Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Evaluation of Pavement Roughness Using An Andriod Based Smartphone
Evaluation of Pavement Roughness Using An Andriod Based Smartphone
Android-Based Smartphone
Waleed Aleadelat, S.M.ASCE 1; Khaled Ksaibati, Ph.D., P.E. 2;
Cameron H. G. Wright, Ph.D., P.E. 3; and Promothes Saha, Ph.D., P.E. 4
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by CRRI - Central Road Research Institute on 07/12/21. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
Abstract: Modern smartphones are equipped with many useful sensors, such as gyroscopes, magnetometers, global positioning system
(GPS) receivers, and three-dimensional (3D) accelerometers. In this study, smartphones’ 3D accelerometers were used for collecting a
vehicle’s vertical acceleration data. Through the use of various signal processing and pattern recognition techniques, such as cross corre-
lations, Welch periodograms, and variance analyses, the measured signals (time series acceleration data) were identified and correlated with
the actual international roughness index (IRI) values. It was found that the variance among the vertical acceleration measurements was the key
feature for classifying the measured signals. A validation analysis was also conducted to measure the reliability of this methodology. The
initial validation results suggested that, using this methodology, the smartphone used could predict with reasonable certainty the actual IRI
values. The study was performed on 35 roadway segments extracted from the Wyoming local roads pavement management system (PMS).
Also, the selected segments have various lengths and geometric features reflecting the actual roadway segments under any PMS. The major
advantage of this technique includes the low-cost solution of measuring local roadway roughness. DOI: 10.1061/JPEODX.0000058. © 2018
American Society of Civil Engineers.
Author keywords: International roughness index (IRI); Smartphone applications; Local roads; Pattern recognition; Accelerometers.
surface are greatly decreased by increased pavement roughness receivers and 3D accelerometers, they found, using simple algo-
(Burns 1981). Moreover, higher levels of road roughness contribute rithms, that the detection of potholes and bumps was possible using
to decreased roadway capacities and reduced free flow speed (FFS) smartphones.
(Chandra 2004). In Vientiane, the capital of Laos, Douangphachanh and Oneyama
As a result, measuring pavement roughness has become a major conducted a study to estimate the IRI through smartphone acceler-
concern for researchers and highway engineers. A sliding straight- ometer measurements (Douangphachanh and Oneyama 2013). They
edge (Viagraph) was one of the first fundamental instruments to used two Android smartphones (Samsung Galaxy Note II and III)
measure roughness (Gillespie 1992). Due to the difficulty in mov- mounted on the dashboard of the test vehicle. Two vehicles, a
ing this device, the rolling straightedge device was developed. The Toyota VIGO 4WD pickup truck and a Toyota Camry were used
rolling straightedge method continued to develop with improve- in this experiment. The IRI was measured using Vehicle Intelligent
ments in the rolling concept. An array of wheels was added to form Monitoring System (VIMS) for every 100 m (328.08 ft). A Fast
a reference plane to measure the deviations in the road surface. This Fourier Transform (FFT) was performed on the accelerometer data
type of device represents the early stages of what is now known as a to obtain a frequency domain view of each signal. A linear relation-
profilograph.
ship was established between the sum of magnitudes from FFT and
In the 1920s, a vehicle’s vibrations caused by road surface irregu-
the measured IRI. The resulting relationship was statistically signifi-
larities became a major concern of highway engineers in identifying
cant when the speed was less than 60 km=h (37.3 mi/h), with a
road roughness. This led to the development of response-type road
partial dependence on the vehicle and smartphone types. One year
roughness meters (RTRRMs). These devices measure vertical dis-
later, Jiménez and Matout (2014) used a tablet’s built in accelerom-
placements in the rear axle of a vehicle. One of the major drawbacks
eters to assess the pavement roughness. It was found that the stan-
of RTRRMs is that they are highly affected by the performance
dard deviation of vertical accelerations normalized by the driving
(particularly the suspension) of the vehicle that is used in the meas-
uring process. These devices were not able to provide time-stable speed can give a good indication of the road roughness condition.
measurements. Hence, they were not comparable and not practical However, this study did not develop a direct correlation to estimate
to be used for pavement management purposes (Gillespie 1992). the IRI; the returned response of the accelerometer was able to iden-
In 1982, the World Bank sponsored a research experiment in tify the different levels of roughness.
order to establish a standard roughness measurement. This research In the same year, Islam et al. (2014) conducted a study at the
effort resulted in the development of the IRI (Al-Omari and Darter University of Illinois to determine the IRI using a smartphones’
1994). The IRI is determined by measuring the actual road profile integrated accelerometers. Three test sites (each 3.22 km long) with
and then processing it through a mathematical algorithm. This various roughness conditions were selected. By using a double in-
algorithm, known as the Quarter Car Simulation, simulates the tegration method on the vertical acceleration data obtained by the
response of a reference vehicle traveling at 80 km/h (50 mi/h) smartphones, a perceived road profile was formed. The perceived
to road roughness (Gillespie 1992). The accumulated suspension road profile was converted to IRI using ProVAL software. It was
deflections of the reference vehicle can be divided by the traveling found that the calculated IRI values were consistent with the
distance to provide an index in the units of slope (Shafizadeh and
Mannering 2002). Accordingly, IRI is considered a geometric
property of the road. Hence, it is a time-stable index, which gen-
Table 1. IRI thresholds and descriptions in Wyoming
erates the same values when applied to the same road (Sayers and
Karamihas 1995). IRI (m=km) Description
The most modern roughness measurement devices are the Less than 1.10 Excellent
noncontact profile measuring systems (Islam et al. 2014). These 1.10–1.56 Good
devices measure deviations in longitudinal pavement profile using 1.60–2.05 Fair
acoustic or light probes. Then, these measured profiles are processed 2.07–2.68 Poor
through Profile Viewing and Analysis (ProVal) software to calculate Greater than 2.68 Very poor
the IRI. One of the most popular devices of this type is the South
Dakota Profiler. This profiler uses two laser sensors to measure the
road profile at both wheel paths. The measured IRI is the average
IRI of both wheel paths. Table 2. Summary of statistics for the test segments
Number
Measuring Pavement Roughness Using of test Standard
Smartphone Applications segments Parameter Mean Median deviation Maximum Minimum
Modern smartphones are equipped with many useful sensors, 20 IRI (m=km) 2.38 1.86 1.46 6.16 0.93
Length (km) 1.77 1.63 1.77 4.76 0.23
such as gyroscopes, magnetometers, GPS receivers, and 3D
measured IRI values using a standard inertial profiler. However, The preceding studies have documented the smartphones’ ability
calibration was required for rougher pavement sections to over- to collect IRI data. However, these studies were limited to measuring
come the effect of suspension damping. This methodology was first IRI at very short test segments with limited changes in horizontal
adapted by Hanson and Cameron in 2012 (Hanson et al. 2014) at and vertical alignments. Moreover, high pass filters or low pass
the University of New Brunswick, Canada. However, Hanson and filters were used to filter the accelerometer data. These filters use
Cameron used DATS Toolbox software to convert the acceleration certain cutoff frequencies that greatly affect the final calculated
data to displacement. The DATS Toolbox software divides the FFT IRI values if not used consistently throughout all the measurements.
of the acceleration data by the negative angular frequency of the Also, the incorrect selection of cutoff frequencies may eliminate part
signal’s components squared to get the displacement. This process of the actual frequencies resulting from pavement roughness. Never-
helps in avoiding the accumulation of errors that result from using theless, smartphones appear to be a promising tool in minimizing
numerical integration (i.e., cumtrapz integration). data collection costs, especially at the local level.
Fig. 2. Crosscorrelation between signal (IRI ¼ 1.78 m=km) and IRI categories (using Samsung Galaxy SIII).
This research was based on the idea that roads with similar Accelerometer data was uploaded to a desktop computer in Micro-
conditions may provide similar signal patterns (time series accel- soft Excel format (*.CSV). Every roadway segment had its own
eration data) using smartphone accelerometers. In other words, Excel file that represented the variations in speed among the
smartphone accelerometers were used to capture the vertical vibra- x-, y-, and z-dimensions. Since the smartphones were fixed hori-
tions while driving the testing vehicles. Then, different analysis zontally (i.e., in x and y), the variations along the z-axis were the
techniques were performed to find the key features among the ac- focus of this study. Therefore, the time series vertical acceleration
quired acceleration signals. Hence, the signals, as produced by the data formed a signal that represented the vibrations of the test
accelerometer, can be considered a reflection of the actual road pro- vehicle, reflecting actual road roughness.
file. The following subsections describe this process: Both median and simple moving average filters were applied to
reduce the amount of noise in the accelerometer signals (Mitra
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by CRRI - Central Road Research Institute on 07/12/21. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
The Welch periodogram is a method used to estimate the power sensors. This application is available for free download in the
in a signal at different frequencies. This is called PSD of a signal. Google Play Store. The application was used to record the smart-
An estimate of the PSD was performed on every measured signal. phone accelerometer data.
Then, these estimates were used to identify any unique fluctuations Regarding roadway test segments, GPS coordinates of the be-
or features of the power among the different frequencies. These ginning and ending points were provided as part of the Wyoming
fluctuation points can be used as a way to identify the different local county roads PMS. These coordinates were uploaded into
measured signals. Microsoft Streets and Trips software, which helped in identifying
Finally, variance analysis was conducted to assess the trends of the exact locations of these segments while driving. For every
the measured vertical accelerations using the smartphones acceler- roadway test segment, the smartphone accelerometer data were
ometers. The calculated variance was compared with the referenced collected at two velocities; 64 km=h (40 mi/h) and 80 km=h
IRI value for each segment. The variance among the accelerometer (50 mi/h). The sampling frequency at both velocities was 200 Hz
readings for every segment was calculated as the second central
(i.e., 200 samples=s).
moment according to the following equation:
As mentioned earlier, the referenced IRI data were collected
Pn
ðX − X̄Þ2 as part of the PMS using a South Dakota profiler. This device
var ¼ i¼1 i ð1Þ is a laser-type profiler manufactured according to ASTM E950/
n−1
E950N-09 (ASTM 2018) specifications and meeting Class 1 re-
where n = total number of vertical acceleration readings for the quirements (Pathway Services 2016). The longitudinal pavement
segment; i = one of the measured vertical acceleration readings profile for both wheel paths was measured and analyzed using
IRI (m/Km)
IRI (m/Km)
5.00 5.00
4.00 4.00
3.00 3.00
2.00 2.00
IRI = 6.42*Var80 + 0.62
1.00 R² = 0.85 1.00
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80
(a) Var80 (m/s 2 ) (b) Var64 (m/s 2 )
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by CRRI - Central Road Research Institute on 07/12/21. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
3.00 3.00
IRI = 7.39*Var80 + 0.30 IRI = 12.42*Var64 + 0.03
2.50 R² = 0.75 2.50 R² = 0.74
IRI (m/Km)
IRI (m/Km)
2.00 2.00
1.50 1.50
1.00 1.00
0.50 0.50
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25
(c) Var80 (m/s 2 ) (d) Var64 (m/s 2 )
7.00 7.00
6.00 6.00
IRI (m/Km)
5.00 5.00
IRI (m/km)
4.00 4.00
3.00 3.00
2.00 2.00
IRI = 0.79*Var80 + 1.31 IRI = 1.16*Var40 + 0.80
1.00 1.00 R² = 0.49
R² = 0.26
0.00 0.00
0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00
(a) Var80 (m/s 2 ) (b) Var64 (m/s 2 )
3.00 3.00
2.50 2.50
IRI (m/Km)
IRI (m/Km)
2.00 2.00
1.50 1.50
1.00 1.00
0.50 IRI = 0.34*Var80 + 1.31 0.50 IRI = 0.56*Var64 + 1.13
R² = 0.22 R² = 0.20
0.00 0.00
0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00
(c) Var80 (m/s 2 ) (d) Var64 (m/s 2 )
after applying the crosscorrelation between all 20 measured signals The driving speed seems to affect the way in which the vehicle
for both speeds. Applying the crosscorrelation analysis on the Sony responds to the road profile (i.e., variance values). In particular, at
Xperia data yielded the same results. Roughness does not affect the 80 km=h (50 mi/h), the variances were higher than those measured
shape of the produced signals considerably. Thus, the crosscorre- at 64 km=h (40 mi/h) for all roadway segments. However, these
lation method did not provide a feature that allowed the desired differences do not detract from the usefulness of the variance to
discrimination between, and classification of, the different IRI predict the IRI values.
categories. Consequently, solving Eqs. (2) and (3) for the actual IRI thresh-
Fig. 3 shows the Welch periodogram estimates of the PSD for olds shown in Table 1 yields variance thresholds that can be used to
different signals measured using the Samsung Galaxy SIII at directly identify the measured signals as shown in Table 3. Accord-
80 km=h (50 mi/h). This estimate was calculated using the pwelch ingly, these values can be used directly to classify the roadway
command of the MATLAB Signal Processing Toolbox, using the segments into the different IRI categories.
