Case Studies in Construction Materials 20 (2024) e02976

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Case Studies in Construction Materials

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/cscm

Building a sustainable future: The role of additive manufacturing

in civil construction
Maicon Douglas Leles da Silva a, Lívia Fernanda Silva b, Berenice Martins Toralles b,
Flávia Aparecida Reitz Cardoso c, *, Marla Corso d,
Luciana Cristina Soto Herek Rezende e
a
Post-Graduation Program in Clean Technology (PPGTL), Cesumar University (UniCesumar), Maringá, Paraná 87050-390, Brazil
b
Post-Graduation Program in Civil Engineering (PPGECiv), State University of Londrina (UEL), Londrina, Paraná 86057-970, Brazil
c
Post-Graduation Program in Technological Innovations (PPGIT), Federal Technological University of Paraná (UTFPR), Campo Mourão, Paraná
87301-899, Brazil
d
Post-Graduation Program in Environmental Management (PPGAmb), Positive University (UP), Curitiba, Paraná 81280-330, Brazil
e
Post-Graduation Program in Clean Technology(PPGTL), ICETI - Cesumar Institute of Science,Technology, and Innovation, Cesumar University
(UniCesumar), Maringá, Paraná 87050-390, Brazil

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: With the advent of Industry 4.0, 3D printing is emerging as a revolutionary technology in various
Constructability. Contour crafting. industrial sectors. The ability to gradually deposit material allows the creation of complex shapes
Extrudability. Cementitious materials without waste and the need for molds. This, coupled with cost reduction, opens up significant
opportunities in the construction sector. To minimize waste on the construction site, optimize
construction time, and positively contribute to the environment, this work focuses on developing
a system capable of three-dimensional printing of objects composed of a desktop-scale 3D printer
prototype. The 3D printer developed in this project is integrated with two other crucial sub­
systems. The first is responsible for extruding a cementitious composite, while the second per­
forms the homogenization of the mixture during material preparation. The Cartesian robot,
essential for 3D printing, was constructed based on mechanical and electrical designs and con­
nected to the pumping subsystem via a 1⁄2-inch diameter hose. To ensure the system’s viability, it
was essential to define flow and printing speed parameters to ensure the extrudability and con­
structibility of composite materials. The process included preparing a conventional mortar with
mixing ratios of 1:0.33:1.33:0.01 (cement, water, sand, and superplasticizer additive). The
pumping subsystem was calibrated through flow tests on the injection pump, resulting in mass
flows of 4 and 5 Kg/min. Printing speeds on the Cartesian robot were parameterized at 10, 30,
and 50 mm/s. This led to the creation of samples named AE1 – 10, AE1 – 30, AE1 – 50 mm/s (for
a flow rate of 5 Kg/min) and AE2 – 30, AE2 – 50 mm/s (for a flow rate of 4 Kg/min), along with
AR – 1 and AR – 2 samples, which were collected in the mixer without extrusion. The system’s
validation involved printing an object with dimensions of 400 ×400×80 mm (length x width x
height). After printing, the object’s measurements were analyzed to assess the cementitious
material’s extrudability and the constructibility of the layers. Tests were conducted in the fresh
and hardened states of the mortar, including measurements of consistency index and tensile and
compressive strength. The results demonstrated that replacing traditional methods with 3D
printing on the construction site is feasible, reducing waste and decreasing construction time. This

* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: [email protected] (F.A.R. Cardoso).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cscm.2024.e02976
Received 21 July 2022; Received in revised form 23 October 2023; Accepted 11 February 2024
Available online 12 February 2024
2214-5095/© 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
M.D. Leles da Silva et al. Case Studies in Construction Materials 20 (2024) e02976

directly contributes to a cleaner and more sustainable construction process. 3D printing repre­
sents a promising innovation in the construction sector, offering significant advantages in terms of
efficiency, waste reduction, and positive environmental impact. This work demonstrates the
viability of this technology and its potential to transform the construction industry toward more
sustainable and effective practices.

1. Introduction

Additive manufacturing gained its first glance in 1980 with the emergence of computer-aided design (CAD) [43], which encour­
aged the three-dimensional (3D) modeling of mechanical parts in a faster and more efficient way. The design of an interest in a
three-dimensional physical model allows the designer to identify functional interferences. It will enable the movement of the part to
observe its assembly or even the functioning of the designed mechanism [34].
The milestone in technological development and innovation is rapid prototyping (RP) [50], as it allows studying product devel­
opment processes by carrying out tests in controlled computational environments [45].
Among the technologies present in rapid prototyping is additive manufacturing via 3D printing [33]. Cost reduction, development,
and improvement of techniques are the main factors that make additive manufacturing increasingly accessible and applied in various
areas of knowledge [53]. In this way, additive manufacturing can be used, for example, in stereolithography (SLA), fused deposition
modeling (FDM), direct ink writing (DIW), selective laser sintering (SLS) [21], Contour Crafting [47].
The evolution of additive manufacturing consists of providing an intelligent manufacturing system through management focused
on control, monitoring, digitization, and efficiency. And the use of information and communication technologies incorporated into the
Industry 4.0 model uses the principles of smart cities [43].
Several additive construction projects have been developed over the years [29], thus creating various techniques applied to civil
construction. The most used are Contour Crafting [25, 27, 55], the D-Shape [12], and 3D Concrete Printing [31]. These stand out
because they are aligned with the sustainability tripod due to the social, economic, and environmental advantages related to the
possibility of printing elements on site [47], to its ability to program machines to perform tasks that can reduce accidents at work [22]
and its contribution to the reduction of environmental impacts [47]. The cementitious matrix composite may contain materials that
can be recycled, such as ceramic waste blocks and cellulose fibers [18]. In addition to relying on the effects of clay minerals on the
performance of 3D printed alkali-activated materials (AAMs) [14], incorporation of waste tire rubber aggregates of different size
gradations (0–1 mm and 1–3 mm) and replacement levels (50 v/v% and 100 v/v%) into a “greener” alkali-activated mixture ” designed
for 3D printing applications [52], or even a 3D printed lightweight concrete mix (3DPLWC), with the intention of replacing natural
aggregate with waste glass (WG) at 50 vol.-% and 100 vol.-% [15]. Also the addition of polyvinyl alcohol (PVA) fibers and attapulgite
nanoclay to alkali-activated materials (AOMs) with the aim of improving mechanical performance and optimizing the printability and
construction of MAAs [13].
The great challenge is the creation of a 3D printer aimed at civil construction, as it elevates the projects carried out with traditional
printers with small objects, in centimeters, for houses, bridges, and buildings in meters. Another challenge is the material’s perme­
ability (mortar), as it needs to be fluid enough to be pumpable and solid sufficient to support the weight of the upper layers [30,38]. In
this way, intelligent processes and automation are essential to overcome the new challenges that arise from design conception to
full-scale printing [38], such as, for example, the use of advanced CAD/ CAM in conjunction with the BIM platform and LEED cer­
tification [24].
In addition to facing these challenges, additive manufacturing shows promise for overcoming environmental and social barriers,
and contributing to sustainable urban planning, since the concepts applied in the urban sector, which integrate the construction of
urban resilience based on sustainability, are solutions for addressing environmental impacts, climate change, in addition to bringing
economic and social development [9].
Sustainability in building constructions has been important for developing sustainable cities [24]. In this way, the significant
contributions of additive manufacturing to the environment, linked to urban planning, became notorious. Also, it must be considered
that one of the objectives of additive manufacturing is aligned with urban planning, as both can remodel spaces with the management
and development of infrastructure and services [9].
Additive manufacturing applied in the urban sector stands out for presenting a high constructive potential, even on a large scale,
with predictions of meeting current demands of architectural and structural projects [38] and future, namely, in the United Arab
Emirates there are predictions of house printing until the year 2030 [46]. It should be noted that this technology has already been
applied in the implementation of houses, commercial and residential buildings [18], complex structures like a castle [22], and bridges
[8,48] and even for the implementation of social housing, investigated in the studies of Poullain et al. [44] and Furet, Poullain, and
Garnier [19].
As research has been improving its equipment, construction methods, and materials, the points of weakness dissolve [30], and city
planning show evolution [49]. And the construction sector has increasingly adopted more efficient methods with less environmental
impact and, consequently, contribution to sustainability [11], meeting SDG number 11 of the Sustainable Development Goals [35].
Given all these considerations, this study aimed to develop and validate a bench scale 3D printer prototype coupled to a pumping
subsystem capable of extruding and supporting overlapping layers to promote a cleaner construction. The development of this work
also presented the challenges and potential of this technique that arise from the initial conception of projects with the aid of advanced

