PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
April 27, 2026Engineering Structures2 citationsOpen Access

Establishing standards for 3D concrete printing: Current insights and future research needs

View Full Paper
BKBalrajh KiriparanJSJay SanjayanPRPathmanathan Rajeev

Key Points

  • This paper aims to identify and address gaps in the current standards of 3D concrete printing (3DCP) for structural applications.
  • Performed a thematic gap analysis of completed projects and existing literature.
  • Conducted a comparative assessment of seven current 3DCP standards to identify deficiencies.
  • Outlined priorities for a model 3DCP standard and proposed necessary quality control protocols.
  • Identified critical gaps in structural design rules and quality control protocols.
  • Highlighted the inconsistency in defining interlayer properties and translating test results into structural capacity calculations.
  • Proposed an actionable framework that links process control, material characterization, and structural verification.

Abstract

3D Concrete Printing (3DCP) has proven its technological readiness for large-scale applications; however, the absence of comprehensive standards enfolding design, construction and quality control significantly hinders its widespread adoption. As a result, current applications remain largely limited to non-structural or quasi-structural elements and extensively rely on hybrid systems incorporating conventional construction. This paper presents a thematic gap analysis to critically synthesise the evidence from completed projects, emerging standards and existing literature, aimed at highlighting current gaps in specifications and outlining potential future research directions. A comparative assessment of seven current standards identifies: (1) the absence of explicit structural design rules, (2) inconsistent treatment of interlayer properties, (3) limited translation of test results into structural capacity calculations, (4) lack of comprehensive quality control protocol and acceptance logic and (5) limited guidance on non-structural performance indicators capturing peculiarities of 3DCP. Based on this comparative analysis, the paper outlines priority components for a model 3DCP standard, subsequently suggests critical mechanical properties required for structural design, reconnaissance viable design and detailing approaches, reframes durability and serviceability requirements as performance targets, and proposes a minimal and testable quality-control protocol that links process control, material characterisation and structural verification. The proposed comparative framework provides a foundation for transitioning 3DCP from project-specific demonstrations to reliable standards-based structural applications. • Identify the construction methods commonly adopted in 3DCP projects. • Critically analyse the provisions of the existing 3DCP standards. • Propose elements to be included in a model 3DCP standard and summarise current insights. • Highlights the research gaps to be addressed in formulation of a comprehensive 3DCP standard.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Kiriparan et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/69eefd15fede9185760d3cbahttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2026.122809
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper