Cement and Concrete Research 112 (2018) 1–4
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Cement and Concrete Research
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/cemconres
Editorial for special issue on digital concrete
1. Introduction
This special issue of Cement and Concrete Research is dedicated to
the keynote and invited papers of the RILEM 1st International
Conference on Concrete and Digital Fabrication, also referred to as
Digital Concrete 2018 [1]. This conference is sponsored by RILEM as an
activity of the Technical Committee on Digital Fabrication with Con-
crete. It has also received very large industrial support, reflecting the
interest of the building sector for this subject.
Digital fabrication has emerged as the 3rd industrial revolution,
with perspectives of delivering low cost individualized solutions and
products, something often referred to as mass-customization.
Developments in this field encompass numerous manufacturing
methods and materials, with concrete being no exception. An indication
of the interest in digital concrete lies in increased number of scientific
publications and patent applications on the subject. Additionally, the
field has seen a growing number of workshops and seminars on the
subject.
In this respect, Digital Concrete 2018 is the first major multi-day
event dealing with concrete and digital fabrication. It is hosted by the
Swiss National Centre for Competence in Research on Digital
Fabrication in Architecture [2] at ETH Zurich, conjunctly with RO-
B|ARCH 2018, the leading conference for robotics in architecture [3].
In doing so, the organizers aim at facilitating exchange among dis-
ciplines since interdisciplinarity is absolutely crucial to digital fabri-
cation.
This is reflected by our choice of keynotes and invited talks for
Digital Concrete 2018. In particular, the papers presented in this issue
of Cement and Concrete Research cover aspects of:
• Vision: What can we expect from concrete and digital fabrication?
• Manufacturing: What processes and what challenges?
• Materials: What chemistry for what properties?
• Mechanics: How to design and reinforce digital concrete?
In what follows, we present a brief overview on these different
subject areas, highlighting key features of the related papers.
2. Vision: what can we expect from concrete and digital
fabrication?
The two papers in this section could be summarized by “Knowing
the past and foreseeing the future”. They lay an important basis for
defining what may be expected from digitalization and how to prepare
for it. While the paper of Van Damme takes a very high level look at the
implications of digitalization in the world of concrete, the paper by De
Schutter et al. focuses on 3D printing with concrete [4], specifically
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconres.2018.07.007
Available online 03 August 2018
0008-8846/ © 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
T
extrusion printing, which is the most popular form of digital fabrication
with concrete. This type of process was pioneered by Prof. Koshnevis
[5] and is a subject that multiple universities, startups and larger
companies are now examining closely [6–9]. Prof. Koshnevis will be
receiving one of two pioneering contribution awards at Digital Concrete
2018.
2.1. “Concrete material science: a historical perspective”
Van Damme presents a historical perspective on concrete material
science [10]. He highlights the important developments that have made
concrete what it is today, with its strengths and its weaknesses. Van
Damme particularly emphasizes the development of reinforcement,
offering a key reminder about how this technology developed. This is
particularly welcome since properly reinforcing 3D printed concrete is
not a trivial task, and the prospects for digital fabrication in re-
volutionizing how we reinforce concrete structures are explored. A very
interesting and unique aspect of the paper is the notion about how “big
data” and international data harvesting may provide the means to
overcome the long-standing problem of concrete robustness [11],
which is a problem that is magnified by tighter windows in digital
fabrication, and we feel this is something the community should begin
to consider, with the massive amounts of concrete that are produced
annually.
2.2. “Vision of 3D printing with concrete - technical, economic and
environmental potentials”
An important contribution by De Schutter et al. is to present a
structured discussion on technical challenges and opportunities, as well
as economic and environmental constraints that must be met for 3D
printing to become economically viable and environmentally friendly
[4]. Echoing the comments of Van Damme and Asprone et al. [10, 12],
this paper underlines the need for reinforcement and presents possible
solutions to this issue. An additional challenge that is introduced is the
need for new material processing strategies, in particular active rheo-
logical control and stiffening, a topic for which further details can be
found in the papers of Marchon et al., Reiter et al. and Roussel [13–15].
Finally, in terms of environmental balance, they highlight that what
digital fabrication introduces is additional degrees of freedom at no
additional cost, making the possibility of unique structural designs that
ultimately use less concrete, more of a reality. The importance of this is
worth mentioning here because the constraints on mix design due to
material processing needs generally increase paste content, thus
creating an inherent economic and environmental penalty. This must be
overcome through other means, such as using less formwork, or de-
veloping lean structural designs by form finding algorithms such as

graphic statics, presented by Schwartz in this issue [16].
3. Manufacturing: what processes and what challenges?
The most unique aspects and challenges introduced by digital fab-
rication with concrete have to do with material processing, something
heretofore not largely explored in this sense in concrete technology.
The intersection of concrete and manufacturing technology introduces
important process engineering concepts, and highlights the importance
of interdisciplinarity, as disparate disciplines such as architecture and
robotics now must offer their expertise for successful process develop-
ment.
3.1. “3D printing using concrete extrusion: a roadmap for research”
Continuing on the topic of 3D printing, Buswell et al. discuss specific
processing issues in the highly popular and publicized process of con-
crete extrusion printing [17]. They establish an important state of the
art and identify clear research paths by highlighting how deeply in-
tertwined the materials, manufacturing, and design processes are. One
of the more salient points include how fresh properties and processing
impact stability during printing, and how this affects conformity to the
designed structure and ultimately the final performance. They advocate
for quality control during production if higher precision is desired, an
interesting topic that will surely be the subject of future research. An-
other notable point they make has to do with how simulation of the
manufacturing process is necessary for successful processing, both in
tool path generation, and an understanding of evolution of material
properties, a topic covered more in depth by Marchon et al., Reiter et al.
and Roussel [13–15]. Ultimately they call for increasing robustness in
the materials and process to enable better and more innovative com-
ponent design.
3.2. “Particle-bed 3D printing in concrete construction – possibilities and
challenges”
An important limitation in extrusion printing is the limited possi-
bility of producing overhangs. This is however easily handled in par-
ticle bed or binder jet printing as explained by Lowke et al. [18]. Par-
ticle bed printing is the preferred route for manufacturing highly
complex objects, either directly printing them, or printing formwork in
which they can be ultimately cast [16]. In concrete, the pioneer in
particle bed printing is Enrico Dini, a coauthor on this paper and re-
cipient of a Pioneering Contribution Award at Digital Concrete 2018.
From a material science point of view the paper presents interesting
results and physico-chemical considerations about how liquids pene-
trate the particle bed. It also considers the situation of how in binder
jetting, a yield stress suspension penetrates a bed of aggregates. It lays
the basis for a knowledge based improvement of the performance of this
process.
It is worth noting that particle bed printing involves a labour in-
tensive removal of unbound particles, which means that the process is
potentially only really meaningful for objects requiring a high degree of
complexity. Again this implies that “doing the same as we already do is
not a selling proposition”. Rather high gain situations should be con-
sidered, as for example the printing of “Smart Slabs”, in which floors
integrating piping, electricity, air conditioning and other functions that
save a lot of space between floors in skyscrapers. Specifically, the
“3for2” concept has been proposed stating that with such slabs and
proper energy management, three floors could be placed in a skyscraper
where today only two can be built [19,20].
3.3. “Digital in situ fabrication - challenges and opportunities for robotic in
situ fabrication in architecture, construction, and beyond”
Buchli et al. make a case that in situ fabrication hosts the greatest
2
Cement and Concrete Research 112 (2018) 1–4
number of research challenges for the field of robotics [21]. Indeed, this
requires robots to operate in an unstructured and continuously chan-
ging environment. Real time localization becomes very important, but
also the questions about interaction between robots themselves and
between robots and humans. Buchli et al., exemplify their argument
using the “In Situ Fabricator” and “Mesh Mould”. This is a robotic
process for fabricating reinforcement cages that operates in-situ. The
process is particularly efficient with respect to traditional production of
reinforcement when the shape complexity is increased. In the example
given, a double curved wall is produced, also at the DFAB HOUSE [22,
23], In this case, the curvature of the wall increases the load bearing
capacity per unit mass of concrete used.