2
M.D. Leles da Silva et al. Case Studies in Construction Materials 20 (2024) e02976

Fig. 1. - Flowchart of the methodology used in this research.

3
M.D. Leles da Silva et al. Case Studies in Construction Materials 20 (2024) e02976

CAD/CAM software to the improvement of equipment, processes, and the development of cementitious matrix composites. In addition,
this technology can be promising to overcome environmental and social barriers to contribute positively to sustainable urban planning.

2. Material and methods

A bench-scale 3D printer prototype was manufactured by developing mechanical and electronic projects coupled to a pumping
system capable of extruding and overlapping layers of cementitious materials.
To create the cementitious material (mortar) samples for printing, Portland cement from the Votoran brand, with high initial
strength (CP II-Z-32), purchased in local stores, with a specific mass determined by the manufacturer of 900–1200 Kg/cm3 was used, at
20ºC, due to the fact that it presents good workability, quick setting and superior initial resistance. The same cement and the same
quantity were used for all mixtures.
The sand was purchased from local stores, sieved with a 4.75 mm mesh according to ABNT NBR NM - ISO 3310–1, with a specific
mass according to ABNT NBR 16916 of 2631 kg/cm3. Medium sand was used because sand with larger grain sizes could harm
extrusion and even cause clogging of the printer’s extrusion pump, in addition to making it difficult to pump. The same aggregate and
the same quantity were used for all mixtures.
The cementitious material (mortar) samples were tested before and after extrusion for comparative purposes to verify the func­
tionality of the removed equipment with a focus on the extrusion capacity and layer overlap. The prototype was validated by carrying
out tests in the fresh and hardened states of the printed material.

2.1. Development of a bench-scale 3D printer prototype

The equipment was manufactured at the Machining and Welding Laboratory of Cesumar University in Maringá-PR. It was divided
into four stages: mechanical, electrical, software installation, and configuration. The methodological sequence and the materials used
in this process are explained in (Fig. 1).
The description of the steps that were taken to manufacture the prototype of a bench-scale 3D printer is as follows.

2.1.1. Mechanic project

The mechanical design (Fig. 2) used the CAD software SolidWorks version 2018. The joining of the structure was carried out using a
TIG welding machine RIV 122 - VONDER, with a coated electrode for 2.5 mm steel, and allows movement in all directions.
A metal structure was chosen, consisting of metal with dimensions of 40 ×40×2.5 mm and steel sheets measuring 0.5 mm by 100
×100 mm, as it is easy to purchase and assemble. Four NEMA 23 stepper motors of 30 Kgf/cm2 were used 2 for the Y axis, 1 for the X
axis, and 1 for the Z axis. Length, using a flexible coupler with an external diameter of 25 ×30 mm and an internal diameter of 8
×10 mm, with a maximum torque capacity of 35 Kgf/cm2. The movement of the motors was transmitted to the axes through a 20 mm
diameter nut connected to the spindle.
For the sliding of the whole set, 6 linear axes of 20 mm in diameter with a T-type base were used to fix the structure of the

Fig. 2. - Project for the manufacture of the bench scale 3D printer prototype obtained in SolidWorks software version 2018: a) Stepper motor; (b) T-
type linear axis; (c) Hose coupler; (d) Extruder; (e) Printing table; (f) Trapezoidal spindle pitch 4 mm; (g) Structure; (h) Bearing Ucf 204.

4
M.D. Leles da Silva et al. Case Studies in Construction Materials 20 (2024) e02976

prototype. The 4 axles of 1100 mm in length for the X and Y axes, the 2 axles of 500 mm for the Z axis, and the 12 pillow blocks of
20 mm in diameter formed the prototype’s displacement system.

2.1.2. Electronic project

In this step, electrical cables of 1.5 mm2 (control) were used, as well as cables of 0.75 mm2 (sensors) and 2.5 mm2 for the power
circuits (220 Vac). While printing the object, a panel was installed to visualize the time and temperature variables.
The activation of the motors occurred through the use of external drivers. The electrical power supply for the circuit was provided
by installing 2 switched sources with 24 Vdc and 30 A, 1 for the motors and another for the Ramps 1.4 electronic board.
Three negative-positive-negative (NPN) capacitive sensors were used, one for each axis, with a voltage between 6 and 36 Vdc.
Because the Shield Ramps 1.4 electronic board uses a voltage of 5Vdc, 3 relays were added to close the circuit to guarantee the integrity
of the module and the sensors.
The entire system was supplied with 220 Vac voltage obtained by WEG’s 32 A electromagnetic circuit breaker, which limited the
current consumed by the circuit. A green light indicated that the prototype was connected to an electrical power source. A contactor
was inserted to section the mains voltage to the circuit after the user pressed the button, where a yellow light was turned on, indicating
that the entire system was energized and ready for use. And finally, a last red light was used to indicate that the bench-scale 3D printer
prototype was in operation. A safety circuit consisting of an emergency button, a WEG CP-D electrical device, a safety relay, an
emergency stop control, and a “Normally Open” (NO) pulsing button to reset the circuit was inserted.

2.1.3. Firmware Marlin

To control and process the information in the prototype, the Marlin firmware version 1.8.5 was used, based on the integrated
development platform, in Arduino’s arithmetic language for configuration. Marlin has good adaptability to electronic equipment, easy
parameterization and modification, and compatibility with the Arduino software used.
The firmware can be updated anytime, requiring a USB interface between the Arduino and the Marlin firmware to download the
update. The same recording is done directly through the Arduino development platform.

2.1.4. Installing and configuring the slicing software

Slicing software configures and divides the object into several layers, transforming it into GCODE. Repetier was used, which is the
basic host software compatible with most firmware used worldwide in 3D printers. In this software, the settings related to the pro­
totype’s size, work table, velocity, quantity, height, and density of the layers were performed.
After carrying out the operation settings, printing an object or model that can be imported into the software becomes possible. This
shows the estimated printing time, number of layers to be printed, and number of filaments to be used.

2.1.5. Pumping system

The pumping system was dimensioned to meet the demands of the prototype’s pressure and maximum velocity parameters. After
preparing the material to be printed, it was transferred to the injection pump reservoir. The purpose of the pumping system was to
transport the material in a fresh state to the nozzle of the prototype with the aid of a hose with a diameter of 1/2 in. for printing the 3D
object (Fig. 3).

Fig. 3. - Projects carried out in SolidWorks software version 2018 of the bench scale 3D printer prototype, mixer, and pumping system: (a) Bench
scale 3D printer prototype; (b) B40 pump; (c) Hose for transporting mortar; (d) Mortar mixer.

5
M.D. Leles da Silva et al. Case Studies in Construction Materials 20 (2024) e02976

2.1.6. Mortar mixer

The mixer used in this research was the Betomaq MIX 90. The equipment has a coupling system for easy removal and cleaning,
equipped with three arms and a shovel to scrape the material, carefully configured for the application. The reservoir has a nominal
capacity of 120 L with a half-moon-type lower opening for material output.

2.1.7. Injection pump

The injection pump model used in this research was the Betomaq B40, intended for pumping cream, cement soil, fluid mortars,
pasty mortars, and cellular concrete with a maximum granulometry of Ø 6 mm, and has a 125 L bucket equipped with agitator/feeder
horizontal shaft (Fig. 4).
The pumping process was activated via a 1L6 WF helical unit with a 5.0 hp – 220/380 Vac three-phase electric motor and reducer.
The frequency inverter performed the flow variation for a theoretical production of 5 – 20 Kg/min and a maximum pressure of 20 bar.
Two flows were adopted: one of 5 Kg/min, corresponding to a constant velocity of 320 rpm (value displayed in parameter 02 of the
inverter), and another of 4 Kg/min, in a rotation of 250 rpm. The mortar was pumped by moving a 1/2 in. diameter hose to the
extruder. The extruder nozzle used was designed with a circular opening of 20 mm in diameter, and its format was used based on
research already carried out [34,42].

2.1.8. Validation of the 3D Printing system

For the validation of 3D Printing, three-dimensional objects were printed in mortar, with dimensions 400 ×400×80 mm (W x L x H)
and layer thickness of 40 mm, in carrying out the slicing of the printed objects, as well as the 3DRC settings, the Repetier® software, a
3D printing application developed by Hot-World GmbH & Co. KG.
Through this, it was possible to vary the filling of the object for equipment validation, ranging from 0% filling, printing only the
perimeter of the part, to a solid object, with 100% filling. Filling in “lines” with 0% density was adopted for this research.
It was configured to make solid objects 80 mm high, corresponding to overlapping two layers.

2.1.9. Preparation of mortar samples

Mortars were developed using CP II – Z – 32 composite Portland cement with a specific mass determined by the manufacturer from
900 K to 1200 Kg/cm3 at 20◦ C, fine aggregate (sand) sifted through a 4.75 mm, with a specific mass determined according to ABNT
NBR 16916 [2] of 2631 Kg/cm3, superplasticizer additive (SP), and water.
The mortars were developed in a ratio of 1:1.33 with a w/c ratio of 0.33 and 1% superplasticizer additive (SP) about the cement
mass. And the mixture followed the procedures of ABNT NBR 13281 [1].
The mortars were transferred to the injection pump subsystem compartment and transported to the outlet at the 3DRC nozzle using
hoses, initiating the extrusion process. They were printed at flow parameters of 4 and 5 Kg/min and velocities of 10, 30, and 50 mm/s,
and a sample considered a reference was not subjected to the extrusion process. It was tested for density, entrained air content, water
absorption, and consistency test for characterization purposes.
The samples were collected and identified according to the flow rate and the respective printing velocities; for example, the mortar

Fig. 4. - Model B40 injection pump: (a) Safety grid; (b) Pressure gauge; (c) Power board; (d) Helical pump; (e) Bucket; (f) Hose coupling; (g) Engine
cabin; (h) Rubber wheel.

6
M.D. Leles da Silva et al. Case Studies in Construction Materials 20 (2024) e02976

AE_4_10 (Extruded mortar with a flow rate of 4 Kg/min and velocity of 10 mm/s) and the non-extruded mortars were identified as
ANE_1 (Non-Extruded Mortar).
The collection procedure was performed at different execution times and sequentially, starting with sample collection at a flow rate
of 5 kg/min and a velocity of 50 mm/s, followed by velocities of 30 and 10 mm/s. The execution time was recorded from when the
water came into contact with the cement in the mortar mixing subsystem until collection and printing. For prints at 50 mm/s, the
execution time was 18.65 minutes, followed by 51.38 and 67.16 minutes for velocities of 30 and 10 mm/s, respectively.
The exact process was performed for a flow rate of 4 kg/min, starting with a velocity of 50 mm/s and then 30 mm/s at 18.65 and
51.38 min, respectively.
In Table 1, it is possible to observe the samples and their respective mixing times until extrusion.

2.1.10. Tests in the fresh state

The mortar was characterized before being subjected to the pumping and extrusion process through density and water absorption
tests, according to ABNT NBR 16916 [2] procedures. It incorporated air content, according to ABNT NBR 13278 [3]. The charac­
terization was performed with the ANE_2 sample.
All samples were tested about the consistency index, according to ABNT NBR 13276 [4] procedures, extrudability, and con­
structability tests, except sample AE_4_10, which did not have a defined shape after being printed and was discarded.
Samples for the consistency test were taken directly from the extruder nozzle and placed in a metal container (Fig. 5) for transport
to the slaughter table. The test was performed simultaneously after printing.

2.1.11. Extrudability and constructability

The objects were printed and analyzed about the measurements obtained (width, height, and length) at 3 different points with the
aid of a caliper.

3. Results and discussion

The results are presented in three stages, starting with developing a bench-scale 3D printer prototype. Next, the extrudability and
constructability tests are presented in fresh and hardened states.
For the mechanical system, the weight and displacement of the entire extruder assembly were considered using 4 Nema 23 motors
of 30 Kgf/cm2; 2 for the Y axis, 1 for the X axis, and 1 for the Z axis. These motors were chosen for excellent reliability, torque, and ease
of integration with the Ramps 1.4 motherboard.
The electrical cables were connected and sized according to ABNT NBR 5410 [5]. With the electrical system ready, the Marlin
software was installed on the motherboard, thus enabling the prototype to connect with the Repetier® software (Akter et al., 2018).
The equipment was connected to the system so that features, such as functional area, velocity, torque control of the axes, type of
motors, and sensors available in the equipment, were enabled.
Afterward, the equipment became able to perform impressions through the Repetier® software. This was chosen because it is free,
has quality and practicality, and includes the CuraEngine slicer to prepare the object and the command of the prototype. With it, it was
possible to configure the filling of the object, infill, which is used to fill the printed object. Not only that, but it can offer greater strength
and weight and be directly linked to printing time. The configuration lines with 0% density were used because they only allow the
object’s perimeter to be printed.
According to Hoque et al. [23], the Marlin software can be configured in several ways, depending on the printer to be developed,
since different inputs are used in each piece of equipment built. The Marlin software can be configured in several ways, depending on
the printer to be developed, since different inputs are used in each piece of equipment built.
The pumping system consisted of a mixer to mix the constituents and a pump to help transport the mortar through the hoses to the
prototype nozzle, keeping the flow and pressure constant. The shape of the used nozzle, 20 mm in diameter, was based on Long et al.
[32], Panda et al. [42], and Y. Zhang et al. [56].

