skip to main content
10.1145/3328939.3329002acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagessiggraphConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

A method to evaluate the formability and fluidity of concrete based materials for 3D printing

Published: 16 June 2019 Publication History

Abstract

Use of 3D printers for construction brings a new possibility of creating walls with shapes that were not possible with conventional construction methods. However, existing construction materials can not be used for 3D printing as they are, and the exploration for new materials is the key to the realization of this concept. Formability and fluidity are the key factors in evaluating whether or not materials are suitable for 3D printing, including use within the field of architecture. A standardized quantitative method to evaluate construction materials is required for the comparison between materials for various projects. For example, the concrete slump test is one of the universal standards that is used to evaluate the quality and suitability for a specific construction method. In the emerging field of construction with 3D printing, however, a standardized method is yet to be established. This paper proposes an efficient method to evaluate the formability and fluidity of concrete-based materials, while only using simple instruments. The proposed method and instruments were tested by evaluating geo-polymer-based concretes, which are relatively difficult to evaluate due to its high intrinsic viscosity. By testing with these materials, we aim to show the methods ability to be applied to a wide range of materials. Notably, materials that were evaluated to be favorable under this method were confirmed to be suitable for use in 3D printing robots, being able to be used for building large structures.

References

[1]
MI Abdul Aleem and PD Arumairaj. 2012. Geopolymer concrete-a review. International journal of engineering sciences & emerging technologies 1, 2 (2012), 118--22.
[2]
Richard A Buswell, Rupert C Soar, Alistair GF Gibb, and A Thorpe. 2007. Freeform construction: mega-scale rapid manufacturing for construction. Automation in construction 16, 2 (2007), 224--231.
[3]
Richard A Buswell, A Thorpe, Rupert C Soar, and Alistair GF Gibb. 2008. Design, data and process issues for mega-scale rapid manufacturing machines used for construction. Automation in Construction 17, 8 (2008), 923--929.
[4]
Joseph Davidovits. 1994. Properties of geopolymer cements. (1994).
[5]
Kouji Harada, Hiroki Gouda, Kazuo Ichimiya, and Makoto Hibino. 2014. Basic research on the influence of blast furnace slag of geopolymer. In Concrete Engineering Annual Proceedings. Vol. 36. Japan Concrete Institute.
[6]
K Ikeda. 1998. Consolidation of mineral powders by the geopolymer binder technique for material use. Shigen-to-sozai 114 (1998), 497--500.
[7]
Runa Kawajiri, Minoru Kunieda, Naohumi Ueda, and Hikaru Nakamura. 2011. Basic research on basic physical properties and structure utilization of geo-polymer.
[8]
Concrete Engineering Annual Proceedings 33, 1 (2011), 1943--1948.
[9]
Ali Kazemian, Xiao Yuan, Evan Cochran, and Behrokh Khoshnevis. 2017. Cementitious materials for construction-scale 3D printing: Laboratory testing of fresh printing mixture. Construction and Building Materials 145 (2017), 639--647.
[10]
Thanh T Le, Simon A Austin, Sungwoo Lim, Richard A Buswell, Alistair GF Gibb, and Tony Thorpe. 2012. Mix design and fresh properties for high-performance printing concrete. Materials and structures 45, 8 (2012), 1221--1232.
[11]
Sungwoo Lim, Richard A Buswell, Thanh T Le, Simon A Austin, Alistair GF Gibb, and Tony Thorpe. 2012. Developments in construction-scale additive manufacturing processes. Automation in construction 21 (2012), 262--268.
[12]
Taku Matsuda and Koichi Hasuo. 2014. Study on Ultra-High-Strength Concrete Using Silica Fume and Fly Ash. (2014), 109 115.
[13]
Kousuke Minami, Taku Syorin, and Seiji Funabashi. 2013. Basic research on various physical properties of geopolymer cured product. In Concrete Engineering Annual Proceedings. Vol. 36. Japan Concrete Institute, 1957--1962. http://data.jci-net.or.jp/data_pdf/35/035-01-1322.pdf
[14]
Shigeyoshi Miyahara, Eiji Owaki, Masataka Ogino, and Etsuo Sakai. 2017. Carbonation of a concrete using a large amount of blast furnace slag powder. Journal of the Ceramic Society of Japan 125, 6 (2017), 533--538.
[15]
F Nuruddin, Samuel Demie, FA Memon, and Nasir Shafiq. 2011. Effect of superplasticizer and NaOH molarity on workability, compressive strength and microstructure properties of self-compacting geopolymer concrete. World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology 75 (2011).
[16]
Biranchi Panda, Suvash Chandra Paul, Nisar Ahamed Noor Mohamed, Yi Wei Daniel Tay, and Ming Jen Tan. 2018. Measurement of tensile bond strength of 3D printed geopolymer mortar. Measurement 113 (2018), 108--116.
[17]
Subhash V Patankar, Sanjay S Jamkar, and Yuwaraj M Ghugal. 2013. Effect of water-to-geopolymer binder ratio on the production of fly ash based geopolymer concrete. Int. J. Adv. Technol. Civ. Eng 2, 1 (2013), 79--83.
[18]
Saak, Aaron W., Hamlin M. Jennings, and Surendra P. Shah. 2004. generalized approach for the determination of yield stress by slump and slump flow. 34, 3 (2004), 363--371.
[19]
Mitsugi Sato, Hideki Hirahara, Takumi Uehara, and Hidetaka Umehara. 2001. Effect of moisture content of fine silica sand on concrete. Proceedings of the Japan Concrete Institute 23, 1 (2001), 103--108.
[20]
Geoffrey Howarth Tattersall. 1976. The workability of concrete. Viewpoint Publishing. INC. TORAY INDUSTRIES. Jan 7, 2019. TORELINA PPS Resin, Technical Information, Melt Viscosity Properties. https://www.toray.jp/plastics/en/torelina/technical/tec_017.html
[21]
Peng Wu, Jun Wang, and Xiangyu Wang. 2016. A critical review of the use of 3-D printing in the construction industry. Automation in Construction 68 (2016), 21--31.

Cited By

View all
  • (2024)Additive manufacturing of geopolymer composites for sustainable construction: critical factors, advancements, challenges, and future directionsProgress in Additive Manufacturing10.1007/s40964-024-00703-z10:2(1003-1061)Online publication date: 16-Aug-2024

Index Terms

  1. A method to evaluate the formability and fluidity of concrete based materials for 3D printing

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Information & Contributors

    Information

    Published In

    cover image ACM Conferences
    SCF '19: Proceedings of the 3rd Annual ACM Symposium on Computational Fabrication
    June 2019
    106 pages
    ISBN:9781450367950
    DOI:10.1145/3328939
    Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

    Sponsors

    Publisher

    Association for Computing Machinery

    New York, NY, United States

    Publication History

    Published: 16 June 2019

    Permissions

    Request permissions for this article.

    Check for updates

    Author Tags

    1. 3D printing
    2. additive manufacturing
    3. architecture
    4. concrete
    5. construction
    6. evaluation
    7. geopolymer

    Qualifiers

    • Research-article

    Conference

    SCF '19
    Sponsor:
    SCF '19: Symposium on Computational Fabrication
    June 16 - 18, 2019
    Pennsylvania, Pittsburgh

    Contributors

    Other Metrics

    Bibliometrics & Citations

    Bibliometrics

    Article Metrics

    • Downloads (Last 12 months)24
    • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)8
    Reflects downloads up to 18 Feb 2025

    Other Metrics

    Citations

    Cited By

    View all
    • (2024)Additive manufacturing of geopolymer composites for sustainable construction: critical factors, advancements, challenges, and future directionsProgress in Additive Manufacturing10.1007/s40964-024-00703-z10:2(1003-1061)Online publication date: 16-Aug-2024

    View Options

    Login options

    View options

    PDF

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader

    Figures

    Tables

    Media

    Share

    Share

    Share this Publication link

    Share on social media