Science China Technological Sciences

, Volume 61, Issue 4, pp 475–495 | Cite as

State-of-the-art of 3D printing technology of cementitious material—An emerging technique for construction

Review

Abstract

In recent few years, significant improvement has been made in developing largescale 3D printer to accommodate the need of industrial-scale 3D printing. Cementitious materials that are compatible with 3D printing promote rapid application of this innovative technique in the construction field with advantages of cost effective, high efficiency, design flexibility and environmental friendly. This paper firstly reviews existing 3D printing techniques that are currently being used in commercial 3D printers. It then summarizes three latest development of largescale 3D printing systems and identifies their relationships and limiting factors. Thereafter, critical factors that are used to evaluate the workability and printable performance of cementitious materials are specified. Easy-extrusive, easy-flowing, well-buildable, and proper setting time are significant for cementitious material to meet the critical requirements of a freeform construction process. Finally, main advantages, potential applications and the prospects of future research of 3D printing in construction technology are suggested. The objective of this work is to review current design methodologies and operational constraints of largescale 3D printing system and provide references for optimizing the performance of cementitious material and promote its responsible use with largescale 3D printing technology.

Keywords

3D printing cementitious material construction automation 

References

  1. 1.
    American Society for Material and Testing (ASTM). Standard Terminology for Additive Manufacturing Technologies. vol. F2792-12a. ASTM International, West Consholhocken, United States. 2009, http://www.astm.org/DATABASE.CART/HISTORICAL/F2792-10.htmGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Singh M, Haverinen H M, Dhagat P, et al. Inkjet printing-process and its applications Adv Mater, 2010, 22: 673–685Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Labonnote N, Rønnquist A, Manum B, et al. Additive construction: State-of-the-art, challenges and opportunities Automat Constr, 2016, 72: 347–366Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Berman B. 3-D printing: The new industrial revolution. Bus Horiz, 2012, 55: 155–162Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Gao W, Zhang Y, Ramanujan D, et al. The status, challenges, and future of additive manufacturing in engineering Comput Aided Des, 2015, 69: 65–89Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Zhang D, Chi B, Li B, et al. Fabrication of highly conductive graphene flexible circuits by 3D printing Synth Met, 2016, 217: 79–86Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Jiang Q, Feng X, Gong Y, et al. Reverse modelling of natural rock joints using 3D scanning and 3D printing Comput Geotech, 2016, 73: 210–220Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Sun J, Peng Z, Yan L, et al. 3D food printing—An innovative way of mass customization in food fabrication. Int J Bioprint, 2015, 1: 27–38Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Hull C W. Apparatus for production of three-dimensional objects by stereolithography. US Patent 5556590, 1986Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Utela B, Storti D, Anderson R, et al. A review of process development steps for new material systems in three dimensional printing (3DP). J Manuf Process, 2008, 10: 96–104Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Henke K, Treml S. Wood based bulk material in 3D printing processes for applications in construction Eur J Wood Prod, 2013, 71: 139–141Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Goyanes A, Buanz A B M, Basit A W, et al. Fused-filament 3D printing (3DP) for fabrication of tablets. Int J Pharm, 2014, 476: 88–92Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ju Y, Wang L, Xie H, et al. Visualization and transparentization of the structure and stress field of aggregated geomaterials through 3D printing and photoelastic techniques Rock Mech Rock Eng, 2017, 50: 1383–1407Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Hsu C Y, Chen D Y, Lai M Y, et al. EDM electrode manufacturing using RP combining electroless plating with electroforming. Int J Adv Manuf Technol, 2008, 38: 915–924Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Griffini G, Invernizzi M, Levi M, et al. 3D-printable CFR polymer composites with dual-cure sequential IPNs. Polymer, 2016, 91: 174–179Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Invernizzi M, Natale G, Levi M, et al. UV-assisted 3D printing of glass and carbon fiber-reinforced dual-cure polymer composites. Materials, 2016, 9: 583–595Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Melchels F P W, Feijen J, Grijpma D W. A review on stereolithography and its applications in biomedical engineering. Biomaterials, 2010, 31: 6121–6130Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Chia H N, Wu B M. Recent advances in 3D printing of biomaterials J Biological Eng, 2015, 9: 1–14Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Pegna J. Exploratory investigation of solid freeform construction Automat Constr, 1997, 5: 427–437Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Khoshnevis B, Dutton R. Innovative rapid prototyping process makes large sized, smooth surfaced complex shapes in a wide variety of materials Mater Technol, 1998, 13: 53–56Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Dini E. D-shape printers. 2007, http://d-shape.com/d-shape-printersGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Designboom. Stone spray robot produces architecture from soil. 2012, http://www.designboom.com/design/stone-spray-robot-produces-architecture-from-soilGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Platte B. Branch technology is 3D printing the future of construction one wall at a time. 2015, https://www.3dprintingindustry.com/news/branch-technology-is-3d-printing-the-future-of-construction-one-wall-at-a-time-54149Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Feng L, Liang Y. Study on the status quo and problems of 3D printed buildings in China Glob J Hum Soc Sci Res, 2014, 14: 7–10Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    WASP. The first adobe building. 