Table 1 -
Collections for the consistency index test for mortars ANE_1; ANE_2; AE_5_10; AE_5_30; AE_5_40; AE_4_10 e AE_4_30; AE_4_50.
Mortar Execution time (min) Flow rate (Kg/min) Velocity (mm/s)

ANE_1* 18.65 - -
ANE_2* 51.38 - -
AE_5_10 67.16 5 10
AE_5_30 51.38 5 30
AE_5_50 18.65 5 50
AE_4_10** 67.16 4 10
AE_4_30 51.38 4 30
AE_4_50 18.65 4 50

(*) Non-extruded sample.

(**) Sample discarded due to non-standard shape of the printed layer.

7
M.D. Leles da Silva et al. Case Studies in Construction Materials 20 (2024) e02976

Fig. 5. - Collect samples in a metal container for consistency index tests.

Table 2 -
Results of tests on dry constituents for preparing mortar samples printed at a flow rate of 4 and 5 Kg/min.
Ensaios Resultados Referência
3
Massa específica Areia 2631 Kg/cm ABNT NBR 16916 [2]
Cimento 3144 Kg/cm3
Ensaio granulométrico Areia 4.75 mm ABNT NBR NM – ISO 3310–1 (2010)

Table 3 -
Results of tests in the fresh state carried out on samples of printed mortars at a flow rate of 4 and 5 kg/min.
Ensaios Resultados Referência

Absorção de água 9.17% ABNT NBR 16916 [2]

Densidade argamassa 2275.86 Kg/m3 ABNT NBR 13278 [3]
Teor de ar incorporado 1% ABNT NBR 13278 [3]

3.1. Sample development

For the development of samples, the dry constituents of sand and cement were analyzed for specific mass tests according to ABNT
NBR 16916 [2], as shown in (Table 2).
The results of the tests in the fresh state for the mortar samples printed at a flow rate of 4 and 5 kg/min, according to the regulations
for carrying out the tests, are shown in (Table 3).
The mixer used was indicated according to the manufacturer for dosing and mixing ready-made mortars or mortars drawn on site,
aiming for better agglutination of materials/additives. The pump employs dry constituents whose particles are not greater than 6 mm,
thus adjusting the granulometry of the fine aggregate in a 4.75 mm mesh sieve as provided in ABNT NBR NM – ISO 3310–1 (2010). The
passing material was used to prepare the samples. This value is in line with that adopted by Dai et al. [16], who used a nozzle in the
exact dimensions since the size of the particles directly influences the diameter of the extruder nozzle.
Several similar studies use aggregate screening methodology to avoid pump clogging [36,37,54].
Particle segregation in the hose can lead to blockages caused by particulate mix and/or insufficient mixing before pumping. The
Contour Crafting technique is susceptible to pauses in construction because components are created by the sequential layering of
materials that must come together to form a homogeneous component. Therefore, there is more significant potential in not developing
the ligament between the layers than in more conventional methods [10].
In addition to this factor, Dai et al. [16] concluded that the size of the particles directly influences the diameter of the extruder
nozzle that should be used for printing 3D mortars.
The water absorption, density, and incorporated air content tests were carried out only with the AR – 1 mortar to guarantee the
method’s reproducibility. Thus, 9.17% of water absorption was obtained, representing a percentage reduction of 1.37 L. Ding et al.
[17], using fine aggregates, recycled and without recycling, received 13.5% and 4.5%, respectively, for the absorption test. They
considered these results to be excellent.
A densidade para a amostra AR – 1 foi de 2275,86 Kg/m3 e, por meio destes resultados, foi possível pela [3] determinar o teor de ar
incorporado. A densidade teórica da argamassa foi de aproximadamente 2302,47 Kg/m3 e, consequente, o teor de ar incorporado na

8
M.D. Leles da Silva et al. Case Studies in Construction Materials 20 (2024) e02976

argamassa AR – 1, resultou em 1%. Baz et al. [7] afirmam queue teores de absorção de até 1% estão relacionados aos vazios formados
pela entrada de ar observados no interior da argamassa. O teor de ar incorporado nas argamassas, apesar de favorecer a sua tra­
balhabilidade, atua de forma desfavorável em relação às resistências mecânicas [7,26].

3.1.1. Tests in the fresh state

The mortar samples were tested in the fresh state regarding flow rate and consistency index for samples AE1 – 10, AE1 – 30, AE1 –
50, AE2 – 30, and AE2 – 50.

3.1.2. Flow calibration

The average beaker filling time at the theoretical flow rate of 5 L/min was 24.6 seconds, resulting in 2.46 L/min. For a theoretical
flow of 4 L/min, it took 28.2 seconds to fill the container, resulting in a flow of 2.18 L/min. These results prove that the theoretical
volume flow described by the manufacturer did not match the actual flow of the equipment.
To determine the mass flow, the average time of filling the beaker in the theoretical flow of 5 L/min was 24 seconds, resulting in 5
Kg/min. The theoretical flow of 4 L/min took 30 seconds to fill the container, resulting in a 4 kg/min flow. Thus, mass flow rates of 4
and 5 kg/min were adopted for this research.
The 4 kg/min flow rate was the lowest possible for the equipment used in this research. A 5 Kg/min flow rate was used to compare
the best impression. Xiao et al. (2020) successfully defined a flow rate of 1.35 L/min, approximately 2.47 Kg/min, printing a full-size
compartment with 2.5 ×2.5 ×3 m dimensions.

3.1.3. Consistency index

The consistency index was carried out with velocities in descending form, that is (AE1 – 50; AE1 – 30; AE1 – 10; AE2 – 50 and AE2 –
30), since the reference of the research used as bases made use of velocities above 50 mm/s (Fig. 6).
The average diameter for the consistency index in the AR – 1 sample, whose sample did not go through the extrusion process, was
296.97 mm in the time of 51.38 min and 255.72 mm when the printing time was 18. 65 min.
The consistency index test was not carried out for sample AE2 – 10, as it was proven that for sample AE1 – 10, the printed object did
not have a standardized form, making its use impracticable. Fig. 7 shows the average diameter of the consistency index of samples AE1
and AE2 for the velocities of 10, 30, and 50 mm/s.
Samples AE1 with a flow rate of 5 Kg/min and AE2 with a flow rate of 4 Kg/min obtained the same behavior, as the time in which
the impression was made was more remarkable at a velocity of 10 mm/s compared to a velocity of 50 mm/s, concluding that It is

Fig. 6. - Consistency index test for mortar samples. (a) AR – 1; (b) AE1 – 10; (c) AE1 – 30; (d) AE1 – 50; (e) AE2 – 30; (f) AE2 – 50.

