本研究以台灣污水下水道非開挖推進工法之施工經驗為主題，建立一套可系統整理施工條件、比較案例差異及輔助工程前期風險辨識之評估方法，並以台東市、高雄市小港區及屏東縣潮州鎮三處工程案例進行驗證。研究採文獻回顧、案例資料整理、施工經驗分析及影響因子評分等方法，探討地質、施工環境與施工資源對推進施工難易度之影響。
本研究將施工影響條件分為自然、環境、內部及設計等四大類，細分為天候、地質、施工、既有設施、古蹟、土地使用、設備、人員及管材等九項因子，並結合「人、機、料、法、環」概念，採十級尺度進行評分，以比較各案例之施工優勢與限制。
評估結果顯示，台東市案例平均5.78分，評估為「普通偏有利」，主要受卵礫石及砂礫石地層、刀盤磨耗、礫石卡阻及排礫困難影響；高雄市小港區平均7.11分，評估為「有利」，其設備、人員及管材條件較佳，但既有設施密集、管線淨距有限及施工空間受限；屏東縣潮州鎮平均6.67分，評估為「有利偏普通」，主要受砂土夾礫石地層、季節性降雨及土地使用協調等因素影響。評分結果與實際施工經驗大致相符，顯示本方法可辨識不同案例之主要風險來源。
本研究所建立之評估架構，可將較依賴個人經驗之施工判斷轉化為具分類、量化及比較功能之分析方式，供規劃設計、投標前評估、設備選擇及施工風險管理參考。惟目前僅以三處案例驗證，且各因子採相同權重，未納入工程成本、工期及經濟效益。未來可增加案例數量、進行專家交叉評估並導入因子權重，以提升評估架構之客觀性與應用價值。

This study develops a structured method for evaluating construction conditions in trenchless pipe jacking for wastewater sewer systems in Taiwan. Pipe-jacking projects are influenced by geology, weather, underground utilities, working space, equipment, personnel, construction methods, and pipe materials. In engineering practice, these factors are often assessed primarily through individual experience, making systematic project comparison and knowledge transfer difficult. Therefore, three representative cases in Taitung City, the Xiaogang District of Kaohsiung City, and Chaozhou Township of Pingtung County were selected to examine whether practical construction experience could be classified and transformed into a quantitative and comparable evaluation framework. The proposed method is intended to support preliminary risk identification, construction planning, equipment selection, and comparison among pipe-jacking projects.

1.內政部營建署，《污水下水道發展方案核定本》，臺北市：內政部營建署，2009a。
2.內政部營建署，《污水下水道第四期建設計畫（98至103年度）核定本》，臺北市：內政部營建署，2009b。
3.內政部營建署，《污水下水道第五期建設計畫（104至109年度）核定本》，臺北市：內政部營建署，2014。
4.內政部，《污水下水道第六期建設計畫（110至115年度）核定本》，臺北市：內政部，2020。
5.社團法人台灣下水道協會，《下水道短（小）管直線推進技術手冊編制及虛擬實境模擬訓練系統研發》，臺北市：內政部營建署委託辦理，2020。
6.內政部國土管理署，《全國污水下水道用戶接管普及率及整體污水處理率統計表》，臺北市：內政部國土管理署，2026。
7.舩橋透，〈以推進技術的進一步發展為目標〉，《月刊推進技術》，第39卷，第7期，頁4–13，2024。
8.屏東縣政府，《屏東縣潮州鎮污水下水道系統（第一期）管線及用戶接管工程（第一標）細部設計圖說（核定版）》，屏東縣：屏東縣政府，2025。
9.高雄市政府水利局，《小港路區域污水次幹管、分支管及用戶接管工程（Ⅱ）細部設計圖說（核定版）》，高雄市：高雄市政府水利局，2024。
10.國家發展委員會，《110年度行政院管制「污水下水道第六期建設計畫」查證報告》，臺北市：國家發展委員會，2021。
11.台東縣政府，《台東市污水下水道系統第二期工程第一標（A管線系統及B管線系統下游）細部設計圖說（核定版）》，台東縣：台東縣政府，2023。
12.謝啟萬、馬志安，〈未使用既有污水下水道幹管狀況調查與修繕—以台東市幹管為例〉，《2021工程永續與土木防災研討會論文集》，頁246–255，2021。
13.Bosseler, B., Homann, D., Brüggemann, T., Naismith, I., and Rubinato, M., “Quality assessment of CIPP lining in sewers: Crucial knowledge acquired by IKT and research gaps identified in Germany,” Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, Vol. 143, Article 105425, 2024.
14.Cheng, W. C., Ni, J. C., Arulrajah, A., and Huang, H. W., “A simple approach for characterising tunnel bore conditions based upon pipe-jacking data,” Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, Vol. 71, pp. 494–504, 2018.
15.Cheng, W. C., Wang, L., Xue, Z. F., Ni, J. C., Rahman, M. M., and Arulrajah, A., “Lubrication performance of pipejacking in soft alluvial deposits,” Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, Vol. 91, Article 102991, 2019.
16.Haurum, J. B., and Moeslund, T. B., “Sewer-ML: A multi-label sewer defect classification dataset and benchmark,” Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pp. 13456–13467, 2021.
17.Hicks, J., Kaushal, V., and Jamali, K., “A comparative review of trenchless cured-in-place pipe (CIPP) with spray applied pipe lining (SAPL) renewal methods for pipelines,” Frontiers in Water, Vol. 4, Article 904821, 2022.
18.Hsu, J. M., and Shou, K. J., “Experimental study of the separated joint of an underground pipeline rehabilitated by cured-in-place pipe,” Underground Space, Vol. 7, No. 4, pp. 543–563, 2022a.
19.Hsu, J. M., and Shou, K. J., “Numerical analysis of the mechanical behavior of separated joints in underground pipelines rehabilitated by cured-in-place pipes,” Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, Vol. 125, Article 104520, 2022b.
20.Leu, S. S., Wen, P. H., Ludiansari, M., and Gahi, J., “Risk, robustness and microtunneling machine selection under geological uncertainty of clayed sand layer in Taiwan,” Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, Vol. 165, Article 106876, 2025.
21.Ma, P., Shimada, H., Sasaoka, T., Hamanaka, A., Moses, D. N., Dintwe, T. K. M., Matsumoto, F., Ma, B., and Huang, S., “A new method for predicting the friction resistance in rectangular pipe-jacking,” Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, Vol. 123, Article 104338, 2022.
22.Ma, P., Shimada, H., Huang, S., Moses, D. N., Zhao, G., and Ma, B., “Transition of the pipe jacking technology in Japan and investigation of its application status,” Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, Vol. 139, Article 105212, 2023.
23.Sheil, B. B., Suryasentana, S. K., Templeman, J. O., Phillips, B. M., Cheng, W. C., and Zhang, L., “Prediction of pipe-jacking forces using a Bayesian updating approach,” Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, Vol. 148, No. 1, Article 04021173, 2022.
24.Sun, L., Zhu, J., Tan, J., Li, X., Li, R., Deng, H., Zhang, X., Liu, B., and Zhu, X., “Deep learning-assisted automated sewage pipe defect detection for urban water environment management,” Science of the Total Environment, Vol. 882, Article 163562, 2023.
25.Wadood, A., McCabe, B. A., and Sheil, B. B., “Field monitoring and instrumentation in microtunnelling/pipe jacking: A review and future directions,” Underground Space, Vol. 22, pp. 225–240, 2025.
26.Yang, Y., Liu, Y., Zhang, J., Zhang, Z., and Li, Q., “Jacking Force Prediction for Long-Distance Pipe by Integrating Physical Information and Adversarial Learning Mechanism,” Buildings, Vol. 15, No. 8, Article 1337, 2025.