Skip to main content


Log in

Comparison between mono- and bi-component extruders in concrete additive manufacturing

  • Full Research Article
  • Published:
Progress in Additive Manufacturing Aims and scope Submit manuscript


In a growing mobilisation against climate change, the reduction of the impact of the construction sector is becoming a priority. To achieve this reduction, among the topics to be improved (transport, fine particle emission, water depletion, soil contamination), the global warming potential (GWP) of concrete is clearly the one with the most impact. Cement is the second most used product in the world and emits CO2 in all of its life cycle phases. In absence of a satisfactory alternative, a reduction of the amount of material used is a promising and straightforward path to reduce its impact. Casting, the current method to employ concrete, is inherently inefficient due to constraints of the formwork mould. Additive manufacturing is an interesting alternative to overpass the limitations of the casting process as already proven in other sectors. The implementation of 3D concrete printing (3DCP) is entangled between a tendency for an easy quick cost-effective implementation and the ability to achieve complex structures that require more advanced methods. From the final impact point of view, the bi-component solutions seem to give more promising results than mono-component solutions.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1

Source: Own work

Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Source: Own work

Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Source: 3DCONS Project

Fig. 6

Source: HINDCON Project

Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10

Source: Own work

Fig. 11

Source: HINDCON Project

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

Data sharing is not applicable to this article as no new data were created or analyzed in this study.


  1. Adaloudis M et al (2021) Sustainability tradeoffs in the adoption of 3D concrete printing in the construction industry. J Cleaner Prod.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. A. Hobley et al. (2021) A net-zero world needs zero-carbon concrete. Here’s how to do it. (Accessed 17th Sep, 2022).

  3. Martens P et al (2018) Optimising 3D printed concrete structures using topology optimisation. Fib Symp.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Perkins I et al (2015) Three-dimensional printing in the construction industry: a review. Int J Constr Manag 15(1):1–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Lim S et al (2012) Developments in construction-scale additive manufacturing processes. Autom Constr 21(1):262–268.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Ma W-G et al (2018) 3D printing technology of cementitious material—an emerging technique for construction. Science China Technol Sci 61:475–495.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Muñoz I et al (2021) Life cycle assessment of integrated additive–subtractive concrete 3D printing. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 112(7):2149–2159.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Khoshnevis B (2004) Automated construction by contour crafting—related robotics and information technologies. Autom Constr 13(1):5–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. MarketandMarkets (2018) 3D Concrete Printing Market by Offering (Printing Services, Materials), Technique (Extrusion-based, Powder-based), End-use sector (Building, Infrastructure) and Region (Americas, Asia Pacific, Europe, Middle East) - Global Forecast to 2023. Accessed 12 Jan 2023

  10. Ahmed ZY et al (2020) On-demand additive manufacturing of functionally graded concrete. Virtual Phys Prototyp 15(2):194–210.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Sakin M et al (2017) 3D printing of buildings: construction of the sustainable houses of the future by BIM. Energy Procedia 134:702–711.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Lediga R, Ntakana K, Alabi S (2020) Research report on availability of 3d concrete printing technologies for sustainable human settlements. University of Johannesburg

    Google Scholar 

  13. Bos FP et al (2022) The realities of additively manufactured concrete structures in practice. Cem Concr Res.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Poudelet L et al (2021) Presentation of a concrete additive manufacturing extruder with online rheology modification capabilities. IOP Conf Ser Mater Sci Eng.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. B.Chang. (2022) See how a huge 3D printer is going to build 200 concrete homes in Virginia's tech hub within the next 5 years. (Accessed 17th Sep, 2022).

  16. J. Michelle. (2020) Topology optimization for 3D printing. (Accessed Sep 17, 2022).

  17. Y. Tarhan et al. (2019) Developments of 3d concrete printing process. In Proceedings of the International Civil Engineering and Architecture Conference, Trabzon, Turkey

  18. Ji G et al (2019) A 3D printed ready-mixed concrete power distribution substation: materials and construction technology. Materials (Basel).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Le TT et al (2012) Mix design and fresh properties for high-performance printing concrete. Mater Struct Constr 45(8):1221–1232.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Paul SC et al (2018) Fresh and hardened properties of 3D printable cementitious materials for building and construction. Arch Civ Mech Eng 18(1):311–319.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. National Bureau of Standards (1962) Chemistry of cement: Proceedings of the Fourth International Washington 1960. US department of commerce, Washington, p 660

    Google Scholar 

  22. Liu WJ et al (2021) Prediction model of concrete initial setting time based on stepwise regression analysis. Materials 14(12):3201.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Kalousek GL et al (1943) Composition and physical properties of aqueous extracts from portland cement clinker pastes containing added materials. J Res Natil Bur Stand 30:215–255

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Gosselin C et al (2016) Large-scale 3D printing of ultra-high performance concrete—a new processing route for architects and builders. Mater Des 100:102–109.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Sika group. (2018) “Sika Provides a Boost for the Construction Industry with 3D Concrete Printing” (Accessed 17th Sep, 2022).

  26. LafargeHolcim. (2022) Tector@ 3D build. (Accessed 17th Sep, 2022).

  27. COBOD. (2019) Europe’s first 3D printed building in just 3 days re-printed. (Accessed 17th Sep, 2022).

  28. Xtree (2017) “X-Reef, in the Calanques national park” (Accessed 17th Sep, 2022).

  29. ConcreteConstruction. (2016) “LafargeHolcim Partners with XtreeE in Large-Scale 3D Printing”. (Accessed 17th Sep, 2022).

  30. Esnault V et al (2018) Experience in online modification of rheology and strength acquisition of 3D printable mortars. Rilem.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references


The results of this project have been funded by the EC in the framework of the H2020 Hindcon project Grant agreement ID: 723611

Author information

Authors and Affiliations


Corresponding author

Correspondence to Louison Poudelet.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Poudelet, L., Molina, M.G., Calvo, L. et al. Comparison between mono- and bi-component extruders in concrete additive manufacturing. Prog Addit Manuf 8, 37–46 (2023).

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: