3D Printing vs. Traditional Construction (2024-06)¶

Construction 3D printing (3DP) has the potential to be cost-effective compared to traditional construction, due to its shorter supply chain and higher level of automation. However, there is a lack of comprehensive studies comparing the costs of traditional construction and 3DP across various stages, from design to waste disposal. Therefore, this study investigates the overall cost of traditional and 3DP construction, considering both off-site and onsite 3DP techniques. Mathematical models are developed to analyse costs, including research and development (R&D), Architecture, Engineering, and Construction (AEC), transportation, warehousing, setup installation, printing and on-site assembling processes, waste disposal, and environmental costs. Real-time case studies have been investigated to validate the feasibility and practicality of the models. The comparative analysis revealed that the design stage cost of 3DP is 19 times higher than those of traditional construction due to significant investments in R&D. Off-site 3DP incurs higher logistics costs primarily due to holding costs. Nevertheless, it becomes a more viable option for small-scale projects (less than 35t for the considered cases), like printing architectural elements, as the expense of delivering printed components to the construction site is lower compared to transporting bulky 3DP equipment and raw materials. On-site 3DP presents a competitive alternative to traditional construction methods, both for individual projects and large-scale developments. The findings of this research provide valuable insights that can help the construction industry optimize cost-effectiveness and enhance efficiency in construction practices.