You are currently viewing a new version of our website. To view the old version click .
MDPIMDPI
Search all articles
Buildings
Download PDF
  • Editor’s Choice
  • Review
  • Open Access

6 December 2020

Additive Manufacturing Applications for Industry 4.0: A Systematic Critical Review

,
,
,
and
1
Faculty of Built Environment, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW 2052, Australia
2
School of Engineering and the Built Environment, Birmingham City University, Birmingham B5 5JU, UK
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Buildings2020, 10(12), 231;https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings10120231
This article belongs to the Special Issue Towards Construction 4.0: The Connection of Lean Construction and Industry 4.0
Version Notes
Order Reprints

Abstract

Additive manufacturing, including 3D printing (3DP), is one of the critical pillars of Industry 4.0 and the next construction revolution. Several countries, including China, have utilized 3DP on larger scales or real projects. However, reviews of the lessons learned from previous large-sized practices of 3DP utilization are scarce. This paper presents a few practical applications of implementing 3DP over the past decade and suggests a direction for future research work. Recent publications on 3DP practices are systematically reviewed using an interpretivist philosophical lens, and more specifically, the nozzle characteristics are focused upon. The Scopus and China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) journal databases are utilized, resulting in the examination of 54 English and 62 Chinese papers. The selected practices from Mainland China, Hong Kong, Taiwan and Macao are considered for this review. A content critical review approach is adopted, and the identified papers are critically reviewed. These papers reported key challenges and advantages from their reported practices, such as limitations in aggregate sizes, nozzle sizes, standards, post-occupancy satisfaction, final product quality, productivity challenges and other associated risks. The paper reports upon prominent limitations and signposts directions for future investigations.

1. Introduction

3D printing (3DP) has developed substantially over recent decades and is synonymous with intelligent and efficient technology, the applications of which are myriad in developed economies internationally. These applications traverse the diverse fields of science, including biomedical, aerospace and engineering. Yet compared with the exponential growth of applications and further development of 3DP technology in other industrial sectors, its implementation within the construction industry only accounts for 3.1% of the 3DP application market [1]. This slim market share is somewhat enigmatic given that the global annual revenues of the construction industry are valued at $10 trillion, which accounts for 6% of global GDP [2]. Moreover, 3DP offers a viable solution to many major recurrent issues that doggedly persist within the sector, including the need for affordable homes, augmenting quality control and mitigating cost overruns. While there are many papers that promote a 3DP approach for on-site construction, industry readiness remains low, thus precluding its widescale adoption. For example, Tahmasebinia et al. [3] note that while 3DP was introduced to the construction sector in the 1980s, its applicability and relative advantages have only recently been recognized by practitioners who note the significant challenges its adoption poses. This paper attempts to identify and delineate these challenges and define necessary directions that future research should take in order to address them. These objectives will be achieved by conducting a systematic review of extant literature, using different terminology and assumptions. To ensure consistency throughout the paper, definitions relevant to 3DP are summarized in Table 1. Tahmasebinia et al. [3] define 3DP technology as a useful technology for developing construction automation and increasing the sustainability practices in this field. Technology per se refers to the method, process, technique or knowledge, here related to 3DP. 3DP is one of the recommended technologies for implementing the Industry 4.0 concept in the construction context, which refers to developing or implementing the relevant tools, mechanisms, materials, hardware and software [4]. Industry 4.0 encapsulates the coalescence of existing digital technologies and techniques in order to build a resource-efficient, automated or smart construction process [4,5]. By embracing advanced automated digital technologies such as 3DP, forward-thinking practitioners and academics aspire to address the aforementioned challenges posed, which have their antecedents founded within human intervention (viz: acts or omissions).
Table 1. Summary of definitions for consistency throughout this review.
3DP is associated with different key terms such as liquid, sheet or powder bed additive manufacturing (AM) technology [18], and fused deposition modeling (FDM) (such as D-shape, contour crafting (CC) and concrete printing) [19], selective laser sintering (SLS) and selective laser melting (SLM), another powder-based AM technology used in different countries [18]. Using these technological solutions, a number of prominent advancements and applications of 3DP have been employed in both industry and practice. For instance, Huazhong University of Science and Technology (HUST), China, developed a 3DP system for large objects, which solved previous restrictions on not being able to print buildings larger than 1000 mm on SLS and SLM systems [20]. The SLS scales up to 1400 × 700 × 500 and 1400 × 1400 × 500 mm3, and the SLM system enlarges the project dimensions to 500 × 500 × 400 mm3 [20]. The CC variant of FDM is the most widely accepted by the Chinese construction industry and has been applied to the construction of many successful structures and buildings. For example, in 2014, China’s Winsun Decoration Design Engineering Co. achieved a tall 3DP building and completed ten houses within 24 h in Jiangsu, China [21]. ZhuoDa Group accomplished a ready-made modular of a 3DP house by a LEGO brick technique that theoretically resists an earthquake of level nine on the Richter scale, while HuaShang Tengda managed to create the world’s first villa by a custom-built 3DP system, which conceptually withstood a level eight earthquake [21]. In a further development, Winsun combined an aquaponic system with 3DP to achieve sustainability [21]. The first 3DP office was built in Dubai within 17 days in 2014 [21]. A challenge that limits the implementation of 3DP is the lack of controllability of the extruded geometry of printing specimens, which leads to the deformation of the printing material and other quality issues [22]. The structural stability of the printed specimens is mainly attributed to pumpability, extrudability, buildability and open time [23,24,25]. However, Shakor et al. [26] experimentally determined that different shapes of nozzle lead to different intercepting shocks, which influence the printability, shape and flowability of the slurry. Roussel et al. [27] reached the conclusion that in the process of printing, the distance between the nozzle and the previous layer limits the flowability of printing material, with a smaller distance resulting in a locally compressed and deformed filament. Contextualized against this prevailing background of 3DP opportunities and limitations, this paper seeks to conduct a systematic review of contemporary literature on this advanced technology, with specific focus on nozzle shape and size. The work is structured into three parts: first, the research method is presented; second, selected papers are reviewed and analyzed; and third, the limitations of current literature are analyzed, and future directions are delineated.

2. Research Method

To evaluate 3DP practices, two primary databases were selected to conduct interpretivist research, namely Scopus and China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI). Scopus is a high-quality international database and CNKI is an extensive database that includes Chinese scholarly papers. Different keywords, such as building information modeling (BIM) [28], scanner [15,29], and 3DP, were used to identify relevant papers within the construction and structural design fields. Figure 1 illustrates the outline systematic review process, keywords and the exclusion or inclusion criteria, whilst Figure 2 presents the methodology used for collecting, selecting and filtering relevant articles based on the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) approach [30], and similar systematic reviews in the construction field [31,32]. The bibliographic analysis was used since it shows who contributed to the topic and how the topic has evolved over time [33,34]. A set of keywords was used in combination with 3DP to review how these technologies work together and identify the existence of potential applications. Analytical network maps of co-occurrences of keywords were generated in order to visualize the main concepts in the 3DP literature and their possible evolutions or inter-relationships. This is a common and useful practice that is used for other topics in construction [35,36].
Figure 1. Research flowchart, including the main tasks of the present systematic review process.
Figure 2. Flowchart for identifying relevant papers in Scopus and CNKI, based on preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) approach.
Conference proceedings, trade publications, book series, the publication year 2020 and medicine, physical and astronomy, biochemistry, genetics and molecular biology, agricultural and biological science, pharmacology toxicology and pharmaceutics, immunology and microbiology, were excluded after manual processing, and 116 papers were selected to be reviewed. The search keywords are indicated in the Appendix A.

3. Results

In order to identify the current status of 3DP in construction, in terms of co-occurrence of keywords, a networking approach was used, which incorporated recent papers from the three-year period 2018 to 2020. Figure 3 shows the network of keywords limited to journal articles within six relevant subjects: engineering, computer science, business, decision sciences, social sciences, and energy. The string was considered based on the Search 2 strategy (refer to Figure 1): Title-Abs-Key (“3DP” OR ”3d PRINT *”) AND Title-Abs-Key (”construction” OR “build *” OR “architecture *"). VOS viewer was used to identify keyword hot topics of 3DP research in the construction context based on the co-occurrence of keywords. Figure 4 shows fractional analysis of the co-occurrence network, which mainly relates to “mechanical properties”, “microstructure” and “material science”. Figure 3 and Figure 4 show the key focuses in this area, including the links of 3DP concept with “tensile strength”, “compressive strength” and “mechanical properties”; the mechanical properties of the material are the bases of 3DP implementation in construction. Thus, researchers have conducted research of 3DP in construction from the microscopic and macroscopic perspectives, respectively. The keywords “shape optimization” and “process parameters” were also connected to “3d printing” [37,38,39,40,41]. This connection shows that the optimization of printing parameters and specimen shapes are still the key focus of future research [42,43,44,45,46,47,48,49]. Figure 3 shows the appearance of the ”robotics” key word [50,51,52,53] and Figure 5 shows the co-occurrence of key words. This means that the construction phase will be handled by robots rather than humans.
Figure 3. Co-occurrence analytical map of keywords generated based on Scopus data set. Note: the minimum cluster of 40 is considered and three clusters include 109 keywords among 2321 papers.
Figure 4. Fractional analysis of the co-occurrence network.
Figure 5. Co-occurrence analytical map of selected keywords created on bibliographic Scopus data for each group of keywords within and outside their individual groups: (a) process parameter network map; (b) microstructure network map; (c) mechanical properties network map; (d) porosity network map. Note: the minimum number of co-occurrences of keywords was 40, with a minimum strength of 0.
Figure 6 reflects the distribution of each topic of paper in the English database Scopus (a) and the Chinese database CNKI (b).
Figure 6. The distribution of papers in different topics: (a) English database Scopus; and (b) Chinese database CNKI.
The results indicate that Scopus contains more papers related to “3D scan or laser or scan *” compared to “BIM” and “robot or automate“. However, in the CNKI database, the number of papers related to “BIM” or “robot or automation” is greater than “3D scan or laser or scan *”. Thus, this research result indicates that in Chinese articles, 3DP is more focused on “BIM” and “robot or automation”, highlighting a large and unexpected difference in research topic between China and the English-speaking world.

