Research Article

Comparison of 3D Printing Technology and Reinforced Concrete Frame Systems: An Exploratory Study

Volume: 13 Number: 4 December 30, 2025
EN TR

Comparison of 3D Printing Technology and Reinforced Concrete Frame Systems: An Exploratory Study

Abstract

This paper compares 3D printing technology with the conventional reinforced concrete frame system in the context of building construction. By conducting an extensive literature review, the study examines the technical, material, and time aspects of both methods. A fictional single-store residential project of 150 m² was designed initially to assess and evaluate each approach descriptively. The analysis covers the design stage, construction processes, timeframes, labor requirements, costs, and environmental implications. The comparison shows that 3D printing can reduce overall construction duration to approximately 1–1.5 months by eliminating formwork, minimizing curing times, and automating material placement. It also enables greater design flexibility, particularly for complex geometries, while generating less construction waste. Nevertheless, its adoption is currently constrained by limitations in material diversity, equipment scale, regulatory standards, and technical expertise. Besides, the implementation of 3D printing has limits on building heights and floors. Conversely, the reinforced concrete frame system remains widely used for large-scale and high-rise projects due to its proven structural performance, established codes, and material availability. Although it generally requires 5–6 months to complete, it demands more labor-intensive processes. The findings suggest that 3D printing holds significant potential for small to medium-scale buildings and rapid construction scenarios, especially where time efficiency and waste reduction are priorities. This comparative perspective offers practical insights for integrating digital fabrication into contemporary construction practice.

Keywords

References

  1. [1] U. Yergün, “Batılılaşma dönemi mimarisinde yapım teknolojisindeki değişim ve gelişim”, Jan. 2002.
  2. [2] K. Sümer Haydaraslan, “Bina İnşa Sürecinde Yeni İnşaat Teknolojileri Kullanımının İncelenmesi,” Sivas Cumhuriyet Üniversitesi Bilim ve Teknoloji Dergisi, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 1–13, Jul. 2024, doi: 10.69560/cujast.1437235.
  3. [3] B. Khoshnevis, “Automated construction by contour crafting - Related robotics and information technologies,” in Automation in Construction, Jan. 2004, pp. 5–19. doi: 10.1016/j.autcon.2003.08.012.
  4. [4] S. Volpe, V. Sangiorgio, A. Petrella, A. Coppola, M. Notarnicola, and F. Fiorito, “Building envelope prefabricated with 3d printing technology,” Sustainability (Switzerland), vol. 13, no. 16, Aug. 2021, doi: 10.3390/su13168923.
  5. [5] S. A. M. Tofail, E. P. Koumoulos, A. Bandyopadhyay, S. Bose, L. O’Donoghue, and C. Charitidis, “Additive manufacturing: scientific and technological challenges, market uptake and opportunities,” Jan. 01, 2018, Elsevier B.V. doi: 10.1016/j.mattod.2017.07.001.
  6. [6] T. Uygunoğlu and S. Barlas Özgüven, “İnşaat mühendisliği 3d teknolojisinde kullanılan harçların reolojik özelliklerinin araştırılması,” 2019.
  7. [7] A. Dasgupta and P. Dutta, “A Comprehensive Review on 3D Printing Technology: Current Applications and Challenges,” 2022. [Online]. Available: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/370816735
  8. [8] “Tecla house.” Accessed: Jul. 16, 2025. [Online]. Available: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tecla_house

Details

Primary Language

English

Subjects

Architectural Science and Technology, Automation and Technology in Building and Construction

Journal Section

Research Article

Publication Date

December 30, 2025

Submission Date

August 16, 2025

Acceptance Date

October 4, 2025

Published in Issue

Year 2025 Volume: 13 Number: 4

APA
Ceylan, H., & Çalışkan, E. B. (2025). Comparison of 3D Printing Technology and Reinforced Concrete Frame Systems: An Exploratory Study. Gazi University Journal of Science Part B: Art Humanities Design and Planning, 13(4), 589-605. https://izlik.org/JA56PT83MP
AMA
1.Ceylan H, Çalışkan EB. Comparison of 3D Printing Technology and Reinforced Concrete Frame Systems: An Exploratory Study. GUJSPB. 2025;13(4):589-605. https://izlik.org/JA56PT83MP
Chicago
Ceylan, Hatice, and Ekrem Bahadır Çalışkan. 2025. “Comparison of 3D Printing Technology and Reinforced Concrete Frame Systems: An Exploratory Study”. Gazi University Journal of Science Part B: Art Humanities Design and Planning 13 (4): 589-605. https://izlik.org/JA56PT83MP.
EndNote
Ceylan H, Çalışkan EB (December 1, 2025) Comparison of 3D Printing Technology and Reinforced Concrete Frame Systems: An Exploratory Study. Gazi University Journal of Science Part B: Art Humanities Design and Planning 13 4 589–605.
IEEE
[1]H. Ceylan and E. B. Çalışkan, “Comparison of 3D Printing Technology and Reinforced Concrete Frame Systems: An Exploratory Study”, GUJSPB, vol. 13, no. 4, pp. 589–605, Dec. 2025, [Online]. Available: https://izlik.org/JA56PT83MP
ISNAD
Ceylan, Hatice - Çalışkan, Ekrem Bahadır. “Comparison of 3D Printing Technology and Reinforced Concrete Frame Systems: An Exploratory Study”. Gazi University Journal of Science Part B: Art Humanities Design and Planning 13/4 (December 1, 2025): 589-605. https://izlik.org/JA56PT83MP.
JAMA
1.Ceylan H, Çalışkan EB. Comparison of 3D Printing Technology and Reinforced Concrete Frame Systems: An Exploratory Study. GUJSPB. 2025;13:589–605.
MLA
Ceylan, Hatice, and Ekrem Bahadır Çalışkan. “Comparison of 3D Printing Technology and Reinforced Concrete Frame Systems: An Exploratory Study”. Gazi University Journal of Science Part B: Art Humanities Design and Planning, vol. 13, no. 4, Dec. 2025, pp. 589-05, https://izlik.org/JA56PT83MP.
Vancouver
1.Hatice Ceylan, Ekrem Bahadır Çalışkan. Comparison of 3D Printing Technology and Reinforced Concrete Frame Systems: An Exploratory Study. GUJSPB [Internet]. 2025 Dec. 1;13(4):589-605. Available from: https://izlik.org/JA56PT83MP