A particularly interesting anecdote about this project is that the rate
limiting step in the robotic production of such reinforcing meshes is the
number of welding points, which for a given load bearing capacity,
scales with the power 4 of the steel diameter. Recognizing this, the
robotic tool head was upgraded to handle steel bars 3 times larger than
initially possible, thus giving an acceleration factor of about 80 in
production speed. Further increases in diameter of the rebars become
problematic either for bending or cutting. In any case the factor 80 gain
in production rate illustrates how technology in an early stage of de-
velopment can improve their performance radically within relatively
short periods of time (here about one year). It also speaks to the im-
portance of interdisciplinarity, as this result came about from the result
of the direct interactions between roboticists, architects and structural
engineers.
4. Materials: what chemistry for what properties?
In general, digital fabrication with concrete introduces much more
stringent requirements in terms of material control than there are for
ordinary concrete. Since controlling the properties of ordinary concrete
is already a challenge, it can only be expected that material control will
be particularly important in digital fabrication, something that the
papers by De Schutter et al. and Buswell et al. already underline [4, 17].
This special issue of Cement and Concrete Research proposes a group of
three papers addressing complementary aspects of this very important
problem that should also capture the interest of a large portion of the
readership of this journal. Most of the papers in this section go beyond
extrusion-based 3D printing to include slip casting, which in digital
fabrication has been coined as Smart Dynamic Casting [24].
4.1. “Rheological requirements for printable concretes”
Roussel elaborates on the strength that a given layer must have
initially to support itself and how that strength must evolve in order to
support subsequently deposited layers [15]. His Fig. 3 illustrates how
the yield stress of extruded concrete should evolve over time and in-
cludes useful sketches schematically representing microstructural build
up at different stages. Interesting a large part of these considerations
build upon work, originally motivated by formwork pressure in self-
compacting concrete [25–27].
Readers will also appreciate the scale laws for: individual strength-
based layer stability, collective strength-based layer stability, individual
layer geometry control, collective geometry control and collective
buckling failure, all conveniently summarized in Table 1.
4.2. “The role of early age structural buildup in digital fabrication with
concrete”
Reiter et al. discuss structural build up in further detail [14]. They
present a useful and very targeted discussion on possible measurement
methods along with their advantages and limitations. A noteworthy
aspect of this paper lies in the detailed discussion of “where, when and
how” to activate a digitally processed concrete. Indeed, the analysis of
structural build up clearly shows a contradiction in requirements for

material storage, transport and placing. One option for this lies in
continuous mixing, while another calls for “set on demand” approaches
in which concrete is initially retarded and then activated shortly before
being placed. Reiter et al. explain that the location of an activator inlet
plays a substantial role and represents a leverage that must be selected
in conjunction with the specific kinetics of the selected activation. This
highlights the intimate connection between processing design and
material selection that represents a corner stone of many digital fabri-
cation processes. In this respect, many readers will also value the
careful discussion of the physico-chemical processes responsible for
activation as well as structural build-up. For example, the differentia-
tion between “thickening” and “acceleration” represents a simple but
very important distinction which this emerging field ought to assimilate
[28].
4.3. “Hydration and rheology control of concrete for digital fabrication:
potential admixtures and cement chemistry”
Taking yet another step into material chemistry, Marchon et al.
consider material control at the level of molecular structure of chemical
admixtures and of cement chemistry [13]. They include a useful dis-
cussion on binder systems “beyond Portland cement”. This highlights
the potential of calcium aluminate cements or calcium sulfo aluminate
cements to control the time evolution of yield stress required by digital
fabrication as defined in [14, 15].