3.1. Content Analysis

Table 2, Table 3 and Table 4 contain detailed information for each 3DP article that was researched from Scopus. In these tables, the classification is based on the relevance of the article and China’s 3DP applications.
Table 2. Selected papers from the Scopus database related to general concepts of 3D printing (3DP) methods, including selected cases in China.
Table 3. Selected papers from the CNKI database related to general concepts of 3DP methods.
Table 4. Selected papers from the CNKI database related to a detailed analysis of general concepts of 3DP practices, including structural and architectural examples.

3.2. Major 3DP Technologies

Tao et al. [59] review three different 3DP technologies. The first comprises SLS, SLM and SLA. The SLS and SLM mechanisms are layer by layer, and a laser beam scanning powder generates every single layer [67]. The second technology is EBM, which is similar to SLM, but EBM works in a vacuum environment and uses the metal powder under an electron beam. EBM products are smoother with high-quality performance [68]. The last approach is FDM, which involves the deposition of layers of extruded material [69]. FDM (and its variant CC) are discussed in this paper as they are widely used in the Chinese construction industry. Table 5 presents some information for 3DP technologies with the material information and working principles.
Table 5. Further 3DP technology information from sample papers [61].

3.3. Development and Challenges of Largescale Printing

Ma et al. [19] review three common largescale 3DP systems (D-shape introduced by Enrico in 2007 [70,71]; CC created by Khoshnevis in 1998 [72]; and concrete printing used globally in the construction field) and three of the latest 3DP techniques (Stone Spray [73]); cellular fabrication technology [74]; and BigDelta [19]. Their applications and limitations are stated in Table 6 [19]. There is no size specification of largescale structure printing. Regarding the SLS and SLM systems, they could not accept a dimension > 1000 mm before 2014 [20].
Table 6. Summary of largescale 3DPs used in the selected dataset of papers.
Ma et al. [19] highlight that largescale 3DP is cost-effective, efficient at reducing construction waste, suitable for freeform buildings or complex structures, sustainable and capable of providing a higher safety level on construction sites. There are three main challenges: the limited scale of the produced components, reinforcement issues and voids available in concrete. Figure 7 shows a few models created in the experiments conducted for the present paper, and they confirm that there are some deformations and issues in the final products using different materials such as plastic and clay [8]. The waste of material has also been observed in these experiments (see Figure 7), but this might be much less than in conventional construction methods.
Figure 7. 3DP models created at the laboratory by the investigators: (a) using plastic materials; (b) using clay (source: authors).
Fok and Picon [54] report on the standard and copyright issues of 3DP practices. In China, Philip Yuan and Hao Meng introduced the robotic platform as one method to solve the issue of open-source architecture. Open-source benefits are easy modification and coordination between stakeholders, but it is also easy to misunderstand the responsibility [17]. Xu [76] indicates that the copyrights between any two counties are different and, as such, this constitutes a significant potential issue of 3DP.
Moreover, many papers indicate that prevailing standards or copyrights are a significant limitation for China’s 3DP development. Yu et al. [77] state that existing criteria are no longer applicable. Yu. [61] and Su et al. [66] state that standard specification problems should be considered as barriers.

3.4. Criteria of 3DP Material Discussed in the Literature

The material challenge is the primary barrier to the adoption of 3DP in China and worldwide. The extant literature reveals that there are no united criteria for material but provides a reference based on the experiments conducted.
Ma et al. [19] develop some criteria for producing an optimized cementitious mixture, including shrinkage, extrudability, flowability, setting time, buildability and mechanical properties (refer to Table 7). For example, the control of extrudability tends to achieve a round shape, smooth grading and tiny particles, which is akin to self-compacting concrete. Figure 8 shows examples of deformation and issues in the final product, as part of experiments conducted by Shi et al. [78] and Tahmasebinia et al. [3].
Table 7. Summary of criteria discussed in the literature and examples from the sample.
Figure 8. Architecture models made of paper clay: (a–d) Model 1 100%; (e–h) Model 2 100%; (i–l) Model 3 100%; (m–p) Model 4 100% (source: authors).
Additionally, Hager et al. [81] demonstrate that sulfur concrete would be the 3DP material as it contains sulfur and aggregates. It obtains the required strength after cooling between 130 and 140 °C near the melting point. There are claims that sulfur concrete might be the material used on Lunar as well.

3.5. Environmental, Social and Economic Benefits Reported in the 3DP Database

Zhang and Su [65] state that China’s labor resources are in short supply and the construction industry contaminates the environment, intimating that changes in response are inevitable. In 2013, China’s 3DP was involved in the national development strategy project and consequently, many big cities, such as Chengdu, have launched 3DP development.
Tao et al. [59] discuss 3DP as a high-level accuracy manufacturing process that can be controlled to within 0.3 mm. For instance, the project SD 6000/7000 of 3D Systems can reach 0.025 to 0.05 mm, suitable for major products’ requirements. 3DP is highly efficient as no mold is required during the process, but customized products can be created using a diverse range of materials. Therefore, 3DP can control the financial budget while maximizing customer satisfaction and is an eco-friendly construction method.
Zhang and An [82] report the advantages of 3DP as materialization, improved safety and enhanced high-efficiency, which reduces environmental impact by reusing waste materials. Figure 9 shows the results of the thermal and humidity analyses of the models created in the laboratory by the student author of the present paper. This type of analysis is important for predicting the post-occupancy satisfaction of the 3DP models, as well as the structural analysis of the item created, by measuring the moisture lost per day. There is a need to measure all the thermal, sustainability and environmental indicators of the items created by 3DP in different contexts and climates. Zhang and Su [65] confirm that 3DP saves energy and provides a long-life cycle because conventional construction is a complicated process that is labor and equipment-intensive. In comparison, 3DP can be controlled by intelligent operation and cloud-based servers.
Figure 9. Model thermal and humidity analyses in the laboratory: (a–d) model thermal image 24–28 degrees; (e–h) model thermal image 25–29 degrees; (i–l) model humidity, 65–66% rh with 28 degrees using a thermal scanner 875-2i (source: authors).
Yu [61] demonstrates that 3DP technology could reduce construction material usage by 60%, lower labor by 80%, shorten construction periods by 70% and reduce construction costs by 30% per square meter. The benefits of 3DP are palpable and include its integration with modern information technology, computer-aided manufacturing technology, new material technology and mechanical technology. Design and manufacturing are highly integrated, and a complex structure does not limit 3DP as it is an automated process. Yu [61] reiterates the benefits with regard to the customized, efficient and diverse materials that can be used, but also refers to quality control and assurance and the rapid fabrication of small batches of complex units that are suitable for China’s market. Yu et al. [77] demonstrate the same benefits for 3DP but also refer to a shorter payback period on investment and lowering of labor intensity, thus alleviating labor shortages in China [65].
Su et al. [66] reiterate the same benefits and highlight that earthquake resistance is theoretically excellent because the 3D printer prints entirely, and the “ink” used is high-grade concrete, which can achieve high strength whilst simultaneously being lightweight [66].

3.6. Review of Industry Practices

Su et al. [66] state that the Chinese construction industry began to accept 3DP technology due to the CC method improving the performance of construction, as it hangs the nozzle on the crane and moves in both X and Y directions. The finished product has higher strength and excellent surface finishes using this method [66]. Table 8 shows a summary of selected successful projects using 3DP technology. The first case study (ID 1) presents a large-sized project comprising ten houses with a gigantic 3D printer (150 m × 10 m × 6 m). This project used recycled waste materials or natural stones from mining sites that were processed before use. The walls were printed with some room for beams and columns, steel bars were inserted, and spaces were filled with the required insulating materials. The second project (ID 2) presents a five-story apartment in Jiangsu Province, China, which in 2014 was known as the world’s tallest 3DP structure [83]. The diagonally reinforced printing process was used in the walls and other parts of the building to form a hollow section for insulation; this was off-site manufactured in the factory [81]. The third project (ID 3) presents a two-story villa constructed by using the factory-manufactured LEGO brick approach, which was assembled on-site in three hours using a mobile crane [84]. The fourth project (ID 4) presents a two-story villa built in the Tongzhou District, Beijing, within 45 days [85]. The formwork used traditional reinforcements and installed plumbing pipes [86]. A forked nozzle was used to extrude the double layers of concrete simultaneously [86]. The fifth project (ID 5) created the Classical Gardens of Suzhou, Shanghai, and was completed in two months at a competitive rate. The walls were designed as hollow structures to save materials and money, reduce the weight and grant the place insulation [87]. The sixth project (ID 6) shows an office printed in Dubai via a joint venture contract with a specialized company in China [88]. Table 8 summarizes these selected projects in China.
Table 8. Summary of selected 3DP practices.
Table 8 illustrates that although CC can achieve on-site 3DP, Winsun still pre-printed the structural components in factories instead of printing on-site. Even the earthquake-proof modular home at Xian was pre-printed and assembled on-site using the LEGO brick technique. However, HuaShang Tengda chose to print the world’s first 3D printed villa on-site.

3.7. The Benefits for Construction Applications of 3DP, 3D Scanners and BIM Reported in the Dataset

Table 9 lists the benefits of 3DP at each construction phase.
Table 9. The advantages of 3DP in the different construction phases.
The 3DP trend in China aims to combine with BIM to achieve automated construction, such as Urumqi International Highway–Railway combined Passenger Station and its North Square Entrance. The use of BIM can enhance site management and regulation and improve construction efficiency from all aspects.
Tao et al. [59] also demonstrate that 3DP could resolve the issue of weak connection points between components because it fabricates the node integrally. Moreover, 3DP can enhance earthquake resistance by increasing the connection size to avoid premature breakage under stress. Due to these beneficial characteristics, 3DP has engendered a revolution in the construction industry by creating “freeform construction.” The San Francisco–Oakland Bay Bridge, which collapsed in an earthquake, was used as a case study to prove the importance of improving weak points. During the rebuild process, the sheer energy link design was added, and after the experience, the weakest part of the design was still the weld section but 3DP can reduce defects caused by the weld section.
In China, HUST developed SLS and SLM systems for printing large building components, but these systems are not able to generate components with a size larger than 1000 mm. The object’s size is limited due to the technology of EOS GmbH-Electro Optical Systems (EOS), which is a state-of-the-art powder laser fusion AM technology. The largest project created by the largest EOS direct metal laser sintering (DMLS) system up to 2014 is 400 × 400 × 400 mm3. Therefore, it is necessary to separate the large component and then re-integrate it. However, this process is time and money consuming and incurs accuracy issues [20].
Wen et al. [20] introduced a multi-layer flexible preheating system, according to the self-adaptive fuzzy control technique, to address the non-uniform temperature field created by a single large preheating system. Moreover, they introduced self-adaptive preheating technology to prevent component distortion. They presented a multi-laser beam scanning method to enhance the precision and efficiency of a sports focus. They developed HRPS™ largescale laser sintering systems, which can create objects with dimensions up to 1400 × 700 × 500 mm3 and 1400 × 1400 × 500 mm3. This approach accepts numerous powdered ingredients, such as metal, composite powder, polymers, resin-coated sands and ceramic powders. They also developed a material with superior mechanical properties, which is known as high impact polystyrene (HIPS), a polymer blend of polystyrene (PS) toughened with polybutadiene rubber. The other suitable material for SLS is the mixture of polyamide (PA) and reinforcement particles. However, the size of the particles is too small for a significant density difference. Mixing these two materials is a challenge and performance is therefore limited. Wen et al. [20] developed the dissolution–precipitation process to make PA base materials, such as the PA/carbon fiber introduced by Yan et al. in 2011, PA/aluminum introduced by Yan et al. in 2009, PA/nanosilica introduced by Yan et al. in 2009 and PA/potassium titanium whisker introduced by Yang et al. in 2010. The carbon fiber under the scanning electron microscope (SEM) micrograph has a good effect on mechanical properties due to the particles dispersing and the PA aluminum has an excellent interfacial bond. The SLM system enlarges the project dimension to 500 × 500 × 400 mm3 by the double-laser scanning system [20].
The combination of 3D scanning and 3DP is useful for heritage maintenance [56]. Xu et al. [55] developed a methodology to combine 3D scanning and cement mortar-based 3DP. This methodology represents a novel approach for replicating a decorative heritage element as the labor cost is expensive. A layering algorithm for model slicing and an enhanced nozzle path scan line algorithm were developed for the cement mortar placement process. The cup-shaped individual plinth was damaged and replicated through 3D scanning, then remodeled and reconstructed. This approach has a few limitations, viz: the requirement for improvement of the materials used; the high requirements for intricate carving patterns on the components using improved control of mechanical motion and a precise and flexible nozzle; and the restoration modeling algorithms for alternative or missing elements. Hence, enhanced printing and its compatibility are essential [55].
Leach [57] discusses the size issue of the architecture design and illustrates that 3DP models do not have the same properties as the full-size building, as the structural performance is affected. A large scale 3DP cladding of the Arachne facade project was designed by Chinese architect Lei Yu, Foshan, China, 2017, as an example. Therefore, 3DP was more suitable for the small scale and customized structure until 2017.
Kan and Lin [58] discuss the significant impact of 3DP on manufacturing a new type of TiAl alloy by selecting EMB. The SLM and EMB can be used to manufacture the metal material. However, the limitations are the material preparation for the TiAl alloy. The limitation is the microstructure evolution process of EBM samples during heat treatment.
With regard to the high-cost 3DP material, Fu and Liu [90] developed an innovative approach to enhancing the printed skin-truss structure by a mesh simplification strategy and maintained the similarity of the original. This kind of structure is used extensively in architecture, bridge engineering and aerospace.
Jia et al. [91] discuss how geopolymer and geopolymer-based composites could be applied in 3DP due to the low-temperature molding, cheaper cost and eco-friendly properties. For instance, 3DP can accept the aluminum–silicon acid polymer system.
Liu and Gao [64] demonstrate that 3DP is a significant symbol of the third industrial revolution and can be applied on the PC assembled inclined support node steel frame structure residential system. The self-supporting printed floor slab has a space truss support system in the middle of the slab, which can reduce the slab’s weight. Thus, 3DP is an efficient method for volumetric modular construction using concrete structural units. 3DP can print a structure at once; therefore, the stability and the strength of the flexibility are higher than the traditional method.
Liu et al. [92] demonstrate the application process of converting a BIM model into 3DP STL format, importing the STL format into Cura 3D software, and adjusting the printing parameter set to produce the G-code used for the 3D printer.
Guo et al. [60] demonstrate the combination of BIM and 3DP in architectural decoration for a concealed fire-hydrant box stone door for a theatre project. The project department uses a method called “secondary conversion” to solve the opening angle and force degree, amongst other issues.
Lu et al. [62] discuss the combination of BIM and 3DP using Urumqi International Highway–Railway Combined Passenger Station and its North Square Entrance as a case study. This project includes many sophisticated techniques, such as 3DP, 3D laser scanning and an electronic distance measuring device (an intelligent photoelectric measuring instrument). In this project, RealWorks, Catia, Naviswork, Enovia (for data sharing and transfer platform) and Rhino were used for modeling curtain wall optimization.
Due to the unique style of the roof façade system and the consideration of the strength and life cycle, this project used 3DP, SRC (a kind of special glass fiber reinforcement cement) as the roof façade. The model data were imported into a 3DP system and then printed with SRC. The combination of BIM and 3DP can enhance quality and efficiency. This project used BIM with 3DP through the design, production, constitution and management phases to maximize the architecture design in a high-quality and eco-friendly way. Figure 10 shows a few different architectural models’ designs, considering different angles and curves for further examination.
Figure 10. Five different designs of architectural models, including angles and curves for evaluating the performance of any proposed 3DP.
The BIM progress used on the Tecent Beijing Headquarters sought to use crush detection to optimize reinforcement arrangement and print a solid mold by 3DP to try to enhance the process of reinforcement implementation [93]. China Vanke cooperated with the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) on robotic-controlled processes for 3D houses [77].
Zhang and An. [82] state that the 3DP building is cheaper than conventional structures. Thus, it is suitable for low-income people and emergency housing. It is customizable and suitable for freeform construction, which is good for a natural disaster area. Furthermore, 3DP may be applied to services integration or decoration in buildings.

3.8. The Shape and Size of the Nozzle

The nozzle is a quintessentially important component in 3DP because it impacts upon the material’s compressive strength and interlayer bonding [94,95]. The nozzle type can be divided into two categories, screw type and plunger-type [96], and common nozzle graphics are circular, elliptical and rectangular [97,98,99]. Table 10 provides detail on the common shapes, sizes and types of nozzle based on current shortcomings, advantages and improvement direction.
Table 10. Summary of the shape and size of the nozzle.
Material blockage presents a common and frequently occurring problem facing the nozzle [111]. In addition to its shape, the nozzle’s size plays a decisive role. The nozzle material’s properties (such as wear resistance, sealing and impact resistance) are also a key factor that cannot be ignored in minimizing this problem [97,101]. Hou et al. [96] and Shakor et al. [11] note that replacing aluminum bronze with beryllium bronze (which can better withstand the pressure of printing) as the material to produce a nozzle can effectively avoid material blockage [96]. However, an overweight nozzle material will reduce the nozzle’s freedom and flexibility. In addition, with the development of printing materials, composite materials have increasingly replaced the traditional single thermoplastic materials, such as polylactic acid-filled stainless steel and iron. These composite materials will lead to the wear and deformation of nozzles and accelerate the use period [112]. Nozzle design is, therefore, at the core of 3DP technology. Further empirical research should be undertaken to test the optimum shape, size and material of nozzle design to improve printing quality.

4. Discussion

This paper presents a combination of a scientometric and content review of the concrete 3DP literature, including large-sized case studies and the available information about them. Major limitations presented in the selected literature show that the ink materials cannot achieve the optimized machinery properties, such as the strength both for off-site or on-site 3DP. The main challenges of 3DP are due to its implementation as on-site technology, and it can be less challenging where it is used as an off-site technology producing small-sized items. While the use of off-site technologies and modular construction are discussed and promoted by recent publications [31], the utilization of advanced technologies for on-site construction remains most challenging due to difficult site conditions affecting the performance of the 3DP [3,60,66,113].
In addition to the production challenges of 3DP, other issues include the quality of the components’ surface finishes; the size of the components; the issue of the joint connection between off-site printed units; and the durability of the 3DP components in the natural environment due to the specific material properties requirement, such as zero slump. Previous 3DP practices using BIM show an efficient information exchange and model modification. However, the integration of BIM with 3DP has been reported as challenging and issues such as copyright and modeling responsibilities remain largely unexplored. A comparison of a few selected papers published in the first three years of the decade (2011–2013) with those from the last three years (2018–2020) shows that the main concerns have shifted from prototyping and applications to BIM and concrete materials. However, Yu et al. [77] report that 3D modeling design software is not yet mature enough for 3DP purposes. In addition, new information technologies, and software and hardware interoperability with 3DP systems are growing concerns mentioned in the literature. Su et al. [66] and Guo et al. [60] mention other limitations which include the software, hardware facility and standards specification, the size of the 3D printer and the accuracy of the printed elements. Aoki et al. [114] introduce a new augmented reality (AR) 3D modeling system with an air spray-like interface and a novel data structure, which is octet voxel, to represent the design model. This approach has been testified based on the user test, and users can design individual components in a short period with a simple interface.
Figure 11 shows the frequency of keywords within a different set of documents collected from scholarly papers and the website content provided by different relevant companies. Interestingly, the content analysis of 50 websites of commercial companies shows that robots and housing applications are of the most concern in practice. Zhang and Su [65] report that standard concrete cannot be adopted, the processing of the additive materials and the size of the 3D printer are limitations, the size of material aggregates is significant and the admixture mechanism properties may change when added into the 3DP “ink”. Therefore, the transformation between the software and reality is vital. The major limitation mentioned is that the windows, doors and pipework cannot be printed at the same time. Figure 12 presents a set of the most frequent words within the datasets and gives an overall idea about the main concerns within the literature or within the industry. The figure shows the shift from technology, manufacturing practice and process definitions at the beginning of the decade to the integration of 3DP with BIM, automation and productivity at the end of the selected decade from 2018 to 2020. The figure also shows that conversation in commercial companies is revolving around housing applications as a high demand market and the introduction of using concrete by 3DP.
Figure 11. Comparison of the frequency of keywords within the selected documents, which include scholarly articles and selected commercial companies’ websites.
Figure 12. Dominated concepts and main concerns within the literature or the industry.
This paper has discussed some of the practical limitations reported in the literature. For example, Tao et al. [59] highlight that the 3DP envelope height limits the size of 3DP products and the accessibility of multiple-level structures. A challenge that should be addressed is the low corrosion resistance of the materials used in 3DP for reinforcement, which affects the durability of the components. Zhang and An [82] further mention quality control of the surface and assurance of the printing components, such as the earthquake resistance. In addition, Yu [61] demonstrates two other limitations, architecture design (given material limitations) and 3DP machinery, which require high accuracy and automation. Furthermore, Hager et al. [81] state that the potential consequence for widespread adoption of 3DP is increasing unemployment. Li [63] discusses the development of a new self-climbing 3D printer to solve the problem regarding the difference between the 3D printer and the building height. This machine can be installed on the building and climb along with the structure. Further development is the introduction of the multi-head printer to overcome the low outcome caused by the single printer head. Li [63] also demonstrates the future advancement of 3DP in the architecture, construction, engineering and operations (AECO) industries via a material with high inherent safety and excellent printability. Li [63] also investigates the development of a multi-print head, distributed, self-climbing 3D printer to enhance printer efficiency and safety levels. One of the practical implications of 3DP development is that automated versions do not succumb to the labor shortages that grip China’s construction industry, a situation that is further exacerbated by the global COVID-19 pandemic [65].
Table 11 lists the benefits and limitations mentioned in the sample literature. The embryonic adoption of 3DP in China is largely focused on experimentation and theoretical synchronization, even before the theory. For instance, the “ink” that Winsun used contained construction waste and industry debris combined with high-grade quick-dry cement and glass fiber to achieve the desired strength [1]. However, the process details are still unfolding. The literature shows that construction waste could be reused within the 3DP “ink”, and Winsun company real practices followed in some articles.
Table 11. A summary of the benefits and limitations experienced in previous practice within 3DP literature.
Moreover, most Chinese articles focus on technology applications in different contexts and are interested in the practical implications of 3DP. Therefore, this means the selected Chinese papers rarely offer a radical innovation in this field; rather, they rely on world-wide developments in the 3DP area. For instance, HUST, China, further developed the system for large objects to solve the restrictions on not being able to print buildings larger than 1000 mm on SLS and SLM systems [3]. However, the current literature shows that many other countries, such as Malaysia, have not accepted the latest prototypes of 3DP in practice [126]. A future direction would be to investigate barriers to utilizing 3DP technology in different construction contexts and projects. Evaluating industry readiness, particularly for small and medium-sized construction companies, is critical for a successful diffusion process.
Figure 13 presents a taxonomy of 3DP systems, digital tools, operation methods and required materials for 3DP. While many studies have mentioned that the shape and size of nozzles could influence the quality of printed components, few studies have conducted experiments to demonstrate how the design of the nozzle could be optimized. However, a series of experiments needs to be conducted to explore any potential relationships between the nozzle and the mechanical performance of printed components. Another question that should be addressed is how the quality could be improved accordingly. Future studies should consider the design and implementation of various sizes and shapes of the nozzle. At the technical level, Rhino software is helpful in designing the shape and size of the nozzle to then be used by the 3D printer. The impact of different factors should be taken into account, such as the properties of the material, the printing environment and the amount of printing in order to reduce accidental error. In addition, with the rapid development of 3DP technology, material technology and manufacturing modes, large-scale production and high-precision customization production will become the mainstream of the future market. Thus, the main challenges to future nozzle design are to optimize the nozzle design to achieve high dimensional accuracy and printing quality; strengthen the connection between nozzles from different production steps and the connection between nozzle and other intelligent equipment to increase production efficiency; and find the balance between high precision production and minimum printing period.
Figure 13. Taxonomy of 3DP systems, digital tools, operation methods and required materials for three-dimensional printing in construction. Note: FDM: fused deposition modelling; SLS: selective laser sintering; SLA: stereolithography apparatus; DLP: digital light processing; CNC: computerized numerical control; EDM: electrical discharge machining; BOQ: bill of quantities.

