Next Article in Journal
Bending and Crack Evolution Behaviors of Cemented Soil Reinforced with Surface Modified PVA Fiber
Next Article in Special Issue
In-Depth Analysis of Cement-Based Material Incorporating Metakaolin Using Individual and Ensemble Machine Learning Approaches
Previous Article in Journal
Shear Strength of Ultra-High-Performance Concrete (UHPC) Beams without Transverse Reinforcement: Prediction Models and Test Data
Previous Article in Special Issue
Investigating the Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity of Concrete Containing Waste Marble Dust and Its Estimation Using Artificial Intelligence
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Review

A Scientometric Review on Mapping Research Knowledge for 3D Printing Concrete

1
School of Architecture, Changsha University of Science and Technology, Changsha 410015, China
2
Department of Civil Engineering, COMSATS University Islamabad, Abbottabad 22060, Pakistan
3
Department of Civil Engineering, Najran University, Najran, Saudi Arabia
4
Structural Engineering and Construction Management Department, Faculty of Engineering and Technology, Future University in Egypt, Cairo 11835, Egypt
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Materials 2022, 15(14), 4796; https://doi.org/10.3390/ma15144796
Submission received: 25 May 2022 / Revised: 5 July 2022 / Accepted: 6 July 2022 / Published: 8 July 2022
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Advances in Binders for Construction Materials)

Abstract

:
The scientometric analysis is statistical scrutiny of books, papers, and other publications to assess the “output” of individuals/research teams, organizations, and nations, to identify national and worldwide networks, and to map the creation of new (multi-disciplinary) scientific and technological fields that would be beneficial for the new researchers in the particular field. A scientometric review of 3D printing concrete is carried out in this study to explore the different literature aspects. There are limitations in conventional and typical review studies regarding the capacity of such studies to link various elements of the literature accurately and comprehensively. Some major problematic phases in advanced level research are: co-occurrence, science mapping, and co-citation. The sources with maximum articles, the highly creative researchers/authors known for citations and publications, keywords co-occurrences, and actively involved domains in 3D printing concrete research are explored during the analysis. VOS viewer application analyses bibliometric datasets with 953 research publications were extracted from the Scopus database. The current study would benefit academics for joint venture development and sharing new strategies and ideas due to the graphical and statistical depiction of contributing regions/countries and researchers.

1. Introduction

Charles Hull, in 1986, initially introduced the 3D printing or additive manufacturing (AM) technology in stereolithography (SLA). Afterwards, it gained the attention of everyone, either from industry or an individual hobbyist [1]. The enhanced popularity of 3D printing is primarily because of its potentially freeform design, minimizing waste materials, mass customization, complex geometries manufacturing, and accelerating the fabrication procedure [2]. In the current era, the application of 3D printing technology in construction is becoming very prevalent [3,4]. Kim et al. [5] used the 3D printing technology to determine reinforced concrete beams’ shear strength having multiple interfaces before initial setting. Three-dimensional printing technology can offer new prospects in the construction sector, such as geometrical flexibility, labor cost reduction, safety and efficiency improvement, and hard/harsh area/environment construction [6,7]. The primary distinguishing component of 3D printing technology is the flexibility in geometry that enables the improved architectural appearance. Three-dimensional printing technology also offers the independency of shape on cost, ultimately providing design freedom [3]. Further, the additive/3D printing technology enables the creation of multi-functional components of a building and links the digital building and designing process [4,8]. The cost reduction, coupled with human resources, is also an essential component of said technology. It is linked with enhancement in safety and efficiency. Three-dimensional technology offers higher cost-effectiveness and accuracy with respect to traditional technology [4,9]. The need for formwork, a significant component in conventional construction, is also eliminated using 3D printing [4,10]. The enhancement in safety levels by reducing the injury rates can also be achieved by eliminating the formwork stage [10,11]. Furthermore, it also helps to reduce the on-site construction time [10]. The last and most important advantage of 3D printing is sustainability. The construction waste, specifically generated from formwork, is also significantly reduced by using this technology [3,10]. Initially, the lesser material would be consumed for casting and molding, followed by the possible optimization of construction provided by this technology and the reduction in materials consumed by this process itself. A further benefit of this technology also includes the reduction in transportation costs. In addition to that, this technology also comes up with reduced CO2 emissions by declining the inadequacies throughout the process of building. Multiple studies are going on for achieving sustainable development by using recycled/waste materials such as natural fibers, supplementary cementitious materials, construction and demolition waste, marble and ceramic waste powders, functionally graded materials etc., to conserve the natural resources [12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22].
Hence, it can be concluded that the rising agreement of using the 3D printing technology over conventional methods is due to multiple benefits such as highly accurate complex geometry fabrication, design flexibility, personal customization, and maximum material conservation. A wide variety of materials are applied in 3D printing such as, concrete, polymers, metals, and ceramics. Acrylonitrile butadiene styrene (ABS) and polylactic acid (PLA) are among the significant polymers that are utilized for composites 3D printing. Advanced alloys and metals are usually used in aerospace to reduce the time and cost consumption involved in conventional methods. Three-dimensional printing of scaffolds mainly consumes ceramics, whereas concrete is the primary material for building additive manufacturing. However, large-scale printing is still quite limited due to poorer anisotropic behavior and mechanical characteristics of the 3D printed parts. Accordingly, there is a need to have an optimized 3D priming pattern to restrict anisotropic behavior and error sensitivity [23].
The finished products quality is also dependent on the printing environment [24]. The multiple sizes, i.e., micro to macro scale, of parts fabrication can be performed by using additive manufacturing (AM). Whereas the printed parts accuracy is mainly dependent on the precision of the applied printing scale and method. For example, 3D printing at the micro level offers challenges with the layer bonding, surface finish and resolution that usually need sintering like post-processing treatments [25]. The limited 3D printing materials provide challenges in employing 3D printing technology in different industrial sectors. Therefore, appropriate materials are needed to be utilized in 3D printing. In addition, the improvement techniques for 3D printed parts’ mechanical characteristics are also to be developed [26].
The enhancement in additive manufacturing leads to the development of research on 3D printing concrete. The obstacles in scholarly collaboration and creative investigation are created due to researchers’ information restraints. Accordingly, the creation and application of a process for the researchers/scientists to obtain important information from dependable sources are vital. Applying a scientometric method via the software may support overcoming this loophole and research gap. The main aim of the current study is to provide a detailed review of 3D printing methods with a focus on utilized materials, primary techniques applied, their applications, and the current state in different industry sectors. The research challenges and gaps in accepting 3D technology are also provided in this paper. The scientometric analysis of research published in 3D printing concrete up to 2022 is intended in this study. The quantitative evaluation of the bulk research dataset may be undertaken with the help of scientometric analysis using appropriate software [27,28]. The traditional review natured studies are somehow weak in their respective capability of connecting the various literature segments thoroughly and accurately. Co-occurrence, science mapping, and co-citation are key factors of exploration in the current era [29,30,31]. Identifying sources with co-occurrence of keywords, most research articles, the main credible researchers in terms of citations and papers, and actively engaged research areas in 3D printing concrete can also be performed with scientometric analysis. The bibliometric data of 953 related research articles is extracted using the Scopus dataset, which is determined afterwards using VOSviewer. The current study would assist academics in the engineering field belonging to various geographical locations in exchanging ground-breaking novel methods/ideas, creating joint ventures, and forming research alliances due to the graphical and statistical depiction of countries and authors.

2. Methodology

In this study, the scientometric analysis is carried out for the research dataset to evaluate the different aspects of bibliographic data [32,33,34,35,36]. Multiple studies have been conducted and reported on this matter depicting the questionable application of a reputable search engine. The two highly precise search engines, i.e., Web of Science and Scopus, are specifically explored for said aim [37,38]. The research data to conduct the current study on 3D printing concrete were collected using the academically highly recommended search engine, i.e., Scopus [39,40]. As of May 2022, the Scopus search for “3D printing concrete” found 1837 articles from 1998 to 2022. Multiple filters, depending upon preferences, are applied to avoid unnecessary data. The “journal research article”, “journal review”, “conference review”, and “conference paper” are opted as the document type. The “source type” selected is “conference proceeding” and “Journal”. The chosen period restriction for “publication year” is set to “2022”, and “English” is set as “language” constraint. For more scrutiny, the “engineering”, “environmental science”, and “material science”, are selected as “subject areas”. Following the employment of said desirables, a total of 953 records are kept. Similarly, multiple studies have been conducted by using same method [41,42,43,44,45].
In academics, scientific mapping is developed to analyze bibliometric data, which is usually employed to analyze scientometric inquiries [46,47,48]. Comma separated values (CSV) files are used to save Scopus records for further determination with the help of a suitable software tool. The quantitative evaluation of the recovered records’ literature and scientific visualization are generated using VOSviewer (version: 1.6.17). In academics, the VOSviewer is a majorly suggested and mainly used tool over a broader range of areas, and this mapping tool (open-source) has easy availability [49,50,51,52]. Therefore, the application of VOSviewer in the current study satisfies its goals. Loading of attained CSV files in VOSviewer is performed, and further evaluation is conducted to retain the consistency and integrity of data. At the same time, assessment of bibliographic data, countries’ participation, the publication sources, the researchers having more citations and publications, the frequently appearing keywords, and the country’s involvement are assessed. The various aspects and their co-occurrence and relationships are graphically represented, whereas the figures’ statistics are listed in tables. Figure 1 presents the strategical flowchart for scientometric analysis.

3. Analysis of Results

3.1. Annual Publications and Related Subject Areas

The analysis for discovering the most appropriate research areas is carried out by applying the Scopus analyzer. The three leading articles producing sections are engineering, materials science, and computer science, having almost 41%, 27%, and 8% articles, respectively, bearing the overall contribution of 76% depending on document count, as presented in Figure 2. Furthermore, Figure 3 shows the evaluation of paper type in the Scopus database for searched terms. According to the current study, conference review papers, journal review articles, and journal articles bear around 3%, 9%, 27%, and 61% of documents. The annual publication trend in the current research field from 1998 to 2022 is shown in Figure 4, as the occurrence of the first respective article was revealed in 1998. A mild rise in publication trend for the said research area, i.e., 3D printing concrete, is observed, with an approximate average of three annual articles until 2014. Afterwards, a gradual rise in annual publications is observed, with an approximate average of twenty articles per annum from 2015 to 2019. However, a significant enhancement in annual publications has been observed during the last three years, (i.e., 2020–2021). Recently, a drastic increase in 3D printing concrete for building and concrete research has been observed, depicting the initiative for all-rounded and comprehensive research work in the said field [53]. Scientific research globalization might be the reason behind increasing trend development in 3D printing concrete.

3.2. Publication Sources

The VOSviewer was utilized on the gathered bibliographic database to evaluate the published sources. While performing analysis, the sources are taken as “unit of analysis”, whereas the “bibliographic coupling” is opted as a “kind of analysis”. The minimum quantum of articles per source is set to ten. The sources of publication that met the said requirement are 14 out of 265. The publication sources are listed in Table 1, with at least ten published articles presenting data on 3D printing concrete until 2022 and the citation’s quantum acquired in the said period. The three main journals/sources, depending upon the paper count, are i. “Construction and Building Materials” having 60 papers, ii. “Additive Manufacturing” has 39 documents, and iii. “Automation in Construction” with 35 articles. Furthermore, the primary three sources having overall maximum citations are “Automation in Construction”, “Additive Manufacturing”, and “Buildings”, born 1580, 871, and 798 citations, respectively. Automation in construction also covers the aspect of multiple software applications such as building information modelling (BIM) for 3D printing concrete [54]. The coupling of 3D printing concrete with BIM to monitor and track novel variables was also performed by Azhar [55] and Bryde, et al. [56]. Combining 3D printing and BIM may make the creation of customized building components easier and facilitate sophisticated and complex design [53]. Davtalab, Kazemian and Khoshnevis [54] also declared that robotic construction is a construction industry revolution by using 3D printing concrete. This significant research exploration in the area of 3D printing concrete is come out to be the reason for intended scientometric analysis in the said research area. Further, conventional review studies are not enough to develop scientific visualization maps. The mapping journals with a minimum of ten articles in understudied research areas is presented in Figure 5. The quantum of research in 3D printing concrete in the form of articles is directly proportional to the size of the box showing the impact of the journal. The bigger the dimension of the box, the effect is more superior. For example, the biggest box in terms of sizes is for “Construction and Building Materials” showing the significant importance of this source in the considered field. Based on the type, five groups are developed, and all of them are offered in different colors, i.e., purple, red, green, blue, and yellow. The formation of groups is based on the similar article co-citations frequency [57]. The patterns of published articles’ co-citation are the basis of group creation in VOSviewer. For example, the red group comprises three sources having frequent co-citations in similar works. In addition, the space among frames/journals in a group shows significant relationships compared to the other far-spaced frames. For example, “Additive Manufacturing” is more firmly correlated with “Rapid Prototyping Journal” than with “Materials Today: Proceedings”.

