Automation in Construction 10 2001.

517526
www.elsevier.comrlocaterautcon

Technological enhancement and creation of a computer-aided

construction system for the shotcreting robot
Min-Yuan Cheng a,) , Yueh Liang b, Ching-Ming Wey b, Jiann-Chyun Chen a
a

Department of Construction Engineering, National Taiwan Uniersity of Science and Technology, PO Box 90 130, Taipei, Taiwan
b
Ret-Ser Engineering Agency, 207 Sung Chiang Road, Taipei, Taiwan
Accepted 12 September 2000

Abstract
This paper addresses the technological enhancement of the shotcreting robot. The shotcreting robot has an arm with six
degrees of freedoms, which is remotely controlled by an operator. Due to current utilization drawbacks, an improvement
plan has been developed in two stages. First, the control system of the semi-automated robot was improved by reducing the
number of joysticks from six to two, incorporating a real-time computer simulation model enhanced to identify model
feasibility. Second, the robot was enhanced from semi-automated to fully automated. Thus, an automated profile measuring
instrument is used to measure the excavated surface and a simulation model calculates the nozzle path for shotcreting. The
automated shotcreting robot was completed by integrated the graphical model with the robot control system. q 2001 Elsevier
Science B.V. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Shotcreting robot; Computer simulation; Profile measuring instrument; Tunnel construction

1. Introduction
Shotcrete containing coarse aggregate has been
successfully used for many years in mining and
tunnel construction as a primary support and finishing lining. Investigations have showed that lining
rock tunnels with shotcrete combined with other
measures, such as rock bolts, reinforcement mesh, or
light rebar trusses, is more economical and also
minimizes construction hazard under adverse rock
conditions w1,5,6x. Thus, typical shotcrete designs

)
Corresponding author. Tel.: q886-2-2737-6596; fax: q886-22737-6606.
E-mail address: myc@hp.ct.ntust.edu.tw M.-Y. Cheng..

have been developed for the permanent support of

rock tunnels. During construction, the concrete has
to be placed immediately after mucking up and
before the next round can be drilled. To speed up the
driving operation, collapsible steel forms are used
and the concrete is placed using pumps.
Conventionally, shotcrete is manually applied by
the nozzleman. These operators are subjected to high
concentrations of noise, dust, rebound, and causticity, in addition to poor visibility and footing see Fig.
1.. As a nozzleman experiences the worst conditions
while handling the shotcreting nozzle, replacement
with the semi-automated shotcrete machine can not
only improve the construction progress and improve
operator safety, but also increases construction efficiency and quality w2,3x.

0926-5805r01r$ - see front matter q 2001 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.
PII: S 0 9 2 6 - 5 8 0 5 0 0 . 0 0 1 0 4 - 7

518

M.-Y. Cheng et al.r Automation in Construction 10 (2001) 517526

Fig. 1. Manual shotcreting method.

This paper addresses technological enhancement

of the semi-automated shotcreting robot. The robot
prototype is a hydraulic spraying arm model for
placing shotcrete in tunneling and mining operations.
The robot arm has six degrees of freedoms and is
remotely controlled by an operator using a control
box with six joysticks and three buttons on the
board. The replacement of the manual spraying
method with the robot shotcreting method significantly improves construction productivity and working place hygiene for the nozzle operator.

2. Research purpose and objectives

The primary research purpose is to improve the
efficiency and use of the semi-automated shotcreting
robot. The objectives required to achieve this primary purpose are the following: 1. use of the
shotcreting robot to replace the manual spraying
method, 2. improve the prototype shotcreting robot
to increase construction efficiency, 3. use computer
simulation to reduce the development cost and risks
to the robot, and 4. employ graphical animation
models for in-house training.

3. Improvement plan and procedures

When automated construction equipment is manufactured, it may not be suitable for all job-site conditions. For the needs of utilization, the prototype

robot may require some adjustments and modifications. The plan and procedures for improving the
prototype robot are described as follows: 1. investigate drawbacks of the current model, 2. propose an
enhancement plan, 3. develop a real-time 3D computer model for graphical simulation and animation,
4. improve the prototype, 5. apply field tests, and
6. employ the animation model for in-house training.
3.1. Current model
The first generation of the shotcreting robot as
shown in Fig. 2. is a multi-joint arm robot with eight
degrees of freedoms. Due to the complexity of operation and control, the robot was modified to the
current model see Fig. 3.. Fig. 4a. shows the
mechanisms of the second-generation spraying arm.
The second generation of the robot arm has six
degrees of freedoms and is remotely controlled by
the operator using a control box with six joysticks
and three buttons. A pivot drive with pedestal forms
the connecting element between the spraying arm
and the carrier vehicle. The motions of the spraying
arm are illustrated in Fig. 4b.. Fig. 4c. shows the
control board of the current model. The pivot drive
controlled by Rod 6 can be rotated 3608 around the
y-axis while the solid arm system controlled by Rod
1 can be rotated 2708 around the z-axis tunnel axis..
In Fig. 4a., the solid arm system consists of three
arms, four joints, and one spraying head. Based on
the z-axis, Arm I is controlled by Rod 2 and can be