2016, http://www.xinkebot.com/en/nd.jsp?_np=103_420&id=220Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Gibbons G J, Williams R, Purnell P, et al. 3D Printing of cement composites. Adv Appl Ceram, 2010, 109: 287–290Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Maier A K, Dezmirean L, Will J, et al. Three-dimensional printing of flash-setting calcium aluminate cement. J Mater Sci, 2011, 46: 2947–2954Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Xia M, Sanjayan J. Method of formulating geopolymer for 3D printing for construction applications Mater Des, 2016, 110: 382–390Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Khoshnevis B, Bukkapatnam S, Kwon H, et al. Experimental investigation of contour crafting using ceramics materials Rapid Prototyp J, 2001, 7: 32–42Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Ju Y, Jia Y D, Liu H B, et al. Mesomechanism of steel fiber reinforcement and toughening of reactive powder concrete Sci China Ser E-Technol Sci, 2007, 50: 815–832Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Ju Y, Wang L, Liu H, et al. An experimental investigation of the thermal spalling of polypropylene-fibered reactive powder concrete exposed to elevated temperatures Sci Bull, 2015, 60: 2022–2040Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Al-Hadithi A I, Hilal N N. The possibility of enhancing some properties of self-compacting concrete by adding waste plastic fibers J Build Eng, 2016, 8: 20–28Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Salvador R P, Cavalaro S H P, Cincotto M A, et al. Parameters controlling early age hydration of cement pastes containing accelerators for sprayed concrete Cement Concrete Res, 2016, 89: 230–248Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Rouhana C M, Aoun M S, Faek F S, et al. The reduction of construction duration by implementing contourontour crafting (3D printing). In: Proceedings for the 22nd Annual Conference of the International Group for Lean Construction. Volume 22. Oslo, Norway, 2014Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Khoshnevis B, Hwang D, Yao K T, et al. Mega-scale fabrication by Contour Crafting. Int J Indus Sys Eng, 2006, 1: 301–320Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Hopkinson N, Dickens P M. Analysis of rapid manufacturing—Using layer manufacturing processes for production P I Mech Eng C-J Mec, 2003, 217: 31–39Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Malaeb Z, Hachem H, Tourbah A, et al. 3D concrete printing: Machine and mix design. Int J Civil Eng, 2015, 6: 14–22Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Wu P, Wang J, Wang X. A critical review of the use of 3-D printing in the construction industry. Automat Constr, 2016, 68: 21–31Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Perkins I, Skitmore M. Three-dimensional printing in the construction industry: A review. Int J Constr Manage, 2015, 15: 1–9Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Rengier F, Mehndiratta A, von Tengg-Kobligk H, et al. 3D printing based on imaging data: Review of medical applications. Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg, 2010, 5: 335–341Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Kaye R, Goldstein T, Zeltsman D, et al. Three dimensional printing: A review on the utility within medicine and otolaryngology Int J Pediatr Otorhi, 2016, 89: 145–148Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    3D printing. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3D_printingGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Kumar S, Kruth J P. Composites by rapid prototyping technology Mater Des, 2010, 31: 850–856Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Ma X L. Research on application of SLA technology in the 3D printing technology Appl Mech Mater Des, 2013, 401-403: 938–941Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Kotlinski J. Mechanical properties of commercial rapid prototyping materials Rapid Prototyp J, 2014, 20: 499–510Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Günther D, Heymel B, Franz Günther J, et al. Continuous 3D-printing for additive manufacturing Rapid Prototyp J, 2014, 20: 320–327Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Choudhari C M, Patil V D. Product development and its comparative analysis by SLA, SLS and FDM rapid prototyping processes. In: IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering, Volume 149. Bangalore, India, 2016. 012009Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Mierzejewska A, Markowicz W. Selective laser sintering-binding mechanism and assistance in medical applications Adv Mater Sci, 2015, 15: 20–31Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Saprykin A A, Babakova E V, Ibragimov E A, et al. Prospects of creating products using selective laser sintering Appl Mech Mater, 2015, 770: 608–611Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    Akande S O, Dalgarno K W, Munguia J, et al. Assessment of tests for use in process and quality control systems for selective laser sintering of polyamide powders J Mater Process Technol, 2016, 229: 549–561Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Erdal M, Dag S, Jande Y, et al. Manufacturing of functionally graded porous products by selective laser sintering Mater Sci Forum, 2009, 631-632: 253–258Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    3D system. Introduction of the metal 3D printer. https://uk.3dsystems.com/3d-printers/prox-dmp-200Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    Salmoria G V, Lafratta F H, Biava M M, et al. Rapid manufacturing and rapid tooling of polymer miniaturized parts using Stereolithography J Braz Soc Mech Sci Eng, 2008, 30: 7–10Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    Lifton V A, Lifton G, Simon S. Options for additive rapid prototyping methods (3D printing) in MEMS technology Rapid Prototyp J, 2014, 20: 403–412Google Scholar
  55. 55.
    Ju Y, Xie H, Zheng Z, et al. Visualization of the complex structure and stress field inside rock by means of 3D printing technology Chin Sci Bull, 2014, 59: 5354–5365Google Scholar
  56. 56.
    Casavola C, Cazzato A, Moramarco V, et al. Orthotropic mechanical properties of fused deposition modelling parts described by classical laminate theory Mater Des, 2016, 90: 453–458Google Scholar
  57. 57.
    Yan X, Gu P. A review of rapid prototyping technologies and systems. Comp-Aided Des, 1996, 28: 307–318Google Scholar
  58. 58.
    Hashemi Sanatgar R, Campagne C, Nierstrasz V. Investigation of the adhesion properties of direct 3D printing of polymers and nanocomposites on textiles: Effect of FDM printing process parameters Appl Surf Sci, 2017, 403: 551–563Google Scholar
  59. 59.
    Ju Y, Wang L, Xie H, et al. Visualization of the three-dimensional structure and stress field of aggregated concrete materials through 3D printing and frozen-stress techniques Constr Build Mater, 2017, 143: 121–137Google Scholar
  60. 60.
    Lim S, Buswell R A, Le T T, et al. Developments in constructionscale additive manufacturing processes Autom Constr, 2012, 21: 262–268Google Scholar
  61. 61.
    Cesaretti G, Dini E, De Kestelier X, et al. Building components for an outpost on the Lunar soil by means of a novel 3D printing technology Acta Astronautica, 2014, 93: 430–450Google Scholar
  62. 62.
    Krassenstein E. D-Shape looks to 3D print bridges, a military bunker, and concrete/metal mixture. 2014, https://www.3dprint.com/27229/d-shape-3d-printed-militaryGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Krassenstein E. D-Shape intern unveils plans to 3D print unique buildings in Australia & beyond. 2015, https://www.3dprint.com/64469/3d-printed-buildings-australia/Google Scholar
  64. 64.
    Colla V, Dini E. Large scale 3D printing: From deep sea to the moon. In: Canessa E, Fonda C, Zennaro M, Eds. Low-Cost 3D Printing for Science, Education and Sustainable Development. Trieste, Italy: ICTP—The Abdus Salam Centre for Theoretical Physics, 2013. 127–132Google Scholar
  65. 65.
    Taylor D. “Endless” house to be built using giant 3D printer. 2013, http://newatlas.com/giant-3d-printer-endless-house/25913Google Scholar
  66. 66.
    Khoshnevis B. Automated construction by contour crafting—Related robotics and information technologies Automat Constr, 2004, 13: 5–19Google Scholar
  67. 67.
    Hwang D. Contour crafting: The emerging construction technology. In: IIE Annual Conference and Exposition. Atlanta, GA, 2005Google Scholar
  68. 68.
    Zhang J, Khoshnevis B. Optimal machine operation planning for construction by Contour Crafting Automat Constr, 2013, 29: 50–67Google Scholar
  69. 69.
    Bosscher P, Williams Ii R L, Bryson L S, et al. Cable-suspended robotic contour crafting system. Automat Constr, 2007, 17: 45–55Google Scholar
  70. 70.
    Rudenko A. 3D concrete house printer. 2015, http://www.designboom.com/technology/3d-printed-concrete-castle-minnesota-andrey- rudenko-08-28-2014Google Scholar
  71. 71.
    Winsun. WinSun China builds world’s first 3D printed villa and tallest 3D printed apartment building. 2015, http://www.3ders.org/articles/20150118-winsun-builds-world-first-3d-printed-villa-andtallest-3d-printed-building-in-china.htmlGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    Lim S, Buswell R, Le T, et al. Development of a viable concrete printing process. In: Proceedings of the 28th International Symposium on Automation and Robotics in Construction, (ISARC2011). Seoul, South Korea, 2011. 665–670Google Scholar
  73. 73.
    Lim S, Le T, Webster J, et al. Fabricating construction components using layered manufacturing technology. In: Global Innovation in Construction Conference. Leicestershire, UK: Loughborough University, 2009. 512–520Google Scholar
  74. 74.
    Clare Scott. 3D printed, livable tiny house built in only 24 hours by the Vesta V2 concrete printer. 2016, https://3dprint.com/139022/vesta-3d-printed-tiny-houseGoogle Scholar
  75. 75.
    Bridget B M. Eindhoven University of Technology (TU/e) unveils massive robotic concrete 3D printer, displays new pavilion. 2016, https://3dprint.com/139988/tue-concrete-3d-printer-pavilionGoogle Scholar
  76. 76.
    Lim S, Buswell R A, Valentine P J, et al. Modelling curved-layered printing paths for fabricating large-scale construction components Addit Manuf, 2016, 12: 216–230Google Scholar
  77. 77.
    Gosselin C, Duballet R, Roux P, et al. Large-scale 3D printing of ultra-high performance concrete—A new processing route for architects and builders. Mater Des, 2016, 100: 102–109Google Scholar
  78. 78.
    Buswell R A, Thorpe A, Soar R C, et al. Design, data and process issues for mega-scale rapid manufacturing machines used for construction. Automat Constr, 2008, 17: 923–929Google Scholar
  79. 79.
    Silva Y F, Robayo R A, Mattey P E, et al. Properties of self-compacting concrete on fresh and hardened with residue of masonry and recycled concrete Constr Build Mater, 2016, 124: 639–644Google Scholar
  80. 80.
    Mastali M, Dalvand A. Use of silica fume and recycled steel fibers in self-compacting concrete (SCC) Constr Build Mater, 2016, 125: 196–209Google Scholar
  81. 81.
    Le T T, Austin S A, Lim S, et al. Mix design and fresh properties for high-performance printing concrete Mater Struct, 2012, 45: 1221–1232Google Scholar
  82. 82.
    Perrot A, Rangeard D, Pierre A. Structural built-up of cement-based materials used for 3D-printing extrusion techniques Mater Struct, 2016, 49: 1213–1220Google Scholar
  83. 83.
    Singh S B, Munjal P, Thammishetti N. Role of water/cement ratio on strength development of cement mortar J Build Eng, 2015, 4: 94–100Google Scholar
  84. 84.
    Kong H J, Bike S G, Li V C. Development of a self-consolidating engineered cementitious composite employing electrosteric dispersion/stabilization Cem Conc Comp, 2003, 25: 301–309Google Scholar
  85. 85.
    Mardani-Aghabaglou A, Tuyan M, Yilmaz G, et al. Effect of different types of superplasticizer on fresh, rheological and strength properties of self-consolidating concrete Constr Build Mater, 2013, 47: 1020–1025Google Scholar
  86. 86.
    Lorimer P, Omari M A, Claisse P A. Workability of cement pastes ACI Mater J, 2001, 98: 476–482Google Scholar
  87. 87.
    Lee S H, Kim H J, Sakai E, et al. Effect of particle size distribution of fly ash-cement system on the fluidity of cement pastes Cement Concrete Res, 2003, 33: 763–768Google Scholar
  88. 88.
    Burgos-Montes O, Palacios M, Rivilla P, et al. Compatibility between superplasticizer admixtures and cements with mineral additions Constr Build Mater, 2012, 31: 300–309Google Scholar
  89. 89.
    Kwan A K H, Wong H H C. Effects of packing density, excess water and solid surface area on flowability of cement paste Adv Cement Res, 2008, 20: 1–11Google Scholar
  90. 90.
    Park C K, Noh M H, Park T H. Rheological properties of cementitious materials containing mineral admixtures Cement Concrete Res, 2005, 35: 842–849Google Scholar
  91. 91.
    Ferraris C F, Obla K H, Hill R. The influence of mineral admixtures on the rheology of cement paste and concrete Cement Concrete Res, 2001, 31: 245–255Google Scholar
  92. 92.
    Lachemi M, Hossain K M A, Lambros V, et al. Performance of new viscosity modifying admixtures in enhancing the rheological properties of cement paste Cement Concrete Res, 2004, 34: 185–193Google Scholar
  93. 93.
    Sonebi M, Lachemi M, Hossain K M A. Optimisation of rheological parameters and mechanical properties of superplasticised cement grouts containing metakaolin and viscosity modifying admixture Constr Build Mater, 2013, 38: 126–138Google Scholar
  94. 94.
    Lin X Q, Zhang T, He L. Preparation, properties and application of cement-based building 3D printing materials. Concr Australia, 2016, 42: 59–67Google Scholar
  95. 95.
    Paglia C, Wombacher F, Böhni H. The influence of alkali-free and alkaline shotcrete accelerators within cement systems Cement Concrete Res, 2001, 31: 913–918Google Scholar
  96. 96.
    Maltese C, Pistolesi C, Bravo A, et al. A case history: Effect of moisture on the setting behaviour of a Portland cement reacting with an alkali-free accelerator. Cement Concrete Res, 2007, 37: 856–865Google Scholar
  97. 97.
    Feng P, Meng X, Chen J F, et al. Mechanical properties of structures 3D printed with cementitious powders Constr Build Mater, 2015, 93: 486–497Google Scholar
  98. 98.
    Nerella V N N M. CONPrint3D-3D printing technology for onsite construction. Concr Australia, 2016, 42: 36–39Google Scholar
  99. 99.
    Shao Y, Qiu J, Shah S P. Microstructure of extruded cement-bonded fiberboard Cement Concrete Res, 2001, 31: 1153–1161Google Scholar
  100. 100.
    Christ S, Schnabel M, Vorndran E, et al. Fiber reinforcement during 3D printing Mater Lett, 2015, 139: 165–168Google Scholar
  101. 101.
    Nerella V N, Krause M, Näther M, et al. Studying printability of fresh concrete for formwork free Concrete on-site 3D Printing technology (CONPrint3D). In: Conference on Rheology of Building Materials. Regensburg, Germany, 2016Google Scholar
  102. 102.
    Lee S J, Won J P. Shrinkage characteristics of structural nano-synthetic fibre-reinforced cementitious composites Composite Struct, 2016, 157: 236–243Google Scholar
  103. 103.
    Bissonnette B, Attiogbe E K, Miltenberger M A, et al. Drying shrinkage, curling, and joint opening of slabs-on-ground ACI Mater J, 2007, 104: 259–267Google Scholar
  104. 104.
    Zhang J, Gong C, Guo Z, et al. Engineered cementitious composite with characteristic of low drying shrinkage Cement Concrete Res, 2009, 39: 303–312Google Scholar
  105. 105.
    Rongbing B, Jian S. Synthesis and evaluation of shrinkage-reducing admixture for cementitious materials Cement Concrete Res, 2005, 35: 445–448Google Scholar
  106. 106.
    Xu J, Ding L, Love P E D. Digital reproduction of historical building ornamental components: From 3D scanning to 3D printing Automat Constr, 2017, 76: 85–96Google Scholar
  107. 107.
    Jeon K H, Park M B, Kang M K, et al. Development of an automated freeform construction system and its construction materials. In: Proceedings of the 30th International Symposium on Automation and Robotics in Construction and Mining (ISARC 2013). Montreal, Canada: Canadian Institute of Mining, Metallurgy and Petroleum, 2013. 1359–1365Google Scholar
  108. 108.
    Flexible production of building elements Accessed. 2008, http://blog.fabric.ch/index.php?/archives/212-ROB-Flexible-Production-of-Building-Elements.htmlGoogle Scholar
  109. 109.
    Buswell R A, Soar R C, Gibb A G F, et al. Freeform construction: Mega-scale rapid manufacturing for construction Automat Constr, 2007, 16: 224–231Google Scholar
  110. 110.
    Lu W, Yuan H. Exploring critical success factors for waste management in construction projects of China Resour Conserv Recycl, 2010, 55: 201–208Google Scholar
  111. 111.
    Australia S W. Model work health and safety regualtions. 2016, https://www.safeworkaustralia.gov.au/doc/model-work-health-andsafety-regulationsGoogle Scholar
  112. 112.
    Kreiger M, Pearce J M. Environmental life cycle analysis of distributed three-dimensional printing and conventional manufacturing of polymer products ACS Sustain Chem Eng, 2013, 1: 1511–1519Google Scholar
  113. 113.
    Deep research and investment strategy analysis consulting report of 3D printing industry in China from 2015 to 2020 (in Chinese). 2015, http://www.chyxx.com/research/201701/483678.htmlGoogle Scholar
  114. 114.
    Belezina J. D-shape 3D printer can print full-sized houses. 2012, http://www.newatlas.com/d-shape-3d-printer/21594Google Scholar
  115. 115.
    Bak D. Rapid prototyping or rapid production? 3D printing processes move industry towards the latter Assem Autom, 2003, 23: 340–345Google Scholar
  116. 116.
    Yossef M, Chen A. Applicability and limitations of 3D printing for civil structures. In: Proceedings of the 2015 Conference on Autonomous and Robotic Construction of Infrastructure. Ames, USA, 2015. 237–246Google Scholar
  117. 117.
    Camile H L, Kalven L E, Lloyd R. Redmond Lloyd Construction 3D printing. Concr Australia, 2016, 42: 30–35Google Scholar
  118. 118.
    Robert H. Think formwork-reduced cost. Struct Mag, 2007: 12–14Google Scholar
  119. 119.
    Wolfs R J M. 3D printing of concrete structures. Dissertation of Masteral Degree. Eindhoven, Netherlands: Eindhoven University of Technology, 2015Google Scholar
  120. 120.
    Shou W, Wang J, Wang X, et al. A comparative review of building information modelling implementation in building and infrastructure industries. Arch Comput Meth Eng, 2015, 22: 291–308Google Scholar
  121. 121.
    Chang Y F, Shih S G. BIM-based computer-aided architectural design. Comp-Aided Des Appl, 2013, 10: 97–109Google Scholar
  122. 122.
    Arayici Y, Coates P, Koskela L, et al. BIM adoption and implementation for architectural practices. Struct Survey, 2011, 29: 7–25Google Scholar
  123. 123.
    Arayici Y, Egbu C O, Coates P. Building information modelling (BIM) implementation and remote construction projects: issues, challenges, and critiques J Inf Technol Constr, 2012, 17: 75–92Google Scholar
  124. 124.
    Contour Crafting. Technologies for building immediate infrastructure on the moon and mars for future colonization. http://contourcrafting.com/space-applicationsGoogle Scholar
  125. 125.
    Schrunk D, Sharpe B, Cooper B, et al. The moon: Resources, future development and colonization. Wiley-Praxis Series on Space Science and Technology, 1999Google Scholar
  126. 126.
    Kading B, Straub J. Utilizing in-situ resources and 3D printing structures for a manned Mars mission Acta Astronaut, 2015, 107: 317–326Google Scholar
  127. 127.
    Gibson I, Kvan T, Wai Ming L. Rapid prototyping for architectural models Rapid Prototyp J, 2002, 8: 91–95Google Scholar
  128. 128.
    Campbell T, Williams C, Ivanova O. Could 3D printing change the world? Technologies, Potential, and Implications of Additive Manufacturing. Strategic Foresight Report. Washington, DC: Atlantic Council, 2011Google Scholar
  129. 129.
    Mcgee W, Leon M P D. Experiments in additive clay depositions. Rob Fabric Archit, Art Des, 2014: 261–272Google Scholar
  130. 130.
    Leach N, Carlson A, Khoshnevis B, et al. Robotic construction by contour crafting: The case of Lunar construction Int J Archi Comput, 2012, 10: 423–438Google Scholar
  131. 131.
    Jacobsen S, Haugan L, Hammer T A, et al. Flow conditions of fresh mortar and concrete in different pipes Cement Concrete Res, 2009, 39: 997–1006Google Scholar
  132. 132.
    Austin S A, Goodier C I, Robins P J. Low-volume wet-process sprayed concrete: Pumping and spraying. Mat Struct, 2005, 38: 229–237Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Science China Press and Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.College of Architecture and Civil EngineeringBeijing University of TechnologyBeijingChina
  2. 2.School of Civil, Environmental and Mining EngineeringThe University of Western AustraliaCrawleyAustralia
  3. 3.School of Mechanics and Civil EngineeringChina University of Mining & Technology at BeijingBeijingChina
  4. 4.State Key Laboratory of Coal Resources and Safe MiningChina University of Mining & Technology at BeijingBeijingChina

Personalised recommendations