Figures & data
Figure 1. Conventional PHC pile head cutting work process.
Figure 2. Submerged PHC pile head cutting work site.
Figure 3. Pile lifting using an excavator and rope.
Figure 4. Damage to a PHC pile caused by pushing work.
Figure 5. Sensing-unit hardware.
Figure 6. Cutting-unit hardware.
Figure 7. Handling-unit hardware.
Figure 8. Automated process of the PHC pile head cutting robot.
Figure 9. Prototype of the all-in-one attachment-based PHC pile head cutting robot.
Figure 10. Field test of the PHC pile head cutting robot prototype.
Figure 11. Sensing-unit test.
Figure 12. Cutting-unit test.
Figure 13. Handling-unit test.
Table 1. Test results for each key unit.
Table 2. Analysis of conventional and automated PHC pile head cutting processes.
Figure 14. Overview of the work site for productivity analysis of the conventional and automated methods.
Table 3. Conventional PHC pile head cutting work time data.
Figure 15. Web-CYCLONE model for productivity analysis of the conventional method.
Table 4. Web-CYCLONE results for the conventional PHC pile head cutting method.
Figure 16. Working-scope zoning for the target building.
Figure 17. Web-CYCLONE model for the automated PHC pile head cutting process.
Table 5. Web-CYCLONE results for the automated PHC pile head cutting method.
Table 6. Web-CYCLONE results for the conventional and automated PHC pile head cutting methods.