Energy Performance of 3D-Printed Concrete Walls: A Numerical Study
Abstract
:1. Introduction
1.1. Three-Dimensional-Printed Concrete (3DPC) and Sustainability
1.2. Types of 3DPC Cavity Structures
1.3. Energy Efficiency of 3D-Printed Concrete Structures
1.4. Scope of the Current Study
2. Development of the Finite Element Model
3. Validation of the Developed FE Model
4. Parametric Study
5. Results and Discussion
5.1. Effect of Wall Thickness with Different Configurations
5.2. Effect of Cavity Insulation
5.3. Variation of U-Values with Cavity Area
6. Proposal of Equation for the Estimation of U-Value of 3DPC Cavity Walls
7. Conclusions
- U-values of cavity walls generally decreased with increased wall thickness, regardless of the cross-sectional configurations;
- A significant reduction in the U-value was recognized for 100 mm wall panels with an additional intermediate row compared to single-row panels;
- Triangular-shaped cavity wall panels of 100 mm thickness displayed the highest performance, with lower U-values compared to other configurations. Double-row triangular and sinusoid-shaped 200 mm thickness cavity wall panels showed higher performance compared to other walls. However, the U-values were noticeably higher than the standard values. Thus, expanded polylactic acid (E-PLA) was used as thermal insulation material to enhance the performance;
- The incorporation of E-PLA material as the insulation reduced the U-value, and thus increased the thermal performance of the wall panels for all the configurations;
- The lowest obtained thermal transmittance value in this study was 0.34 W/m2·K, for the 200mm thickness wall configuration with a double-row lattice arrangement with E-PLA insulation (C6200);
- There was an evident relationship with void area and energy performance of 3DPC walls with the integration of insulation material;
- An equation was proposed to determine the U-values of 100 mm thickness cavity wall panels with complex cross-sectional configurations without using FE modelling.
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Di Foggia, G. Energy efficiency measures in buildings for achieving sustainable development goals. Heliyon 2018, 4, e00953. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Santos, P.; Gonçalves, M.; Martins, C.; Soares, N.; Costa, J.J. Thermal transmittance of lightweight steel framed walls: Experimental versus numerical and analytical approaches. J. Build. Eng. 2019, 25, 100776. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lima, L.; Trindade, E.; Alencar, L.; Alencar, M.; Silva, L. Sustainability in the construction industry: A systematic review of the literature. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 289, 125730. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Murtagh, N.; Scott, L.; Fan, J. Sustainable and resilient construction: Current status and future challenges. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 268, 122264. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yüksek, I.; Karadayi, T.T. Energy-Efficient Building Design in the Context of Building Life Cycle. Energy Effic. Build. 2017, 1–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Lohmann, V.; Santos, P. Trombe Wall Thermal Behavior and Energy Efficiency of a Light Steel Frame Compartment: Experimental and Numerical Assessments. Energies 2020, 13, 2744. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Al-Ghamdi, K.A. Sustainable FDM additive manufacturing of ABS components with emphasis on energy minimized and time efficient lightweight construction. Int. J. Light. Mater. Manuf. 2019, 2, 338–345. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jacobs, J. Concrete for Energy-Efficient Buildings, The Benefits of Thermal Mass; European Concrete Platform: Brussels, Belgium; British Cement Association: Camberley, UK ; British Ready-Mixed Concrete Association: London, UK; British Precast Concrete Federation: Glenfield, UK; The Cement Admixtures Association: Solihull, UK, 2007. [Google Scholar]
- 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] [Green Version]
- Al Rashid, A.; Khan, S.A.; Al-Ghamdi, S.G.; Koç, M. Additive manufacturing: Technology, applications, markets, and opportunities for the built environment. Autom. Constr. 2020, 118, 103268. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Luhar, S.; Suntharalingam, T.; Navaratnam, S.; Luhar, I.; Thamboo, J.; Poologanathan, K.; Gatheeshgar, P. Sustainable and Renewable Bio-Based Natural Fibres and Its Application for 3D Printed Concrete: A Review. Sustainability 2020, 12, 10485. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Khan, S.A.; Koç, M.; Al-Ghamdi, S.G. Sustainability assessment, potentials and challenges of 3D printed concrete structures: A systematic review for built environmental applications. J. Clean. Prod. 2021, 303, 127027. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, Y.; Çopuroğlu, O.; Rodriguez, C.R.; Filho, F.F.D.M.; Schlangen, E. Characterization of air-void systems in 3D printed cementitious materials using optical image scanning and X-ray computed tomography. Mater. Charact. 2021, 173, 110948. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ooms, T.; Vantyghem, G.; Van Coile, R.; De Corte, W. A parametric modelling strategy for the numerical simulation of 3D concrete printing with complex geometries. Addit. Manuf. 2021, 38, 101743. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nguyen-Van, V.; Panda, B.; Zhang, G.; Nguyen-Xuan, H.; Tran, P. Digital design computing and modelling for 3-D concrete printing. Autom. Constr. 2021, 123, 103529. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cuevas, K.; Chougan, M.; Martin, F.; Ghaffar, S.H.; Stephan, D.; Sikora, P. 3D printable lightweight cementitious composites with incorporated waste glass aggregates and expanded microspheres—Rheological, thermal and mechanical properties. J. Build. Eng. 2021, 44, 102718. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Song, J.; Cao, M.; Cai, L.; Zhou, Y.; Chen, J.; Liu, S.; Zhou, B.; Lu, Y.; Zhang, J.; Long, W.; et al. 3D printed polymeric formwork for lattice cementitious composites. J. Build. Eng. 2021, 43, 103074. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Baduge, S.K.; Navaratnam, S.; Abu-Zidan, Y.; McCormack, T.; Nguyen, K.; Mendis, P.; Zhang, G.; Aye, L. Improving performance of additive manufactured (3D printed) concrete: A review on material mix design, processing, interlayer bonding, and reinforcing methods. Structures 2021, 29, 1597–1609. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hou, S.; Duan, Z.; Xiao, J.; Ye, J. A review of 3D printed concrete: Performance requirements, testing measurements and mix design. Constr. Build. Mater. 2021, 273, 121745. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Xiao, J.; Liu, H.; Ding, T. Finite element analysis on the anisotropic behavior of 3D printed concrete under compression and flexure. Addit. Manuf. 2021, 39, 101712. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Suiker, A. Mechanical performance of wall structures in 3D printing processes: Theory, design tools and experiments. Int. J. Mech. Sci. 2018, 137, 145–170. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Panda, B.; Lim, J.H.; Tan, M.J. Mechanical properties and deformation behaviour of early age concrete in the context of digital construction. Compos. Part B Eng. 2019, 165, 563–571. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Santos, P.; Lemes, G.; Mateus, D. Thermal Transmittance of Internal Partition and External Facade LSF Walls: A Parametric Study. Energies 2019, 12, 2671. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Wang, L.; Jiang, H.; Li, Z.; Ma, G. Mechanical behaviors of 3D printed lightweight concrete structure with hollow section. Arch. Civ. Mech. Eng. 2020, 20, 1–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- 3D Printed Building in SIP. [image]. Available online: http://www.sipac.gov.cn/english/categoryreport/IndustriesAndEnterprises/201611/t20161129_506766.htm (accessed on 13 April 2021).
- INNOVATIVE METHODS FOR REINFORCED CONCRETE. [image]. Available online: https://www.etesias.it/en/about-en.html (accessed on 15 April 2021).
