Buildings 12 01319
Buildings 12 01319
Buildings 12 01319
Review
3D Printing Technologies in Architectural Design and
Construction: A Systematic Literature Review
Maša Žujović , Radojko Obradović, Ivana Rakonjac and Jelena Milošević *
Abstract: The proliferation of digital technologies considerably changed the field of architecture.
Digital fabrication pushes architecture into an unexpected new domain of previously unachievable
complexity, detail, and materiality. Understanding these technologies’ impact can help direct future
research, innovate design and construction processes, and improve the education of future profes-
sionals. However, comprehensive reviews offering a holistic perspective on the effects of 3D printing
technologies on architecture are limited. Therefore, this study aims to provide a systematic review
of state-of-the-art research on 3D printing technologies in architectural design and construction.
The review was performed using three major databases, and selected peer-reviewed journal articles
published in the last ten-year period were included in quantitative and qualitative analyses. Using
bibliometric analysis, the research progress is summarized through the identified trend of the annual
number of articles, prominent authors and co-authorship network, and key topics in the literature
organized in three clusters. Further, content analysis of selected articles enabled coding cluster
themes. Moreover, the analysis differentiated two categories of 3D printing technologies based on the
scale of the system, elaborating their peculiarities in terms of materials, methods, and applications.
Finally, challenges and promising directions for future work and research challenges are discussed.
Citation: Žujović, M.; Obradović, R.;
Rakonjac, I.; Milošević, J. 3D Printing Keywords: architecture; design; digital fabrication; construction industry; additive construction;
Technologies in Architectural Design additive manufacturing; rapid prototyping; 3D printing; models; prototypes
and Construction: A Systematic
Literature Review. Buildings 2022, 12,
1319. https://doi.org/10.3390/
buildings12091319 1. Introduction
Academic Editor: Derek The construction industry had to introduce innovative procedures and technolo-
Clements-Croome gies, such as digital fabrication, to respond to architectural design requests for flexibility,
complexity, high performance, detail, personalization of material, and technology [1–5].
Received: 31 July 2022
Automation in architecture [6–8] is offered as an alternative to inefficient and wasteful
Accepted: 23 August 2022
production models. This model of digital architecture is expected to make a difference and
Published: 28 August 2022
positive change in the built environment. Consequently, architectural discipline is expected
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral to work towards fully automated production forms and processes that promote equality,
with regard to jurisdictional claims in sustainability, democracy, diversity, and inclusiveness.
published maps and institutional affil- Understanding the effects of advanced technologies on architectural discipline can
iations. guide future research, innovate design and construction methods, and enhance educa-
tion. Accordingly, the purpose of this work is to discuss state-of-the-art digital fabrication
technologies in architecture, focusing on 3D printing (3DP). Out of all digital fabrication
technologies, 3DP is chosen because of its operational potential in the architecture en-
Copyright: © 2022 by the authors.
gineering and construction (AEC) industry. Applying this technology could enable the
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
This article is an open access article
fabrication of complex structures more sustainably with less material and without the need
distributed under the terms and
for traditional formwork. Another advantage is that 3DP can be used in all stages of the
conditions of the Creative Commons
design process, from form-finding prototypes to the fabrication of full-scale structures.
Attribution (CC BY) license (https:// Additive manufacturing (AM) is the procedure of successive printing layers of ma-
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ terials formed on top of one another [9]. The terms “additive manufacturing” and “3D
4.0/). printing” are often used synonymously to denote the construction of an object through the
successive building of material. 3DP technology has been developing since the mid-1980s
when Charles Hull developed the first commercial 3D printer [10]. Pegna developed the
first large-scale concrete printer in the late 1990s, which enabled the use of 3DP in the
construction industry [11]. Although this technology started developing over 25 years ago,
its rapid development started much later.
The study by Chung et al. [12] showed that the number of papers on using 3DP
technology in the construction industry has increased in the last ten years. Previous
indicates a growing interest in applying and developing this technology in the construction
sector and, consequently, in architecture. With the growing number of papers, many
authors have reviewed this technology and its impact and use in construction [13–24].
These studies, even though extensive, tend to focus on specific aspects of technology and its
application. However, while there are studies covering different aspects of 3DP technology,
current research lacks the systematization needed to provide a general insight into all the
applications of this technology in architecture.
For example, studies [12,25,26] focus on 3DP technology from a more technical stand-
point, discussing printing equipment specifications and limitations. Another common
research topic is the development of printing materials. Materials used for 3DP construc-
tion are often presented from a material science perspective, making those researches too
technically oriented for this paper, as seen in [27,28]. On the other hand, several authors
are focusing their research on specific aspects of the usage of the 3DP technology, such as
its impact on the labor market [29] or environmental impact [30]. There are also papers that
focus on the possible applications of 3DP in architecture, but they mainly review specific
research projects such as printed large-scale architectural elements [31].
This research aims to conduct a comprehensive systematic literature review (SLR) on
the impact of state-of-the-art 3DP technology on architectural design and construction.
Starting from the research question “What is the scope of application of 3DP technology
in architecture?”, three major databases were searched, and relevant publications were
selected and analyzed. The analysis generated findings on the trend of the annual num-
ber of articles, keyword co-occurrence, and clustering. The further analysis enabled the
identification of the main research themes as well as categorization based on the scale
of 3DP systems. Finally, this discussion could be relevant to other researchers because
it summarizes up-to-date accomplishments and trends of development to better identify
experiences and scientific results as well as to recognize possibilities for future research,
innovation, and opportunities for applications of this technology in the AEC industry.
Parameters Values
Information source Scopus, Web of Science, Google Scholar
(a) Keyword method
[using keyword strings: “3D printing” AND “architecture”
Search Strategy OR “design” OR “construction” OR “rapid prototyping” OR
“education”]) and
(b) Snowballing method
(a) Document type: journal papers;
(b) Search language: title, abstract, key words, and full text
Eligibility criteria
only in English;
(c) Data range: 2013–present;
(d) Last update: 25 June 2022
Data collection was done by searching three main databases: Scopus, Web of Science,
and Google Scholar. Selected databases cover a wide range of scientific publications, in-
cluding some of the most relevant journals. The scope of the literature was restricted to
peer-reviewed journal papers, eliminating other types of publications such as books or
conference proceedings due to the immense volume of scientific works published each year.
Different databases were used to provide a variety of indexed journals for searching.
Search limitations, set in advance, were the same for all databases. In addition, the
observed publication period includes the last ten years, from 2013–present, excluding early-
access articles and articles still in the publishing phase. This time frame was established
because 3DP technology is relatively new in common use and is fast-developing, so this
timeframe was deemed most relevant for a state-of-the-art review. Lastly, this study
included only articles written in the English language.
The keyword strings used were intentionally vague to cover all possible application
areas. For example, the initial string for searching the Google Scholar database was [archi-
tecture OR CONSTRUCTION “3D print *”], resulting in over 15,600 initial results, which
were later narrowed down to 351 by eliminating keywords from science fields. The final
Google Scholar keyword string was [architecture OR CONSTRUCTION “3D print *”-biology
-medicine -computer -molecular -biological -medical -bionic -cell -tissue -bio -rheological
-micro -energy -BIM -chemical -chemistry -fashion -electrical]. A similar methodology
was then applied for searching two other databases considering the specifics of each
search engine.
The snowballing method was used in addition to the keyword search to collect more
data and find papers that might have been missed. The term “snowballing” describes the
process of finding more publications by analyzing a paper’s reference list or its citations.
According to guidelines for snowballing in systematic literature studies [36], using refer-
ences and citations of the analyzed papers for finding new literature is called backward
and forward snowballing. In this study, backward snowballing was mainly used.
Figure 1 outlines the SRL procedure and recaps the number of publications at the end
of each process stage.
Buildings 2022, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 4 of 24
Buildings 2022, 12, 1319 Figure 1 outlines the SRL procedure and recaps the number of publications at the4 of
end24
Figure 1.
Figure 1. PRISMA
PRISMA flow
flow diagram
diagram of
of literature
literature review.
review.
added another 23 articles to be assessed in full text, out of which 11 were used in the final
literature sample.
Since AEC is a wider field than just architecture, there were still some papers that
focused on material science or technical engineering details of 3DP technology. This body
of research was then narrowed to the articles relevant to the field of architecture by going
through full texts. After going through full texts, some articles were eliminated because
they were in the field of mechanical engineering, civil engineering, or material science with
no overlap with the use of 3DP technology in architecture but rather focusing on chemical
or structural properties of the material and formwork. This final refinement resulted in
65 articles for which analysis is discussed in the next section.
A team of different researchers was assembled to guarantee the validity of the article
selection procedure and avoid bias. Two researchers had the task to conduct activities
of the three phases—identification of data from databases and through the snowballing
method, screening papers, and assessing papers for eligibility. The other two researchers
were responsible for overseeing and reviewing the process to ensure forming a relevant
literature sample and the quality of the research.
3. Results
This section presents the results of bibliometric analysis and qualitative analysis
organized in subsequent subheadings.
Buildings 2022, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 6 of 24
Buildings 2022, 12, 1319 6 of 24
18 17
16 15
14 13
12
10
8
6
6 5 5
4
2
2 1 1
0
0
2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022
Figure2.
Figure Publicationrate
2. Publication rateof
offiltered
filtered articles
articles on
on 3DP
3DP in
in architecture.
architecture.
Table 2. Source journals for articles on 3DP in architecture in the analyzed literature sample.
Two publications have significantly more 3DP-related articles than the others: Au-
tomation in Construction (16 papers) and Cement and Concrete Research (8 papers). These
two publications together account for 36.9% of the total papers. Since 3DP is a technology
based on AM processes, which are closely related to digitalization and automation, articles
from the journal Automation in Construction account for the largest portion of the published
literature. The analysis also indicates that the material used in 3DP is commonly concrete
since the second most represented journal is Cement and Concrete Research. According to the
journal occurrence, the study on 3DP mostly focuses on expanding knowledge of materials
and processes. Four journals had an occurrence rate of two or more articles—Virtual and
Physical Prototyping, 3D Printing and Additive Manufacturing, Buildings, and Infrastructures.
Automation in Construction is highly active in the construction 3DP, covering all aspects
of the use of information technologies in the design, engineering, construction, maintenance,
and management of constructed facilities. Cement and Concrete Research, on the other hand,
primarily introduces research accomplishments in material science with a focus on cement
materials. Nevertheless, both journals significantly impact the building and construction
field, having a Q1 score based on the SCImago Journal Ranking (SJR) system and high
impact factors (IF). Virtual and Physical Prototyping has a Q1 score in computer graphics
and computer-aided design, industrial and engineering manufacturing, and modeling and
simulation, and Buildings has a Q1 score for architecture based on SJR.
The study by Ning et al. [16] produced similar results in terms of publication distribu-
tion, with Automation in Construction and Cement and Concrete Research being the second
and third most occurring publications in their Web of Science search for the period between
2013 and 2020. Their study focused on the review of the 3DP in the construction industry,
which is a narrower field than architecture. For that reason, the most prevalent journal in
their search was Construction and Building Materials. However, only one paper from this
journal is included in the literature sample since the journal has a more technical focus on
3DP technology and materials, which is less relevant for the scope of this study.
does not account for repetition within an article; it only counts the presence or absence of a
term. On the other hand, full counting entails recording each word’s occurrence. Because it
offers a more thorough understanding of the actual representation of research issues, the
full counting method was chosen for this study.
Keywords were selected by scanning repeating words in titles and abstracts of all
papers. Word repeating is limited to five times or more to observe emerging research
interests. In total, 103 words fit this criterium. For each word, a relevance score was
calculated, and then, based on that score, 60% of the words with the highest relevance were
used for further analysis to highlight the most influential terms; 62 words were evaluated
using this criterion. Table 3 shows selected 25 keywords with strong connection strength.