3.3. Keywords

The fundamental subject of a study domain is highlighted and defined with the help of keywords in the research [58]. For the evaluation, the “analysis type” is selected as “co-occurrence”, whereas the “analysis unit” is opted to “all keywords”. The minimum repetition restriction is set at 20 for a keyword. Accordingly, 96 keywords out of 4185 are taken. The leading and most frequently used 20 keywords in published papers on relevant research areas are provided in Table 2. The terms 3D printers, concretes, 3-D printing, 3D printing, and concrete printings are among the most frequent five keywords in the considered area of research. As per the analysis of keywords, 3D printing concrete has been mainly studied for concrete mixtures, its rheology, and mechanical properties. Furthermore, it has also been explored for multiple types of building systems. Duballet et al. [59] classified the 3D printing concrete building systems based on five parameters: extrusion scale, object scale, printing environment, assembly parameter, and printing support. This classification was mainly featured for reinstating techniques apart from a single extrusion phase for concrete 3D printing at a larger scale. The keywords visualization map in terms of linkages, co-occurrences, and the occurrence frequency-related density is shown in Figure 6. The frequency of keywords is depicted by the size of the circle for the respective keyword, while the co-occurrence in papers is shown by its position (Figure 6a). It is evident from the graph that the comparatively bigger circles are for leading keywords depicting their significance for research on 3D printing. The formation of groups is also made for keywords to reflect the keywords’ co-occurrence over several research publications. The multiple keywords’ co-occurrence in published articles is the basis of color-coded grouping. Four different colors, i.e., green, red, yellow and blue, indicate the group’s existence (Figure 6a). The concentrations for density of keywords are indicated by different colors (Figure 6b). The colors are aligned with respect to respective density concentrations. The red color shows the highest, whereas the blue color shows the lowest density concentration. Three-dimensional printers and concretes show red symbols depicting significant density concentration. This finding may aid ambitious researchers in selecting keywords that would enable the published data identification in a specific area.

3.4. Authors

A researcher’s influence in a specific study area is depicted from the citations [60]. Accordingly, the “co-authorship” is selected as a “kind of analysis”, whereas; “authors” is chosen as the “unit of analysis” for the authors’ assessment. The efficacy of a researcher is hard to determine while considering all parameters, such as total citations, the number of publications, and average citations. Contrary to this, a researcher’s evaluation is performed by considering each factor independently, i.e., total citations, total publications, and average citations. The leading researcher is Tan, M.J., having 34 publications, followed by 29 publications each by Panda, B. and Mechtcherine, V. Afterward, Sanjayan, J. and Ma, G. are prominent, with 28 publications each. However, in terms of total citations, Tan, M.J leads the field with 2453 citations, followed by Panda, B. having 2362 citations in the 3D printing concrete research area. In addition, upon comparing the citations average, Paul, S.C. stands out with an average of 113, followed by Panda, B. having an average of 81 and Tan, M.J with a 72 average. The correlation between most eminent researchers and authors with a minimum of 10 publications is illustrated in Figure 7. The noticed largest network of interconnected researchers is seven. It is revealed from this analysis that a few researchers are inter-connected in terms of citations in the 3D printing concrete research area.

3.5. Articles

The number of article citations influences a specific research area. Articles with a higher citation count are known as pioneers in relevant research areas. To evaluate articles, the “bibliographic coupling” is set for “kind of analysis”, and “documents” is designated as “unit of analysis”. The set limitation of most minor citations for an article is 50. In the 3D printing concrete research area, the top 10 articles, as per citations, are presented in Table 3 with respective citations and authors’ detailing. Ngo, Kashani, Imbalzano, Nguyen and Hui [26] have 2520 citations for the research article titled; “Additive manufacturing (3D printing): A review of materials, methods, applications and challenges”. For their relevant publications, Stansbury and Idacavage [61] and Buswell et al. [62] have 793 and 466 citations, respectively, and are placed in the first three positions. Furthermore, the linked articles mapping, based on citations and their density in the considered area, is shown in Figure 8. The inter-connected articles citation mapping is presented in Figure 8a, whereas, in Figure 8b, the enhancement of density concentration by top articles is revealed from the density mapping.

3.6. Countries

The contribution of multiple countries is comparatively more towards 3D printing concrete research than others, and different expectations are there for enhancement in contribution. A network map is developed to help researchers access the areas related to 3D printing concrete research. Again, “Bibliographic coupling” is taken as a “kind of analysis”, whereas, “countries” are opted for as a “unit of analysis”. The limitation of the minor article for a nation is set at 10, and the countries met the desired limitation are 38 (Table 4). China, the United States, and Germany have the most articles with 377, 348, and 148 documents. Furthermore, the top three countries with the most considered research area citations of 10,514, 6179, and 3435 are the United States, China and Australia. The science mapping visualization and nation density inter-connected with citations is illustrated in Figure 9. The box size is directly proportional to a country’s effect on the considered area of research (Figure 9a). The most engaging countries have more density, as illustrated in the map of density visualization (Figure 9b). It may be noted that the publication trend in developed countries such as the USA, China, Australia, Germany and UK is significantly more than that in developing countries such as India, Pakistan, etc. [69]. As in developed countries, there are diverse applications of 3D printing; however, in recent years, this technology is also gaining attention in countries. There is a huge potential for 3D printing in developing countries [70,71]. The graphical and statistical analysis of the contributing countries may help concerned scientists form joint ventures, develop scientific alliances, and exchange novel ideas and methods. Scientists from different countries contributing for enhancing research on 3D printing concrete may collaborate with specialists in the said research area and yield from their expertise.

4. Discussions and Future Perspectives

The mapping and statistical overview of different aspects of the 3D printing concrete literature are presented in the current study. The conventional and manually conducted review studies have limited capability in terms of comprehensiveness and precise inter-connectivity among the various literature segments. The identification of most articles publishing journals, the frequently applied/used keywords in articles, countries having significant contributions, and authors and articles with most citations in the research field of 3D printing concrete is made in the current study. It is revealed from the keyword analysis that 3D printing concrete has been mainly explored in terms of its mechanical and rheological properties [72,73,74,75,76]. Furthermore, 3D printing is also researched for manufacturing geopolymer concrete [76,77,78]. Three-dimensional printing has various benefits upon utilization as concrete. The new prospects that can be utilized by 3D printing construction such as labor cost reduction, geometrical flexibility, efficiency improvement, safety and hard area construction [6,7]. In addition, physical construction consumes a bulk quantity of energy that comes out with higher CO2 emissions [79]. As a result, there are rising concerns regarding natural resource depletion. Thus, 3D printing concrete reduces the cement requirement, resulting in sustainable construction with reduced CO2 emissions [80,81,82]. The application of 3D printing concrete may also have resolved difficulties in waste management, specifically in the formwork [3,10]. The above-mentioned 3D printing concrete applications are yet in the phase of development. Detailed analyses are still required before their application broadens. Presently, the available research on 3D printing concrete is mainly based on their insight for extracting the optimal dosage of mix ingredients for desirable properties. Additionally, due to inferior properties and anisotropic behavior, the applicability of 3D printing at a larger scale is restricted. Therefore, it can be said that the information in said field is developing yet and needs to pass specific transition stages to accomplish optimum commercial applications and replace conventional manufacturing techniques. Therefore, the following research horizons in the field of 3D printing concrete may further be explored:
  • Three-dimensional printed components’ structural integrity, especially in regions vulnerable to natural disasters, seismic activity, military attacks and extreme climatic conditions, needs to be ensured by performing structural testing and developing specified standards and codes.
  • Due to the provision of controlled environmental conditions for performing the experiment on 3D printed components, its behavior may not depict the true performance. As in real site conditions, the components are exposed to variable climatic factors such as humidity, temperature and precipitation, debris and dust, and varied lighting, etc. [83]. Therefore, the performance of 3D printing concrete components may be evaluated under real environmental conditions to ensure the global efficiency of this method.
  • The effective implementation of the 3D printing approach is dependent on reliable, strong and printer-compatible materials [84,85]. Hence, the in situ materials that are available locally should be used for printing to have compatible and effective printing.
  • Further research should also be conducted for large-scale building construction and experimentation to ensure the real capacity of 3D printing technology and to depict the application of this technology in the industry.
  • Furthermore, nowadays, calcium carbonate (CaCO3) whisker is used as micro-fiber in cementitious composites to improve the micromechanical properties of concrete [86,87,88,89,90,91,92,93,94]. Hence, the exploration of CaCO3 whisker for 3D printing concrete would be an interesting horizon to explore.
  • Three-dimensional printing is still a new technology; therefore, the information on its life cycle cost, including the maintenance and upfront costs, is limited yet. Further, there may be variations in the costs of design, planning, machinery, labor, and materials from country to country [95]. Therefore, a thorough life cycle cost analysis should be conducted for 3D printing technology to have detailed insight into its cost–benefit ratio with respect to conventional construction [96].
  • Furthermore, the information regarding the life cycle assessment (LCA) of 3D printing concrete is also limited and demands thorough exploration in terms of its sustainability impact, preparation of material, construction, utilization, and ultimately the structures’ demolition. This information is necessary to explore to have a clear picture of 3D printing concrete environmental impacts [97,98].

5. Conclusions

The abundance of scientific information produced in recent years, along with new communication channels, prompted the research community to propose the metric that gave origin to the new field of bibliometrics. This utilizes mathematical and statistical analysis techniques that permit getting dependable quality indicators. Thus, it is feasible to determine the number of documents published by an institution, nation, research group, or individual with the highest scientific output. A bibliometric study is an appropriate tool for identifying the volume and growth trend of literature focusing on concrete for the further 3D printing-related investigation that would be helpful for early-stage researchers.
The main aim of the current study is to perform a scientometric analysis of the literature available on 3D printing concrete to assess different measures. The Scopus database is enquired for 953 related articles, and the outcomes are evaluated by applying the VOSviewer program. It is revealed from the conducted analysis that the top three journals are “Construction and Building Materials”, “Additive Manufacturing”, and “Automation in Construction”, having 60, 39, and 35 articles, respectively. Further, the top three journals having the most citations of 1580, 871, and 798 are “Automation in Construction”, “Additive Manufacturing”, and “Buildings”, respectively. The analysis of keywords regarding the considered research area depicts that 3D printers, concretes, 3D printing, 3-D printing and concrete printing are the five most frequently appearing keywords. The keyword analysis revealed that 3D printing is mainly explored as concrete in the construction industry.
The top researchers are also classified based on the number of citations, publications, and average citations. Tan, M.J, with 34, Panda B., and Mechtcherine, V., with 29 each, and Sanjayan, J., and Ma, G., with 28 articles each, are among the leading three researchers with the most publications. With 2453 citations, Tan, M.J. leads the field, followed by 2362 citations of Panda, B. and 1441 citations o Bos, F.P. untill 2022. Furthermore, comparing average citations, the stand-out authors are Paul, S.C., who has almost 113, Tay, Y.W.D., who has around 95, and Panda, B., who has 85 average citations. In the analysis of articles related to 3D printing concrete, Ngo, Kashani, Imbalzano, Nguyen and Hui [26] have 2520 citations for the article “Additive manufacturing (3D printing): A review of materials, methods, applications and challenges”. Stansbury and Idacavage [61] and Buswell, De Silva, Jones and Dirrenberger [62] have 793 and 466 citations for the respective publications and are among the best three.
The leading countries are also determined by their contribution to the 3D printing concrete research area. China, the United States, and Germany have contributed 377, 348, and 148 articles. Further, the countries, i.e., the United States, China, and Australia, have received citations of 10,514, 6179, and 3435, respectively. The 3D printing concrete application in the construction industry would develop sustainable construction by having reduced demand for cement, waste, and formwork requirements, ultimately saving natural sources and declining CO2 emissions. The applicability of 3D printing concrete at a larger scale is still quite limited, and most of its applications are under exploration. Further analysis is also vital for broadening the effective applications of 3D printing concrete.

Author Contributions

C.H.: conceptualization, data curation, software, methodology, investigation, validation, writing—original draft. S.Z.: conceptualization, funding acquisition, resources, project administration, supervision, writing, reviewing, and editing. Y.L.: conceptualization, data curation, software, methodology, investigation, validation, writing—original draft. W.A.: methodology, investigation, supervision, writing, reviewing, and editing. F.A.: resources, funding acquisition, visualization, writing, reviewing, and editing. S.H.A.: resources, project administration, funding acquisition, validation, writing, reviewing, and editing. M.F.J.: formal analysis, resources, project administration, supervision, writing, reviewing, and editing. A.F.D.: validation, resources, visualization, writing, reviewing, and editing. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

The authors are thankful to the Deanshipof Scientific Research at Najran University for funding this work under the Research Collaboration Funding program grant code (NU/RC/SERC/11/2).

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

The data used in this research has been properly cited and reported in the main text.

Acknowledgments

This work was sponsored in part by The Key Scientific Research Project of Education Department of Hunan Province, China (No. 21A0189).The authors are thankful to the Deanship of Scientific Research at Najran University for funding this work under the Research Collaboration Funding program grant code (NU/RC/SERC/11/2).

