3 Sustainable Construction

Technologies
A Way Forward
Keerthana Kirupakaran

3.1 INTRODUCTION
According to the World Green Building Council [1], about 40% of annual global
carbon emissions can be traced back to the construction sector. With the current
surge in urbanization across different parts of the world, the carbon emission from
the construction industry is expected to double in the next two decades if substan-
tial measures are not taken [2]. To meet the climate goal, it is critical for builders,
manufacturers, and policymakers to incorporate sustainability into every facet of the
construction industry.
Sustainability in construction is viewed in three verticals, namely: economic,
environmental, and social sustainability [3]. Economic sustainability concerns profit-
ability in the construction processes, efficient use of resources such as water, energy,
natural or human-made materials, and labour. Environmental sustainability involves
undertaking eco-friendly construction practices. A few ways to achieve environmen-
tal sustainability include diligent use of resources, minimizing waste, and employing
construction materials and techniques that consume less energy and emit less carbon
dioxide. Social sustainability deals with addressing the needs of people in all stages
of the construction process, starting from commissioning to demolition of a building/
structure. It evaluates the company’s engagement with its employees, suppliers, cus-
tomers, clients, and the local community.
Social sustainability encapsulates human rights, wellness and safety, diver-
sity, and societal impact [4]. The existing and emerging construction technologies
should cater to these three verticals to promote sustainable development in the
construction industry. Earlier challenges in the construction industry were focused
only on three factors: cost, quality, and time. Now sustainability being the prime
motto, a new paradigm is proposed by Huovila and Kokela [5], as illustrated in
Figure 3.1. This new paradigm modifies the existing construction practices by con-
sidering the minimization of resource depletion, reduction in harmful emissions,
and preservation of biodiversity. In a global context, the new paradigm aims to
achieve a healthy economy, environmental quality, social equity, and cultural heri-
tage. While this task seems intimidating, it is achievable when we break it down
into smaller goals.

DOI: 10.1201/9781032686899-4 39
This chapter has been made available under a CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 license.
40 Civil Engineering Innovations for Sustainable Communities

FIGURE 3.1 New paradigm for sustainable construction according to Huovila and Kokela [5].

To achieve environmental sustainability in the construction sector, research efforts

are focused on developing various construction materials and technologies that can
mitigate net carbon emissions. Some of the approaches and inventions include (1) sup-
plementary cementitious material (SCMs), which are used as a partial replacement for
Portland cement either during manufacturing or during concrete mixing; SCMs are
widely explored, as they can reduce CO2 emissions by up to 30–40% without compro-
mising much on the performance of concrete [6]; (2) fibre-reinforced concrete (FRC) and
textile-reinforced concrete (TRC) have high ductility and load-bearing capacity, which
enables the production of thin and light structural components; (3) concrete 3D-printing
technology is the digital fabrication of cementitious components by eliminating form-
work; (4) use of construction and demolition (C&D) waste in the new construction; and
(5) use of artificial intelligence (AI), robotics, and automation in construction enables
better planning in addition to promoting time and cost-effective construction. The sus-
tainability potential of emerging technologies can be truly realized only when we per-
form a life-cycle assessment to quantify embodied and operational carbon emissions.
Further, real change can happen only when there is a drive for the implementation of
sustainable technologies through policies and standards. This chapter gives an overview
of various research and implementation efforts for achieving environmental sustainabil-
ity in the construction industry. First, the importance of embodied and operational car-
bon and life-cycle assessment in the context of the construction industry is elaborated,
followed by the discussions on various sustainable construction materials and technolo-
gies mentioned previously. The chapter concludes with the significance of policies and
standards in the large-scale adoption of sustainable principles and technologies in the
construction sector and as a way forward to attain sustainability in construction.

3.2 EMBODIED AND OPERATIONAL CARBON

3.2.1 Embodied Carbon
The total energy consumed or carbon emitted from the manufacturing stage to the
point where the product is ready to be used is referred to as embodied carbon or
Sustainable Construction Technologies 41

energy. With respect to the construction sector, embodied carbon constitutes carbon
emitted during the manufacturing material, including raw material extraction and
their processing, the transport of manufactured material to the construction site, and
the energy consumed while using the construction equipment and type of construc-
tion practices adopted [7]. In other words, embodied carbon refers to the carbon
emission in the entire construction process, starting from the manufacture of raw
materials for the construction of the building to the point where the people are ready
to occupy the building [8, 9].