Table 3. The occurrence and relevance of keywords in the analyzed literature sample.
when analyzing the nodes with the highest combined occurrence rate and link strength,
when analyzing the nodes with the highest combined occurrence rate and link strength,
the most prevalent terms are “structure”, “student”, “construction industry”, “industry”,
Buildings 2022, 12, 1319
the most prevalent terms are “structure”, “student”, “construction industry”, “industry”,
9 of 24
and “concrete.” Those depict the main areas of interest and research.
and “concrete.” Those depict the main areas of interest and research.
Figure 3. Network visualization of occurrence of keywords and clusters in the analyzed literature
sample.
Figure
Figure 3. Network
3. Network visualization
visualization of occurrence
of occurrence of keywords
of keywords andinclusters
and clusters in theliterature
the analyzed analyzed literature
sample.
sample.
As
As this
this paper
paper aims
aims toto obtain
obtain aa comprehensive
comprehensiveoverview
overviewofofthe theconnection
connectionbetween
between
3DP
3DP technology
As thisand
technology andthe
paper field
aims
the of of
to
field architecture,
obtain the the
terms
a comprehensive
architecture, “3D
terms printing
overview
“3D technology”
of
printing and “ar-
thetechnology”
connection between
and
chitecture”
“architecture”were
3DP technologyinvestigated
were and
investigatedmore
the field ofclosely concerning
architecture,
more closely their“3D
the terms
concerning connections
printing
their to various
technology”
connections clus-
and “ar-
to various
ters in the
clusters in network
chitecture” of investigated
were
the networkkeywords. The
of keywords. results
more of this
Theclosely
results ofanalysis
concerning are presented
their
this analysis in Figure
connections
are presented to 4.
in various
Figure 4.clus-
ters in the network of keywords. The results of this analysis are presented in Figure 4.
(a) (b)
(a) 4.
Figure
Figure
Connections with different terms and clusters in the network(b)
4. Connections with different terms and clusters in the network
of analyzed literature sample
of analyzed literature sample
for terms: (a) “3D printing technology” and (b) “architecture”.
Figure(a)
for terms: 4. “3D
Connections
printing with differentand
technology” terms
(b) and clusters in the network of analyzed literature sample
“architecture”.
for terms: (a) “3D printing technology” and (b) “architecture”.
Both terms had a strong connection with all clusters. “Architecture” is less dominant
since not all articles whose research problems are in the domain of architecture use this
term specifically in abstracts or titles. Adversely, they opt for other terms in the architecture
field that are more specific to their research, such as “construction”. However, it can be
Buildings 2022, 12, 1319 10 of 24
seen that “architecture” has links with most terms that have high relevance in terms of
occurrence and link strength.
Representative
No. Cluster Theme No. of Keywords Tag
Keywords
student
Application of 3DP model
1 Green 17 Education
technology in education education
creativity
structure
concrete
Application of 3DP
2 Red 30 fabrication Design
technology in design
architecture
production
3DP technology
Application of 3DP
construction industry
3 Blue technology in 15 Construction
automation
construction industry
new development
trend, researchers are still exploring this technology by testing its geometric and structural
potentials [54,55]. Correspondingly, authors are testing different design and fabrication ap-
proaches for 3DP concrete, mainly direct printing of structural material [31,56] as opposed
to the 3DP formworks [52,55]. Both approaches have unique advantages and disadvantages
in terms of geometric complexity and structural characteristics of printed forms. In general,
the main subject of this cluster is the potential of integrating AM technologies into the
design process.
Table 5. Materials, methods, and applications of 3DP systems categories based on scale.
Materials used in small-scale 3DP are plastic (nylon, polymers, Acrylonitrile butadiene
styrene (ABS) or poly lactic acid (PLA)), ceramic, metal, and wax. These materials are
mainly used for FDM and SLS. Aside from them, hardened liquid photosensitive resins are
employed for SLA to produce plastic material [21].
There are three types of 3DP application for small-scale architectural models: (1) design
exploration models [41,44–47,49,50,63–66], (2) design presentation models [43–45,48], and
(3) test models [66]. The use of RP can be a part of design research or prototyping of
small-scale models of large-scale 3DP constructions. Additionally, several studies have
shown the effects of integrating this technology in an educational setting in other design
areas such as fashion or product design [45,64]. Design exploration using 3DP models
can be found in architectural education within studio design courses at all levels of study.
Studies by Ruheili and Hajri [50] and Kim et al. [48], for instance, showed the benefits of
the RP’s introduction in landscape architecture design courses. On the other hand, a case
study by Howeidy and Arafat [43] compared students who made models in traditional
ways with those who had access to the RP technology to explore the relationship between
the student’s design complexity and model-making method.
Another application of RP is for making functional models or small-scale test models
for large-scale structures to examine their mechanical or structural properties. For example,
Yi et al. [66] described the process of using 3DP technology in prototyping kinetic shading
devices. Likewise, the form-finding and testing of vault structures through 3DP were
studied by Tomé et al. [65]. Small-scale 3DP technology can sometimes be used for fully
functional construction elements, such as optimized steel nodes by Arup [13].
The usual application of 3DP in architecture is also for making presentation models.
These kinds of models can be commonly found in education and used as a part of design
projects’ final presentation [44]. This technology can be available to students as part of the
in-class equipment, but universities often have separate shared spaces, such as FabLabs or
Maker Spaces [45].
the construction industry, forming cluster 3. This cluster mostly comprises the use of
large-scale 3DCP.
Human-like-scale printed elements that could be applied in the construction industry
require adequate structural properties. Therefore, most papers focus either on printing
technology or material characteristics. These topics are extensively covered by number of
authors [12,13,16,19,23–25,41,51,67–69] in recent years. According to Tay et al. [20], methods
used for large-scale printing can be grouped into two main categories: binder jetting and
material deposition method (MDM).
Binder jetting is a powder-based process where the liquid binder is deposited in thin
layers over a build tray filled with powder to create objects. A well-known binder jetting
method is D-shape printing [13,17,70]. This method, developed by architect Enrico Dini, is
the oldest large-scale powder-based 3DP method [41] and is similar to SLA. On the other
hand, MDM is similar to the FDM method. A nozzle extrudes heated materials in layers on
a predefined path. The material then solidifies, creating the object. Two best-known MDM
methods are contour crafting [18,43,70], developed by Behrokh Khoshnevis, and concrete
printing [13,18].
Some other hybrid methods cannot be classified into any of the categories, such as se-
lective binder activation (SBA), selective paste intrusion (SPI) discussed by Lowke et al. [41]
or foam spraying [51], and tangential continuity method (TCM) [70]. Over the years, these
methods have been adopted by many companies and research groups. Systematization of
these processes can be found in [24]. Additionally, some processes do not rely on printing
the actual concrete or building material but rather on printing the formwork. One of these
methods is robotic formwork FDM 3D printing, discussed by Burger et al. [52].
Several authors cover the materials used for large-scale 3DP in depth, and their
classifications are based on different properties of technological processes. Three common
material types applied in these processes are concrete materials, polymers, and metallic
materials [13,16,24]. Other materials are also used, including foams [51], wax [70], or
cob [53].
Large-scale 3DP is applied in the construction industry in two main areas. One field
of research addresses the printing of full-scale structures. Many research groups focus on
infrastructure projects, with bridges being the most common. The production process of one
of such bridges, the bicycle bridge in Gemert, the Netherlands, is discussed in [58] and [67].
Other research groups and companies focus on developing technology and methods for
building full-scale architecture projects such as multistory buildings and houses. An
overview of these projects can be found in [13,19,71]. The second field of research focuses
development and testing of full-scale building elements such as beams, columns, plates,
walls, and even pavilions that serve as large-scale prototypes. These research projects are
often developed in academic settings as a form of large-scale RP. Concrete choreography,
developed at ETH Zürich [31], is one of these efforts. Other examples from ETH Zürich are
branching columns and the future tree pavilion by Burger et al. [52]. Similar initiatives are
covered in [41,63,67].
Table 6. Cont.
4. Discussion
This chapter discusses the contribution of this work—summary and mapping of the
state-of-the-art research on 3DP technology in architecture in terms of research limitations
and challenges within identified major research themes and further directions of work.
Practically oriented courses such as design studios, workshops, or other courses that
apply project-based learning methods are particularly suitable for curriculum innovation.
In this respect, it could be worthwhile to study the possibility of creative 3DP tools ap-
plication in the design process as opposed to just for design presentations. For example,
Greenhalgh [47] noticed that developing a curricular connection between design and pro-
duction may be needed to better prepare students for design-based careers. Furthermore,
he observed that the iterative character of the design process would be a critical strategy in
developing curricula utilizing 3DP since many students readily accepted the first model,
neglecting its evident design weaknesses [47].
Furthermore, improving students’ skills in using 3D software and printing technology
is important. We need to understand how to better acquire 3DP skills outside the traditional
educational programs and how to adapt learning from informal and formal education [46].
Additionally, the teaching approach must be customized to the students with different
proficiency, experience [64,89,90], academic levels, or learning styles [91]. Furthermore,
more effort should be put into creating educational support resources, such as books and
other materials [48].
As observed in the literature included in this review, the application of 3DP in ed-
ucation could contribute to developing hands-on learning experience, problem solving,
creative learning and thinking, spatial cognition [46], or increase learning motivation.
However, up-to-date research does not fully explore the possibilities of the technology
and its implications. Finally, it is crucial to encourage students to think of themselves as
lifelong learners who are prepared to continually acquire new skills, keeping in mind the
obsolescence of technology and the rapid change in socioeconomic circumstances.
tested for solving global issues of providing economy housing for low-income people,
local reconstruction of buildings after natural disasters such as earthquakes and floods, or
military operations [13].
On the other hand, collaborative research could be done in performance-based design
(PBD) to develop optimization design methods and tools. For instance, the idea of using
geometry to induce structure functionality and its relationship with the construction process
(e.g., suggested in [42]) needs additional research. An approach to design that asks for
further studies includes material-based building automation. In this regard, Yi et al. [66]
propose further development of design methods to fully automate operation, increase AM
building efficiency, and enhance the controllability of component performance in different
building applications.
The development of software tools for design is another work perspective. For ex-
ample, Buswell et al. [74] suggested developing a tool for component design through
optimization of geometry using co-simulation, coupling a model of the manufacturing
process (tool path generation) with a model of the material characteristics to generate a
performance model based on hardened properties and optimized design for reinforcement.
Moreover, this software could facilitate manufacturing standardization by applying specific
components to produce optimal configurations [74]. On the other hand, Gosselin et al. [42]
proposed the future development of a tool that enables multi-scale consideration. In ad-
dition, Lowke et al. [41] suggested the development of software for design and toolpath
formation. New tools should be implemented as plug-ins in design software to provide
design autonomy.
arises from the need for adequate structural properties of printing materials on large scales.
Therefore, many authors focus their research on developing new materials [78,86].
More research is required to improve construction productivity, reduce labor, increase
safety, and reduce the industry’s ecological footprint [31]. Research efforts should also be
directed towards full automation to make the process economically viable and less labor
intensive. Furthermore, studies must continue to move toward large-scale experimentation
and building construction to ascertain the true capability of this technology and its applica-
tion in the industry [40]. In addition, other research topics could be related to lowering the
resource intensity of construction, including material consumption and labor cost, and less
environmental damage, such as waste and noise pollution [13].
overview of the research area relevant to this study. Although this enabled the creation of
more input data, bibliographic analysis was still performed on a limited sample and de-
pended on data provided by these databases. The scope of this study should be expanded
in future research to incorporate conference papers and other literature in order to provide
a broader perspective on the subject. Furthermore, retrieval bias and language bias led to
the potential limitation of the review. Additionally, when using the results of this research,
one should be aware of the authors’ bias and that a formal risk-of-bias assessment was
not performed.