5. Conclusions

This paper presented lessons that have been learned in the previous decade from the selected contexts and a few practices conducted in China using a systematic review of the literature, particularly those articles focusing on the nozzle, which is a key component of 3DP. A systematic review was conducted to identify relevant articles and the content of the relevant articles was critically reviewed to identify the limitations of the current methods. In addition, 50 websites of commercial companies were chosen for further content analysis and identification of the main concerns and keywords used by practitioners. 3DP limitations in real practice (such as size, productivity measures and interoperability with other software tools) require a considerable amount of work in order for them to be widely adopted by a variety of small to large companies. Another concern regarding the widespread implementation of 3DP is to maintain a high level of safety where there is interaction between humans and machines. Adequate availability of required materials for the 3DP performance with the correct attributes (easily pumpable, short setting time and good interlayer performance after curing) is another concern reported in the literature. Other challenges at the operational level include physical progress based on the cooperative path plan of a multi-printhead printer using artificial intelligence, such as the optimized mathematical model and post-occupancy satisfaction measures and benchmarks.
The benefits, limitations and further development directions of 3DP are similar between China and other countries according to both the English and Chinese articles reviewed in this paper. Therefore, it would be mutually beneficial for China and other countries to cooperate with each other. This article also discussed the limitations, challenges, and optimization directions of the nozzle in 3DP, based on size and shape. The potential relationship between the nozzle and the mechanical performance of printed components still requires further study. A taxonomy was presented of 3DP systems and associated tools based on the systematic review conducted, which provides a big picture of the different directions and focuses on the literature. This will be helpful to future scholars and practitioners in understanding and organizing the diverse range of methods and tools and for conducting comparison-based evaluations and investigations.
3DP resides at an embryonic stage of development and there is wide scope to develop this field in the decade ahead to facilitate the concept of Industry 4.0. The utilization of 3DP can be controversial as an advanced on-site technology versus the application of off-site technologies promoted by different literature. This review can be helpful to scholars to learn from the current practices because it provides an overview of the main challenges of a 3DP implementation process.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization and methodology, S.M.E.S.; formal analysis and investigation, S.M.E.S., A.S., L.Y., S.S. and D.J.E.; writing—original draft preparation, writing—review and editing, S.M.E.S., A.S., L.Y., S.S. and D.J.E. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Acknowledgments

The experiments were conducted in the Design Futures Lab at the University of New South Wales.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Abbreviations

3DThree-dimensional
3DPThree-dimensional printing
BIMBuilding information modeling
FDMFused deposition modeling
CCContour crafting
AMAdditive manufacturing
SLSSelective laser sintering
SLMSelective laser melting
EBMElectron beam melting
MJMaterial jetting
BJBinder jetting
SLAStereo lithography appearance
DEDDirected energy deposition
C-FabCellular fabrication technology
VMAViscosity modifying agent
FRPFiberglass reinforced plastics
GDPGross domestic product
HUSTHuazhong University of Science and Technology
DMLSDirect metal laser sintering
HIPSPolystyrene
PAPolyamide
SEMScanning electron microscope
AECOArchitecture, engineering, construction and operations
PSPolymer blend of polystyrene
NASANational Aeronautics and Space Administration
EOSElectro-optical systems

Appendix A. Keywords and Eligibility

Table A1 and Table A2 and Table 11 show the keywords and the eligibility criteria set out during the research process, which were the resources used for the analysis.
Table A1. Keywords and eligibility—Scopus.
Table A1. Keywords and eligibility—Scopus.
Combinations of KeywordsLimitations
(Scopus Copy not Finishes)		No of Result PaperTotal
3dp* or ‘3D print*’ + construction or build* or architectur* + chin* or ‘hong kong’ or taiwan or macao + All (BIM or ‘Building information model*’)Exclude Conference Paper, Conference Review.
Exlude Conference Proceedings and Book Series.		1 (English)
1 (Chinese)		20
3dp* or ‘3D print*’ + construction or build* or architectur* + chin* or ‘hong kong’ or taiwan or macao + All (‘3D scan*’ or laser or scan*)Exclude 2019.
Exclude Physics and Astronomy, Medicine, Agricultural and Biological Sciences, Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology, Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics. Exclude Conference Paper. Exclude Conference Proceedings and Trade Publications.		5 (English)
7 (Chinese)		Laser (E):
3 repeated with Robot (E).
1 repeated with BIM and Robot (E).
3dp* or ‘3D print*’ + construction or build* or architectur* + chin* or ‘hong kong’ or taiwan or macao + All (robot* or automat*)Exclude 2019.
Exclude Agricultural and Biological Sciences, Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology, Physics and Astronomy.
Exclude Conference Paper, Editorial.
Exclude Conference Proceedings.		4 (English)
2 (Chinese)		Robot (E):
3 repeated with Laser (E).
1 repeated with BIM and Laser (E).
1 repeated with BIM.
3dp* or ‘3D print*’ + construction or build* or architectur* + nozzle +shape or sizeExclude Medicine, Physical and Astronomy, Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology, Agricultural and Biological Science, Pharmacology Toxicology and Pharmaceutics, Immunology and Microbiology.
Exclude 2019.
Exclude Conference Paper, Conference Review, Editorial.
Exclude Russian.
Exclude Conference Proceedings, Trade Publications, Book Series.		34 (English)34
Table A2. Keywords and eligibility—CNKI.
Table A2. Keywords and eligibility—CNKI.
Combinations of KeywordsLimitationsNo of Result PaperTotal
ABSTRACT (3d printing and engineering) + ABSTRACT (architectur) + ALL (BIM)Include Mathematics, Mechanics, Physics, Resources Science; Architecture/Energy/traffic/electromechanics, etc; Macro-economic Management and Sustainable Development; Theory of Industrial Economy; Economy of Traffic and Transportation; Culture Economy; Information and Post Economy; Market Research and Information and Management Science.3 (English)
15 (Chinese)		62
ABSTRACT (3d printing and engineering) + ABSTRACT (architecture) + ALL (3D scan OR laser OR scan)Include Mathematics, Mechanics, Physics, Resources Science; Architecture/Energy/traffic/electromechanics, etc; Macro-economic Management and Sustainable Development; Theory of Industrial Economy; Economy of Traffic and Transportation; Culture Economy; Information and Post Economy; Market Research and Information and Management Science.5 (English)
25 (Chinese)		Laser:
1 repeated with BIM
ABSTRACT (3d printing and engineering) + ABSTRACT (architecture) + ALL (robot OR automat)Include Mathematics, Mechanics, Physics, Resources Science; Architecture/Energy/traffic/electromechanics, etc; Macro-economic Management and Sustainable Development; Theory of Industrial Economy; Economy of Traffic and Transportation; Culture Economy; Information and Post Economy; Market Research and Information and Management Science.2 (English)
12 (Chinese)		Robot:
4 repeated with BIM

References

  1. Wohlers, T. Wohlers Report 2016; Wohlers Associates Inc.: Fort Collins, CO, USA, 2016. [Google Scholar]
  2. Gerbert, P.; Castagnino, S.; Rothballer, C.; Renz, A.; Filitz, R. The transformative power of building information modeling. In Digital in Engineering and Construction; Boston Consulting Group: Boston, MA, USA, 2016. [Google Scholar]
  3. Tahmasebinia, F.; Sepasgozar, S.M.; Shirowzhan, S.; Niemela, M.; Tripp, A.; Nagabhyrava, S.; Ko, Z.M.K.; Alonso-Marroquin, F. Criteria development for sustainable construction manufacturing in Construction Industry 4.0. Constr. Innov. 2020, 20, 379–400. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Sepasgozar, S.M. Digital technology utilisation decisions for facilitating the implementation of Industry 4.0 technologies. Constr. Innov. 2020. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Sawhney, A.; Riley, M.; Irizarry, J. Construction 4.0: An Innovation Platform for the Built Environment; Routledge: London, UK, 2020. [Google Scholar]
  6. Leino, M.; Pekkarinen, J.; Soukka, R. The Role of Laser Additive Manufacturing Methods of Metals in Repair, Refurbishment and Remanufacturing–Enabling Circular Economy. Phys. Procedia 2016, 83, 752–760. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Teh, K.S. Additive direct-write microfabrication for MEMS: A review. Front. Mech. Eng. 2017, 12, 490–509. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Tahmasebinia, F.; Niemelä, M.; Sepasgozar, S.M.E.; Lai, T.Y.; Su, W.; Reddy, K.R.; Shirowzhan, S.; Sepasgozar, S.M.E.; Marroquin, F.A. Three-Dimensional Printing Using Recycled High-Density Polyethylene: Technological Challenges and Future Directions for Construction. Buildings 2018, 8, 165. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Lee, D.; Kim, H.; Sim, J.; Lee, D.; Cho, H.; Hong, D. Trends in 3D Printing Technology for Construction Automation Using Text Mining. Int. J. Precis. Eng. Manuf. 2019, 20, 871–882. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Sepasgozar, S.M.E.; Davis, S. Digital Construction Technology and Job-site Equipment Demonstration: Modelling Relationship Strategies for Technology Adoption. Buildings 2019, 9, 158. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Freire, T.; Brun, F.; Mateus, A.; Gaspar, F. 3D Printing Technology in the Construction Industry. In Frontiers in Water-Energy-Nexus—Nature-Based Solutions, Advanced Technologies and Best Practices for Environmental Sustainability; Springer Science and Business Media LLC: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2020; pp. 157–167. [Google Scholar]
  12. Sepasgozar, S.M.; Lim, S.; Shirowzhan, S.; Kim, Y. Implementation of As-Built Information Modelling UsingMobile and Terrestrial Lidar Systems. In Proceedings of the 31st International Symposium on Automation and Robotics in Construction and Mining (ISARC), Sydney, Australia, 9–11 July 2014; pp. 876–883. [Google Scholar]
  13. Sepasgozar, S.M.E.; Forsythe, P.; Shirowzhan, S. Evaluation of Terrestrial and Mobile Scanner Technologies for Part-Built Information Modeling. J. Constr. Eng. Manag. 2018, 144, 04018110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Shirowzhan, S.; Sepasgozar, S.; Li, H.; Trinder, J. Spatial compactness metrics and Constrained Voxel Automata development for analyzing 3D densification and applying to point clouds: A synthetic review. Autom. Constr. 2018, 96, 236–249. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Sepasgozar, S.; Lim, S.; Shirowzhan, S.; Kim, Y.; Nadoushani, Z.M. Utilisation of a New Terrestrial Scanner for Reconstruction of As-Built Models: A Comparative Study. In Proceedings of the 32nd ISARC, Oulu, Finland, 15–18 June 2015; pp. 1–9. [Google Scholar]
  16. Wilkesmann, M.; Wilkesmann, U. Industry 4.0–organizing routines or innovations? VINE J. Inf. Knowl. Manag. Syst. 2018, 48, 238–254. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Andelfinger, U. An investigation into the technology adoption paradox. In Proceedings of the Third AIS SIGSAND European Symposium on Analysis, Design, Use and Societal Impact of Information Systems (SIGSAND-EUROPE 2008), Marburg, Germany, 12–13 June 2008. [Google Scholar]
  18. Feng, P.; Meng, X.; Chen, J.-F.; Ye, L. Mechanical properties of structures 3D printed with cementitious powders. Constr. Build. Mater. 2015, 93, 486–497. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Ma, G.; Wang, L.; Ju, Y. State-of-the-art of 3D printing technology of cementitious material—An emerging technique for construction. Sci. China Technol. Sci. 2017, 61, 475–495. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Wen, S.; Yan, C.; Wei, Q.; Zhang, L.; Zhao, X.; Zhu, W.; Shi, Y. Investigation and development of large-scale equipment and high performance materials for powder bed laser fusion additive manufacturing. Virtual Phys. Prototyp. 2014, 9, 213–223. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Koslow, T. 35 Greatest 3D Printed Houses & Structures All3DP 2017. Available online: http://www.dongoubag.com/listing/35-greatest-3d-printed-houses-structures-of-2017-all3dp-466b-623518 (accessed on 15 November 2019).
  22. Lao, W.; Li, M.; Tjahjowidodo, T. Variable-Geometry Nozzle for Surface Quality Enhancement in 3D Concrete Printing. Addit. Manuf. 2020, 101638. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Buswell, R.A.; De Silva, W.L.; Jones, S.Z.; Dirrenberger, J. 3D printing using concrete extrusion: A roadmap for research. Cem. Concr. Res. 2018, 112, 37–49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Camacho, D.D.; Clayton, P.; O’Brien, W.J.; Seepersad, C.; Juenger, M.; Ferron, R.; Salamone, S. Applications of additive manufacturing in the construction industry–A forward-looking review. Autom. Constr. 2018, 89, 110–119. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Lim, S.; Buswell, R.A.; Le, T.T.; Austin, S.A.; Gibb, A.G.; Thorpe, T. Developments in construction-scale additive manufacturing processes. Autom. Constr. 2012, 21, 262–268. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Shakor, P.; Nejadi, S.; Paul, G. A Study into the Effect of Different Nozzles Shapes and Fibre-Reinforcement in 3D Printed Mortar. Materials 2019, 12, 1708. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Roussel, N.; Spangenberg, J.; Wallevik, J.; Wolfs, R. Numerical simulations of concrete processing: From standard formative casting to additive manufacturing. Cem. Concr. Res. 2020, 135, 106075. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Shirowzhan, S.; Sepasgozar, S.M.E.; Edwards, D.J.; Li, H.; Wang, C. BIM compatibility and its differentiation with interoperability challenges as an innovation factor. Autom. Constr. 2020, 112, 103086. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Shirowzhan, S.; Sepasgozar, S.; Liu, C. Monitoring physical progress of indoor buildings using mobile and terrestrial point clouds. In Proceedings of the Construction Research Congress 2018, New Orleans, LA, USA, 2–4 April 2018. [Google Scholar]
  30. Moher, D.; Liberati, A.; Tetzlaff, J.; Altman, D.G.; Group, P. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta analyses: The PRISMA statement. PLoS Med. 2009, 151, 6. [Google Scholar]
  31. Wang, M.; Wang, C.C.; Sepasgozar, S.; Zlatanova, S. A Systematic Review of Digital Technology Adoption in Off-Site Construction: Current Status and Future Direction towards Industry 4.0. Buildings 2020, 10, 204. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Zhong, B.; Wu, H.; Li, H.; Sepasgozar, S.; Luo, H.; He, L. A scientometric analysis and critical review of construction related ontology research. Autom. Constr. 2019, 101, 17–31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Sepasgozar, S.; Karimi, R.; Shirowzhan, S.; Mojtahedi, M.; Sepasgozar, S.M.E.; McCarthy, D. Delay Causes and Emerging Digital Tools: A Novel Model of Delay Analysis, Including Integrated Project Delivery and PMBOK. Buildings 2019, 9, 191. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Leonidou, L.C.; Katsikeas, C.S.; Coudounaris, D.N. Five decades of business research into exporting: A bibliographic analysis. J. Int. Manag. 2010, 16, 78–91. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Sepasgozar, S.M.E.; Li, H.; Shirowzhan, S.; Tam, V.W.Y. Methods for monitoring construction off-road vehicle emissions: A critical review for identifying deficiencies and directions. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2019, 26, 15779–15794. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  36. Sepasgozar, S.M.E.; Karimi, R.; Farahzadi, L.; Moezzi, F.; Shirowzhan, S.; Sepasgozar, S.M.E.; Hui, F.K.P.; Aye, L. A Systematic Content Review of Artificial Intelligence and the Internet of Things Applications in Smart Home. Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 3074. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Murcia, D.H.; Genedy, M.; Taha, M.R. Examining the significance of infill printing pattern on the anisotropy of 3D printed concrete. Constr. Build. Mater. 2020, 262, 120559. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Ding, T.; Xiao, J.; Zou, S.; Wang, Y. Hardened properties of layered 3D printed concrete with recycled sand. Cem. Concr. Compos. 2020, 113, 103724. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Seyedkanani, A.; Niknam, H.; Akbarzadeh, A.H. Bending behavior of optimally graded 3D printed cellular beams. Addit. Manuf. 2020, 35, 101327. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Kruger, J.; Zeranka, S.; Van Zijl, G. A rheology-based quasi-static shape retention model for digitally fabricated concrete. Constr. Build. Mater. 2020, 254, 119241. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Kruger, J.; Cho, S.; Zeranka, S.; Viljoen, C.; Van Zijl, G. 3D concrete printer parameter optimisation for high rate digital construction avoiding plastic collapse. Compos. Part B Eng. 2020, 183, 107660. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Mantihal, S.; Prakash, S.; Godoi, F.C.; Bhandari, B. Optimization of chocolate 3D printing by correlating thermal and flow properties with 3D structure modeling. Innov. Food Sci. Emerg. Technol. 2017, 44, 21–29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Abeykoon, C.; Abeykoon, C.; Fernando, A. Optimization of fused deposition modeling parameters for improved PLA and ABS 3D printed structures. Int. J. Light. Mater. Manuf. 2020, 3, 284–297. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Huang, B.; He, H.; Meng, S.; Jia, Y. Optimizing 3D printing performance of acrylonitrile-butadiene-styrene composites with cellulose nanocrystals/silica nanohybrids. Polym. Int. 2019, 68, 1351–1360. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Hassani, V.; Khabazi, Z.; Raspall, F.; Banon, C.; Rosen, D. Form-Finding and Structural Shape Optimization of the Metal 3D-Printed Node. In Proceedings of the CAD’19, Singapore, 24–26 June 2019; pp. 24–28. [Google Scholar]