M.-Y. Cheng et al.r Automation in Construction 10 (2001) 517526

519

Fig. 2. Shotcreting robot prototype.

rotated around the x-axis downward 308 and upward

458 see Fig. 4b... Arm III, controlled by Rod 3, is a
telescopic lance that allows the spraying nozzle to be
extended an additional 1.7 m. Along the vertical
axis, Arm II, controlled by Rod 5, can be rotated
back and forth for 308 around the x-axis. Likewise,

Rod 4, controlling the spraying head, can rotate the

head up and down for 22.58 around the x-axis. The
buttons on the control board are the switches used
for spraying shotcrete.
The robots second-generation model is still very
complex for the operator to control. Thus, the re-

Fig. 3. Spraying arm of current model.

M.-Y. Cheng et al.r Automation in Construction 10 (2001) 517526

520

quirement of a skilled operator becomes critical for

manipulating the machine properly. Operator training
is another problem that has to be solved in using the
robot. Concluding the results of utilization, the current model has two major drawbacks for implementation at the job site: 1. the control board has too
many joysticks and buttons for the operator to control, and 2. due to poor visibility, it is difficult for
the operator to place the nozzle in the spraying
position.
3.2. Improement plan
In response to the problems addressed, a plan was
developed and decided into two stages for model
improvement w2,8,10x. In the first stage, the model
was investigated and a proposal was developed for
improving the robot based on results of the field
tests. The control system for the semi-automated
robot was simplified and improved by reducing the
number of joysticks from six to two. Fig. 4d. shows
the improved control board. Rod B replaces the
functionality of Rod 3. Rod A combines Rods 1, 2,
and 5 of the original board and can be controlled in
four directions. In terms of the vertical direction,
Rod A controls the height of the solid arms. The
principle of moving the arms is always to keep Arm
III horizontal. Arms I, II, and III are combined as

one unit. When Arm I moves 18 in a counter-clockwise direction, Arm II rotates in a clockwise direction by 18 and Arm III rotates simultaneously in a
counter clockwise direction by 18. In terms of the
horizontal direction, Rod A replaces the function of
Rod 1, which can rotate the solid arm 2708 around
the tunnel axis. To reduce the development cost and
risks, a real-time computer simulation model was
developed to identify the feasibility of the proposed
model. The graphically animated model was applied
for in-house training after the improved model was
completed.
In the second stage, the robot was improved from
semi-automated to fully-automated. Within this, an
automated profile measuring instrument is used to
measure the excavated surface. Based on this measurement, the simulation model calculates and identifies the path for the shotcreting nozzle. The coordinates of the path are then fed back to the control
system of the robot. The automated shotcreting robot
was completed by integrating the graphical model
with the robot control system.
3.3. Computer graphical simulation and animation
The main purpose of developing a computer simulation model is to measure the feasibility of the
proposed model before the plan commences. In addi-

Fig. 4. a. Mechanisms of the spraying arm. b. Motions of the spraying arm. c. Original control board. d. Modified control board.

M.-Y. Cheng et al.r Automation in Construction 10 (2001) 517526

521

Fig. 4 continued ..

tion to reducing development cost and risks, the

graphical model can also be used for in-house training. Simulation helps the operator visualize how the
new robot will function and how the manual
shotcreting method functions w13x. Moreover, it is
one of the best ways for the nozzleman to understand
the shotcreting process and learn how to manipulate
the robot. Fig. 5 shows the graphical model. The

model was developed on a SiliconGraphics workstation using ModelGen software to create the 3D
model and PERFORMER software for animation.
The development procedures are described as follows see Fig. 6..
Identify plan objecties: Mechanisms of the arm
motions and control system were first investigated
before improving the model. Second, to achieve the

522

M.-Y. Cheng et al.r Automation in Construction 10 (2001) 517526

Fig. 5. Graphic animation model.

objectives of increasing the arms maneuverability

and ease of control, the motion path of the arm was

Fig. 6. Development procedures for graphics simulation model.

studied. Third, a graphic simulation model was developed to verify the feasibility of the enhancement
plan and also identify any potential problems in
advance.
Establish the simulation model: The hierarchy of
the robot mechanisms was first established and broken down into different levels to create a robot
geometry database. The relationship between different levels is masterrslave based. The higher entity is
the master of the following entities slaves.. As the
master moves, the slave entities also move in relation
to keep the arm as one unit. After identifying the
mechanisms of the solid arm and the relative coordinate for each mechanism, mathematical functions for
each mechanical motion were formulated to assure
movement of the mechanisms as planned.
Deelop the simulation draft: The simulation draft
was developed according to the construction process
in the field. The site environment was established
and relative coordinates between the working spots

M.-Y. Cheng et al.r Automation in Construction 10 (2001) 517526

and the location of the robot were identified. The

sequence of the robot movements and the construction procedure were defined for conducting the simulation. Also, for considering complexity of the
operation conditions, the robot, integrated with the
simulation model, can be manipulated simultaneously by the boards in real time for walking through
the site and performing the shotcreting operation.
Conduct real-time simulation: As mentioned
above, the scene of the site was created and the
initial position of the robot was determined to conduct the shotcreting simulation. The control board of
the current model was connected and placed on the
screen along side the modified board. If some of the
angels and positions for the arm cant be reached
using the modified board, the original board can be
used to bridge the gap. In addition, for simulation
and training purposes, the external control board can
also be connected to both the computer model and
the robot through IrO ports w4,7x. Controlling both
machines in parallel makes it easy for the operator to
learn how to operate the robot and adjust the spraying operations.
Ealuate the model: based on the cycle of Aplan,
do, check, and actionB, the model was repetitively
evaluated and modified to assure that the expected
objectives were achieved.

523

3.4. Improed model

The arm mechanisms and control system of the
robot were modified after the improvement plan was
verified according to the simulation results. Fig. 4a.
and c. shows the improved model and control board.
The principle of operation is based on the parallelogram system. Hence, the operator can manipulate the
computer model and remote control the robot simultaneously. The solid arm system was made to rotate
around the tunnel axis, permitting the placement of
the shotcrete over the entire tunnel section and in the
invert area w9x. Thus, controlled motion of the nozzle
is achieved. Automatic spraying can be used to
achieve a uniform application of shotcrete at high
placement rates see Fig. 7..
3.5. In-house training
The animated model was used for in-house training after the robot was improved. In addition to the
control boards provided on the computer screen, the
computer model was also connected in parallel with
the external control board through IrO ports. Using
either ways, operators can learn how to control the
shotcreting robot by manipulating the computer
model. Through practice, errors and unexpected risks

Fig. 7. Shotcreting using improved robot.

524

M.-Y. Cheng et al.r Automation in Construction 10 (2001) 517526

caused by the nozzleman can be reduced to a minimum. By conducting simulations, operators can manipulate the robot for different job-site conditions
and training cost is reduced w11x.
4. Automated shotcreting robot
After completing the first stage of improvement
of the shotcreting robot, the second stage was to
improve the robot from semi-automated to fully-automated. To achieve this objective, an automated
profile measuring instrument was applied to measure
the excavated surface see Fig. 8. w12,1416x. Automated measurement and control are essential to the
development of the automatic shotcreting robot. The
laser measurement instrument was developed by the
Ret-Ser Engineering Agency, the biggest construction company in Taiwan. For each survey point, the
distance is measured twice and the average is calculated. The measurement speed is 25 pointsrmin. The
instrument can be connected with an external computer to display the measured path and the designed
profile as well. The difference in area between the
measured and designed cross sections is integrated.
Thus, the volume of shotcrete can be estimated by
multiplying the area by the width that each spraying
pass covers.

The survey instrument is located on the spraying

head. Considering the effects of airborne dust and
rebound, shielding is installed around the spraying
head to protect the measuring equipment before
shotcreting commences. The coordinates of the excavated surface are identified and stored as a spreadsheet in a PC. The contents of the spreadsheet,
including angle, distance, and coordinate projection
in vertical and horizontal directions, are transferred
to the workstation. Based on the results of measurement, the simulation model calculates and identifies
the path of the nozzle for shotcreting. Then, the
robot sprays shotcrete according to the path identified. The distance between the spraying head and the
excavated surface is 1 m. To reduce the quantity of
rebound, the spraying head is always kept vertical to
the excavated surface. The automated shotcreting
robot was achieved by integrating the graphical model
with the robot control system. Fig. 9 describes the
automated shotcreting process. The length of each
excavation unit for shotcreting is 3 m and the width
for each spraying round is 50 cm. Thus, the robot
has to spray six rounds for each excavation unit.
Also, since the surface of the tunnel is not even, the
nozzle has to be able to adapt flexibly to the requirements for achieving the proper quality. Hence, a
button for switching manualrautomated control

Fig. 8. Automated profile measuring instrument.