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Tibbits, S.; McKnelly, C.; Olguin, C.; Dikovsky, D.; Hirsch, S. 4D Printing and Universal Transformation. In Proceedings of the 34th Annual Conference of the Association for Computer Aided Design in Architecture (ACADIA), Los Angeles, CA, USA, 23–25 October 2014. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Panda, B.; Tan, M.J.; Gibson, I.; Chua, C.K. The disruptive evolution of 3D printing. In Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Progress in Additive Manufacturing, Singapore, 17–19 May 2016; pp. 16–19. [Google Scholar]
  3. Sanjayan, J.G.; Nematollahi, B.; Xia, M.; Marchment, T. Effect of surface moisture on inter-layer strength of 3D printed concrete. Constr. Build. Mater. 2018, 172, 468–475. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Labonnote, N.; Rønnquist, A.; Manum, B.; Rüther, P. Additive construction: State-of-the-art, challenges and opportunities. Autom. Constr. 2016, 72, 347–366. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Kim, K.; Park, S.; Kim, W.; Jeong, Y.; Lee, J. Evaluation of Shear Strength of RC Beams with Multiple Interfaces Formed before Initial Setting Using 3D Printing Technology. Materials 2017, 10, 1349. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  6. Panda, B.; Tan, M.-J. Rheological behavior of high volume fly ash mixtures containing micro silica for digital construction application. Mater. Lett. 2018, 237, 348–351. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Soltan, D.G.; Li, V.C. A self-reinforced cementitious composite for building-scale 3D printing. Cem. Concr. Compos. 2018, 90, 1–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Katzer, J.; Szatkiewicz, T. Properties of concrete elements with 3-D printed formworks which substitute steel reinforcement. Constr. Build. Mater. 2019, 210, 157–161. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Hager, I.; Golonka, A.; Putanowicz, R. 3D printing of buildings and building components as the future of sustainable construction? Procedia Eng. 2016, 151, 292–299. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  10. Nematollahi, B.; Xia, M.; Sanjayan, J. Current progress of 3D concrete printing technologies, ISARC. In Proceedings of the International Symposium on Automation and Robotics in Construction, Taipei, Taiwan, 28 June–1 July 2017. [Google Scholar]
  11. Yao, Y.; Hu, M.; Di Maio, F.; Cucurachi, S. Life cycle assessment of 3D printing geo-polymer concrete: An ex-ante study. J. Ind. Ecol. 2020, 24, 116–127. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  12. Farooqi, M.U.; Ali, M. Effect of pre-treatment and content of wheat straw on energy absorption capability of concrete. Constr. Build. Mater. 2019, 224, 572–583. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Farooqi, M.U.; Ali, M. Effect of Fibre Content on Splitting-Tensile Strength of Wheat Straw Reinforced Concrete for Pavement Applications. Key Eng. Mater. 2018, 765, 349–354. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Farooqi, M.U.; Ali, M. Effect of Fibre Content on Compressive Strength of Wheat Straw Reinforced Concrete for Pavement Applications. IOP Conf. Ser. Mater. Sci. Eng. 2018, 422, 012014. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Awoyera, P.O.; Ndambuki, J.M.; Akinmusuru, J.O.; Omole, D. Characterization of ceramic waste aggregate concrete. HBRC J. 2018, 14, 282–287. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  16. Ahmad, W.; Farooq, S.H.; Usman, M.; Khan, M.; Ahmad, A.; Aslam, F.; Al Yousef, R.; Al Abduljabbar, H.; Sufian, M. Effect of Coconut Fiber Length and Content on Properties of High Strength Concrete. Materials 2020, 13, 1075. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  17. Li, X.; Qin, D.; Hu, Y.; Ahmad, W.; Ahmad, A.; Aslam, F.; Joyklad, P. A systematic review of waste materials in cement-based composites for construction applications. J. Build. Eng. 2021, 45, 103447. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Alyousef, R.; Ahmad, W.; Ahmad, A.; Aslam, F.; Joyklad, P.; Alabduljabbar, H. Potential use of recycled plastic and rubber aggregate in cementitious materials for sustainable construction: A review. J. Clean. Prod. 2021, 329, 129736. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Althoey, F.; Hosen, M.A. Physical and mechanical characteristics of sustainable concrete comprising industrial waste materials as a replacement of conventional aggregate. Sustainability 2021, 13, 4306. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Althoey, F.; Farnam, Y. Performance of Calcium Aluminate Cementitious Materials in the Presence of Sodium Chloride. J. Mater. Civ. Eng. 2020, 32, 1–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Ali, E.; Althoey, F. A Simplified Stress Analysis of Functionally Graded Beams and Influence of Material Function on Deflection. Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, 11747. [Google Scholar]
  22. Althoey, F.; Balapour, M.; Farnam, Y. Reducing detrimental sulfate-based phase formation in concrete exposed to sodium chloride using supplementary cementitious materials. J. Build. Eng. 2022, 45, 103639. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Korniejenko, K.; Łach, M. Geopolymers reinforced by short and long fibres–innovative materials for additive manufacturing. Curr. Opin. Chem. Eng. 2020, 28, 167–172. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Ivanova, O.; Williams, C.; Campbell, T.A. Additive manufacturing (AM) and nanotechnology: Promises and challenges. Rapid Prototyp. J. 2013, 19, 353–364. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  25. Vaezi, M.; Seitz, H.; Yang, S. A review on 3D micro-additive manufacturing technologies. Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 2013, 67, 1721–1754. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Ngo, T.D.; Kashani, A.; Imbalzano, G.; Nguyen, K.T.Q.; Hui, D. Additive Manufacturing (3D Printing): A Review of Materials, Methods, Applications and Challenges. Compos. Part B Eng. 2018, 143, 172–196. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Amin, M.N.; Ahmad, W.; Khan, K.; Sayed, M.M. Mapping Research Knowledge on Rice Husk Ash Application in Concrete: A Scientometric Review. Materials 2022, 15, 3431. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  28. Huang, S.; Wang, H.; Ahmad, W.; Ahmad, A.; Vatin, N.I.; Mohamed, A.M.; Deifalla, A.F.; Mehmood, I. Plastic Waste Management Strategies and Their Environmental Aspects: A Scientometric Analysis and Comprehensive Review. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 4556. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Zakka, W.P.; Lim, N.H.A.S.; Khun, M.C. A scientometric review of geopolymer concrete. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 280, 124353. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Udomsap, A.D.; Hallinger, P. A bibliometric review of research on sustainable construction, 1994–2018. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 254, 120073. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Yang, H.; Liu, L.; Yang, W.; Liu, H.; Ahmad, W.; Ahmad, A.; Aslam, F.; Joyklad, P. A comprehensive overview of geopolymer composites: A bibliometric analysis and literature review. Case Stud. Constr. Mater. 2021, 16, e00830. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Xu, Y.; Zeng, J.; Chen, W.; Jin, R.; Li, B.; Pan, Z. A holistic review of cement composites reinforced with graphene oxide. Constr. Build. Mater. 2018, 171, 291–302. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Xiao, X.; Skitmore, M.; Li, H.; Xia, B. Mapping Knowledge in the Economic Areas of Green Building Using Scientometric Analysis. Energies 2019, 12, 3011. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  34. Darko, A.; Chan, A.P.; Huo, X.; Owusu-Manu, D.-G. A scientometric analysis and visualization of global green building research. Build. Environ. 2018, 149, 501–511. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Zhang, B.; Ahmad, W.; Ahmad, A.; Aslam, F.; Joyklad, P. A scientometric analysis approach to analyze the present research on recycled aggregate concrete. J. Build. Eng. 2021, 46, 103679. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Ahmad, W.; Ahmad, A.; Ostrowski, K.A.; Aslam, F.; Joyklad, P. A scientometric review of waste material utilization in concrete for sustainable construction. Case Stud. Constr. Mater. 2021, 15, e00683. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Aghaei Chadegani, A.; Salehi, H.; Yunus, M.M.; Farhadi, H.; Fooladi, M.; Farhadi, M.; Ale Ebrahim, N. A comparison between two main academic literature collections: Web of science and scopus databases. Asian Soc. Sci. 2013, 9, 18–26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  38. Afgan, S.; Bing, C. Scientometric review of international research trends on thermal energy storage cement based composites via integration of phase change materials from 1993 to 2020. Constr. Build. Mater. 2021, 278, 122344. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Bergman, E.M.L. Finding Citations to Social Work Literature: The Relative Benefits of Using Web of Science, Scopus, or Google Scholar. J. Acad. Libr. 2012, 38, 370–379. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  40. Meho, L.I. Using Scopus’s CiteScore for assessing the quality of computer science conferences. J. Inf. 2019, 13, 419–433. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Zuo, J.; Zhao, Z.-Y. Green building research–current status and future agenda: A review. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2014, 30, 271–281. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Darko, A.; Zhang, C.; Chan, A.P. Drivers for green building: A review of empirical studies. Habitat Int. 2017, 60, 34–49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Ahmad, W.; Khan, M.; Smarzewski, P. Effect of Short Fiber Reinforcements on Fracture Performance of Cement-Based Materials: A Systematic Review Approach. Materials 2021, 14, 1745. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Luhar, I.; Luhar, S.; Abdullah, M.M.A.B.; Razak, R.A.; Vizureanu, P.; Sandu, A.V.; Matasaru, P.-D. A State-of-the-Art Review on Innovative Geopolymer Composites Designed for Water and Wastewater Treatment. Materials 2021, 14, 7456. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  45. Pal, K.; Sarkar, P.; Anis, A.; Wiszumirska, K.; Jarzębski, M. Polysaccharide-Based Nanocomposites for Food Packaging Applications. Materials 2021, 14, 5549. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  46. Markoulli, M.P.; Lee, C.I.; Byington, E.; Felps, W.A. Mapping Human Resource Management: Reviewing the field and charting future directions. Hum. Resour. Manag. Rev. 2017, 27, 367–396. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Amin, M.N.; Ahmad, W.; Khan, K.; Ahmad, A. A Comprehensive Review of Types, Properties, Treatment Methods and Application of Plant Fibers in Construction and Building Materials. Materials 2022, 15, 4362. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  48. Maier, D. Building Materials Made of Wood Waste a Solution to Achieve the Sustainable Development Goals. Materials 2021, 14, 7638. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Jin, R.; Gao, S.; Cheshmehzangi, A.; Aboagye-Nimo, E. A holistic review of off-site construction literature published between 2008 and 2018. J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 202, 1202–1219. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  50. Park, J.Y.; Nagy, Z. Comprehensive analysis of the relationship between thermal comfort and building control research—A data-driven literature review. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2017, 82, 2664–2679. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Oraee, M.; Hosseini, M.R.; Papadonikolaki, E.; Palliyaguru, R.; Arashpour, M. Collaboration in BIM-based construction networks: A bibliometric-qualitative literature review. Int. J. Proj. Manag. 2017, 35, 1288–1301. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Van Eck, N.J.; Waltman, L. Software survey: VOSviewer, a computer program for bibliometric mapping. Scientometrics 2009, 84, 523–538. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  53. Tay, Y.W.D.; Panda, B.; Paul, S.C.; Mohamed, N.A.N.; Tan, M.J.; Leong, K.F. 3D printing trends in building and construction industry: A review. Virtual Phys. Prototyp. 2017, 12, 261–276. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Davtalab, O.; Kazemian, A.; Khoshnevis, B. Perspectives on a BIM-integrated software platform for robotic construction through Contour Crafting. Autom. Constr. 2018, 89, 13–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Azhar, S. Building information modeling (BIM): Trends, benefits, risks, and challenges for the AEC industry. Leadersh. Manag. Eng. 2011, 11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Bryde, D.; Broquetas, M.; Volm, J.M. The project benefits of Building Information Modelling (BIM). Int. J. Proj. Manag. 2013, 31, 971–980. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  57. Wuni, I.Y.; Shen, G.Q.; Osei-Kyei, R. Scientometric review of global research trends on green buildings in construction journals from 1992 to 2018. Energy Build. 2019, 190, 69–85. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Su, H.-N.; Lee, P.-C. Mapping knowledge structure by keyword co-occurrence: A first look at journal papers in Technology Foresight. Scientometrics 2010, 85, 65–79. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Duballet, R.; Baverel, O.; Dirrenberger, J. Classification of building systems for concrete 3D printing. Autom. Constr. 2017, 83, 247–258. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  60. Yu, F.; Hayes, B.E. Applying data analytics and visualization to assessing the research impact of the Cancer Cell Biology (CCB) Program at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. J. E Sci. Librariansh. 2018, 7, 4. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Stansbury, J.W.; Idacavage, M.J. 3D Printing with Polymers: Challenges among Expanding Options and Opportunities. Dent. Mater. 2016, 32, 54–64. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Buswell, R.A.; De Silva, W.R.L.; Jones, S.Z.; Dirrenberger, J. 3D printing using concrete extrusion: A roadmap for research. Cem. Concr. Res. 2018, 112, 37–49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Bos, F.; Wolfs, R.; Ahmed, Z.; Salet, T. Additive manufacturing of concrete in construction: Potentials and challenges of 3D concrete printing. Virtual Phys. Prototyp. 2016, 11, 209–225. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  64. 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]
