With the introduction of 3D concrete printing, research started on how to include reinforcement in 3D printed structures. Initial studies on the implementation of strain hardening cementitious composites (SHCC) as self-reinforcing printable mortars have shown promising results. The development of this new type of SHCC comes with additional challenges. Where SHCC by itself is already a complex material engineered to achieve specific micromechanical behaviour under tensile loading, its application in 3D printing techniques imposes even more requirements - the so-called ‘printability’ requirements. The question that rises for the development of this new material is how to achieve printability without losing strain hardening capacity. This paper investigates the influence of raw materials and additives, such as silica fume, limestone powder, viscosity modifying agents and water, on the fresh and hardened mechanical properties of printable SHCC, by improving on a previously developed mixture. The fresh material mixtures were subjected to slump flow tests to analyse their applicability for 3D printing. In hardened state, the mixtures were tested on their compressive strength and flexural strength to assess their potential for strain hardening capacity. Finally, two mixtures were selected for printing. The mixtures were assessed on print quality and buildability by the deployment of a buildability test. Furthermore, the printed elements were mechanically tested at 28 days, on compressive strength, flexural strength and uniaxial tensile strength and strain. It was concluded that the silica fume content and water to solid ratio are relevant variables for 3DP-SHCC optimization. The study has yielded two 3DP-SHCC mix designs that display significant strain hardening capacity and good printability properties.

@en

The need for methods for forming concrete has existed for as long as concrete has been used in constructing the built environment. Creating flat, rectilinear formers have traditionally been the cost and time efficient default for the majority of applications. The desire for greater design freedom and the drive to automate construction manufacturing is providing a platform for the continued development of a family of processes called Digital Fabrication with Concrete (DFC) technologies. DFC technologies are many and varied. Much of the material science theory is common, but the process steps vary significantly between methods, creating challenges as we look towards performance comparison and standardisation. Presented here is a framework to help identify and describe process differences and a showcase of DFC application case studies that explain the processes behind a sub-set of the technologies available.@en

Digital Fabrication with Concrete (DFC) encompasses 3D Concrete Printing (3DCP) and many other methods of production. DFC is emerging from an era of invention and demonstration to one where the merits of one principle over another needs to be quantified systematically. DFC technologies vary in characteristics, complexity and maturity which hampers the synthesis of research and comparisons of performance. The interdependence of design geometry, material properties and process characteristics is well recognised. Materials research has made significant progress in recent years and there have been many applications with varying design geometries demonstrated. Far less has been done to guide the definition and description of the processes used. This work takes a step forward by presenting classification and process description guidance for DFC. The approach was developed by engaging a broad cross-section of the international community through the activities of the RILEM Technical Committee 276 between 2016 and 2020.

@en

In this research paper a new methodology for 3D Printing concrete onto a temporary freeform surface is presented. One of the geometrical restrictions associated with printed paste materials such as concrete is that material must be self-supporting during printing. The paper explores the possibilities of printing on top of a temporary freeform surface in order to overcome this restriction. This is achieved by combining a flexible-mould developed at TU Delft with a 3-axis gantry printer provided at TU Eindhoven. A number of hypothetical cases are studied, namely fully-printing geometries or combining 3D printing with casting concrete. The final outcome is a 5m2 partially-printed and partially-cast shell structure, realized through a completely digital workflow using Grasshopper and Rhinoceros @en