They also present a useful overview on chemical admixtures, of-
fering insight on recent advances in understanding their working me-
chanisms both on cement hydration and on flow loss [29, 30]. A take
home message of this paper lies in the existence of coupled chemical
reactions involving cement and admixtures and how this represents an
opportunity to control the material in digital fabrication, but also a risk
of limited robustness. This calls for inline measuring systems and
quality control measures that several of the other papers have also
mentioned [14, 15, 17].
5. Mechanics: how to design and reinforce digital concrete?
It is somewhat of a paradox that concrete research tends to have a
“phase separation” between researchers concerned with material issues
from those concerned with structure. Both fields have in common the
notion of compressive strength, but it sometimes appears that there is
not much more. In a perhaps provocative way we do find that many
material scientists have little understanding of structural aspects of
reinforced concrete, while structural engineers often have limited no-
tions of material behavior. Because of this, it appeared to us particularly
important to also include papers dealing with considerations on struc-
tural concrete both in terms of reinforcement and also of design.
5.1. “Rethinking reinforcement for digital fabrication with concrete”
Asprone et al. present an extremely welcome overview of different
reinforcement strategies for digital concrete, covering steel rebars, rods,
wires, fibres and filaments [12]. Their paper begins with a section on
reinforcement in conventional concrete structures and will represent a
very useful reference for many researchers working on digital concrete
but not trained as civil engineers.
Building upon this, Asprone et al. develop their presentation on
possible reinforcement strategies for digital concrete, providing a very
useful summary thereof in their Tables 1&2. This is followed by an
overview on recent developments in the field covering all the various
technologies, with an additional interesting approach of “compression
only structures” briefly mentioned, whereby shape is optimized by
design to avoid the need of tensile reinforcement. The authors also
discuss the use of fiber reinforcement, and while they identify it as a
clear solution with obvious advantages, they also underline some the
issue of fiber alignment that can compromise the effectiveness of this
3
Cement and Concrete Research 112 (2018) 1–4
approach. One innovative solution that is mentioned is to continuously
place reinforcing cables at the interface between layers [31], an ap-
proach giving encouraging results. All in all, it can be expected that a
combination of these solutions may ultimately be the most effective
solution.
5.2. “Graphic statics and their potential for digital design and fabrication
with concrete”
This issue of efficiently designing material lean structure is ad-
dressed by Schwartz [16]. He presents the approach of graphic statics
that is built upon a number of fundamental theorems of plasticity that
are briefly presented in the first part of this paper. From this, the author
moves on to showing how the analysis of stress fields allows to optimize
the shape of structural elements such as beams, walls, frames, plates
and shells. From this he moves on to present strut-and-tie models as
well as models allowing to identify the most effective structures.
The paper ends by presenting a number of case studies as recent
developments. A particular example is the Incidental Space that was
presented at the Swiss Pavilion at the 2016 Architecture Biennale in
Venice. It can be seen as a prototype of complexity and Schwartz uses
this to highlight central constructive questions that arose in relation to
this project. He then uses this to underpin key manufacturing chal-
lenges and offers some prospects about for “enlightened design” of
structures that can be “easily enough” manufactured by digital fabri-
cation.
6. Conclusions
In summary, the field of digital fabrication with concrete offers
promising perspectives. However, for it to be successful many actors
need to coordinate their efforts and the scope of interdisciplinarity
needed is clearly much broader than in ordinary concrete.
Multidisciplinary research, with its inherent challenges, has been cited
as necessary to tackle complex problems facing society [32], and the
inexorable march towards automation in construction has created a
new multidisciplinary research question that we hope we have captured
during its growing stages in this special issue. More specifically, there is
a much more intimate interaction needed between the different dis-
ciplines, with important overlaps between constraints from materials,
processing, structure, manufacturing and design. It is the experience of
the editors of this special issue that communication and understanding
across disciplines is absolutely essential for success as this new and
exciting area of research develops and matures. We hope that this
special issue of Cement and Concrete Research illuminates that reality
and motivates more exchanges between the relevant disciplines.
In terms of “feasibility”, it appears to us at this stage that “just doing
what we already do very well” will not be a cost-effective proposal for
the near future. Rather, it is through smart and more informed design
that material lean, environmentally friendly and cost effective solutions
will be found. It means that without proper consideration for structure
and design, any technological development will have a hard time
making its way into the market. This presents a great opportunity for
further expanding the concepts of digital fabrication to those disciplines
and promises an exciting future.
References
[1] DigitalConcrete 2018 RILEM 1st International Conference on Digital Fabrication
with Concrete, (n.d.). http://digitalconcrete2018.ethz.ch/ (accessed June 14,
2018).
[2] dfab NCCR Digital Fabrication|Innovative Building Processes in Architecture, (n.d.).
http://www.dfab.ch.
[3] ROB, ARCH 2018 Robotic Fabrication in Architecture, Art, and Design, (n.d.).
http://www.robarch2018.org/ (accessed June 14, 2018).
[4] G. De Schutter, et al., Vision of 3D Printing With Concrete - Technical, Economic
and Environmental Potentials, Cem. Concr. Res. Special issue on Digital Concrete
(n.d.). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconres.2018.06.001

[5] B. Khoshnevis, Automated construction by contour crafting—related robotics and
information technologies, Autom. Constr. 13 (2004) 5–19, https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.autcon.2003.08.012.
[6] C. Gosselin, R. Duballet, P. Roux, N. Gaudillière, J. Dirrenberger, P. Morel, Large-
scale 3D printing of ultra-high performance concrete – a new processing route for
architects and builders, Mater. Des. 100 (2016) 102–109, https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.matdes.2016.03.097.
[7] A. Perrot, D. Rangeard, A. Pierre, Structural built-up of cement-based materials
used for 3D-printing extrusion techniques, Mater. Struct. 49 (2016) 1213–1220,
https://doi.org/10.1617/s11527-015-0571-0.
[8] A. Kazemian, X. Yuan, E. Cochran, B. Khoshnevis, Cementitious materials for con-
struction-scale 3D printing: laboratory testing of fresh printing mixture, Constr.
Build. Mater. 145 (2017) 639–647, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2017.
04.015.
[9] C. Balletti, M. Ballarin, F. Guerra, 3D printing: state of the art and future perspec-
tives, J. Cult. Herit. (n.d.). doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.culher.2017.02.010.
[10] H. Van Damme, Concrete material science: past, present, and future innovations,
Cem. Concr. Res. (2018), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconres.2018.05.002.
[11] P.-C. Nkinamubanzi, S. Mantellato, R.J. Flatt, 16 - superplasticizers in practice, Sci.
Technol. Concr. Admix, Woodhead Publishing, 2016, pp. 353–377 http://www.
sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/B9780081006931000163 , Accessed date: 31
March 2016.
[12] D. Asprone, C. Menna, F.P. Bos, T.A.M. Salet, J. Mata-Falcón, W. Kaufmann,
Rethinking reinforcement for digital fabrication with concrete, Cem. Concr. Res. (n.
d.). doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconres.2018.05.020.
[13] D. Marchon, S. Kawashima, H. Bessaies-Bey, S. Mantellato, S. Ng, Hydration and
rheology control of concrete for digital fabrication: potential admixtures and ce-
ment chemistry, Cem. Concr. Res. (2018), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconres.
2018.05.014.
[14] L. Reiter, T. Wangler, N. Roussel, R.J. Flatt, The role of early age structural build-up
in digital fabrication with concrete, Cem. Concr. Res. (n.d.). doi:https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.cemconres.2018.05.011.
[15] N. Roussel, Rheological requirements for printable concretes, Cem. Concr. Res.
(2018), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconres.2018.04.005.
[16] J. Schwartz, Graphic statics and their potential for digital design and fabrication
with concrete, Cem. Concr. Res. Special issue on Digital Concrete (n.d.). https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.cemconres.2018.06.015
[17] R.A. Buswell, W.R. Leal De Silva, S.Z. Jones, J. Dirrenberger, 3D printing using
concrete extrusion: a roadmap for research, Cem. Concr. Res. (n.d.). doi:https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.cemconres.2018.05.006.
[18] D. Lowke, et al., Particle-bed 3D Printing in Concrete Construction – Possibilities
and Challenges, Cem. Concr. Res. Special issue on Digital Concrete (n.d.). https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconres.2018.05.018
[19] A. Schlueter, A. Rysanek, F. Meggers, 3for2: realizing spatial, material, and energy
⁎
Corresponding author.
Cement and Concrete Research 112 (2018) 1–4
savings through integrated design, CTBUH J. (2016) 40–45.
[20] 3for2 Beyond Efficiency, (n.d.). http://www.fcl.ethz.ch/research/research-to-ap-
plication/3for2.html (accessed June 14, 2018).
[21] J. Buchli, et al., Digital In Situ Fabrication - Challenges and Opportunities for
Robotic In Situ Fabrication in Architecture, Construction, and Beyond, Cem. Concr.
Res. Special issue on Digital Concrete (n.d.). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconres.
2018.05.013
[22] DFAB House, (n.d.). http://dfabhouse.ch/dfab-house/.
[23] MESH Mould @ nest, (n.d.). http://dfabhouse.ch/mesh_mould/.
[24] E. Lloret, A.R. Shahab, M. Linus, R.J. Flatt, F. Gramazio, M. Kohler, S. Langenberg,
Complex concrete structures: merging existing casting techniques with digital fab-
rication, Comput. Aided Des. 60 (2015) 40–49, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cad.
2014.02.011.
[25] P. Billberg, 12 - Understanding Formwork Pressure Generated by Fresh Concrete, in:
N. Roussel (Ed.), Underst, Woodhead Publishing, Rheol. Concr, 2012, pp. 296–330
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/B9780857090287500121 ,
Accessed date: 24 January 2015.
[26] N. Roussel, A thixotropy model for fresh fluid concretes: theory, validation and
applications, Cem. Concr. Res. 36 (2006) 1797–1806, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
cemconres.2006.05.025.
[27] N. Roussel, Rheology of fresh concrete: from measurements to predictions of casting
processes, Mater. Struct. 40 (2007) 1001–1012, https://doi.org/10.1617/s11527-
007-9313-2.
[28] V. Esnault, A. Labyad, M. Chantin, F. Toussaint, Experience in online modification
of rheology and strength acquisition of 3D printable mortars, Proc Digit. Concr.
2018 1st RILEM Int. Conf. Concr. Digit. Fabr, Springer-Verlag Berlin, Zurich,
Switzerland, 2018.
[29] D. Marchon, P. Juilland, E. Gallucci, L. Frunz, R.J. Flatt, Molecular and sub-
molecular scale effects of comb-copolymers on tri-calcium silicate reactivity: to-
ward molecular design, J. Am. Ceram. Soc. (2017), https://doi.org/10.1111/jace.
14695 (n/a–n/a).
[30] S. Mantellato, Flow Loss in Superplasticized Cement Pastes, ETH Zurich, Zurich,
2017. https://doi.org/10.3929/ethz-b-000265510 (accessed June 14, 2018).
[31] F.P. Bos, Z.Y. Ahmed, E.R. Jutinov, T.A.M. Salet, Experimental exploration of metal
cable as reinforcement in 3D printed concrete, Materials 10 (2017) 1314, https://
doi.org/10.3390/ma10111314.
[32] Meet the challenge of interdisciplinary science, Nature (News Features) 534 (2016)
589, https://doi.org/10.1038/534589b.
⁎
Robert J. Flatt , Timothy Wangler
ETH Zürich, Switzerland
E-mail address: flattr@ethz.ch (R.J. Flatt)