9
M.D. Leles da Silva et al. Case Studies in Construction Materials 20 (2024) e02976

Fig. 7. - Average diameter of consistency indices for samples of mortar printed at flow rates of 4 and 5 Kg/min.

known that regardless of the established flow rate, the longer the printing takes place, the lower the consistency index will be.
The decrease in the consistency index is notable, as chemical reactions induced by the cement and SP additive occur in any mortar
[6,20]. According to Y. Zhang et al. [56], the printing time is directly proportional to the consistency index; the longer the printing
time, the lower the consistency index of the mortar. The consistency index in the AE1 samples (5 Kg/min) was higher, on average
1.95%, when compared to the AE2 samples (4 Kg/min), concluding that the higher the flow rate, the greater the consistency index
[40].

3.1.4. Tests in the hardened state

Tests in the hardened state were carried out for mortars AR – 1, AE1, and AE2. All were analyzed about the mechanical tests
presented below after 28 days of curing.

3.1.5. Flexural tensile strength

The proof bodies made for the AR samples – 1; AE1 – 10, AE1 – 30; SE1 – 50; SE2 – 30; AE2 – 50 were tested about the tensile
strength parameter in flexion, according to the results shown in (Table 4).
The flexural tensile strength determined for AR – 1 was 7.42 MPa. Samples AE1 – 10, AE1 – 30, and AE1 – 50 were 6.95, 7.49, and
7.00 MPa, respectively. Dai et al. [16], using a circular nozzle with 20 mm in diameter, obtained values of 8.53 and 6.51 MPa. This
way, the resistance values determined for this research are within the expected range since the nozzle used here was 12 mm.
Thus, for mortar AE2, when there was a variation in velocity from 30 mm/s to 50 mm/s, there was an increase of 13%, proving that
at higher velocities, the resistance of the specimens increases as it decreases the number of creases.
Under the same test conditions, Long et al. [32] determined flexural tensile strength of 12 MPa at the adopted velocity of 80 mm/s,
with a 20 mm diameter nozzle, and Ma et al. [34] setting the flow rate at 0.450 Kg/min and velocity at 75 mm/s, they obtained a
resistance of 6.51 MPa with a 12 mm diameter nozzle. Thus, the velocity combined with the flow rate in the equipment may be directly
linked to the material’s resistance, which is a determining factor to be adopted.
The AE2 – 50 sample obtained a resistance around 16% higher when compared to the AE1 – 50 sample. According to Marchment
et al. [36], melting between the layers of the test specimens may have occurred due to the amount of water in the mixture.
The flow rate did not significantly change the resistance of the samples printed at a velocity of 30 mm/s (AE1 – 30 and AE2 – 30), as
there was a reduction in flexural tensile strength of only 3% when compared.

3.1.6. Compressive strength

The compressive strength test was carried out with one of the parts from the test specimens resulting from the flexural tensile
strength test (Table 5).
The compressive strength for the proof bodie of the AR – 1 sample was 36.69 MPa, in line with that determined by Ma et al. [34],
who, using a circular nozzle with 12 mm in diameter, the flow rate of 0.450 Kg/min and velocity of 75 mm/s, obtained 39.50 MPa,
which is the highest determined value.

Table 4 -
Results of the flexural tensile strength tests for the proof bodies of the samples.
Corpo de Prova Argamassas

AR – 1 AE1 – 10 AE1 – 30 AE1 – 50 AE2 – 30 AE2 – 50

Média 7,42 MPa 6,92 MPa 7,49 MPa 7,00 MPa 7,26 MPa 8,36 MPa
Desvio padrão 0,72 0,22 0,70 0,15 0,41 0,94
Coeficiente de variação (%) 9,67 3,17 9,29 2,09 5,60 11,26

10
M.D. Leles da Silva et al. Case Studies in Construction Materials 20 (2024) e02976

Table 5 -
Results of the compressive strength tests for the proof bodies of the samples.
Corpo de Prova Argamassas

AR – 1 AE1 – 10 AE1 – 30 AE1 – 50 AE2 – 30 AE2 – 50

Média 37,66 MPa 35,10 MPa 39,96 MPa 40,54 MPa 38,34 MPa 34,33 MPa
Desvio padrão 2,16 1,70 7,28 0,97 9,18 5,02
Coeficiente de variação (%) 5,73 4,84 18,23 2,40 23,95 14,62

For the samples AE1 – 10, AE1 – 30, and AE1 – 50, it is observed that the highest compressive strength was at a velocity of 50 mm/s,
40.64 MPa. In the samples made for AE2, the AE2 – 30 sample had 38.48 MPa, which is higher when compared to the AE2 – 50 sample.
Dai et al. [16] obtained resistance of 46 MPa, and Long et al. [32] 55.00, 36.21, and 40.64 MPa, and observed an improvement in
compressive strength of 18.6% in the proof body aged 28 days. Marchment et al. [36] justify that powers between 34 and 53.4 MPa are
associated with the dispersion of cement particles bonded to the SP additive. The flow to be directly related to the material’s resistance.
Higher resistances for the mortar AE1 (flow 5 Kg/min) were obtained about compression regardless of the velocity.
For the proof bodies printed at 50 mm/s, the compressive strength obtained was 40.64 MPa, with an increase of 15% compared to
the AE2 samples (flow rate 4 Kg/min). The proof bodies printed at 30 mm/s reached a compressive strength of 40.04 MPa, 4% higher
than the AE1 mortar sample (5 Kg/min) at the same velocity.
Ma et al. [34] obtained a compressive strength of 40 MPa using a circular nozzle with a diameter of 12 mm, a flow rate of 0.450
Kg/min, and a velocity of 75 mm/s; Dai et al. [16] with a circular nozzle of 20 mm in diameter and Long et al. [32], with a circular
nozzle of 20 mm in diameter at a velocity of 80 mm/s, they obtained 39.50; 46 and 55 MPa, respectively, stating that the printing
method addressed is feasible for use in civil construction. Thus, the results determined in this research are justified.

3.2. Validation of the bench scale 3D printer prototype

The equipment was validated after each impression; in all samples of extruded mortars, the printed objects were analyzed about the
geometric measurements (width, height, and length) with a caliper with a resolution of 0.05 mm. Fig. 8 shows the impressions made
for this test.
The impression of the presented object occurred at decreasing velocity (AE1 – 50; AE1 – 30; AE1 – 10; AE2 – 50 and AE2 – 30) since
the reference of the research used as a basis made use of velocities above from 50 mm/s. Table 6 presents the extrudability and
constructability variables of the printed object.
The impression was not made with the sample AE2 – 10 because after analyzing the results obtained for the sample AE1 – 10, it was
verified that it did not present a format for carrying out the measurements, thus deducing that there would be no parameters to
measure. Due to the low velocity of the prototype, a high volume of mortar was added at the same point, causing it to spread on the
printing table.
The width of the projected object was 40 mm, and for all samples, there was a variation between 73.37 and 132.75 mm, a per­
centage increase of 83.42–231.87%, respectively. The height of the projected object was 80 mm, so it would be possible to print two
layers, each 40 mm high. The printed object presented a variation about the height of 25.05 and 52.12 mm, that is, a reduction of
37.28%.
The sample with measurements closest to those projected was AE1 – 50, in which the height of the first layer was 49 mm, 22.50%
higher, and the second layer was 31.27 mm, showing a reduction of 21.83% from the designed.
The width of the first and second layers was 85.28 and 73.37 mm, compared to the projected value of 40 mm, with an increase of
113.20% and 83.43%, respectively. The impression of the first layer of mortar AE1 – 50 is shown in (Fig. 9).
The presence of wrinkles in pumped AE1–50 mortar is noticeable, forming when the speed does not match the equipment’s flow
rate (Smith et al., 2017). One approach to minimize or even eliminate these wrinkles is to increase the printing speed. However, it’s
essential to note that the maximum allowable speed for this equipment is 50 mm/s (Johnson et al., 2020). According to Nerella et al.
(2018), if the material flow is not precisely synchronized with the print head speed, the printed structure may not be continuous or
coherent. Furthermore, previous studies conducted by Kruger et al., Ma et al., Long et al. [32], and Nerella et al. (2020) have
demonstrated improvements in the extrusion process when using higher print speeds.
Extrudability, as defined by Buswell et al. [10], refers to the ability to extrude a mixture through a nozzle without significant
transverse deformation. Currently, there are no formal reference tests for this parameter, with evaluation typically relying on visual
inspection. As highlighted by Le et al. [31], extrudability is influenced by the shape and size of the extrusion nozzle, the movement of
the print head, and the nozzle’s position concerning the previous layer. It’s worth noting that particle segregation in the hose can lead
to blockages caused by particles in the mixture and/or insufficient mixing before pumping, as pointed out by Buswell et al. [10].
Additive manufacturing is particularly sensitive to pauses in the construction process due to the sequential layering of materials,
which must bond together to form a homogeneous component [10]. This makes achieving proper bonding between layers a critical
challenge compared to more conventional manufacturing methods.
Moreover, the optimization of print speed and material flow synchronization is essential in achieving consistent and high-quality
3D printed structures. As demonstrated by Smith et al. (2017), deviations from the optimal speed-flow rate balance can result in not
only wrinkles but also delamination and reduced structural integrity. The control of printing speed and material flow rate

11
M.D. Leles da Silva et al. Case Studies in Construction Materials 20 (2024) e02976

Fig. 8. - Impressions of objects with the mortar samples. (a) AE_5_10; (b) AE_5_30; (c) AE_5_50; (d) AE_4_30; (e) AE_4_50.

synchronization is crucial in the realm of additive manufacturing, particularly for cement-based materials. While the equipment’s
speed limitations must be observed, there is potential for improving the printing process by optimizing these parameters, as indicated
by recent research findings (Johnson et al., 2020; Kruger et al., 2019; Ma et al., 2019; [32]; Nerella et al., 2020).

4. Conclusion

The successful completion of the bench-scale 3D printer prototype marked a pivotal achievement in research. It enabled to conduct

12
M.D. Leles da Silva et al. Case Studies in Construction Materials 20 (2024) e02976

Table 6 -
Results of extrudability and constructability tests of AE1 and AE2 mortar samples at 30 and 50 mm/s velocities.
Parâmetros AE1 – 30 AE1 – 50 AE2 – 30 AE2 – 50

Altura 1ª camada (± 1,39) (mm) 51,65 49,00 52,12 50,40

2ª camada (± 3,58) 33,37 31,27 31,12 25,05
(mm)
Largura 1ª camada (± 10,75) 99,62 85,28 84,73 73,37
(mm)
2ª camada (± 17,10) 132,75 106,78 107,38 91,47
(mm)

Fig. 9. - Impression of the first layer of mortar AE1 – 50.

comprehensive tests using the idealized mortar samples, validating the effectiveness of our equipment throughout the development
process. The four sequential stages of equipment manufacturing, encompassing mechanics, electrical components, software instal­
lation, and configuration, were executed meticulously, each phase building upon the successful completion of the preceding one. It is
worth noting that the performance of the equipment exceeded initial expectations, demonstrating its reliability and functionality.
The integration of the pumping system into the setup proved to be of paramount importance. This enhancement greatly increased
operational agility, allowing for the handling of larger quantities of material. To ensure the efficiency of this system, validated the
volumetric flow of the pump, achieving flow rates of 2.46 and 2.18 liters per minute, corresponding to mass flow rates of 5 and 4 kg per
minute, respectively.
In the development of mortar, drew upon prior research that employed precise quantities of dry constituent materials. Conse­
quently, established a fixed proportion of 1:1.33 (cement: sand), with a factor A/C of 0.33 and a 0.01% proportion of the SP additive
relative to the cement. These carefully calculated ratios yielded a mortar that not only met but exceeded the primary research ob­
jectives, demonstrating exceptional extrudability and constructability. Furthermore, the mortar displayed ample mechanical strength,
rendering it suitable for use in civil construction projects.
The tests conducted in the fresh state of the mortar yielded characteristics consistent with the findings of esteemed authors such as
Long et al. [32], Ma et al. [34], Marchment et al. [36], Moeini et al. [39], and Yuan et al. [54]. These tests revealed that the consistency
index for mortar AE1, at velocities of 10, 30, and 50 mm/s, experienced reductions of 10.28%, 6.78%, and 5.66%, respectively, in
comparison to the AR – 1 mortar. Similarly, mortar AE2, tested at velocities of 30 and 50 mm/s, exhibited decreases of 8.90% and
7.35%, respectively, when compared to the same reference mortar. Furthermore, the mortar displayed a water absorption rate of
93.79%, resulting in an approximate loss of 1 liter of water within the system. The mortar’s density was measured at 2302.47 kg/m3,
with an incorporated air content of 1%.
In the hardened states, we conducted two pivotal tests: the tensile strength test in flexion and the compressive strength test. The
evaluation in flexion revealed exceptional mechanical performance, with the mortar samples AE1 and AE2 displaying tensile strengths
between 6.95 and 7.49 MPa and 7.26–8.35 MPa, respectively, after 28 days of curing. These values comfortably met industry stan­
dards, especially when compared to the AR – 1 mortar, which reached a tensile strength of 7.42 MPa in flexion. The evaluation of
compressive strength also demonstrated excellent mechanical performance, with the mortar samples AE1 and AE2 exhibiting

13
M.D. Leles da Silva et al. Case Studies in Construction Materials 20 (2024) e02976

resistance between 36.21 and 40.64 MPa and 34.71–38.48 MPa, respectively, after the same curing period, with the AR – 1 mortar
reaching 36.69 MPa. It is essential to highlight that further analyses involving porosity and moisture content must be undertaken to
assess the adhesion properties between layers, as lower printing speeds can influence the bonding capacity between layers. Conse­
quently, fine-tuning the flow and speed parameters is crucial to enhancing adherence, as an in-depth understanding of equipment-
related parameters, particularly those concerning extrusion flow and speed, plays a pivotal role in influencing the quality of the
printed layers.
The developed and evaluated mortar holds significant promise for utilization in additive manufacturing processes. This not only
presents exciting opportunities for the construction industry but also contributes significantly to the advancement of sustainable smart
cities. Moreover, the adoption of this technology can address and potentially overcome environmental and social barriers, thereby
positively impacting sustainable urban planning efforts. This research represents a significant stride forward in the quest for innovative
and sustainable construction practices, poised to reshape the cities of the future.

Declaration of Competing Interest

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to
influence the work reported in this paper.

Data availability

No data was used for the research described in the article.

Acknowledgments

To the Brazilian research promotion agency to support the scientific and technological development of the state of Paraná,
Fundação Araucária, as well as to the Instituto Cesumar de Ciência, Tecnologia e Inovação (ICETI) of the Cesumar University (Uni­
Cesumar), for funding the research.

Declaration of Competing Interest

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that may have influenced the
work reported in this article.

References

[1] ABNT NBR 13281, Associação Brasileira de Normas Técnicas. Argamassa para assentamento e revestimento de paredes e tetos - Requisitos, Rio de Janeiro, 2001.
[2] ABNT NBR 16916, Associação Brasileira de Normas Técnicas. Agregado Miúdo: Determinação da Densidade e da Absorção de Água, Rio de Janeiro, 2021.
[3] ABNT NBR 13278, Associação Brasileira de Normas Técnicas. Argamassa para assentamento e revestimento de paredes e tetos: Determinação da densidade de
massa e do teor de ar incorporado, Rio de Janeiro - BR, 2005.
[4] ABNT NBR 13276, Associação Brasileira de Normas Técnicas. Argamassa para assentamento e revestimento de paredes e tetos: Determinação do índice de
consistência, Rio de Janeiro, 2016.
[5] ABNT NBR 5410, Associação Brasileira de Normas Técnicas. Instalações elétricas de baixa tensão, Rio de Janeiro, 2004.
[6] A. Al Rashid, S.A. Khan, S. G. Al-Ghamdi, M. Koç, Additive manufacturing: Technology, applications, markets, and opportunities for the built environment,
Autom. Constr. Vol. 118 (2020), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2020.103268.
[7] B. Baz, G. Aouad, S. Remond, Effect of the printing method and mortar’s workability on pull-out strength of 3D printed elements, Constr. Build. Mater. 230
(2020), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2019.117002.
[8] C. Buchanan, L. Gardner, Metal 3D printing in construction: a review of methods, research, applications, opportunities and challenges, Eng. Struct. Vol. 180
(2019) 332–348, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2018.11.045.
[9] J. Bush, A. Doyon, Building urban resilience with nature-based solutions: How can urban planning contribute? Cities 95 (2019) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
cities.2019.102483.
[10] R.A. Buswell, W.R. Leal de Silva, S.Z. Jones, J. Dirrenberger, 3D printing using concrete extrusion: a roadmap for research, Cem. Concr. Res. Vol. 112 (2018)
37–49, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconres.2018.05.006.
[11] D. Carvajal-Arango, S. Bahamón-Jaramillo, P. Aristizábal-Monsalve, A. Vásquez-Hernández, L.F.B. Botero, Relationships between lean and sustainable
construction: positive impacts of lean practices over sustainability during construction phase, J. Clean. Prod. Vol. 234 (2019) 1322–1337, https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.05.216.
[12] G. Cesaretti, E. Dini, X. De Kestelier, V. Colla, L. Pambaguian, Building components for an outpost on the Lunar soil by means of a novel 3D printing technology,
Acta Astronaut. 93 (2014) 430–450, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actaastro.2013.07.034.
[13] M. Chougan, S.H. Ghaffar, P. Sikora, S.Y. Chung, T. Rucinska, D. Stephan, A. Albar, M.R. Swash, Investigation of additive incorporation on rheological,
microstructural and mechanical properties of 3D printable alkali-activated materials, Mater. Des. 202 (2021), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2021.109574.
[14] M. Chougan, S. Hamidreza Ghaffar, B. Nematollahi, P. Sikora, T. Dorn, D. Stephan, A. Albar, M.J. Al-Kheetan, Effect of natural and calcined halloysite clay
minerals as low-cost additives on the performance of 3D-printed alkali-activated materials, Mater. Des. 223 (2022), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
matdes.2022.111183.
[15] K. Cuevas, M. Chougan, F. Martin, S.H. Ghaffar, D. Stephan, P. Sikora, 3D printable lightweight cementitious composites with incorporated waste glass
aggregates and expanded microspheres – rheological, thermal and mechanical properties, J. Build. Eng. 44 (2021), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jobe.2021.102718.
[16] S. Dai, H. Zhu, M. Zhai, Q. Wu, Z. Yin, H. Qian, S. Hua, Stability of steel slag as fine aggregate and its application in 3D printing materials, Constr. Build. Mater.
299 (2021), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2021.123938.
[17] T. Ding, J. Xiao, F. Qin, Z. Duan, Mechanical behavior of 3D printed mortar with recycled sand at early ages, Constr. Build. Mater. 248 (2020), https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2020.118654.

