Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
The Kadipaten–Majalengka/Indramayu Boundary Road is one of the provincial roads that plays a strategic role in supporting community mobility as well as the distribution of goods and services. The high traffic volume has the potential to accelerate pavement deterioration, making periodic pavement condition assessment essential for developing appropriate maintenance programs. This study aims to evaluate pavement conditions using the Surface Distress Index (SDI) method, identify the dominant types of pavement distress and their severity levels, and develop maintenance recommendations based on the existing pavement condition. This study employed a quantitative descriptive method with a field visual survey approach. The 20-km road section was divided into 40 segments, each 500 m in length. The survey data were analyzed using the SDI method to determine pavement condition, identify the types and severity of pavement distress, and formulate appropriate maintenance recommendations. The results indicate that the pavement condition was predominantly classified as good, covering 17,516.12 m (87.58%), followed by fair condition for 1,920.46 m (9.60%) and minor damage for 563.42 m (2.82%), with no sections classified as severely damaged. The road serviceability level reached 97.18%, while only 2.82% of the road was categorized as unserviceable. The dominant pavement distresses were settlement (47.40%), alligator cracking (26.97%), potholes (8.41%), rutting (7.79%), and bleeding (6.10%), with settlement identified as the most severe distress based on the SDI value. The recommended treatments include routine maintenance for pavement in good condition, periodic maintenance for fair condition, and rehabilitation for minor damage, while reconstruction is not required. The findings demonstrate that the SDI method provides an objective pavement condition assessment and serves as a reliable basis for developing condition-based pavement maintenance programs.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Suparman et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: