Substitution of cement by marine clay in spray-based 3D concrete printing
Source abstract
Abstract
Spray-based 3D concrete printing (S-3DCP) is a type of 3D concrete printing specifically for automated constructions on vertical and overhanging surfaces, e.g. facades and ceilings. In this study, cement is partially substituted by calcined marine clay to develop a high-performance mixture for S-3DCP. Through setting, rheological, and tack tests, the fresh properties of the mixtures with marine clays calcined after different temperatures have been assessed. Considering pumping and deposition performance, tackiness, and sustainability, the optimum calcination temperature of marine clay is determined as 700 °C. The subsequent spray-based printing test shows that compared with the mixture without marine clay, the mixture with the marine clay calcined at 700 °C has a more uniform thickness distribution and 185% higher building capacity. The study contributes to the deeper understanding of the rheological and tack properties of the mixtures with calcined marine clay, which guides the future utilization of marine clay.
Source: openalex_inverted_index · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Innovations in Concrete and Construction Materials · Additive Manufacturing and 3D Printing Technologies · Concrete and Cement Materials Research
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Singapore Centre for 3D Printing, School of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore, Singapore
School of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore, Singapore
Funding
National Research Foundation
References (49)
Show source-provided references
1. 10.1007/978-3-662-53987-310.1007/978-3-662-53987-3 ↗
2. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2021.12531210.1016/j.conbuildmat.2021.125312 ↗
3. 10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.12872010.1016/j.jclepro.2021.128720 ↗
4. 10.1016/j.jobe.2020.10177910.1016/j.jobe.2020.101779 ↗
5. 10.1016/j.addma.2022.10328610.1016/j.addma.2022.103286 ↗
6. 10.1080/21650373.2018.153414810.1080/21650373.2018.1534148 ↗
7. 10.1080/21650373.2012.74261010.1080/21650373.2012.742610 ↗
8. 10.1080/21650373.2022.214963310.1080/21650373.2022.2149633 ↗
9. 10.1080/21650373.2012.72732210.1080/21650373.2012.727322 ↗
10. 10.1680/geot.1995.45.3.50910.1680/geot.1995.45.3.509 ↗
11. 10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.07.06810.1016/j.jclepro.2018.07.068 ↗
12. 10.1080/1064119X.2013.79706010.1080/1064119X.2013.797060 ↗
13. 10.11113/mjfas.v13n4.92110.11113/mjfas.v13n4.921 ↗
14. 10.1080/1064119X.2019.161558310.1080/1064119X.2019.1615583 ↗
15. 10.1061/(ASCE)1090-0241(2009)135:4(573)10.1061/(ASCE)1090-0241(2009)135:4(573) ↗
16. 10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.12278410.1016/j.jclepro.2020.122784 ↗
17. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2020.12025010.1016/j.conbuildmat.2020.120250 ↗
18. 10.1016/j.cemconcomp.2021.10404910.1016/j.cemconcomp.2021.104049 ↗
19. 10.1016/j.cemconres.2020.10607910.1016/j.cemconres.2020.106079 ↗
20. 10.1016/j.cemconres.2019.10578010.1016/j.cemconres.2019.105780 ↗
21. 10.1016/j.matdes.2016.03.09710.1016/j.matdes.2016.03.097 ↗
22. Laubier R Wunder M Witthoft S et al. Will 3D printing remodel the construction industry? 2018. Available from: https://www.bcg.com/en-sea/publications/2018/will-3d-printing-remodel-construction-industry.aspx
23. 10.1016/j.cemconres.2018.06.00110.1016/j.cemconres.2018.06.001 ↗
24. 10.1080/21650373.2023.218917210.1080/21650373.2023.2189172 ↗
25. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2019.03.18610.1016/j.conbuildmat.2019.03.186 ↗
26. 10.1007/s44150-022-00062-910.1007/s44150-022-00062-9 ↗
27. Lindemann H, Gerbers R, Ibrahim S, et al. Development of a shotcrete 3D-Printing (SC3DP) technology for additive manufacturing of reinforced freeform concrete structures. RILEM International Conference on Concrete and Digital Fabrication. Zurich: Springer; 2018. p. 287–298.
28. 10.1002/cend.20200002210.1002/cend.202000022 ↗
29. 10.1016/j.matdes.2019.10808810.1016/j.matdes.2019.108088 ↗
30. 10.1016/j.matpr.2022.09.11910.1016/j.matpr.2022.09.119 ↗
31. 10.1016/j.cemconcomp.2021.10417410.1016/j.cemconcomp.2021.104174 ↗
32. 10.1016/S0169-1317(01)00040-010.1016/S0169-1317(01)00040-0 ↗
33. 10.21809/rilemtechlett.2020.10710.21809/rilemtechlett.2020.107 ↗
34. 10.1016/j.cemconres.2015.08.00610.1016/j.cemconres.2015.08.006 ↗
35. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2017.03.18810.1016/j.conbuildmat.2017.03.188 ↗
36. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2014.09.06810.1016/j.conbuildmat.2014.09.068 ↗
37. 10.1016/j.tafmec.2019.10226210.1016/j.tafmec.2019.102262 ↗
38. 10.32656/2018_29SFF_Symposium_Aug13-15_0110.32656/2018_29SFF_Symposium_Aug13-15_01 ↗
39. 10.1016/j.autcon.2021.10357010.1016/j.autcon.2021.103570 ↗
40. 10.1016/j.cemconcomp.2022.10468810.1016/j.cemconcomp.2022.104688 ↗
41. 10.1016/j.cemconcomp.2020.10370810.1016/j.cemconcomp.2020.103708 ↗
42. 10.1111/jace.1317710.1111/jace.13177 ↗
43. 10.1016/0008-8846(95)00213-810.1016/0008-8846(95)00213-8 ↗
44. Chhabra RP, Richardson JF. Non-Newtonian flow and applied rheology: engineering applications. Oxford, U.K.: Butterworth-Heinemann; 2011.
45. 10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.12067110.1016/j.jclepro.2020.120671 ↗
46. 10.1016/0095-8522(47)90017-210.1016/0095-8522(47)90017-2 ↗
47. 10.1617/s11527-015-0571-010.1617/s11527-015-0571-0 ↗
48. 10.1016/j.cemconres.2011.04.00510.1016/j.cemconres.2011.04.005 ↗
49. Montgomery DC. Design and analysis of experiments. Hoboken, NJ, U.S.: John Wiley & Sons; 2017.