Environmental assessment of large-scale 3D printing in construction: A comparative study between cob and concrete

Alhumayani, Hashem; Gomaa, Mohamed; Soebarto, Veronica; Jabi, Wassim

doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.122463

Cited by 132 publications

(49 citation statements)

References 34 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, the current construction method of 3D printed concrete has no significant economic and environmental benefits compared with the traditional construction method, which can be attributed to the following reasons. Firstly, compared to traditional construction, the environmental impact of 3D concrete printing technology is generally higher because of the high cement content as the dominant factor [83,84]. The mix of 3D printed concrete needs to be optimized to reduce the environmental impact.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

3D printed concrete components and structures: an overview

Xiao,

Liu,

Ding

et al. 2021

Sustain. Struct.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper aims to present an overview and explore components or structures suitable for 3D printed concrete. Most traditional structural forms are not well suitable for 3D printed concrete. To be more specific, it cannot fully consider the characteristics and advantages of 3D printing such as individualization and digitalization. Several 3D-printing-specific structure forms (including hollow form, tree form, arch form, and structure-functional form) are classified and the relevant successful cases are demonstrated. Moreover, the application potential of 3D printed concrete structures is illustrated and the limitations as well as the solutions for the application of 3D printed concrete in practical projects are also summarized. Based on the classification of different reinforcement materials, several reinforcement methods are intensively discussed for 3D printed concrete including steel bars, fibers and other reinforcement materials. The comparison of economic and environmental benefits between 3D concrete printing technology and traditional construction method is discussed respectively. Finally, the expected evolution of 3D printed structures is put forward and recommended.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

3D printed concrete components and structures: an overview

Xiao,

Liu,

Ding

et al. 2021

Sustain. Struct.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Two LCA approaches are commonly investigated in the construction industry, namely, cradle to grave and cradle to site. The first method includes all materials and processes in a comprehensive assessment, while the second approach focuses on certain aspects of the construction project such as the materials [17]. In this study, a cradle to site approach was selected and the LCA was performed in four stages including, goal and scope, life cycle inventory (LCI), and life cycle impact assessment (LCIA) analysis, and results interpretation.…”

Section: Life Cycle Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Moreover, the study attributed the high emissions to cement production processes. Another study compared the environmental impacts of 3D printing and conventionally built house [17]. The study utilized concrete and cob (a sustainable material) to run the analysis.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Environmental Footprint and Economics of a Full-Scale 3D-Printed House

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

3D printing, is a newly adopted technique in the construction sector with the aim to improve the economics and alleviate environmental impacts. This study assesses the eco-efficiency of 3D printing compared to conventional construction methods in large-scale structural fabrication. A single-storey 3D-printed house was selected in the United Arab Emirates to conduct the comparative assessment against traditional concrete construction. The life cycle assessment (LCA) framework is utilized to quantify the environmental loads of raw materials extraction and manufacturing, as well as energy consumption during construction and operation phases. The economics of the selected structural systems were investigated through life cycle costing analysis (LCCA), that included mainly the construction costs and energy savings. An eco-efficiency analysis was employed to aggregate the results of the LCA and LCCA into a single framework to aid in decision making by selecting the optimum and most eco-efficient alternative. The findings revealed that houses built using additive manufacturing and 3D printed materials were more environmentally favourable. The conventional construction method had higher impacts when compared to the 3D printing method with global warming potential of 1154.20 and 608.55 kg CO2 eq, non-carcinogenic toxicity 675.10 and 11.9 kg 1,4-DCB, and water consumption 233.35 and 183.95 m3, respectively. The 3D printed house was also found to be an economically viable option, with 78% reduction in the overall capital costs when compared to conventional construction methods. The combined environmental and economic results revealed that the overall process of the 3D-printed house had higher eco efficiency compared to concrete-based construction. The main results of the sensitivity analysis revealed that up to 90% of the environmental impacts in 3D printing mortars can be mitigated with decreasing cement ratios.

show abstract

“…LCA is one of the most widely used tools for building environment assessment [71]. For example, Alhumayani et al [72] used LCA to explore the environmental impact of different building materials and processes in large-scale 3DP construction. Han et al [73] attempted to use LCA to assess the environmental impact and economic benefits of recycled 3DP buildings.…”

Section: Environmental Challenges and Trendsmentioning

confidence: 99%

3D Printing in Construction: Current Status, Implementation Hindrances, and Development Agenda

Ning

Liu

et al. 2021

Advances in Civil Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

3D printing (3DP) is regarded as an innovation that contributes to automation in civil engineering and offers benefits in design, greenness, and efficiency. It is necessary to objectively analyze the current status and challenges associated with 3DP and identify future research directions to properly understand its construction applications. Previous research has focused more on the technical dimension of 3DP; however, the nontechnical dimension of the technology may hinder its implementation and thus must be paid particular attention to. This study presents a systematic review of the existing literature from both technical and nontechnical dimensions by combining quantitative and qualitative studies. The quantitative study was conducted using scientometric methods. The qualitative study analyzed information, including the technical research status and nontechnical challenges and trends. Two aspects of technical research status are presented, including materials and processes. In addition, nontechnical challenges and trends from the economic, environmental, social, and legislative aspects are proposed. This study provides a comprehensive agenda to advance 3DP in construction and proposes research interests, challenges, and future topics. It is intended to help construction practitioners systematically master existing processes and materials and assess the application degree and necessity of 3DP.

show abstract

Environmental assessment of large-scale 3D printing in construction: A comparative study between cob and concrete

Cited by 132 publications

References 34 publications

3D printed concrete components and structures: an overview

3D printed concrete components and structures: an overview

Environmental Footprint and Economics of a Full-Scale 3D-Printed House

3D Printing in Construction: Current Status, Implementation Hindrances, and Development Agenda

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About