- Gosselin, C.; Duballet, R.; Roux, P.; Gaudillière, N.; Dirrenberger, J.; Morel, P. Large-scale 3D printing of ultra-high performance concrete—A new processing route for architects and builders. Mater. Des. 2016, 100, 102–109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Piroozfar, A.E.; Larsen, O.P.; Altan, H.; Piller, F.T.; Tseng, M.M. Customization in Building Design and Construction: A Contribution to Sustainability. In Handbook of Research in Mass Customization and Personalization; World Scientific Pub Co Pte Lt.: London, UK, 2009; pp. 911–939. [Google Scholar]
- Pessoa, S.; Guimarães, A.; Lucas, S.; Simões, N. 3D printing in the construction industry - A systematic review of the thermal performance in buildings. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2021, 141, 110794. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Marais, H.; Christen, H.; Cho, S.; De Villiers, W.; Van Zijl, G. Computational assessment of thermal performance of 3D printed concrete wall structures with cavities. J. Build. Eng. 2021, 41, 102431. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Alkhalidi, A.; Hatuqay, D. Energy efficient 3D printed buildings: Material and techniques selection worldwide study. J. Build. Eng. 2020, 30, 101286. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- He, Y.; Zhang, Y.; Zhang, C.; Zhou, H. Energy-saving potential of 3D printed concrete building with integrated living wall. Energy Build. 2020, 222, 110110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Craveiro, F.; Bartolo, H.; Gale, A.; Duarte, J.; Bartolo, P. A design tool for resource-efficient fabrication of 3d-graded structural building components using additive manufacturing. Autom. Constr. 2017, 82, 75–83. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- ABAQUS. Hibbitt; Karlsson & Sorensen, Inc.: Pawtucket, RI, USA, 2021. [Google Scholar]
Mix | Density (kg/m3) | Thermal Conductivity (W/m·K) | Specific Heat (J/g·K) | Emissivity |
---|---|---|---|---|
Mix 1 | 1254 | 0.367 | 0.803 | 0.558 |
Mix 2 | 986 | 0.338 | 1.127 | 0.583 |
Mix 3 | 1522 | 0.2 | 0.73 | 0.94 |
Cavity Filling | Density (kg/m3) | Thermal Conductivity (W/m·K) | Specific Heat (J/g·K) | Viscosity (kg/m·s) |
---|---|---|---|---|
Air cavity | Ideal gas | 0.0242 | 1.00643 | 1.7894 × 10−5 |
E-PLA | 30 | 0.03 | 1.483 | - |
Wall Thickness | Wall Configuration | Insulation Type | Number of Models |
---|---|---|---|
100 mm 200 mm | C1 | Air cavity E-PLA insulation | 4 |
C2 | 4 | ||
C3 | 4 | ||
C4 | 4 | ||
C5 | 4 | ||
C6 | 4 | ||
C7 | 4 | ||
C8 | 4 | ||
Total | 32 |
Wall Configuration (1 m Length) | 100 mm (12 mm Layer) | 200 mm (25 mm Layer) |
---|---|---|
C1 | ||
C2 | ||
C3 | ||
C4 | ||
C5 | ||
C6 | ||
C7 | ||
C8 |
Wall Configuration | Cavity Area (mm2) | Concrete Area (mm2) | U-Values | |
---|---|---|---|---|
Cavity Wall | E-PLA Insulated Wall | |||
C1100 | 52,519 | 47,481 | 2.68 | 0.87 |
C2100 | 64,144 | 35,856 | 3.16 | 0.65 |
C3100 | 57,174 | 42,826 | 2.79 | 0.64 |
C4100 | 23,923 | 76,077 | 1.85 | 1.42 |
C5100 | 23,923 | 76,077 | 1.85 | 1.42 |
C6100 | 45,568 | 54,432 | 1.89 | 0.96 |
C7100 | 37,736 | 62,264 | 2.09 | 0.68 |
C8100 | 37,736 | 62,264 | 2.09 | 0.69 |
C1200 | 99,330 | 100,670 | 1.74 | 0.45 |
C2200 | 126,225 | 73,775 | 1.26 | 0.50 |
C3200 | 106,855 | 93,145 | 1.71 | 0.49 |
C4200 | 43,477 | 156,523 | 1.01 | 0.73 |
C5200 | 43,477 | 156,523 | 1.01 | 0.72 |
C6200 | 87,500 | 112,500 | 2.17 | 0.34 |
C7200 | 72,721 | 127,279 | 1.01 | 0.49 |
C8200 | 72,721 | 127,279 | 1.01 | 0.50 |
Wall Arrangement | U-Value Reduction Percentage for Double Rows (%) | |
---|---|---|
100 mm Wall | 200 mm Wall | |
Triangular | 30.71 | 42.10 |
Lattice | 40.13 | −42.03 |
Sinusoid | 25.02 | 40.72 |
Wall Configuration | U-Value Reduction Percentage (%) | Wall Configuration | U-Value Reduction Percentage (%) |
---|---|---|---|
C1100 | 67.67 | C1200 | 74.20 |
C2100 | 79.59 | C2200 | 60.50 |
C3100 | 77.09 | C3200 | 71.38 |
C4100 | 23.62 | C4200 | 27.64 |
C5100 | 23.61 | C5200 | 28.23 |
C6100 | 49.22 | C6200 | 84.29 |
C7100 | 67.51 | C7200 | 51.51 |
C8100 | 66.88 | C8200 | 50.49 |
Wall | Cavity Area (m2) | Concrete Area (m2) | Avg Cavity Thickness (m) | Avg Concrete Thickness (m) | λc (W/m2·K) | λs (W/m2·K) | R Value | U Value Equation (5) | U Value FEM | Equation/FEM |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
C1100 | 52519 | 47481 | 0.05 | 0.05 | 0.36 | 0.2 | 0.39 | 2.60 | 2.68 | 0.97 |
C2100 | 64144 | 35856 | 0.06 | 0.04 | 0.42 | 0.2 | 0.33 | 3.02 | 3.16 | 0.96 |
C3100 | 57174 | 42826 | 0.06 | 0.04 | 0.36 | 0.2 | 0.38 | 2.67 | 2.79 | 0.96 |
C4100 | 23923 | 76077 | 0.02 | 0.08 | 0.14 | 0.2 | 0.55 | 1.83 | 1.85 | 0.99 |
C5100 | 23923 | 76077 | 0.02 | 0.08 | 0.14 | 0.2 | 0.55 | 1.83 | 1.85 | 0.99 |
C6100 | 45568 | 54432 | 0.05 | 0.05 | 0.18 | 0.2 | 0.53 | 1.89 | 1.89 | 1.00 |
C7100 | 37736 | 62264 | 0.04 | 0.06 | 0.22 | 0.2 | 0.48 | 2.08 | 2.09 | 0.99 |
C8100 | 37736 | 62264 | 0.04 | 0.06 | 0.22 | 0.2 | 0.48 | 2.08 | 2.09 | 0.99 |
Mean | 1.00 | |||||||||
COV | 0.02 |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2021 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Suntharalingam, T.; Upasiri, I.; Gatheeshgar, P.; Poologanathan, K.; Nagaratnam, B.; Santos, P.; Rajanayagam, H. Energy Performance of 3D-Printed Concrete Walls: A Numerical Study. Buildings 2021, 11, 432. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings11100432
Suntharalingam T, Upasiri I, Gatheeshgar P, Poologanathan K, Nagaratnam B, Santos P, Rajanayagam H. Energy Performance of 3D-Printed Concrete Walls: A Numerical Study. Buildings. 2021; 11(10):432. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings11100432
Chicago/Turabian StyleSuntharalingam, Thadshajini, Irindu Upasiri, Perampalam Gatheeshgar, Keerthan Poologanathan, Brabha Nagaratnam, Paulo Santos, and Heshachanaa Rajanayagam. 2021. "Energy Performance of 3D-Printed Concrete Walls: A Numerical Study" Buildings 11, no. 10: 432. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings11100432