  65. Perrot, A.; Rangeard, D.; Pierre, A. Structural built-up of cement-based materials used for 3D-printing extrusion techniques. Mater. Struct. 2015, 49, 1213–1220. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. De Schutter, G.; Lesage, K.; Mechtcherine, V.; Nerella, V.N.; Habert, G.; Agusti-Juan, I. Vision of 3D printing with concrete—Technical, economic and environmental potentials. Cem. Concr. Res. 2018, 112, 25–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Kazemian, A.; Yuan, X.; Cochran, E.; Khoshnevis, B. Cementitious materials for construction-scale 3D printing: Laboratory testing of fresh printing mixture. Constr. Build. Mater. 2017, 145, 639–647. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Wolfs, R.J.M.; Bos, F.P.; Salet, T.A.M. Early age mechanical behaviour of 3D printed concrete: Numerical modelling and experimental testing. Cem. Concr. Res. 2018, 106, 103–116. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Schuldt, S.J.; Jagoda, J.A.; Hoisington, A.J.; Delorit, J.D. A systematic review and analysis of the viability of 3D-printed construction in remote environments. Autom. Constr. 2021, 125, 103642. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Geneidy, O.; Ismaeel, W.S.; Abbas, A. A critical review for applying three-dimensional concrete wall printing technology in Egypt. Arch. Sci. Rev. 2019, 62, 438–452. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Ahmed, A.; Azam, A.; Bhutta, M.M.A.; Khan, F.A.; Aslam, R.; Tahir, Z. Discovering the technology evolution pathways for 3D printing (3DP) using bibliometric investigation and emerging applications of 3DP during COVID-19. Clean. Environ. Syst. 2021, 3, 100042. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Zahabizadeh, B.; Pereira, J.; Gonçalves, C.; Pereira, E.N.B.; Cunha, V.M.C.F. Influence of the printing direction and age on the mechanical properties of 3D printed concrete. Mater. Struct. 2021, 54, 73. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Alchaar, A.S.; Al-Tamimi, A.K. Mechanical properties of 3D printed concrete in hot temperatures. Constr. Build. Mater. 2020, 266, 120991. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Paul, S.C.; Tay, Y.W.D.; Panda, B.; Tan, M.J. Fresh and hardened properties of 3D printable cementitious materials for building and construction. Arch. Civ. Mech. Eng. 2018, 18, 311–319. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Bohuchval, M.; Sonebi, M.; Amziane, S.; Perrot, A. Rheological properties of 3D printing concrete containing sisal fibres. Acad. J. Civ. Eng. 2019, 37, 249–255. [Google Scholar]
  76. Li, L.; Wei, Y.-J.; Li, Z.; Farooqi, M.U. Rheological and viscoelastic characterizations of fly ash/slag/silica fume-based geopolymer. J. Clean. Prod. 2022, 354, 131629. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Ziejewska, C.; Marczyk, J.; Korniejenko, K.; Bednarz, S.; Sroczyk, P.; Łach, M.; Mikuła, J.; Figiela, B.; Szechyńska-Hebda, M.; Hebda, M. 3D Printing of Concrete-Geopolymer Hybrids. Materials 2022, 15, 2819. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  78. Ilcan, H.; Sahin, O.; Kul, A.; Yildirim, G.; Sahmaran, M. Rheological properties and compressive strength of construction and demolition waste-based geopolymer mortars for 3D-Printing. Constr. Build. Mater. 2022, 328, 127114. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Gustavsson, L.; Sathre, R. Variability in energy and carbon dioxide balances of wood and concrete building materials. Build. Environ. 2006, 41, 940–951. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Gislason, S.; Bruhn, S.; Breseghello, L.; Sen, B.; Liu, G.; Naboni, R. Lightweight 3D Printed Concrete Beams Show an Environmental Promise: A Cradle-to-Grave Comparative Life Cycle Assessment; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2022. [Google Scholar]
  81. Bedarf, P.; Szabo, A.; Zanini, M.; Heusi, A.; Dillenburger, B. Robotic 3D printing of mineral foam for a lightweight composite concrete slab. In Proceedings of the 27th CAADRIA Conference, Sydney, NSW, Australia, 9–15 April 2022; pp. 61–70. [Google Scholar]
  82. Mohan, M.K.; Rahul, A.; van Dam, B.; Zeidan, T.; De Schutter, G.; Van Tittelboom, K. Performance criteria, environmental impact and cost assessment for 3D printable concrete mixtures. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2022, 181, 106255. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Kazemian, A.; Yuan, X.; Davtalab, O.; Khoshnevis, B. Computer vision for real-time extrusion quality monitoring and control in robotic construction. Autom. Constr. 2019, 101, 92–98. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. Panda, B.; Tay, Y.W.D.; Paul, S.C.; Tan, M.J. Current challenges and future potential of 3D concrete printing: Aktuelle Herausforderungen und Zukunftspotenziale des 3D-Druckens bei Beton. Mater. Werkst. 2018, 49, 666–673. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  85. Tay, Y.W.; Panda, B.; Paul, S.C.; Tan, M.J.; Qian, S.Z.; Leong, K.F.; Chua, C.K. Processing and Properties of Construction Materials for 3D Printing. Mater. Sci. Forum 2016, 861, 177–181. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  86. Khan, M.; Cao, M.; Chu, S.; Ali, M. Properties of hybrid steel-basalt fiber reinforced concrete exposed to different surrounding conditions. Constr. Build. Mater. 2022, 322, 126340. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  87. Cao, M.; Khan, M.; Ahmed, S. Effectiveness of Calcium Carbonate Whisker in Cementitious Composites. Period. Polytech. Civ. Eng. 2020, 64, 265–275. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  88. Khan, M.; Cao, M.; Ai, H.; Hussain, A. Basalt Fibers in Modified Whisker Reinforced Cementitious Composites. Period. Polytech. Civ. Eng. 2022, 66, 344–354. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  89. Xie, C.; Cao, M.; Guan, J.; Liu, Z.; Khan, M. Improvement of boundary effect model in multi-scale hybrid fibers reinforced cementitious composite and prediction of its structural failure behavior. Compos. Part B Eng. 2021, 224, 109219. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  90. Cao, M.; Khan, M. Effectiveness of multiscale hybrid fiber reinforced cementitious composites under single degree of freedom hydraulic shaking table. Struct. Concr. 2020, 22, 535–549. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  91. Khan, M.; Cao, M.; Xie, C.; Ali, M. Effectiveness of hybrid steel-basalt fiber reinforced concrete under compression. Case Stud. Constr. Mater. 2022, 16, e00941. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  92. Khan, M.; Cao, M.; Xie, C.; Ali, M. Hybrid fiber concrete with different basalt fiber length and content. Struct. Concr. 2021, 23, 346–364. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  93. Cao, M.; Xie, C.; Li, L.; Khan, M. Effect of different PVA and steel fiber length and content on mechanical properties of CaCO3 whisker reinforced cementitious composites. Mater. Construcción 2019, 69, e200. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  94. Khan, M.; Cao, M.; Hussain, A.; Chu, S. Effect of silica-fume content on performance of CaCO3 whisker and basalt fiber at matrix interface in cement-based composites. Constr. Build. Mater. 2021, 300, 124046. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  95. Rouhana, C.M.; Aoun, M.S.; Faek, F.S.; Eljazzar, M.S.; Hamzeh, F.R. The reduction of construction duration by implementing contourontour crafting (3D printing). In Proceedings of the 22nd Annual Conference of the International Group for Lean Construction: Understanding and Improving Project Based Production, IGLC, Oslo, Norway, 25–27 June 2014; pp. 1031–1042. [Google Scholar]
  96. Wu, P.; Zhao, X.; Baller, J.H.; Wang, X. Developing a conceptual framework to improve the implementation of 3D printing technology in the construction industry. Arch. Sci. Rev. 2018, 61, 133–142. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  97. Ford, S.; Despeisse, M. Additive manufacturing and sustainability: An exploratory study of the advantages and challenges. J. Clean. Prod. 2016, 137, 1573–1587. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  98. Verhoef, L.A.; Budde, B.W.; Chockalingam, C.; Nodar, B.G.; van Wijk, A.J. The effect of additive manufacturing on global energy demand: An assessment using a bottom-up approach. Energy Policy 2018, 112, 349–360. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Figure 1. Sequential research methodology.
Figure 1. Sequential research methodology.
Materials 15 04796 g001
Figure 2. Articles subject area.
Figure 2. Articles subject area.
Materials 15 04796 g002
Figure 3. Published document types in the relevant field of study.
Figure 3. Published document types in the relevant field of study.
Materials 15 04796 g003
Figure 4. Annual publication trend of articles.
Figure 4. Annual publication trend of articles.
Materials 15 04796 g004
Figure 5. Scientific visualization of publication sources with at least 10 publications in the related research area.
Figure 5. Scientific visualization of publication sources with at least 10 publications in the related research area.
Materials 15 04796 g005
Figure 6. Analysis of keywords; (a) scientific visualization and (b) density visualization.
Figure 6. Analysis of keywords; (a) scientific visualization and (b) density visualization.
Materials 15 04796 g006aMaterials 15 04796 g006b
Figure 7. Scientific visualization of researchers who published articles in relevant research area.
Figure 7. Scientific visualization of researchers who published articles in relevant research area.
Materials 15 04796 g007
Figure 8. Published articles scientific mapping in relevant area of research until 2022; (a) connected documents based on citations (b) connected articles density.
Figure 8. Published articles scientific mapping in relevant area of research until 2022; (a) connected documents based on citations (b) connected articles density.
Materials 15 04796 g008aMaterials 15 04796 g008b
Figure 9. Scientific visualization regions having minimum ten publications in relevant research area until 2022 (a) network visualization and (b) density visualization.
Figure 9. Scientific visualization regions having minimum ten publications in relevant research area until 2022 (a) network visualization and (b) density visualization.
Materials 15 04796 g009
Table 1. Sources of publication having minimum 10 publications in the considered research area till 2022.
Table 1. Sources of publication having minimum 10 publications in the considered research area till 2022.
S/NPublication SourceNumber of PublicationsTotal Number of Citations
1Automation in Construction351580
2Additive Manufacturing39871
3Buildings13798
4Lecture Notes in Civil Engineering22727
5Materials and Design12716
6Advanced Functional Materials12381
7Construction and Building Materials60309
8Cement and Concrete Research20307
9Cement and Concrete Composites18165
10Journal of Building Engineering12131
11Rapid Prototyping Journal22115
12Polymers1074
133D Printing and Additive Manufacturing1171
14Materials4556
15Applied Sciences (Switzerland)1256
Table 2. Fifty leading frequently used keywords in 3D printing concrete research.
Table 2. Fifty leading frequently used keywords in 3D printing concrete research.
S/NKeywordOccurrences
13DPrinters558
2Concretes272
33-D Printing209
43D Printing188
5Concrete Printings184
63D Concrete Printing154
7Additive Manufacturing139
8Compressive Strength104
9Construction Industry89
10Additives85
11Rheology81
12Concrete75
133D-Printing70
14Concrete Mixtures70
15Extrusion66
16Yield Stress66
17Reinforcement61
18Cementitious Materials60
19Cements58
20Reinforced Concrete57
21Mechanical Properties55
22Printing51
23Mixtures50
24Mortar50
25Tensile Strength50
26Concrete Products48
27Concrete Industry47
28Construction45
29Concrete Construction39
30Fly Ash37
31Rheological Property37
32Portland Cement36
33Geopolymers35
34Inorganic Polymers35
35Digital Fabrication34
36Structural Design34
37Buildability32
38Digital Construction30
39Sustainable Development30
40Mechanical Performance28
41Geopolymer27
42Hardening27
43Shrinkage26
44Fabrication25
45Cement Based Material24
46Concrete Buildings24
47Fibers24
48Anisotropy23
49Binders23
50Concrete Additives22
Table 3. Top 10 highly cited published articles up to 2021 in the research of RHA concrete.
Table 3. Top 10 highly cited published articles up to 2021 in the research of RHA concrete.
S/NArticleTitleTotal Number of
Citations Received
1Ngo, Kashani, Imbalzano, Nguyen and Hui [26]Additive manufacturing (3D printing): A review of materials, methods, applications and challenges2520
2Stansbury and Idacavage [61]3D printing with polymers: Challenges among expanding options and opportunities793
3Buswell, De Silva, Jones and Dirrenberger [62]3D printing using concrete extrusion: A roadmap for research466
4Bos, et al. [63]Additive manufacturing of concrete in construction: potentials and challenges of 3D concrete printing453
5Gosselin, et al. [64]Large-scale 3D printing of ultra-high performance concrete—a new processing route for architects and builders424
6Perrot, et al. [65]Structural built-up of cement-based materials used for 3D-printing extrusion techniques384
7Tay, Panda, Paul, Noor Mohamed, Tan and Leong [53]3D printing trends in building and construction industry: a review310
8De Schutter, et al. [66]Vision of 3D printing with concrete—Technical, economic and environmental potentials305
9Kazemian, et al. [67]Cementitious materials for construction-scale 3D printing: Laboratory testing of fresh printing mixture285
10Wolfs, et al. [68]Early age mechanical behaviour of 3D printed concrete: Numerical modelling and experimental testing284
Table 4. Leading countries in published articles 3D printing concrete research area until 2022.
Table 4. Leading countries in published articles 3D printing concrete research area until 2022.
S/NCountryNumber of PublicationsTotal Number of Citations
1China3776179
2United States34810,514
3Germany1482813
4United Kingdom1142540
5Australia1133435
6Singapore722725
7India70433
8Russian Federation69132
9South Korea671268
10France581807
11Italy571022
12Netherlands561958
13Poland56466
14Spain41362
15Canada37978
16Belgium30698
17Brazil28338
18Japan28502
19Switzerland281557
20Hong Kong26220
21Czech Republic25113
22Portugal23251
23South Africa21382
24Norway20540
25United Arab Emirates20279
26Romania1848
27Taiwan17111
28Greece16400
29Iran16228
30Turkey1550
31Austria1470
32Malaysia13110
33Denmark12518
34Sweden1260
35Finland1156
36Chile1035
37Lebanon10119
38Saudi Arabia10229
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

He, C.; Zhang, S.; Liang, Y.; Ahmad, W.; Althoey, F.; Alyami, S.H.; Javed, M.F.; Deifalla, A.F. A Scientometric Review on Mapping Research Knowledge for 3D Printing Concrete. Materials 2022, 15, 4796. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma15144796

AMA Style

He C, Zhang S, Liang Y, Ahmad W, Althoey F, Alyami SH, Javed MF, Deifalla AF. A Scientometric Review on Mapping Research Knowledge for 3D Printing Concrete. Materials. 2022; 15(14):4796. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma15144796

Chicago/Turabian Style

He, Chuan, Shiyu Zhang, Youwang Liang, Waqas Ahmad, Fadi Althoey, Saleh H. Alyami, Muhammad Faisal Javed, and Ahmed Farouk Deifalla. 2022. "A Scientometric Review on Mapping Research Knowledge for 3D Printing Concrete" Materials 15, no. 14: 4796. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma15144796

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop