China
Africa
Explore chapters and articles related to this topic
Future of robotics and automation in construction
Published in Anil Sawhney, Mike Riley, Javier Irizarry, Construction 4.0, 2020
Borja Garcia de Soto, Miroslaw J. Skibniewski
On the other hand, off-site digital fabrication aims to custom design and prefabricate large-scale complex architectural elements off-site. Among existing additive dfab technologies, the most common for prefabrication include gantry robots, fixed robotic arms, and 3D printers. An example of additive prefabrication with a fixed robotic arm is the project DEMOCRITE from XtreeE and ENSA Paris-Malaquais. The project aims to construct complex concrete structural elements with increased performance and material optimization (Gosselin et al., 2016). Finally, the use of 3D printers is currently investigated for prefabrication of architectural elements. The project D-Shape, developed by Enrico Dini uses this technology for 3D printing sand structures through a binder-jetting process (Cesaretti et al., 2014). Construction robots have characteristics different from both industrial and civil engineering robots. In addition, robotic technologies can be classified as single-task robots (STRs) and automated construction systems. For more information about the classification of robots, the reader is referred to Chapter 16 (Robots in Indoor and Outdoor Environments) of this Handbook.
Developing a conceptual framework to improve the implementation of 3D printing technology in the construction industry
Published in Architectural Science Review, 2018
Peng Wu, Xianbo Zhao, Jessica Hedi Baller, Xiangyu Wang
Another enticing benefit is the reduction in labour cost by relegating the need for human intervention consequently improving safety through reduced injuries and fatalities (Hager, Golonka, and Putanowicz 2016; Perkins and Skitmore 2015). Despite the numerous benefits, adoption of 3D printing technology has been slow (Perkins and Skitmore 2015). Existing research by Smith (2012), Lim et al. (2012), Perkins and Skitmore (2015) and Wu, Wang, and Wang (2016) highlights 3 major 3D printing processes which are prominent in construction. These are concrete contouring, concrete printing, and D-shape technologies.
3D-printed concrete: applications, performance, and challenges
Published in Journal of Sustainable Cement-Based Materials, 2020
Ayesha Siddika, Md. Abdullah Al Mamun, Wahid Ferdous, Ashish Kumer Saha, Rayed Alyousef
In general, 3DP technology requires special and expensive machinery operation, which consumes more energy and cost than the conventional method. As the complexity and size of printing structure increases, the requirement of costlier machinery and arrangement along with supporting tools also increases [74]. Moreover, to operate machineries, skilled and experts are needed, which consequently charges more. For example, industrial AM fusion technology requires metal powders and high-energy beams that consume more electrical energy than ordinary methods [113]. Consequently, the cost of the process increases noticeably. Moreover, 3D concrete printing technology, when applied to large structures, requires large mass production, which is time-consuming and expensive [1]; it could be optimized after the improvement of machines and technologies applied in the design. The crucial issue is the selection of all parameters that may cause difficulties or faults during and after printing technology applications. The labor due to pre-processing file preparation, machinery arrangement and post-processing cleaning, removal of supports or adjoining additional materials, and surface treatments cannot ignore [5]. Several positive aspects were obtained from [109], which discovered that D-shape technology requires half the cost of the conventional construction system. Another study [12] highlighted significant case studies and revealed that most of the cases of 3DP technology save money. Additionally, this system ensures quality and precision, which cannot be measured in monetary terms. Table 2 shows that currently printed structures achieve around 33%–60% cost saving compared with structures built using the conventional construction method. Conventional flat wall construction is cheaper than the irregular shaped one, but shape is not relevant to cost in 3DP technology [104].
Robotic additive manufacturing (RAM) with clay using topology optimization principles for toolpath planning: the example of a building element
Published in Architectural Science Review, 2020
Odysseas Kontovourkis, George Tryfonos, Christos Georgiou
In the examples related to Contour Crafting additional variations can be found. For instance, in the work by (Khoshnevis and Dutton 1998; Khoshnevis 2006) exploitation of the superior surface-forming by applying the idea of trowelling to create smooth and accurate planar and free-form surfaces can be observed. In all cases, regardless of the technology applied, the size of structures is based on the working area of cranes, frames (gantry) or robots. Also, mounted nozzles are used to deposit the ready-made concrete mixtures through computer controlled processes (Lim et al. 2012). Most attempts are based on the construction of vertical walls, limiting the development of complex free-form morphologies, if this is compared with the D-shape technology. Thus, the review shows that the real case examples discussed in this paper are generally based on the same design principles, leading to the production of similar finished products in terms of their complexity and with differences in relation to their size. Also, the available information suggests that there is a significant reduction in construction time and cost although the latter is influenced by other factors such as materials and labour cost. In summary, observations in regard to the application of AM in the reviewed examples show potentials and limitations that are summarized as below: The application of AM in the construction industry and particularly the implementation of Contour Crafting and 3D Concrete printing have advantages in terms of the time and cost of construction compared to conventional methods.The case studies presented herein shows the ability of technology to be applied for the production of structures in different sizes, from small size dwellings to large size buildings, depending on the capabilities of a supportive frame structure that upholds the nozzle mechanisms.The utilization of technology, applied in the projects under review, focuses on the production of structural components or entire systems, depending on the method used that can be prefabrication or printed on-site respectively.The majority of examples use technology for vertical wall production. Hence, limitation in terms of the geometry under implementation is observed.The material used on those examples are cement-based and concrete, particularly because of its fast curing properties and stiffness, making them suitable for the production of structures.