M.-Y. Cheng et al.r Automation in Construction 10 (2001) 517526

525

Fig. 9. Automated robot shotcreting process.

modes was designed and added on the control board

for this purpose. When the shotcreting quality is not
satisfied under automatic control mode, the operator
can change it to the manual control mode and manipulate the robot manually for shotcreting. Once the
gap is fulfilled and the mode is switched back, the
nozzle is automatically moved back to the point

where the operator changed the control mode, and

then continues the shotcreting process.
5. Field test
This section presents the results of the field test
w9x. The improved shotcreting robots were tested in

Table 1
Field test results
Item

Safety
Hygiene
ControlrWorkability
Learning curve
Rebound Quality.
Shotcreting speed M 2 rmin.
No. of labor

Method
Manual

Prototype robot

Improved robot

Fully automated robot

Low
Low
Low
Long
25%
0.1424
6

Medium
Medium
Low
Long
14%
0.2712
4

Medium
Medium
Medium
Medium
14%
0.3225
4

High
High
High
Short
9%
0.58
2

526

M.-Y. Cheng et al.r Automation in Construction 10 (2001) 517526

the San-I tunnel project for the Taiwan Railway

Administration. The Ret-Ser Engineering Agency designed and built the project under a turnkey contract.
Five-Minute Rating method was used to conduct the
filed survey. Based on the survey results and interview with the operators and experts, Table 1 shows
the comparison of the manual method, prototype
model, improved robot and fully-automated robot in
terms of safety, hygiene, control workability., learning curve, rebound quality., shotcreting speed, and
number of labor required. In the table, the advantages of the modified robots include:
1. The safety and hygiene in the working environment are improved.
2. The path of the arm motions is more versatile
and easier to control.
3. Due to the simplicity of the control board, the
nozzleman can easily learn how to operate the
machine in a short period of time.
4. The rebound quantity is significantly reduced.
5. Shotcreting speed in terms of the construction
productivity is increased.
6. The number of labors required for shotcreting
is reduced.

6. Conclusions
The objectives of this study were achieved by
reducing the number of joysticks for the shotcreting
robot from six to two. According to results of the
field test, the control mechanisms were improved
and the learning curve for training was reduced. A
real-time animated model proved to be very useful
for development of the robot. Through simulation,
operators can test and manipulate the robot for different job-site conditions. The simulation model can
also be used for in-house training as the model is
completed. Moreover, with the development and application of the automated robot, the hazardous and
time-consuming scaling operation can not only be

avoided, but more importantly, the risk of a cave-in

triggered by the removal of Akey-stonesB is eliminated. Thus, replacement of the manual spraying
method with the shotcreting robot significantly improves construction productivity, safety, and working
place hygiene for the nozzle operator.
References
w1x ACI, Guide to Shotcrete, Reported by ACI Committee 506,
1985.
w2x C. Alberts, Use of remote controlled spraying nozzle, Proc.
Eng. Found. Conf., 1973, pp. 6578, Maine.
w3x C. Alberts, M. Kramers, Swedish shotcrete equipment and
developments in fibrous shotcrete, Proc. Eng. Found. Conf.,
1976, pp. 254268, Maryland.
w4x D.J. Angelakos, T.E. Everhart, Microwave Communications,
McGraw-Hill, New York, 1986.
w5x K.S. Bawa, Development of shotcrete for metro construction
in Washington, Proc. Eng. Found. Conf., 1973, pp. 3349,
Maine.
w6x R.C. Bates, Shotcrete safety and environmental control, Proc.
Eng. Found. Conf., 1973, pp. 130142, Maine.
w7x L.W. Couch II, Digital and Analog Communication Systems,
Macmillan, New York, 1987.
w8x R. Greer, C. Haas, G. Gibson, A. Traver, R.L. Tucker,
Advances in control systems for construction manipulators,
Automation in Construction vol. 6 3., Elsevier, Amsterdam,
Netherlands, 1997, pp. 193203, June, ISSN: 0926-5805.
w9x J. Golser, K. Mussger, The New Austrian Tunneling Method
NATM., Contractual Aspects, International Tunnel Symp.
1987., Tokyo.
w10x T.Y. Hsieh, C. Haas, Determining functional requirements
for large scale manipulators, Automation in Construction
vol. 3 1., 1994, pp. 5564, May, ISSN: 0926-5805.
w11x P.G. Ioannou, J. Martinez, Animation of complex construction simulation models, Computing in Civil Engineering
New York., 1996, pp. 620626.
w12x N.S. Jaynat, P. Noll, Digital Coding Waveforms, PrenticeHall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1984.
w13x A.A. Oloufa, Modeling and simulation of construction operations, Automation in Construction vol. 1 4., 1993, pp.
351359, March, ISSN: 0926-5805.
w14x M. Schwartz, Telecommunication Networks: Protocals, Modeling, and Analysis, Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA, 1987.
w15x M. Schwartz, Information Transmission, Modulation, and
Noise, 4th edn., McGraw-Hill, New York, 1990.
w16x A. Tanenbaum, Computer Networks, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1989.