A giant printer builds up layers which are assembled on site to make a house. Materials are primarily concrete and fiberglass for reinforcement along with "recycled components". The printer can leave ducting for utilities (power/water) at no extra cost which can be installed quickly on site.
The designers envisage it being used to provide temporary housing for displaced people (evacuees, disaster relief etc...)
Moderator, Treatment Free Beekeepers group on Facebook.
The topic of cnc and 3d print on plywood, and now concrete is an interesting subject, yet most likely best relegated further into manufactured homes. China is pushing fast, and hard (in many urban areas) to tear down, raze, and undermine agronomy, and traditional living. This is not one of the "brighter" aspects of the current political system, as even within the current administration there is strife between the issues of industrial pollution (like from plywood, and cement manufacturing) and those now in power trying to save heritage, and the environment.
I have not seen a single system that will ever contribute to disaster relief yet that engages any cnc or 3d technology. Only the developers and manufactures behind these systems promote such hype. Its a novelty at best and will be until the machines are able to be taken easily into any environment, process raw natural materials, and then "print a structure." This will be a long time coming, billions of dollars spent (perhaps $$$ that could have spent better elsewhere ??) and perhaps at a cost of yet more "human skill sets" being turned over to a machine...The ultimate dream of many a "man" from the "Big E" (aka "enlightened period) of the 1700's which spaun the IR and the industrial illeet that now have become the global ruling class. I know it seems strange to make such a leap, yet as an avid student of "human normative cultures," and the many aspects of "industrialization" compared to "traditional and agronomic societies," I am ever watchful for elements of "crossover" as these are often vestigial constructs and not actually employable modalities.
I want to be clear that I support the research, yet when the real "behind the scenes" goal is "industrial profit" with less effort (and less human skill)...I simply turn away. I am sure out of this research some good will come (as the optimist I tend to be) yet at this point I see more waste, "pie in the sky" thinking, and no real logistical reality in a sustainable, environmentally protective, nor plausible systems in either large scale CNC or 3d printing for anything other than "industrialization" and more "corporate wealth development." One of my own skill sets is under constant threat by this in CNC cut Timber Frames that are only a "pale shell" of what the should be, yet the "innocent" do not see this, and the "industrialist" take full advantage of this niavety all the way to their banks.
3D printing is really only suitable for a handful of fields when you get into an actual 'production level' environment. The biggest problem with 3D printing is that it is horribly sloooooooooow. I spent some time working with a company who used 3D printers for prototyping and design testing. The printers were of similar value to their injection moulding machines, except in the time that it would take them to make one thing on 3D printing, they could roll about a thousand off their line. Same material costs, same labour costs, same equipment cost. The only difference was just how much faster it was to keep copying the same design once setup to do so.
I've been keeping a close eye on 3D printing because it is a field that interests me, but I'm very disappointed to see it constantly used to produce the same things we can already do, but at a fraction of the speed for ten times the price. And this is especially visible in the new craze of large scale printing for buildings. I have only seen one project that relied on a 3D printer that made sense, and that was because they used it to print domes and other complex shapes. Every other project I've seen would have been far better served with semi-prefab panel deployments.
Semi-prefab units are far superior in my view because they can be made and stored in a compact manner until needed, then quickly shipped to location and assembled by lower skilled labour. Modular designs means that a village can be rebuilt in a matter of hours if need be, and they can be built to last after they're deployed.