Additionally, the keywords contained in the articles were non-standardized. Moreover,
several authors employed different variations of keywords. Finally, since several databases
and snowballing methods were used for literature collection and creation of the sample,
specific analyses, including co-citations, countries of origin of publications, and other more
detailed links between authors and publications, could not be performed by VOSviewer
due to the software limitation. However, creating a broad literature sample was valued
more than producing detailed metric analysis because the primary goal of this study was
to systematize and comprehend the scope of application of 3DP technology in architecture.
Finally, we believe that subject-specific knowledge of authors offers context for interpreting
bibliometric analysis.
5. Conclusions
This work reviews the literature on the application of 3DP technologies in the architec-
tural discipline. First, bibliometric analysis performed on the sample of 65 journal pa-pers
showed growth in the number of publications related to the developments in 3DP technolo-
gies. Second, we identified journals in which research on 3DP in architecture is published.
These journals primarily cover building and construction, engineering, and architecture
fields. Third, we isolated keywords to capture the prevalent and emerging topics in the
research. We also visualized keywords co-occurrence and identified three keyword clusters.
Fourth, we identified characteristic themes using qualitative analysis of full texts of papers
for generated keyword clusters. These themes coincide with the spheres of applications
of 3DP technologies in architecture—education, design, and the construction industry.
Fifth, content analysis of the complete texts enabled us to categorize 3DP systems based
on the scale. Two categories—small-scale and large-scale systems— were distinguished
and described in terms of differences in materials, methods, and applications. Sixth, we
classified all journal papers selected for the analyses with respect to year of publication,
cluster themes, and scale categories. Finally, we looked ahead to potential work directions
to provide researchers with innovative perspectives, and within three major themes, we
identified research challenges. Eventually, digital technologies and accelerated automation
will profoundly impact how we design and construct architecture, but it is also a new
system of production with economic, social, and political repercussions that necessitate
further debate.
Author Contributions: Conceptualization, M.Ž. and J.M.; methodology, M.Ž. and J.M.; validation,
M.Ž., J.M., R.O. and I.R.; investigation, M.Ž., J.M. and I.R.; data curation, M.Ž.; J.M., R.O. and I.R.;
writing—original draft preparation, M.Ž. and J.M.; writing—review and editing, M.Ž., J.M., R.O. and
I.R.; visualization, M.Ž. and I.R.; supervision, J.M. and R.O.; project administration, R.O. All authors
have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding: This research was funded by the Ministry of Education, Science and Technological Develop-
ment of the Republic Serbia, grant number 451-03-68/2020-14/200090. The research was done under
the research lab of the University of Belgrade, Faculty of Architecture—Laboratory for Innovative
Structures in Architecture (LISA).
Informed Consent Statement: Not applicable.
Data Availability Statement: Not applicable.
Buildings 2022, 12, 1319 21 of 24
18. Perkins, I.; Skitmore, M. Three-Dimensional Printing in the Construction Industry: A Review. Int. J. Constr. Manag. 2015, 15, 1–9.
[CrossRef]
19. Siddika, A.; Mamun, M.A.A.; Ferdous, W.; Saha, A.K.; Alyousef, R. 3D-Printed Concrete: Applications, Performance, and
Challenges. J. Sustain. Cem. Based Mater. 2020, 9, 127–164. [CrossRef]
20. Tay, Y.W.D.; Panda, B.; Paul, S.C.; Noor Mohamed, N.A.; Tan, M.J.; Leong, K.F. 3D Printing Trends in Building and Construction
Industry: A Review. Virtual Phys. Prototyp 2017, 12, 261–276. [CrossRef]
21. Wu, P.; Wang, J.; Wang, X. A Critical Review of the Use of 3-D Printing in the Construction Industry. Autom. Constr. 2016, 68,
21–31. [CrossRef]
22. Wu, P.; Zhao, X.; Baller, J.H.; Wang, X. Developing a Conceptual Framework to Improve the Implementation of 3D Printing
Technology in the Construction Industry. Archit. Sci. Rev. 2018, 61, 133–142. [CrossRef]
23. Zhang, J.; Wang, J.; Dong, S.; Yu, X.; Han, B. A Review of the Current Progress and Application of 3D Printed Concrete. Compos.
Part A Appl. Sci. Manuf. 2019, 125, 105533. [CrossRef]
24. Delgado Camacho, D.; Clayton, P.; O’Brien, W.J.; Seepersad, C.; Juenger, M.; Ferron, R.; Salamone, S. Applications of Additive
Manufacturing in the Construction Industry-A Forward-Looking Review. Autom. Constr. 2018, 89, 110–119. [CrossRef]
25. Duballet, R.; Baverel, O.; Dirrenberger, J. Classification of Building Systems for Concrete 3D Printing. Autom. Constr. 2017, 83,
247–258. [CrossRef]
26. Waldschmitt, B.; Costanzi, C.B.; Knaack, U.; Lange, J. 3D Printing of Column Structures for Architectural Applications. Archit.
Struct. Constr. 2022. [CrossRef]
27. Ma, G.; Wang, L.; Ju, Y. State-of-the-Art of 3D Printing Technology of Cementitious Material—An Emerging Technique for
Construction. Sci. China Technol. Sci. 2018, 61, 475–495. [CrossRef]
28. Paul, S.C.; van Zijl, G.P.A.G.; Tan, M.J.; Gibson, I. A Review of 3D Concrete Printing Systems and Materials Properties: Current
Status and Future Research Prospects. Rapid Prototyp. J. 2018, 24, 784–798. [CrossRef]
29. Hossain, M.A.; Zhumabekova, A.; Paul, S.C.; Kim, J.R. A Review of 3D Printing in Construction and Its Impact on the Labor
Market. Sustainability 2020, 12, 8492. [CrossRef]
30. Pomponi, F.; Moncaster, A. Embodied Carbon Mitigation and Reduction in the Built Environment-What Does the Evidence Say?
J. Environ. Manag. 2016, 181, 687–700. [CrossRef]
31. Anton, A.; Reiter, L.; Wangler, T.; Frangez, V.; Flatt, R.J.; Dillenburger, B. A 3D Concrete Printing Prefabrication Platform for
Bespoke Columns. Autom. Constr. 2021, 122, 103467. [CrossRef]
32. Petticrew, M.; Roberts, H. Systematic Reviews in the Social Sciences: A Practical Guide; Wiley: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2008;
ISBN 978-1-4051-5014-9.
33. Liberati, A.; Altman, D.G.; Tetzlaff, J.; Mulrow, C.; Gøtzsche, P.C.; Ioannidis, J.P.A.; Clarke, M.; Devereaux, P.J.; Kleijnen, J.;
Moher, D. The PRISMA Statement for Reporting Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses of Studies That Evaluate Health Care
Interventions: Explanation and Elaboration. J. Clin. Epidemiol. 2009, 62, e1–e34. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
34. Page, M.J.; McKenzie, J.E.; Bossuyt, P.M.; Boutron, I.; Hoffmann, T.C.; Mulrow, C.D.; Shamseer, L.; Tetzlaff, J.M.; Akl, E.A.;
Brennan, S.E.; et al. The PRISMA 2020 Statement: An Updated Guideline for Reporting Systematic Reviews. BMJ 2021, n71.
[CrossRef] [PubMed]
35. Saade, M.R.M.; Yahia, A.; Amor, B. How Has LCA Been Applied to 3D Printing? A Systematic Literature Review and Recommen-
dations for Future Studies. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 244, 118803. [CrossRef]
36. Wohlin, C. Guidelines for Snowballing in Systematic Literature Studies and a Replication in Software Engineering. In Proceedings
of the 18th International Conference on Evaluation and Assessment in Software Engineering-EASE ’14, London, UK, 13–14 May
2014; ACM Press: London, UK, 2014; pp. 1–10.
37. Broadus, R.N. Toward a Definition of “Bibliometrics”. Scientometrics 1987, 12, 373–379. [CrossRef]
38. Soomro, S.A.; Casakin, H.; Georgiev, G.V. A Systematic Review on FabLab Environments and Creativity: Implications for Design.
Buildings 2022, 12, 804. [CrossRef]
39. van Eck, N.J.; Waltman, L. Visualizing Bibliometric Networks. In Measuring Scholarly Impact; Ding, Y., Rousseau, R., Wolfram, D.,
Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2014; pp. 285–320. ISBN 978-3-319-10376-1.
40. Schuldt, S.J.; Jagoda, J.A.; Hoisington, A.J.; Delorit, J.D. A Systematic Review and Analysis of the Viability of 3D-Printed
Construction in Remote Environments. Autom. Constr. 2021, 125, 103642. [CrossRef]
41. Lowke, D.; Dini, E.; Perrot, A.; Weger, D.; Gehlen, C.; Dillenburger, B. Particle-Bed 3D Printing in Concrete Construction –
Possibilities and Challenges. Cem Concr Res. 2018, 112, 50–65. [CrossRef]
42. Gosselin, C.; Duballet, R.; Roux, P.; Gaudillière, N.; Dirrenberger, J.; Morel, P. Large-Scale 3D Printing of Ultra-High Performance
Concrete-A New Processing Route for Architects and Builders. Mater. Des. 2016, 100, 102–109. [CrossRef]
43. Howeidy, D.R.; Arafat, Z. The Impact of Using 3D Printing on Model Making Quality and Cost in the Architectural Design
Projects. Int. J. Appl. Eng. 2017, 12, 8.
44. Kempton, W.L. Meeting Learning Challenges in Product Design Education with and through Additive Manufacturing. JSCI 2017,
15, 11.
45. Loy, J. ELearning and EMaking: 3D Printing Blurring the Digital and the Physical. Educ. Sci. 2014, 4, 108–121. [CrossRef]
46. Boumaraf, H.; İnceoğlu, M. Integrating 3D Printing Technologies into Architectural Education as Design Tools. Emerg. Sci. J. 2020,
4, 73–81. [CrossRef]
Buildings 2022, 12, 1319 23 of 24
47. Greenhalgh, S. The Effects of 3D Printing in Design Thinking and Design Education. J. Eng. Des. Technol. 2016, 14, 752–769.
[CrossRef]
48. Kim, S.; Shin, Y.; Park, J.; Lee, S.-W.; An, K. Exploring the Potential of 3D Printing Technology in Landscape Design Process. Land
2021, 10, 259. [CrossRef]
49. Wang, C.; Yap, J.B.H.; Li, H.; Chua, J.; Abdul-Razak, A.S.; Mohd-Rahim, F.A. Topographical Survey Engineering Education
Retrofitted by Computer-Aided 3D-Printing. Comput. Appl. Eng. Educ. 2018, 26, 2116–2130. [CrossRef]
50. Ruheili, A.A.; Hajri, S.A. The Role of 3D Printing Technology in Landscape Architecture Teaching and Learning Practices. Educ.
Sci. Theory Pract. 2021, 21, 13–26.
51. Bedarf, P.; Dutto, A.; Zanini, M.; Dillenburger, B. Foam 3D Printing for Construction: A Review of Applications, Materials, and
Processes. Autom. Constr. 2021, 130, 103861. [CrossRef]
52. Burger, J.; Lloret-Fritschi, E.; Scotto, F.; Demoulin, T.; Gebhard, L.; Mata-Falcón, J.; Gramazio, F.; Kohler, M.; Flatt, R.J. Eggshell:
Ultra-Thin Three-Dimensional Printed Formwork for Concrete Structures. 3D Print. Addit Manuf. 2020, 7, 48–59. [CrossRef]
53. Gomaa, M.; Jabi, W.; Veliz Reyes, A.; Soebarto, V. 3D Printing System for Earth-Based Construction: Case Study of Cob. Autom.
Constr. 2021, 124, 103577. [CrossRef]
54. de la Fuente, A.; Blanco, A.; Galeote, E.; Cavalaro, S. Structural Fibre-Reinforced Cement-Based Composite Designed for Particle
Bed 3D Printing Systems. Case Study Parque de Castilla Footbridge in Madrid. Cem Concr Res. 2022, 157, 106801. [CrossRef]
55. Jipa, A.; Dillenburger, B. 3D Printed Formwork for Concrete: State-of-the-Art, Opportunities, Challenges, and Applications. 3D
Print. Addit Manuf. 2022, 9, 84–107. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
56. Lim, J.H.; Weng, Y.; Pham, Q.-C. 3D Printing of Curved Concrete Surfaces Using Adaptable Membrane Formwork. Constr. Build
Mater. 2020, 232, 117075. [CrossRef]
57. Gardner, L.; Kyvelou, P.; Herbert, G.; Buchanan, C. Testing and Initial Verification of the World’s First Metal 3D Printed Bridge.
J. Constr. Steel Res. 2020, 172, 106233. [CrossRef]
58. Salet, T.A.M.; Ahmed, Z.Y.; Bos, F.P.; Laagland, H.L.M. Design of a 3D Printed Concrete Bridge by Testing. Virtual Phys. Prototyp.
2018, 13, 222–236. [CrossRef]
59. Vantyghem, G.; De Corte, W.; Shakour, E.; Amir, O. 3D Printing of a Post-Tensioned Concrete Girder Designed by Topology
Optimization. Autom. Constr. 2020, 112, 103084. [CrossRef]
60. Zhang, X.; Li, M.; Lim, J.H.; Weng, Y.; Tay, Y.W.D.; Pham, H.; Pham, Q.-C. Large-Scale 3D Printing by a Team of Mobile Robots.
Autom. Constr. 2018, 95, 98–106. [CrossRef]
61. van Woensel, R. Printing Architecture: An Overview of Existing and Promising Additive Manufacturing Methods and Their
Application in the Building Industry. Int. J. Constr. Environ. 2018, 9, 57–81. [CrossRef]
62. Leach, N. Size Matters: Why Architecture Is the Future of 3D Printing. Archit. Design 2017, 87, 76–83. [CrossRef]
63. Hu, H.; Cao, X.; Zhang, T.; Chen, Z.; Xie, J. Three-Dimensional Printing Materials for Cultural Innovation Products of Historical
Buildings. Buildings 2022, 12, 624. [CrossRef]
64. Kwon, Y.M.; Lee, Y.-A.; Kim, S.J. Case Study on 3D Printing Education in Fashion Design Coursework. Fash Text 2017, 4, 26.
[CrossRef]
65. Tomé, A.; Vizotto, I.; Valença, J.; Júlio, E. Innovative Method for Automatic Shape Generation and 3D Printing of Reduced-Scale
Models of Ultra-Thin Concrete Shells. Infrastructures 2018, 3, 5. [CrossRef]
66. Yi, H.; Kim, D.; Kim, Y.; Kim, D.; Koh, J.; Kim, M.-J. 3D-Printed Attachable Kinetic Shading Device with Alternate Actuation: Use
of Shape-Memory Alloy (SMA) for Climate-Adaptive Responsive Architecture. Autom. Constr. 2020, 114, 103151. [CrossRef]
67. Asprone, D.; Menna, C.; Bos, F.P.; Salet, T.A.M.; Mata-Falcón, J.; Kaufmann, W. Rethinking Reinforcement for Digital Fabrication
with Concrete. Cem. Concr. Res. 2018, 112, 111–121. [CrossRef]
68. Melenbrink, N.; Werfel, J.; Menges, A. On-Site Autonomous Construction Robots: Towards Unsupervised Building. Autom.
Constr. 2020, 119, 103312. [CrossRef]
69. Wolfs, R.J.M.; Bos, F.P.; Salet, T.A.M. Early Age Mechanical Behaviour of 3D Printed Concrete: Numerical Modelling and
Experimental Testing. Cem. Concr. Res. 2018, 106, 103–116. [CrossRef]
70. Al Jassmi, H.; Al Najjar, F.; Mourad, A.-H.I. Large-Scale 3D Printing: The Way Forward. IOP Conf. Ser. Mater. Sci. Eng. 2018,
324, 012088. [CrossRef]
71. De Schutter, G.; Lesage, K.; Mechtcherine, V.; Nerella, V.N.; Habert, G.; Agusti-Juan, I. Vision of 3D Printing with
Concrete—Technical, Economic and Environmental Potentials. Cem. Concr. Res. 2018, 112, 25–36. [CrossRef]
72. Bos, F.; Wolfs, R.; Ahmed, Z.; Salet, T. Additive Manufacturing of Concrete in Construction: Potentials and Challenges of 3D
Concrete Printing. Virtual Phys. Prototyp. 2016, 11, 209–225. [CrossRef]
73. Keating, S.J.; Leland, J.C.; Cai, L.; Oxman, N. Toward Site-Specific and Self-Sufficient Robotic Fabrication on Architectural Scales.
Sci. Robot. 2017, 2, eaam8986. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
74. Buswell, R.A.; Leal de Silva, W.R.; Jones, S.Z.; Dirrenberger, J. 3D Printing Using Concrete Extrusion: A Roadmap for Research.
Cem. Concr. Res. 2018, 112, 37–49. [CrossRef]
75. Buchli, J.; Giftthaler, M.; Kumar, N.; Lussi, M.; Sandy, T.; Dörfler, K.; Hack, N. Digital in Situ Fabrication-Challenges and
Opportunities for Robotic in Situ Fabrication in Architecture, Construction, and Beyond. Cem. Concr. Res. 2018, 112, 66–75.
[CrossRef]
Buildings 2022, 12, 1319 24 of 24
76. Borg Costanzi, C.; Ahmed, Z.Y.; Schipper, H.R.; Bos, F.P.; Knaack, U.; Wolfs, R.J.M. 3D Printing Concrete on Temporary Surfaces:
The Design and Fabrication of a Concrete Shell Structure. Autom. Constr. 2018, 94, 395–404. [CrossRef]
77. Buchanan, C.; Gardner, L. Metal 3D Printing in Construction: A Review of Methods, Research, Applications, Opportunities and
Challenges. Eng. Struct. 2019, 180, 332–348. [CrossRef]
78. Reiter, L.; Wangler, T.; Anton, A.; Flatt, R.J. Setting on Demand for Digital Concrete-Principles, Measurements, Chemistry,
Validation. Cem. Concr. Res. 2020, 132, 106047. [CrossRef]
79. Mehar, P.; Khobragade, P.; Mendhe, M.; Bhada, S.; Singh, V.; Salodkar, P. 3D Printing Trends in Building and Construction Industry.
Int. J. Sci. Res. Sci. Technol. 2020, 7, 314–318. [CrossRef]
80. Martínez-Rocamora, A.; García-Alvarado, R.; Casanova-Medina, E.; González-Böhme, L.F.; Auat-Cheein, F. Parametric Program-
ming of 3D Printed Curved Walls for Cost-Efficient Building Design. J. Constr. Eng. Manag. 2020, 146, 04020039. [CrossRef]
81. Jagoda, J.; Diggs-McGee, B.; Kreiger, M.; Schuldt, S. The Viability and Simplicity of 3D-Printed Construction: A Military Case
Study. Infrastructures 2020, 5, 35. [CrossRef]
82. Han, D.; Yin, H.; Qu, M.; Zhu, J.; Wickes, A. Technical Analysis and Comparison of Formwork-Making Methods for Customized
Prefabricated Buildings: 3D Printing and Conventional Methods. J. Archit. Eng. 2020, 26, 04020001. [CrossRef]
83. Hack, N.; Dörfler, K.; Walzer, A.N.; Wangler, T.; Mata-Falcón, J.; Kumar, N.; Buchli, J.; Kaufmann, W.; Flatt, R.J.; Gramazio, F.; et al.
Structural Stay-in-Place Formwork for Robotic in Situ Fabrication of Non-Standard Concrete Structures: A Real Scale Architectural
Demonstrator. Autom. Constr. 2020, 115, 103197. [CrossRef]
84. El-Sayegh, S.; Romdhane, L.; Manjikian, S. A Critical Review of 3D Printing in Construction: Benefits, Challenges, and Risks.
Archiv. Civ. Mech. Eng. 2020, 20, 34. [CrossRef]
85. Carneau, P.; Mesnil, R.; Roussel, N.; Baverel, O. Additive Manufacturing of Cantilever-From Masonry to Concrete 3D Printing.
Autom. Constr. 2020, 116, 103184. [CrossRef]
86. Javed, A.; Mantawy, I.M.; Azizinamini, A. 3D-Printing of Ultra-High-Performance Concrete for Robotic Bridge Construction.
Transp. Res. Rec. 2021, 2675, 307–319. [CrossRef]
87. Katzer, J.; Skoratko, A. Concept of Using 3D Printing for Production of Concrete–Plastic Columns with Unconventional Cross-
Sections. Materials 2021, 14, 1565. [CrossRef]
88. Abdallah, Y.K.; Estévez, A.T. 3D-Printed Biodigital Clay Bricks. Biomimetics 2021, 6, 59. [CrossRef]
89. Celani, G. Digital Fabrication Laboratories: Pedagogy and Impacts on Architectural Education. Nexus Netw. J. 2012, 14, 469–482.
[CrossRef]
90. De Sampaio, C.; Spinosa, R.; Vicentin, J.; Tsukahara, D.; Silva, J.; Borghi, S.; Rostirolla, F. 3D Printing in Graphic Design Education.
In High Value Manufacturing: Advanced Research in Virtual and Rapid Prototyping; Taylor & Francis: Abingdon, UK, 2013; pp. 25–30.
ISBN 978-1-138-00137-4.
91. Hou, L.; Tan, Y.; Luo, W.; Xu, S.; Mao, C.; Moon, S. Towards a More Extensive Application of Off-Site Construction: A Technological
Review. Int. J. Constr. Manag. 2020, 22, 1–12. [CrossRef]
92. Wang, M.; Wang, C.C.; Sepasgozar, S.; Zlatanova, S. A Systematic Review of Digital Technology Adoption in Off-Site Construction:
Current Status and Future Direction towards Industry 4.0. Buildings 2020, 10, 204. [CrossRef]
93. Pan, Y.; Zhang, L. Roles of Artificial Intelligence in Construction Engineering and Management: A Critical Review and Future
Trends. Autom. Constr. 2021, 122, 103517. [CrossRef]
94. Mitchell, A.; Lafont, U.; Hołyńska, M.; Semprimoschnig, C. Additive Manufacturing—A Review of 4D Printing and Future
Applications. Addit. Manuf. 2018, 24, 606–626. [CrossRef]
95. Alshahrani, H.A. Review of 4D Printing Materials and Reinforced Composites: Behaviors, Applications and Challenges. J.
Sci.-Adv. Mater. Dev. 2021, 6, 167–185. [CrossRef]
96. Chea, C.P.; Bai, Y.; Pan, X.; Arashpour, M.; Xie, Y. An Integrated Review of Automation and Robotic Technologies for Structural
Prefabrication and Construction. Transp. Saf. Environ. 2020, 2, 81–96. [CrossRef]