embankm Material Dustin Subgrade ss of dinal
Surfac Material s s Dustiness rse slope rse slope inal slope General
ent Height (Quality ess Soil Surface slope
e Type (Quality Stoniness Stoniness Severity Stability Stability stability remarks
(cm) ) Extent Extension material stability
) Extent Extent Severity Extent Severity Extent
Severity (cm) Severity

rocky
and 10 Fair High Fair High Poor High clay 24 Fair Medium Fair Medium 0
gravel
Very Very
gravel 17 Poor High Fair Medium Poor High clay 17 High High 0
Poor Poor

gravel 29 Fair Medium Good Medium Fair Medium clay 29 Poor High Fair Medium 0

gravel 28.5 Fair Medium Fair Medium Fair Medium 0 29 Fair Medium Fair Medium 0

gravel 19.5 Poor Medium Poor High Poor Medium 0 20 Fair Medium Fair Medium 0

Photos (To Be Inserted)

 Road Condition Data [From Hydrology/ Hydrualic perspective]
Longitudinal Longitudinal Transvers Transvers
Erosion of Erosion of Erosion of Erosion of Damage of
Width of Width of Scour on Left Scour on Left Silt on Left Silt on Left Erosion Erosion Erosion Erosion Scour on Right Scour on Right Silt on Right Silt on Right Vegetation in Vegetation in
Shoulder Shoulder Shoulder Shoulder Debris in structures General
ditch (m) ditch (m) side drain side drain side drain side drain [Gully] on [Gully] on [Gully] on [Gully] on side drain side drain side drain side drain the Road side the Road side
Left side Left side Right side Right side structures by effect of remarks
Left Right Extent Severity Extent Severity Carriageway Carriageway Carriageway Carriageway Extent Severity Extent Severity Extent Severity
Extent Severity Extent Severity water
Extent Severity Extent Severity

0.4 0.4 Good Medium Fair Medium Good Low Fair Low Good Low Good Low Fair Medium Good Low Low Low Poor Medium 0

0.4 0.4 Good Low Poor Medium Poor Medium Fair Medium Fair Low Fair Low Poor Medium Good Low Low Low Fair Low 0

0 0 Good Low Fair Medium Fair Low Fair Low Good Low Good Low Fair Medium Good Low Low Low Fair Low 0

0 0 Good Low Fair Medium Fair Medium Good Low Good Low Fair Low Fair Medium Fair Low Low Low Very Good Low 0

0 0 Good Low Poor Medium Fair Medium Good Low Fair Low Fair Low Poor Medium Good Low Low Low Poor Medium 0
Photos (To Be
Inserted)
4.2 Result and Discussion
Based on the analysis results which has been obtained, discussing of each parameters damaging effect from the road and transport,
geotechnical and hydrology-hydraulic engineering perspectives were discoursed. As aforementioned in the format, the parameters
considered from the road and transport point of view includes; camber deformation/improper cross section, shoulder deformation,
loose of aggregates, potholes, rutting and corrugation. Similarly, from the Geotechnical viewpoint, surface materials quality, stoniness
and dustiness as well as transverse and longitudinal slope stabilities along with embankment heights and drainage channels were
considered. In case of hydrology-hydraulic perspective, Side drains scouring, siltation, shoulder erosion, longitudinal and transverse
erosion gullies, water damage on structures, debris in structures and vegetation along the road sides were considered thoroughly. In
fact, road water conveying structures and bridge structures adequacy, for proper serviceability and safety issues, has been invented and
CF
inspected duly by considering Running Surface (Material Damage, crack formation, Expansion joints /Settlement ),
Guardrails/Barriers (Material Damage, accidental damage, connection & alignment), Water ways (Clogs and Silting, Guide bank
CF
damage, Deck drainage blockage), Superstructure (Girder Beam, Soffit, Diaphragm) Substructure (Abutment /Head wall , Wing
wall, Scour, Piers) from structural engineering point of view. This structures inventory and visual condition survey is presented in a
separate volume/document with its analysis and all corresponding appendices. The superscript “ CF” represents culvert and ford
structures, in this case.

Road Information Data Road Condition Rate (Damage Level) [From Road and Transportation perspective],

Raveling Raveling
Shoulde
Camber Shoulder [Loose [Loose
Link Sta Camber r Ruttin Rutting Corrug Corrug
End Deform Deformat of of Potholes Potholes
Name rt   Deformatio Deforma g Severit ation ation
(km) ation ion Aggrega Aggrega Extent Severity
(O-D) (km) n Extent tion Extent y Extent Severity
Severity Severity tes] tes]
Extent
Extent Severity

Average
Extent
2.5 1.8 2.6 1.8 2.8 1.6 2.3 1.1 3.0 1.4 2.7 1.5
/Severity
level
Rate of
0 5
the road
conditio
30.0% 31.2% 29.9% 16.9% 28.0% 27.0%
n
(damage
Adet - Birakat

level)
Average
Extent
3.6 1.8 3.8 2.0 3.3 2.0 2.7 1.1 4.0 2.2 3.9 2.1
/Severity
level
Rate of
5 10
the road
conditio
43.2% 50.7% 44.0% 19.8% 58.7% 54.6%
n
(damage
level)
10 15 Average 3 1 3 2 3 2 2 1 2 1 3 2
 Extent
/Severity
level
Rate of
the road
conditio
25% 30% 31% 13% 18% 27%
n
(damage
level)
Average
Extent
3 1 3 2 4 2 2 1 3 1 3 2
/Severity
level
Rate of
15 20
the road
conditio
18% 36% 63% 13% 25% 30%
n
(damage
level)
Average
Extent
3 1 3 1 4 2 2 1 3 1 3 2
/Severity
level
Rate of
20 25
the road
conditio
21% 25% 44% 15% 27% 35%
n
(damage
level)
 70.0%

60.0%

50.0%
Damage Level (%)

40.0% Camber Deformation

Shoulder Deformation
30.0% Raveling
20.0% Potholes
Rutting
10.0% Corrugation
0.0%
1 2 3 4 5
Road Section (Km)

From the analysis result obtained as per the road and transport point of view, it can be observed
and concluded that the first 5km is relatively damaged due to all factors. But the damaging effect
of potholing takes the least percentage (16.9%) whereas shoulder damage accounts the highest
(31.2%). The second section, from 5 to 10km is highly damaged by shoulder damage,
corrugation and rutting whereas potholing accounts the least (19.8%) from amongst. However,
relatively this section is susceptible by rutting which shares (58.7%) of the damage level. The
segment from 10 to 15km is significantly affected by shoulder deformation, raveling and
corrugations whereby potholing has still the lowest damaging effect which is only (13%). The
next section of the road from 15 to 20km is also greatly damaged by loose of aggregates which
accounts (63%) whereas this section is less affected by potholes with (13%). The last portion
that covers 20 to 25km is distressed mainly by raveling (44%) and corrugation (35%) but less
effected by potholes (15%).

Conclusion: Generally, this road is significantly damaged by corrugation, shoulder deformation,

and raveling/loose of aggregates from the starting to end sections relative to others. Rutting and
camber deformation damaging effects are next to the above problems. Amongst of all, the effect
of potholing is less at any section of the road length. All the five sections can be seen by using
bar charts to realize which parameter does possess relatively a significant damage level.
 100%
90%
80%
70%
Damge level

60% Camber Deformation

50% Shoulder Deformation
40% Raveling
Potholes
30%
Rutting
20% Corrugation
10%
0%
0-5 5 - 10 10 - 12.5

Length [Km]

Figure 1 Belbala - Yimranekirstos road

From Figure 1, it can be noticed that the road has a problem of loose of aggregate (raveling)
comparing to other parameters. The first 5km is relatively and highly damaged by raveling which
accounts 31.0%. Next to this, potholes, corrugations and rutting damages are observed on this
section of the road with damage level of 15.3%, 16.8% and 18.3% in the order of precedence.
But camber and shoulder deformation has the least damage level percentage (13.3%). The
second section, from 5 to 10km is also highly damaged by raveling (38.4%). In addition, rutting
is the second damages which observed on this section of the road (21.7%) whereas corrugation,
potholes, camber and shoulder damages has nearly the same damage levels. The last section that
covers 10 to 12.5km is distressed mainly by raveling (27.2%) and corrugation (28%) but less
effected by camber and shoulder deformation (19.2%).

Conclusion: Generally, relative to others parameters this road is significantly damaged by

raveling/loose of aggregates from the starting to end sections. Rutting, corrugation and pothole
damaging effects are next to the above problems. Amongst of all, the effect of camber and
shoulder deformation is less at any section of the road length. All the three sections of the road
can be seen by using bar charts to realize which parameter does possess relatively a significant
damage level (Figure 1).
 100%
90%
80%
70%
Damge level

60% Camber Deformation

50% Shoulder Deformation
40% Raveling
Potholes
30%
Rutting
20% Corrugation
10%
0%
0-5 5 - 10 10 - 11.9

Length [Km]

Figure 2 Chet - Gerssa road

As shown from Figure 2, for the first 5km the damaging effect of pothole has highest percentage
comparing to the other parameters (34.5%). In addition to this rutting (29.9%) and raveling/loose
of aggregate (27.2%) are the second and third highest damages observed on this section of the
road respectively. From all parameters camber deformation has the lowest damage (13.3%). The
second section of the road which cover from 5 to 10km is also highly damaged by raveling
(29.9%). In addition to this potholes (22.7%) and rutting (19.1%) are the next damages which
observed on this section of the road whereas corrugation, camber and shoulder damages has
nearly the same damage levels. The last section that covers 10 to 11.9km is distressed mainly by
potholes (20.8%) and rutting (15.0%) but less effected by raveling, corrugation, camber and
shoulder deformation (7.5%).

Conclusion: Generally, relative to others parameters this road is significantly damaged by

potholes, rutting and raveling/loose of aggregates from the starting to end sections. Corrugation,
camber and shoulder deformation are next to the above problems. Amongst of all, the effect of
camber and shoulder deformation is less at any section of the road length. To realize which
parameter does possess relatively a significant damage level, all the three sections of the road
were presented by using bar charts (Figure 2).

100%
90%
80%
70%
Damge level

60% Camber Deformation

50% Shoulder Deformation
40% Raveling
Potholes
30%
Rutting
20% Corrugation
10%
0%
0-5 5 - 10 10 - 15 15 - 20 20 - 25 25 - 28.3

Length [Km]

Figure 3 Dilb - Kulmesk road

As shown from Figure 3, for the first 5km the damaging effect of pothole has highest percentage
comparing to the other parameters (9.3%). On the other hand, the other parameters like raveling,
rutting, corrugation, camber and shoulder deformations has similar damaging level (6.7%) on
this section of the road.

On the second section of the road (5-10 km), all parameters have nearly the same damage level.
But from all parameters relatively corrugation has the highest damage level (13.3%), raveling
and rutting each has a damaging level of 12.7% and the rest parameters have damage level of
12%.

The third section of the road which cover from 10-15 km primarily damages by raveling/loose of
aggregate (18.7%). Potholes (11.7%), corrugations (11.3%) Camber & shoulder deformations
(10.7%) are the second damages and from all relatively rutting damage (10%) is the lowest
damaging effect observed on this section of the road.
The road segment from 15-20 km highly damages through raveling (32.0%) problems. Rutting
(18.3%) and corrugation (17.6%) are the second and third damage level respectively. Potholes
and camber deformation have the same magnitude of damage (14.0%) whereas shoulder
deformation has the least damage (13.3%) comparing to the other parameters.

From 20-25 km section of the road, raveling/loose of aggregate problem observed to the highest
degree of damaging effects (58.7%). Potholes are also the second-high damages (26.0%) shown
on this section of the road. The road also significantly affected by rutting (20.8%), corrugation
(18.3%) and camber deformations (17.3%). But shoulder deformation (13.3%) has the lowest
degree of damages.

The last section of the road covers from 25 to 28.3km, extremely distressed by raveling (80.0%).
Rutting (20.7%) and potholes (16.3%) are also the next parameters which distressed this section
of the road. Whereas rutting, camber and shoulder deformations (13.3%) has the same magnitude
of damages and this section is relatively less affected with such problems.

Conclusion: Generally, relative to others parameters this road is significantly damaged by

raveling/loose of aggregates from 10 up to 28.3km. Corrugation, potholes and rutting and
sometimes camber deformations are next to the above problems. Amongst of all, the effect of
shoulder deformation is less at any section of the road length. Damaging effects are increased
while increasing the length of the road. To realize which parameter does possess relatively a
significant damage level, all the six sections of the road were presented by using bar charts
(Figure 3).
 100%
90%
80%
70%
Damge level

60% Camber Deformation

50% Shoulder Deformation
40% Raveling
Potholes
30%
Rutting
20% Corrugation
10%
0%
0-5 5 - 10

Length [Km]

Figure 4 Densa - Kulmesk (muja) road

As shown on Figure 4 the damaging effect of raveling/loose of aggregate for the first 5km has
highest percent comparing to the other parameters (43.4%). In addition to this corrugation
(16.0%) and potholes (14.7%) are the next highest damages observed on this section of the road.
From all parameters rutting, camber and shoulder deformations have the lowest damage (14.0%).
In this section of the road, except the effect of raveling/loose of aggregate all the other
parameters have nearly the same degree of damages.

The last section of the road which cover from 5 to 10km is also highly damaged by
raveling/loose of aggregate (26.7%). Camber deformations (14.4%) are the next damages which
observed on this section of the road whereas rutting, potholes, corrugation, and shoulder
damages have the same damage levels.

Conclusion: Generally, relative to others parameters this road is significantly damaged by

raveling/loose of aggregates from the starting to end sections. Corrugation and camber
deformation are next to the above problems. Amongst of all, the effect of potholes, rutting and
shoulder deformation is less at any section of the road length. To realize which parameter does
possess relatively a significant damage level, all the two sections of the road were presented by
using bar charts (Figure 4).
 100%
90%
80%
70%
Damge level

60% Camber Deformation

50% Shoulder Deformation
40% Raveling
Potholes
30%
Rutting
20% Corrugation
10%
0%
0-5 5 - 10 10 - 15 15 - 20 20 - 25

Length [Km]

Figure 5 Genji - Ayina road

As presents on Figure 5, the first 5km road section has the highest damages through
raveling/loose of aggregate comparing to the other parameters (20.8%). On the other hand, some
other parameters have similar damaging level like corrugation & rutting (14.0%) and potholes,
camber & shoulder deformations (13.3%) under this section of the road.

From 5-10 km section of the road, except raveling all parameters have the same damage level
(8.7%). Raveling/loose of aggregate (11.2 %) is the highest damaging effect on the section of the
road. But relative to the other section of the road this section has the lowest rutting, potholes,
corrugation, camber and shoulder deformations.

The third section of the road which cover from 10-15 km primarily damages by raveling/loose of
aggregate (25.2%). Corrugations (18.2%), Potholes & rutting (14.7%), Camber deformations
(14.0%) are the additional damages and from all relatively shoulder deformations (12.0%) is the
lowest damaging effect observed on this section of the road.

The road segment from 15-20 km highly damages through raveling (18.0%) problems. Rutting
(14.7%) and corrugation (14.0%) are the second and third damage level respectively. Potholes
and shoulder deformation have the same magnitude of damage (12.0%) whereas camber
deformation has the least damage (10.2%) comparing to the other parameters.
The last section of the road covers from 20-25 km, extremely damaged by raveling/loose of
aggregate with the highest degree of damaging effects (54.4%). Corrugations are also the second
damages (14.7%) shown on this section of the road. The road also affected by shoulder
deformation (12.7%). But potholes, rutting and camber deformation (12.0%) covers the lowest
degree of damages.

Conclusion: Generally, relative to others parameters this road is significantly damaged by

raveling/loose of aggregates from starting to the end section. Corrugation and rutting are
experienced next to the above problem. Amongst of all, the effect of shoulder deformation is less
at any section of the road length. The second section which covers from 5 – 10km shows the
lowest damage relative to the other sections of the road. To realize which parameter does possess
relatively a significant damage level, all the five sections of the road were presented by using bar
charts (Figure 5).
 100%
90%
80%
70%
Damge level

60% Camber Deformation

50% Shoulder Deformation
40% Raveling
Potholes
30%
Rutting
20% Corrugation
10%
0%
0-5 5 - 10

Length [Km]

Figure 6 Hormat – Aware road

As shown in Figure 6 the damaging effect of raveling/loose of aggregate for the first 5km has
relatively the highest percent damages comparing to the other parameters (16.0%). In addition,
rutting, potholes, corrugation, camber and shoulder deformation have the same and the lowest
damaging effect (13.3%).

The second/last section of the road which cover from 5 to 10km is also relatively damaged by
raveling/loose of aggregate and potholes (14.0%). All the other parameters have the same
magnitude of damages (13.3%).

Conclusion: Generally, relative to others parameters this road is slightly damaged by

raveling/loose of aggregates from 5 – 10km. All the other parameters have the same damaging
effects in any section of length of the road. Amongst of all, the effect of potholes, rutting,
corrugations, camber and shoulder deformations are less at any section of the road length. To
realize which parameter does possess relatively a significant damage level, all the two sections of
the road were presented by using bar charts (Figure 6).
 100%
90%
80%
70%
Damge level

60% Camber Deformation

50% Shoulder Deformation
40% Raveling
Potholes
30%
Rutting
20% Corrugation
10%
0%
0-5 5 - 10 10 - 15 15 - 20 20 - 25 25 - 30 30 - 35 35 - 35.9

Length [Km]

Figure 7 Kobo – Zobil road

As shown on Figure 7, for the first 5km the damaging effect of raveling/loose of aggregate has
highest percent comparing to the other parameters (61.3%). The next highest damage is potholes
(39.6%). Corrugations (18.0%), rutting (16.1%) and shoulder deformation (13.3%) in the order
of damaging level are understood in this section of the road. On the other hand, camber
deformation has lowest damaging effect (12.7%).

On the second section of the road (5-10 km), from all parameters relatively raveling/loose of
aggregate has also the highest damage level (44.2%). Potholes (21.3%), corrugation (16.7%) and
camber deformation (14.7%) are the next damaging effect shown on the section. Rutting and
shoulder deformations have the same and least damaging level (13.3%).

The third section of the road which cover from 10 - 15km primarily damages by raveling/loose
of aggregate (36.3%). Rutting (18.4%) and potholes (16.0%) are the next damages observed on
this section of the road. From all corrugations, camber and shoulder deformations have the same
damage levels (14.7%) and are the lowest damaging effect shown on this section.

The road segment from 15-20 km extremely damages through raveling/loose of aggregate
(58.7%) problems. Potholes (21.6%) and rutting (20.8%) are the next damages observed on this
section of the road. The other parameters like corrugations, camber and shoulder deformations
have the same magnitude of damage (17.3%) and which are the least damage comparing to the
other parameters.

From 20-25 km section of the road, here also raveling/loose of aggregate problem observed to
the highest degree of damaging effects (53.3%). Corrugation are the second-high damage
(20.0%) shown on this section of the road. The road also affected by rutting and potholes
(16.7%) which have the same damaging level. But shoulder deformation (13.3%) has the least
damages next to camber deformation (14.0%).

From the total length of the road, road section which cover from 30-35 km extremely damages in
both raveling/loose of aggregate, rutting, corrugations, potholes, camber and shoulder
deformations. From all raveling/loose of aggregate (74.5%) and potholes (70.0%) are the major
problems observed in this section. Shoulder deformation (45.6%) and corrugation (44.3%) are
the next highest damages shown on this section of the road. The road also affected by rutting
(35.1%) and camber deformation (33.8%) which have also the highest damaging level.

The last section of the road covers from 35 to 35.9km, which is distressed by raveling/loose of
aggregate and potholes (40.0%). Rutting (33.3%), shoulder deformations (20.0%) and camber
deformations (13.3%) are also the next parameters which damages this section of the road.
Whereas corrugation (10.0%) is the least damages comparing to the other parameters.

Conclusion: Generally, comparative to others parameters this road is significantly damaged by

raveling/loose of aggregates from start to end section of road length. Potholes, rutting and
sometimes Corrugation are also the uppermost damaging effects next to raveling. From the total
road length, the road section between 30 and 35km are the most distressed section with all
parameters. Averagely, the effect of camber deformation is less at any section of the road length.
To realize which parameter does possess relatively a significant damage level, all the eight
sections of the road were presented by using bar charts (Figure 7).
 100%
90%
80%
70%
Damge level

60% Camber Deformation

50% Shoulder Deformation
40% Raveling
Potholes
30%
Rutting
20% Corrugation
10%
0%
0-5 5 - 7.8

Length [Km]

Figure 8 Lalibela - Ashiton maryam road

As shown on Figure 8 the damaging effect of potholes for the first 5km has highest percent
comparing to the other parameters (49.3%). In addition, rutting (39.6%) and raveling (34.13%)
are the next highest damages observed on this section of the road. This section is also susceptible
with camber deformation (22.7%) and corrugation (19.9%). Shoulder deformation has the lowest
damage (17.3%) comparing with other parameters.

The last section of the road which cover from 5 to 7.8km is extremely damaged by raveling/loose
of aggregate (77.0%). Rutting (44.4%), potholes (40.0%), shoulder (18.9%) and camber
deformations (17.8%) are the next severe damages whereas corrugation is the least damage.

Conclusion: In general, relative to others parameters this road is significantly damaged by

raveling/loose of aggregates, potholes and rutting in the order of degree of damage from starting
to end sections of road length. Camber and shoulder deformations are the additional damages to
the above problems. On the other hand, the effect of corrugation is less at any section of the road
length. To realize which parameter does possess relatively a significant damage level, all the two
sections of the road were presented by using bar charts (Figure 8).

100%
90%
80%
70%
Damge level

60% Camber Deformation

50% Shoulder Deformation
40% Raveling
Potholes
30%
Rutting
20% Corrugation
10%
0%
0-5 5 - 10 10 - 15 15 - 20 20 - 23.6

Length [Km]

Figure 9 Chegoba - Shegobet – Chet road

As presents on Figure 9, the first 5km road section has the highest damages through potholes
comparing to the other parameters (53.2%). Similarly rutting (28.6%), corrugation (17.3%) and
raveling/loose of aggregate (16.7%) are the highest damage observed on this section. Some other
parameters like camber and shoulder deformations have similar damaging level (13.3%) and are
the least damages on the section of the road.

From 5-10 km section of the road, potholes (65.6%) are extremely damages and rutting (42.0%)
is the second highest damages. This section of the road has also susceptible with raveling/loose
of aggregate (20.8%). Shoulder deformation and corrugation have the same damaging effect
(14.7%). Relative with other parameters this section of the road has the least camber
deformation (14.0%).

The third section of the road which cover from 10-15 km primarily damages by raveling/loose of
aggregate (37.3%) and potholes (30.0%). Rutting (17.6%)and corrugations (15.3%) are
additional damages detected from this road section. Relatively, camber (14.0%) and shoulder
deformations (13.3%) are the least damaging effect.

The fourth section (15-20 km) highly damages through raveling/loose of aggregate (48.0%)
problems. Potholes (24.3%) are the next maximum damage observed whereas shoulder
deformation and corrugations have the same level of damages (14.7%). Camber deformation
(14.0%) is the least damage observed on this section next to rutting (13.3%).

The last section of the road covers from 20-23.6 km, extremely damaged by raveling/loose of
aggregate with the highest degree of damaging effects (26.0%). Potholes (12.4%) and shoulder
deformations (11.7%) are also the other damages shown on this section of the road. Rutting,
corrugation and camber deformations have nearly the same damaging effects.

Conclusion: Generally, relative to others parameters this road is significantly damaged by

potholes, raveling/loose of aggregates and to some extents by rutting. From 0 up to 10km the
road extremely damages by potholes and from 10 up to end section it is affected by
raveling/loose of aggregates. Relatively, corrugation, shoulder and camber deformation effects
are less at any section of the road length. To realize which parameter does possess relatively a
significant damage level, all the five sections of the road were presented by using bar charts
(Figure 9).
 Road Information Data Road Condition Rate (Damage Level) [From Geotechnical perspective]

Surface Surface Material Transvers Transvers Longitudinal Longitudinal

Link Star Materials
End Material Material s Dustiness Dustiness e slope e slope slope slope
Name t   Stoniness
(km) (Quality (Quality) Stoniness Extent Severity Stability Stability stability stability
(O-D) (km) Severity
) Extent Severity Extent Extent Severity Extent Severity
Adet - Birakat

Average
Extent
3.3 2.7 3.1 2.5 4.0 3.0 2.9 2.4 3.0 2.4
/Severity
level
Rate of
0 5
the road
conditio
59.4% 51.7% 80.0% 46.4% 48.0%
n
(damage
level)
Average
Extent
4.1 2.6 3.4 2.4 4.0 2.6 4.5 2.8 4.5 2.7
/Severity
level
Rate of
5 10
the road
conditio
71.1% 54.4% 69.3% 84.0% 81.0%
n
(damage
level)
10 15 Average
Extent
3 2 2 2 3 2 4 3 3 2
/Severity
level
Rate of 33% 25% 48% 62% 47%
the road
conditio
n
(damage
 level)
Average
Extent
3 2 3 2 3 2 3 2 3 2
/Severity
level
Rate of
15 20
the road
conditio
43% 48% 39% 53% 37%
n
(damage
level)
Average
Extent
4 2 4 3 4 2 3 2 3 2
/Severity
level
Rate of
20 25
the road
conditio
36% 82% 58% 45% 45%
n
(damage
level)
Conclusion

Road Information Data Road Condition Data [From Hydrology/ Hydrualic perspective]

Longitudina Longitudinal Transvers Transvers Erosion

Scour on Scour on Silt on Silt on Erosion of Erosion of Scour on Scour on Silt on Silt on Erosion of Debris Damage of Vegetatio Vegetation
Link l Erosion Erosion Erosion Erosion of
Start End Left side Left side Left side Left side Shoulder Shoulder Right side Right side Right side Right Shoulder in structures n in the in the
Name [Gully] on [Gully] on [Gully] on [Gully] on Shoulder
(km) (km) drain drain drain drain Left side Left side drain drain drain side drain Right side structur by effect Road side Road side
(O-D) Carriageway Carriageway Carriageway Carriageway Right side
Extent Severity Extent Severity Extent Severity Extent Severity Extent Severity Severity es of water Extent Severity
Extent Severity Extent Severity Extent
Avarage Extent
/ Severity level
2.1 1.5 2.8 1.6 2.1 1.1 2.5 1.2 2.0 1.2 2.1 1.1 3.0 1.7 2.0 1.1 1.1 1.0 3.9 1.6
0 5 Rate of the road
condition 21.0% 29.9% 15.4% 20.0% 16.0% 15.4% 34.0% 14.7% 7.3% 6.7% 41.6%
(damge level)

Avarage Extent
/ Severity level
2.2 1.4 3.7 2.0 3.6 1.7 2.9 1.5 2.6 1.1 2.8 1.2 3.7 2.0 2.4 1.2 1.2 1.0 2.8 1.3
5 10 Rate of the road
condition 20.5% 49.3% 40.8% 29.0% 19.1% 22.4% 49.3% 19.2% 8.0% 24.3%
(damge level)

Avarage Extent
/ Severity level
2 1 3 2 3 1 3 1 2 1 2 1 3 2 2 1 1 1 3 1
det -Brakat

10 15 Rate of the road

condition 15% 40% 22% 22% 17% 18% 33% 14% 7% 21%
(damge level)
A

Avarage Extent
/ Severity level
2 1 3 2 3 2 2 1 2 1 3 1 3 2 3 1 1 1 0 0
15 20 Rate of the road
condition 18% 40% 34% 16% 18% 32% 41% 23% 7% 0%
(damge level)

Avarage Extent
/ Severity level
2 1 4 2 3 2 2 1 3 1 3 1 4 2 2 1 1 1 4 2
20 25 Rate of the road
condition 18% 51% 28% 15% 20% 18% 58% 22% 7% 37%
(damge level)

Conclusion:
4.3 Overall Damaging Effect/Conclusion and Recommendation

Overall Damage level which could provide the combination road condition rating (damage level)
value is obtained by taking the average conditions from road and transport, geotechnical and
hydrology-hydraulic perspectives.

Road condition
Recommended Road
Road Information Data (damage level)
Maintenance Intervention
Rating value
Road Road
Section Section
Link Name
length length
(O-D)
Start End
(km) (km)

Routine by machine/preventive
0 5 30.5%
maintenance

5 10 43% Periodic (heavy maintenance)

Adet - Birakat

Routine by machine/preventive
10 15 27%
maintenance

Routine by machine/preventive
15 20 30%
maintenance

Routine by machine/preventive
20 25 34%
maintenance