14
M.D. Leles da Silva et al. Case Studies in Construction Materials 20 (2024) e02976

[18] S. El-Sayegh, L. Romdhane, S. Manjikian, A critical review of 3D printing in construction: benefits, challenges, and risks, Arch. Civ. Mech. Eng. Vol. 20 (Issue 2)
(2020), https://doi.org/10.1007/s43452-020-00038-w.
[19] B. Furet, P. Poullain, S. Garnier, 3D printing for construction based on a complex wall of polymer-foam and concrete, Addit. Manuf. Vol. 28 (2019) 58–64,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2019.04.002.
[20] S.H. Ghaffar, J. Corker, M. Fan, Additive manufacturing technology and its implementation in construction as an eco-innovative solution, Autom. Constr. Vol.
93 (2018) 1–11, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2018.05.005.
[21] H. Guo, R. Lv, S. Bai, Recent advances on 3D printing graphene-based composites, Nano Mater. Sci. 1 (2) (2019) 101–115, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
nanoms.2019.03.003.
[22] I. Hager, A. Golonka, R. Putanowicz, 3D Printing of buildings and building components as the future of sustainable construction? Procedia Eng. 151 (2016)
292–299, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2016.07.357.
[23] M.M. Hoque, M.M.H. Jony, M.M. Hasan, M.H. KabirDesign and Implementation of an FDM Based 3D Printer 5th International Conference on Computer,
Communication, Chemical, Materials and Electronic Engineering, IC4ME2 , 10.1109/IC4ME247184.2019.9036538.2019.
[24] F. Jalaei, F. Jalaei, S. Mohammadi, An integrated BIM-LEED application to automate sustainable design assessment framework at the conceptual stage of
building projects, Sustain. Cities Soc. 53 (2020), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2019.101979.
[25] A. Kazemian, X. Yuan, E. Cochran, B. Khoshnevis, Cementitious materials for construction-scale 3D printing: laboratory testing of fresh printing mixture, Constr.
Build. Mater. 145 (2017) 639–647, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2017.04.015.
[26] N. Khalil, G. Aouad, K. El Cheikh, S. Rémond, Use of calcium sulfoaluminate cements for setting control of 3D-printing mortars, Constr. Build. Mater. 157 (2017)
382–391, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2017.09.109.
[27] B. Khoshnevis, Automated construction by contour crafting - related robotics and information technologies, Autom. Constr. 13 (1) (2004) 5–19, https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.autcon.2003.08.012.
[29] N. Labonnote, A. Rønnquist, B. Manum, P. Rüther, Additive construction: state-of-the-art, challenges and opportunities, Autom. Constr. Vol. 72 (2016) 347–366,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2016.08.026.
[30] D. Laslett, T. Urmee, The effect of aggregation on city sustainability rankings, Ecol. Indic. 112 (2020), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2020.106076.
[31] T.T. Le, S.A. Austin, S. Lim, R.A. Buswell, A.G.F. Gibb, T. Thorpe, Mix design and fresh properties for high-performance printing concrete, Mater. Struct. /Mater.
Et. Constr. 45 (8) (2012) 1221–1232, https://doi.org/10.1617/s11527-012-9828-z.
[32] W.J. Long, J.L. Tao, C. Lin, Y. cun Gu, L. Mei, H.B. Duan, F. Xing, Rheology and buildability of sustainable cement-based composites containing micro-crystalline
cellulose for 3D-printing, J. Clean. Prod. 239 (2019), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.118054.
[33] B. Lu, Y. Weng, M. Li, Y. Qian, K.F. Leong, M.J. Tan, S. Qian, A systematical review of 3D printable cementitious materials, Constr. Build. Mater. Vol. 207 (2019)
477–490, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2019.02.144.
[34] L. Ma, Q. Zhang, Z. Jia, C. Liu, Z. Deng, Y. Zhang, Effect of drying environment on mechanical properties, internal RH and pore structure of 3D printed concrete,
Constr. Build. Mater. 315 (2022), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2021.125731.
[35] S. Maranghi, M.L. Parisi, A. Facchini, A. Rubino, O. Kordas, R. Basosi, Integrating urban metabolism and life cycle assessment to analyse urban sustainability,
Ecol. Indic. 112 (2020), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2020.106074.
[36] T. Marchment, J. Sanjayan, M. Xia, Method of enhancing interlayer bond strength in construction scale 3D printing with mortar by effective bond area
amplification, Mater. Des. 169 (2019), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2019.107684.
[37] B. Mazhoud, A. Perrot, V. Picandet, D. Rangeard, E. Courteille, Underwater 3D printing of cement-based mortar, Constr. Build. Mater. 214 (2019) 458–467,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2019.04.134.
[38] V. Mechtcherine, F.P. Bos, A. Perrot, W.R.L. da Silva, V.N. Nerella, S. Fataei, R.J.M. Wolfs, M. Sonebi, N. Roussel, Extrusion-based additive manufacturing with
cement-based materials – Production steps, processes, and their underlying physics: A review, Cem. Concr. Res. Vol. 132 (2020), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
cemconres.2020.106037.
[39] M.A. Moeini, M. Hosseinpoor, A. Yahia, Effectiveness of the rheometric methods to evaluate the build-up of cementitious mortars used for 3D printing, Constr.
Build. Mater. 257 (2020), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2020.119551.
[40] S. Nair, S. Panda, A. Tripathi, N. Neithalath, Relating print velocity and extrusion characteristics of 3D-printable cementitious binders: implications towards
testing methods, Addit. Manuf. 46 (2021), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2021.102127.
[42] B. Panda, S.C. Paul, N.A.N. Mohamed, Y.W.D. Tay, M.J. Tan, Measurement of tensile bond strength of 3D printed geopolymer mortar, Meas. J. Int. Meas. Confed.
113 (2018) 108–116, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.measurement.2017.08.051.
[43] S. Phuyal, D. Bista, R. Bista, Challenges, opportunities and future directions of smart manufacturing: a state of art review, Sustain. Futures Vol. 2 (2020), https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.sftr.2020.100023.
[44] P. Poullain, E. Paquet, S. Garnier, B. Furet, On site deployment of 3D printing for the building construction - the case of YhnovaTM, MATEC Web Conf. 163
(2018), https://doi.org/10.1051/matecconf/201816301001.
[45] K. Rajaguru, T. Karthikeyan, V. Vijayan, Additive manufacturing-state of art, Mater. Today. Proc. 21 (2020) 628–633, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
matpr.2019.06.728.
[46] A. Rajan, V. Akre, N. Nassiri, A.H. Alali, Z.B. Sabt, 3D Printing of buildings in UAE: success and failure factors, Inf. Technol. Trends. Emerg. Technol. Artif. Intell.
(2019) 368–372, https://doi.org/10.1109/CTIT.2018.8649541.
[47] M. Sakin, Y.C. Kiroglu, Peer-review under responsibility of KES, Int. Energy Procedia 134 (2017) 702–711, in: 〈www.sciencedirect.comwww.sciencedirect.
comwww.elsevier.com/locate/procedia1876-6102〉.
[48] T.A.M. Salet, Z.Y. Ahmed, F.P. Bos, H.L.M. Laagland, Design of a 3D printed concrete bridge by testing*, Virtual Phys. Prototyp. 13 (3) (2018) 222–236, https://
doi.org/10.1080/17452759.2018.1476064.
[49] J.L. Salvatierra, A. García, P. Aracena, Towards a lean behaviour evaluation system in Latin American construction, IGLC 28 - 28th Annu. Conf. Int. Group Lean
Constr. 2020 (2020) 361–372, https://doi.org/10.24928/2020/0035.
[50] M. Schmidt, M. Merklein, D. Bourell, D. Dimitrov, T. Hausotte, K. Wegener, L. Overmeyer, F. Vollertsen, G.N. Levy, Laser based additive manufacturing in
industry and academia, CIRP Ann. 66 (2) (2017) 561–583, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cirp.2017.05.011.
[52] M. Valente, M. Sambucci, M. Chougan, S.H. Ghaffar, Composite alkali-activated materials with waste tire rubber designed for additive manufacturing: an eco-
sustainable and energy saving approach, J. Mater. Res. Technol. 24 (2023) 3098–3117, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmrt.2023.03.213.
[53] R. Wilhite, I. Wölfel, 3D Printing for veterinary anatomy: an overview, J. Vet. Med. Ser. C Anat. Histol. Embryol. 48 (6) (2019) 609–620, https://doi.org/
10.1111/ahe.12502.
[54] Q. Yuan, Z. Li, D. Zhou, T. Huang, H. Huang, D. Jiao, C. Shi, A feasible method for measuring the buildability of fresh 3D printing mortar, Constr. Build. Mater.
227 (2019), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2019.07.326.
[55] J. Zhang, B. Khoshnevis, Optimal machine operation planning for construction by contour crafting, Autom. Constr. 29 (2013) 50–67, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
autcon.2012.08.006.
[56] Y. Zhang, Y. Zhang, W. She, L. Yang, G. Liu, Y. Yang, Rheological and harden properties of the high-thixotropy 3D printing concrete, Constr. Build. Mater. 201
(2019) 278–285, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2018.12.061.

15