default parameters for segments, smoothing window, and overlap. Compared with the signals obtained with the Samsung Galaxy
The figure shows that these signals have almost the same PSD trend SIII, the measured signals using the Sony Xperia showed an insig-
among the different frequencies. None of these plots show a unique nificant correlation between the referenced IRI and the variance.
feature that could allow the signals to be used to discriminate The variance values were randomly distributed among the different
IRI values. In addition, these variance values were considerably
between the different IRI categories.
higher than the ones obtained using the Samsung Galaxy SIII. This
The Welch periodogram estimates of the PSD for the same
could most likely be attributed to a lower accuracy of the Sony
signals measured using the Sony Xperia are shown in Fig. 4. Again,
Xperia’s accelerometer compared with the Samsung Galaxy SIII.
these signals appear to have a very similar PSD trend without any
Hence, data from the Sony Xperia in this study could not classify
unique features. Different roughness levels do not seem to have a
the roadway segments into the different IRI categories. Fig. 6
specific effect on the PSD of these signals. However, the measured
shows a plot for the variance values versus IRI using the Sony
signals using both smartphones showed a depression in the signal
Xperia at 64 km=h (40 mi/h) and 80 km=h (50 mi/h). The same
energy at 20 Hz. This could be attributed to the effect of the vehicle insignificant behavior still holds even after using segments with
suspension system. Further investigations are required to clarify IRI less than 3.16 m=km (200 in:=mi) as shown in Figs. 6(c and d).
this trend.
While the previous analyses did not identify useful differences
in signal patterns, using variance analysis showed promising re- Validation of the Models
sults. Figs. 5(a and b) show a significant linear relationship between In order to validate the reliability of the variance models [Eqs. (2)
the referenced IRI and the variance of the vertical accelerometer and (3)] in predicting IRI and classifying roadway segments, 15
measurements using the Samsung Galaxy SIII. The variance results new segments were selected to perform the experiment again using
can predict with high significance (R2 ¼ 0.85) the referenced IRI the Samsung Galaxy SIII. Five of these segments have an IRI
values. Also, the results indicate that, as the road roughness in- greater than 2.68 m=km (170 in:=mi). These rough segments were
creases, the variance among the vertical accelerometer measurements selected to verify the reliability of these models in predicting the
will increase, which is a rational reflection of the actual conditions of IRI of rough segments. Table 4 shows a summary of the statistics
the road profile. The same behavior can be observed when using for the validation test segments.
segments with IRI less than 3.16 m=km (200 in:=mi) as shown Fig. 7 shows the referenced versus the predicted IRI using
in Figs. 5(c and d). Eqs. (2) and (3). It can be noted that the variance among the
7.00 7.00
Predicted IRI (m/Km)
6.00 6.00
5.00 5.00
4.00 4.00
3.00 3.00
2.00 2.00
1.00 1.00
0.00 0.00
0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00
(a) Referenced IRI (m/Km) (b) Referenced IRI (m/Km)
Fig. 7. Referenced versus predicted IRI: (a) at 80 km=h; and (b) 64 km=h.
costs.” Transp. Res. Rec. 2285: 47–55. https://doi.org/10.3141/2285-06. profiling. Ann Arbor, MI: Univ. of Michigan Transportation Research
Islam, S., W. G. Buttlar, R. Aldunate, and W. R. Vavrik. 2014. “Measure- Institute.
ment of pavement roughness using android-based smartphone applica- Shafizadeh, K., and F. Mannering. 2002. A statistical analysis of factors
tion.” Transp. Res. Rec. 2457: 30–38. https://doi.org/10.3141/2457-04. associated with driver perceived road roughness on urban highways.
Jiménez, L. A., and N. Matout. 2014. “A low cost solution to assess road’s Rep. No. WA-RD 538.1. Olympia, WA: Washington State Dept. of
roughness surface condition for pavement management.” In Proc., 93rd Transportation.
Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board. Washington, Strazdins, G., A. Mednis, G. Kanonirs, R. Zviedris, and L. Selavo. 2011.
DC: Transportation Research Board. “Towards vehicular sensor networks with android smartphones for road
Ksaibati, K., R. McNamara, W. Miley, and J. Armaghani. 1999. “Pavement surface monitoring.” In Proc., Second Int. Workshop on Networks of
roughness data collection and utilization.” Transp. Res. Rec. 1655: Cooperating Objects (CONET’11): Electronic Proc., CPSWeek’11,
86–92. https://doi.org/10.3141/1655-12. 1–4. Chicago.