  46. Ashrafi, N.; Nazarian, S.; Meisel, N.A.; Duarte, J.P. Experimental prediction of material deformation in large-scale additive manufacturing of concrete. Addit. Manuf. 2020, 101656. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Alghamdi, H.; Neithalath, N. Synthesis and characterization of 3D-printable geopolymeric foams for thermally efficient building envelope materials. Cem. Concr. Compos. 2019, 104, 103377. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Xu, J.; Ding, L.; Cai, L.; Zhang, L.; Luo, H.; Qin, W. Volume-forming 3D concrete printing using a variable-size square nozzle. Autom. Constr. 2019, 104, 95–106. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Dakshinamurthy, D.; Gupta, S. A Study on the Influence of Process Parameters on the Viscoelastic Properties of ABS Components Manufactured by FDM Process. J. Inst. Eng. Ser. C 2016, 99, 133–138. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Mitterberger, D.; Derme, T. Digital soil: Robotically 3D-printed granular bio-composites. Int. J. Arch. Comput. 2020, 18, 194–211. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Yassin, A.; Hamzeh, F.; Al Sakka, F. Agent based modeling to optimize workflow of robotic steel and concrete 3D printers. Autom. Constr. 2020, 110, 103040. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Nicholas, P.; Rossi, G.; Williams, E.; Bennett, M.; Schork, T. Integrating real-time multi-resolution scanning and machine learning for Conformal Robotic 3D Printing in Architecture. Int. J. Arch. Comput. 2020. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Mick, S.; Lapeyre, M.; Rouanet, P.; Halgand, C.; Benois-Pineau, J.; Paclet, F.; Cattaert, D.; Oudeyer, P.-Y.; De Rugy, A. Reachy, a 3D-Printed human-like robotic arm as a testbed for human-robot control strategies. Front. Neurorobotics 2019, 13, 65. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  54. Fok, W.W.; Picon, A. The Ownership Revolution. Arch. Des. 2016, 86, 6–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Xu, J.; Ding, L.; Love, P.E. Digital reproduction of historical building ornamental components: From 3D scanning to 3D printing. Autom. Constr. 2017, 76, 85–96. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Leung, A.K.; Davies, S.; Ching, S.H. When new technology joins old documents and east meets west: Virtually reconstructing the Fisher Island Pagoda Lighthouse (China). Virtual Archaeol. Rev. 2018, 9, 12–27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Leach, N. Size matters: Why architecture is the future of 3D printing. Arch. Des. 2017, 87, 76–83. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Kan, W.; Lin, J. Research progress on fabrication of TiAl alloys fabricated by additive manufacturing. Mat. China 2015, 34, 111–119. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Tao, Y.; Zhang, Y.; Chen, Y.; Wang, W.; Tong, L. prospective applications of 3d printing technology in civil, engineering. Steel Constr. 2014. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Guo, J.; Wang, H.; Guo, Z.; Lu, Z. Application of BIM and 3D Printing Technology in Architectural. Decor. Eng. 2018. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Yu, W. Principle and Prospect on the 3D Printing Construction Technology. J. Beijing Univ. Civ. Eng. Archit. 2015, 4. Available online: https://en.cnki.com.cn/Article_en/CJFDTotal-JZJI201512006.htm (accessed on 5 September 2020).
  62. Lu, Z.; Du, Y.; Yu, Y.; Yang, J. BIM Application in the Porject of Urumchi Inernational Highway-railway Combined Passenger Station and Its North Square Entrance. J. Inf. Technol. Civ. Eng. Archit. 2017. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Li, R. Research Direction and Progress of Building 3D Pringting Key Technology. Build. Constr. 2017, 39, 248–250. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Liu, L.; Gao, W. Analysis on utilization of pre-fabricated housing system projects with PC-steel and 3D-print co-construction technologies. China Acad. J. Electron. Publ. House 2017, 12, 26–30. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
  65. Zhang, Y.; Su, Y. Development and prospect of 3D printing architecture. Shanxi Archit. 2015, 41, 6–8. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
  66. Su, Y.; Li, C.; Yang, T.; Yang, K.; Li, J. Study on application of 3d printing concrete technique in architectural engineering. Archit. Technol. 2017, 48, 98–100. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
  67. Kruth, J.-P.; Badrossamay, M.; Yasa, E.; Deckers, J.; Thijs, L.; Van Humbeeck, J. Part and material properties in selective laser melting of metals. In Proceedings of the 16th International Symposium on Electromachining, Shanghai, China, 19–23 April 2010. [Google Scholar]
  68. Murr, L.E.; Gaytan, S.M.; Ramirez, D.A.; Martinez, E.; Hernandez, J.; Amato, K.N.; Shindo, P.W.; Medina, F.R.; Wicker, R.B. Metal fabrication by additive manufacturing using laser and electron beam melting technologies. J. Mater. Sci. Technol. 2012, 28, 1–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Godbold, O.; Kang, J.; Buswell, R.; Soar, R. Fabrication of acoustic absorbing topologies using rapid prototyping. Can. Acoust. 2008, 36, 144–145. [Google Scholar]
  70. Lim, S.; Le, T.; Webster, J.; Buswell, R.; Austin, A.; Gibb, A.; Thorpe, T. Fabricating construction components using layered manufacturing technology. In Proceedings of the Global Innovation in Construction Conference, Loughborough, UK, 13–16 September 2009; pp. 512–520. [Google Scholar]
  71. Bose, S.; Vahabzadeh, S.; Bandyopadhyay, A. Bone tissue engineering using 3D printing. Mater. Today 2013, 16, 496–504. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Khoshnevis, B.; Dutton, R. Innovative rapid prototyping process makes large sized, smooth surfaced complex shapes in a wide variety of materials. Mater. Technol. 1998, 13, 53–56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Designboom. Stone Spray Robot Produces Architecture from Soil. Available online: https://www.designboom.com/design/stone-spray-robot-produces-architecture-from-soil (accessed on 20 November 2020).
  74. Molitch-Hou, M. Branch Technology is 3D Printing the Future of Construction One Wall at a Time. Available online: https://www.3dprintingindustry.com/news/branch-technology-is-3d-printing-the-future-of-construction-one-wall-at-a-time-54149 (accessed on 20 November 2020).
  75. Colla, V.; Dini, E.; Canessa, E.; Fonda, C.; Zennaro, M. Large Scale 3D Printing: From Deep Sea to the Moon. Low-Cost 3D Printing, for Science, Education & Sustainable Development; Canessa, E., Fonda, C., Zennaro, M., Eds.; ICTP—The Abdus Salam Center for Theoretical Physics: Sant’Anna, Italy, 2013; pp. 127–132. [Google Scholar]
  76. Xu, F.; Fok, W.W.; Picon, A. VULCAN: Closing the Loop in 3D-Printed Architectural Design. Arch. Des. 2016, 86, 82–91. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Yu, X.; Yang, J.; Hu, Z. Talking about the Application of 3D Printing Building Technology. Shanghai Build. Mater. 2017, 3, 33–35. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
  78. Shi, A.; Shirowzhan, S.; Sepasgozar, S.M.; Kaboli, A. 5D BIM Applications in Quantity Surveying: Dynamo and 3D Printing Technologies. In Smart Cities and Construction Technologies; IntechOpen: London, UK, 2020. [Google Scholar]
  79. Huang, Q.; Zhang, J.; Sabbaghi, A.; Dasgupta, T. Optimal offline compensation of shape shrinkage for three-dimensional printing processes. IIE Trans. 2015, 47, 431–441. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Khalil, N.; Aouad, G.; El Cheikh, K.; Rémond, S. Use of calcium sulfoaluminate cements for setting control of 3D-printing mortars. Constr. Build. Mater. 2017, 157, 382–391. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Hager, I.; Golonka, A.; Putanowicz, R. 3D Printing of Buildings and Building Components as the Future of Sustainable Construction? Procedia Eng. 2016, 151, 292–299. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Zhang, H.; An, Y. Application and prosepct of 3D printing technology in the field of construction engineering. Shanxi Archit. 2016, 42, 17–18. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
  83. Stott, R. Chinese Company Constructs the World’s Tallest 3D Printed Building. 2015. Available online: https://www.archdaily.com/591331/chinese-company-creates-the-world-s-tallest-3d-printed-building (accessed on 5 September 2020).
  84. Wang, L. Chinese company ‘builds’ 3D-printed villa in less than 3 hours. 2015. Available online: https://inhabitat.com/chinese-company-builds-3d-printed-villa-in-less-than-3-hours/ (accessed on 5 September 2020).
  85. Morrow, M.a.A. World’s first 3D printed house is completed after just 45 days in China. 2016. Available online: https://www.news.com.au/technology/innovation/design/worlds-first-3d-printed-house-is-completed-after-just-45-days-in-china/news-story/05c819dfc0dc6bf7ec0fd2abfed23edd (accessed on 5 September 2020).
  86. Nematollahi, B.; Xia, M.; Sanjayan, J. Current progress of 3D concrete printing technologies. In Proceedings of the 34th International Symposium on Automation and Robotics in Construction (ISARC), Taipei, Taiwan, 28 June–1 July 2017; pp. 260–267. [Google Scholar]
  87. Tess. Two 3D printed Suzhou-style Chinese courtyards are unveiled in Binzhou! Not a single brick was used. 2016. Available online: https://3dprint.com/148637/3d-printed-house-shandong/ (accessed on 20 November 2020).
  88. Garofalo, F. The world’s first 3D-printed office building is in Dubai. 2016. Available online: https://www.lifegate.com/worlds-first-3d-printed-office-building-dubai (accessed on 5 September 2020).
  89. Koslow, T. 35 Greatest 3D Printed Houses & Structures 2017. Available online: https://genuinebritishengineer.wordpress.com/2017/03/07/3d-printers-in-the-construction-world-30-greatest-3d-printed-houses-structures-in-the-world/ (accessed on 20 November 2020).
  90. Fu, C.; Liu, B. Material Saving Optimization of 3D Printed Objects. J. Comput. Aided Des. Comput. Graph. 2017, 29, 742–750. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
  91. Jia, D.; He, P.; Yuan, J.; Wang, R. Development of Geopolymer and Geopolymer-based Composites. Kuei Suan Jen Hsueh Pao 2017, 45, 1721–1737. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  92. Liu, W.; Ge, Y.; Zhou, Z.; Zhang, S. Multi-source BIM Information Fusion Technology. J. Inf. Technol. Civil Eng. Archit. 2017, 9, 23–28. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
  93. Huang, D.; Yan, B.; Wen, J.; Fan, D.; Zhao, Q.; Li, X. Integrated BIM Application in Construction of Tencent Beijing Headquarter. J. Inf. Technol. Civil Eng. Archit. 2016, 8, 16–22. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
  94. Liu, Z.; Li, M.; Tay, Y.W.D.; Weng, Y.; Wong, T.N.; Tan, M.J. Rotation nozzle and numerical simulation of mass distribution at corners in 3D cementitious material printing. Addit. Manuf. 2020, 34, 101190. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  95. Zhang, X.; Guo, Z.; Chen, C.; Yang, W. Additive manufacturing of WC-20Co components by 3D gel-printing. Int. J. Refract. Met. Hard Mater. 2018, 70, 215–223. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  96. Wu, Y.; Hou, H.; Liu, S.; Wen, Q. A Review of FDM Nozzle System for Additional Materials Manufacturing Technology. In Advanced Graphic Communication, Printing and Packaging Technology; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2020; pp. 517–522. [Google Scholar]
  97. Lao, W.; Tay, D.Y.W.; Quirin, D.; Tan, M.J. The Effect of Nozzle Shapes on the Compactness and Strength of Structures Printed by Additive Manufacturing of Concrete. In Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Progress in Additive Manufacturing (Pro-AM 2018), Singapore, 14–17 May 2018; pp. 80–86. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  98. Bos, F.; Wolfs, R.; Ahmed, Z.; Salet, T. Additive manufacturing of concrete in construction: Potentials and challenges of 3D concrete printing. Virtual Phys. Prototyp. 2016, 11, 209–225. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  99. Paul, S.C.; Van Zijl, G.P.; Tan, M.J.; Gibson, I. A review of 3D concrete printing systems and materials properties: Current status and future research prospects. Rapid Prototyp. J. 2018, 24, 784–798. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  100. Lim, S.; Buswell, R.; Le, T.; Wackrow, R.; Austin, S.A.; Gibb, A.; Thorpe, T. Development of a viable concrete printing process. In Proceedings of the 28th International Symposium on Automation and Robotics in Construction (ISARC 2011), Seoul, Korea, 29 June–2 July 2011; pp. 665–670. [Google Scholar]
  101. Kwon, H. Experimentation and Analysis of Contour Crafting (CC) Process Using Uncured Ceramic Materials. Ph.D. Thesis, University of southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA, 2004. [Google Scholar]
  102. McGee, W.; Ng, T.Y.; Yu, K.; Li, V.C. Extrusion Nozzle Shaping for Improved 3DP of Engineered Cementitious Composites (ECC/SHCC). In Second RILEM International Conference on Concrete and Digital Fabrication; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2020; pp. 916–925. [Google Scholar]
  103. Triyono, J.; Sukanto, H.; Saputra, R.M.; Smaradhana, D.F. The effect of nozzle hole diameter of 3D printing on porosity and tensile strength parts using polylactic acid material. Open Eng. 2020, 10, 762–768. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  104. Cameron, T.; Naseri, E.; Maccallum, B.; Ahmadi, A. Development of a disposable single-nozzle printhead for 3D bioprinting of continuous multi-material constructs. Micromachines 2020, 11, 459. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  105. Zhang, X.; Chen, L.; Kowalski, C.; Mulholland, T.; Osswald, T.A. Nozzle flow behavior of aluminum/polycarbonate composites in the material extrusion printing process. J. Appl. Polym. Sci. 2019, 136, 47252. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  106. Heller, B.; Smith, D.; Jack, D. Effect of extrudate swell, nozzle shape, and convergence zone on fiber orientation in fused deposition modeling nozzle flow. In Proceedings of the Solid Freeform Fabrication, Austin, TX, USA, 10–12 August 2015; pp. 1220–1236. [Google Scholar]
  107. Song, H.; Martínez, J.; Bedell, P.; Vennin, N.; Lefebvre, S. Colored fused filament fabrication. ACM Trans. Graph. 2019, 38, 1–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  108. Sodupe-Ortega, E.; Garcia-Verdugo, J.M.; Pernía-Espinoza, A.; Escobedo-Lucea, C. Accurate calibration in multi-material 3D Bioprinting for tissue engineering. Materials 2018, 11, 1402. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  109. Kolesky, D.B.; Truby, R.L.; Gladman, A.S.; Busbee, T.A.; Homan, K.A.; Lewis, J.A. 3D bioprinting of vascularized, heterogeneous cell-laden tissue constructs. Adv. Mater. 2014, 26, 3124–3130. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  110. Baca, D.; Ahmad, R. The impact on the mechanical properties of multi-material polymers fabricated with a single mixing nozzle and multi-nozzle systems via fused deposition modeling. Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 2020, 106, 4509–4520. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  111. Kłodowski, A.; Eskelinen, H.; Semken, S. Leakage-proof nozzle design for RepRap community 3D printer. Robotica 2015, 33, 721–746. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  112. Pitayachaval, P.; Masnok, K. Feed rate and volume of material effects in fused deposition modeling nozzle wear. In Proceedings of the 2017 4th International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Applications (ICIEA), Nagoya, Japan, 27–29 April 2017; pp. 39–44. [Google Scholar]
  113. Shakor, P.; Nejadi, S.; Paul, G.; Sanjayan, J. Dimensional accuracy, flowability, wettability, and porosity in inkjet 3DP for gypsum and cement mortar materials. Autom. Constr. 2020, 110, 102964. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  114. Aoki, H.; Mitani, J.; Kanamori, Y.; Fukui, Y. AR based ornament design system for 3D printing. J. Comput. Des. Eng. 2014, 2, 47–54. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
  115. Han, D.; Yin, H.; Qu, M.; Zhu, J.; Wickes, A. Technical analysis and comparison of formwork-making methods for customized prefabricated buildings: 3D printing and conventional methods. J. Arch. Eng. 2020, 26, 04020001. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  116. Gusarov, A.V.; Grigoriev, S.N.; Volosova, M.A.; Melnik, Y.A.; Laskin, A.; Kotoban, D.V.; Okunkova, A.A. On productivity of laser additive manufacturing. J. Mater. Process. Technol. 2018, 261, 213–232. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  117. Oh, Y.; Zhou, C.; Behdad, S. Part decomposition and assembly-based (Re) design for additive manufacturing: A review. Addit. Manuf. 2018, 22, 230–242. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  118. Baumers, M.; Dickens, P.; Tuck, C.; Hague, R. The cost of additive manufacturing: Machine productivity, economies of scale and technology-push. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 2016, 102, 193–201. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  119. Mehrpouya, M.; Dehghanghadikolaei, A.; Fotovvati, B.; Vosooghnia, A.; Emamian, S.S.; Gisario, A. The potential of additive manufacturing in the smart factory industrial 4.0: A review. Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, 3865. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  120. Paolini, A.; Kollmannsberger, S.; Rank, E. Additive manufacturing in construction: A review on processes, applications, and digital planning methods. Addit. Manuf. 2019, 30, 100894. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  121. Everton, S.K.; Hirsch, M.; Stravroulakis, P.; Leach, R.K.; Clare, A.T. Review of in-situ process monitoring and in-situ metrology for metal additive manufacturing. Mater. Des. 2016, 95, 431–445. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  122. Colosimo, B.M.; Huang, Q.; Dasgupta, T.; Tsung, F. Opportunities and challenges of quality engineering for additive manufacturing. J. Qual. Technol. 2018, 50, 233–252. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  123. Ngo, T.D.; Kashani, A.; Imbalzano, G.; Nguyen, K.T.; Hui, D. Additive manufacturing (3D printing): A review of materials, methods, applications and challenges. Compos. Part B Eng. 2018, 143, 172–196. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  124. Goh, G.D.; Yap, Y.L.; Tan, H.K.J.; Sing, S.L.; Goh, G.L.; Yeong, W.Y. Process–Structure–Properties in Polymer Additive Manufacturing via Material Extrusion: A Review. Crit. Rev. Solid State Mater. Sci. 2020, 45, 113–133. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  125. Savolainen, J.; Collan, M. How Additive Manufacturing Technology Changes Business Models?–Review of Literature. Addit. Manuf. 2020, 32, 101070. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  126. Chang, Y.N. Lack of Adoption of 3D Printing in Malaysia Construction Industry; Tunku Abdul Rahman University College: Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, 2020. [Google Scholar]
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Article Metrics

Citations

Article Access Statistics

Journal Statistics
Multiple requests from the same IP address are counted as one view.
Download PDF
AHP-Systems Thinking Analyses for Kaizen Costing Implementation in the Construction Industry
Previous
An Anchoring Groove Technique to Enhance the Bond Behavior between Heat-Damaged Concrete and CFRP Composites
Next