3.2.2 Operational Carbon
The operational carbon or energy refers to carbon or energy consumed for the oper-
ation of the building throughout its service life. It includes energy consumed for
maintaining the indoor environment through processes such as heating, ventilation,
cooling, lighting, and the operation of appliances [10, 11]. Operational carbon cur-
rently accounts for 28% of global greenhouse gas emissions. If the total operational
energy demand of the building is met by renewable energy sources such as solar and
wind, then a building is said to have ‘net zero carbon emissions’. To envisage envi-
ronmental sustainability in the construction sector, it is essential to promote large-
scale implementation of renewable energy sources.
To measure the environmental sustainability potential of a building, it is impor-
tant to assess and quantify embodied and operational carbon in the entire life cycle.
The proportionate share of embodied and operational carbon to the total life
cycle carbon of a building depends primarily on the type and function of the
building [12], and secondary factors include climate, fuel type used, building
orientation, location, and building occupancy [13]. The life-cycle assessment of
a building is discussed in the following section.

3.3 LIFE-CYCLE ASSESSMENT

Life-cycle assessment (LCA) is a technique to systematically evaluate the environ-
mental impact of a product or service during its entire life cycle. For instance, during
the life cycle of a product, natural resources such as energy, water, and material are
consumed and, as a result, waste material, undesirable emissions, and by-products
are generated. LCA provides a framework to analyze and quantify one or more
undesirable environmental impact parameters, such as embodied carbon, embodied
energy, acidification, eutrophication, ozone depletion, and smog formation at each
stage of the product’s life cycle. This information helps in taking informed decisions
on the sustainability potential of a product or service. The life-cycle assessment con-
sists of four stages [11]:

• Stage 1—Definition of goal and scope: LCA is performed by defining a

system boundary and considering all the input/output of the process within
that boundary. Typically, three system boundaries are defined in LCA,
which are (1) from cradle to grave—encapsulates all the inputs/outputs of
the processes that participate throughout its life cycle including extraction
42 Civil Engineering Innovations for Sustainable Communities

of raw material, processing of materials, manufacture of components, use

of the product, and recycling or final disposal; (2) from cradle to gate—
considers inputs/outputs from the extraction of raw materials until the
product is placed on the market; and (c) from gate to gate—considers only
the inputs/outputs of the manufacturing process of the product. The system
boundary and embodied carbon emissions at different phases in the LCA of
a building [14] are shown in Figure 3.2.
• Stage 2—Life cycle inventory analysis: In this stage, input and output data
of the processes of the product system is collected and curated.
• Stage 3—Life cycle impact assessment: In the third stage, the curated data
from the previous stage is translated into indicators of potential environ-
mental impacts.
• Stage 4—Life cycle interpretation: In the fourth stage, based on the
defined goal and scope, the results are interpreted and the conclusions
are drawn.

The execution of these four stages of LCA is a comprehensive process that can be
both expensive and time-consuming. Nevertheless, LCA is a powerful tool to evalu-
ate and reduce the environmental impact of the product.
Several research efforts globally are focused on investigating the strategies to
decrease the embodied carbon in a building [8, 10, 15, 16]. The commonly used
strategies are: (1) use low-carbon materials in construction; (2) minimize waste,
reuse and recycle materials; (3) minimize transit of materials/products for long dis-
tances and promote local sourcing; and (4) implement construction optimization
strategies. In this context, the following sections focus on low-carbon construction
materials and technologies that promote environmental sustainability in the con-
struction industry.

FIGURE 3.2 Schematic of system boundary in the life-cycle assessment of a building [14].
Sustainable Construction Technologies 43

3.4 SUPPLEMENTARY CEMENTITIOUS MATERIALS (SCMs)

Cement production constitutes about 6–8% of the anthropogenic CO2 emission [17].
Cement production has starkly increased from 2.5 billion tons in 2005 to 4.1 billion
in 2022 and it is projected to increase up to 5.8 billion tons by 2050 [18]. The high
demand and popularity of cement are due to its low cost, and it is by far the most widely
used binder to make concrete. In cement manufacturing, 60% of CO2 is produced dur-
ing the clinkering process, and the remaining 40% is produced from electricity and
fuel sources used for heating and milling [19]. One way to reduce carbon emissions
due to cement production is by reducing cement consumption by exploring alternative
sources of binder for making concrete. In this light, supplementary cementitious mate-
rials (SCMs) have been the focus of research for the past few decades.
SCMs are used as a partial replacement of Portland cement either during manufac-
turing or the concrete mixing process. In addition to the reduction of CO2 emission,
some SCMs also improve the strength and durability performance of concrete, leading
to further reduction in cost arising from repair and rehabilitation [19, 20]. According
to the ASTM 2015 standard [21], SCM is defined as an inorganic material that contrib-
utes to the properties of a cementitious mixture through either hydraulic or pozzolanic
activity, or both. A pozzolan is either siliceous or both siliceous and aluminous mate-
rial that possesses almost no cementitious value in its pristine form, but in the finely
powdered form, they form compounds having cementitious properties by chemically
reacting with calcium hydroxide. Fly ash and ground granulated blast furnace slag
(GGBFS) with high calcium contents are the most widely used SCMs [22], and other
examples of SCMs include silica fume, calcined clay shale, and volcanic ash.
Fly ash is a byproduct of burning pulverized coal in a power plant, and it displays
both pozzolanic and hydraulic behaviour [22]. On the other hand, GGBFS [23] is
a byproduct of iron production in the blast furnace. The benefits of using GGBFS
in concrete include better workability, durability, low risk of thermal cracking, and
low risk of reinforcement corrosion as it restricts chloride ingress and offers high
resistance against sulphate attack. Research efforts are ongoing to utilize cement kiln
dust (CKD), which is a byproduct of the clinker manufacturing process. CKD are
typically composed of alkali, sulfate, and chlorides, and they are used in conjunc-
tion with other industrial byproducts to develop an alternative binding material for
sustainable concrete [24–26]. A large portion of CKD with lower alkali, sulfate, and
chloride contents are recycled as raw material in the cement kiln.
The use of different SCMs imparts different properties to concrete depending
upon their mineralogical and chemical compositions [27]. The use of SCMs in the
form of blended cement contributes significantly to the refinement of concrete pore
structure, which enhances the concrete strength and durability properties [28, 29].
Currently, several research efforts are focused on finding new sources of SCMs,
as flyash and GGBFS resources are depleting gradually. Annual production of fly
ash is 1 billion tons and GGBFS is 360 million tons, while cement production is
projected to be a whopping 5.8 billion tons by 2050 [30, 18]. Due to environmental
concerns, several coal power stations are shutting down. In the United States, 40%
of coal-fired power plants have been shut down in the past five years, and there are
plans to shut all the coal-fired power plants in the UK and Netherlands by 2025 and
44 Civil Engineering Innovations for Sustainable Communities

2030, respectively [31, 32]. These developments will significantly reduce the fly ash
and GGBFS production. Consequently, new sources of SCMs such as natural SCM,
calcined natural SCM, and limestone calcined clay cement (LC3) materials [33] are
being explored. Further agricultural waste such as rice husk ash, palm oil fuel ash
(POFA), bagasse ash (BA) [34, 29], bamboo leaf ash (BLA), wood waste ash, and
corn cob ash (CCA) are also being researched for their potential use as SCMs [35,
36]. Some of the challenges faced with the introduction of new SCMs are developing
methods to characterize them appropriately and finding the limitations of existing
test methods [37]. While the use of SCMs is one way to reduce the carbon footprint
in concrete, developing thin and lightweight structures that consume less material is
another way to reduce the carbon footprint in concrete.
The following section elaborates on the fibre- and textile-reinforced concrete that
facilitates the construction of thin and lightweight concrete structures in contrast to
conventional steel-reinforced concrete construction.

3.5 FIBRE- AND TEXTILE-REINFORCED CONCRETE

3.5.1 Fibre-Reinforced Concrete (FRC)
Fibre-reinforced concrete (FRC) is a composite material consisting of discon-
tinuous fibre uniformly dispersed in the concrete matrix. The primary role of
fibres in the cementitious matrix is to control crack width opening and crack
propagation. Compared to plain concrete, which is quasi-brittle in nature, FRC
has improved post-peak behaviour, tensile strength, ductility, and fracture tough-
ness. These properties of FRC are very important for structures located in high
seismic regions [38, 39]. Further, its enhanced crack control property restricts the
penetration of water and other contaminants into the concrete, thereby increas-
ing the corrosion resistance and service life of the structure [40]. FRC is an ideal
material for applications where cracking is a concern, such as bridge decks and
industrial flooring.
FRC with its improved durability and strength performance can help in reducing
the size of concrete structural members, which leads to less consumption of cement.
These advantages of FRC over conventional concrete increase its sustainability
potential. FRC research over the past three decades worldwide has resulted in the
development of structural design guidelines and codes [41–45]. FRC has been used
in several applications, including airport runways, ports, precast concrete, indus-
trial floors, tunnel segments, highways, roads, and bridges. About 100 million cubic
meters of FRC are produced annually, of which 60% is used for slab construction
[46], 25% is used in the manufacture of precast components, and other applications
constitute the remaining 15% [46]. FRC is frequently used to retrofit damaged con-
crete structures and is a popular option for industrial flooring applications [47, 48].
Owing to the better crack width control property of FRC, permeability in concrete
can be substantially reduced, which is highly desirable for coastal structures as they
are vulnerable to reinforcement corrosion [49]. FRC also shows better performance
under fatigue loading. An experimental study by Stephie et al. [50] revealed that the
incorporation of even a low dosage of fibres significantly improves the fatigue per-
formance of concrete due to crack bridging and mitigation of fracture propagation.
Sustainable Construction Technologies 45

In recent years, FRC research is further being explored to employ recycled steel
fibres and natural fibres to promote sustainable construction practices.
While there are several advantages of FRC from a strength, durability, and sus-
tainability perspective, one major limitation of FRC is the lack of confidence in
ensuring uniform distribution of fibres. During the FRC production stage, the balling
effect of fibres is encountered due to improper mixing methods. Proper care should
be taken while mixing and placing FRC to ensure uniform fibre distribution. ACI
Committee 544 [51] has put forward a few guidelines to ensure the uniform distri-
bution of fibres. However, there is always an uncertainty associated with the fibre
distribution, and uniform fibre distribution is critical for its performance and is the
primary assumption in FRC structural design. The uncertainty in the fibre distribu-
tion can be overcome by using continuous fibre reinforcement in the form of textile
fabric, which is discussed in the following section.

3.5.2 Textile-Reinforced Concrete (TRC)

Textile-reinforced concrete (TRC) is a new-generation fibre-cement composite mate-
rial that contains a multi-axial textile fabric embedded in a fine-grained concrete
matrix. The textile fabrics used in TRC are generally made of glass or carbon or
basalt fibres. The schematic of multilayer TRC is depicted in Figure 3.3. Unlike
conventional steel-reinforced concrete, TRC is non-corrosive, and this feature makes

FIGURE 3.3 Schematic of TRC with multilayer textile reinforcement.

46 Civil Engineering Innovations for Sustainable Communities

it an attractive material from a durability perspective. TRC has excellent bearing

capacity and ductility, which enable us to produce thin and lightweight structural
components [52]. TRC enhances durability as well as helps in minimizing the use
of concrete. Consequently, it is argued to be more environmentally sustainable than
traditional steel-reinforced concrete due to less consumption of cement [52, 53].
Currently, the application of TRC is in the form of strengthening existing con-
crete structures, facades, and structures that carry minor vertical loads.
A few examples of TRC applications are depicted in Figure 3.4. The type of fibre
used in the textile reinforcement plays a critical role in influencing TRC properties,
and it is chosen depending upon application, with desired material properties such as
anti-corrosive, temperature resistance, and bond quality. In addition to these mate-
rial properties, the cost and environmental impact also play a significant role in the
choice of fibre for TRC [54, 55]. Tomoscheit et al. [56] found that concrete consump-
tion can be reduced up to 85% in TRC applications that use carbon or alkali-resistant
(AR) glass textiles as reinforcement. The LCA based on a cradle-to-gate system
boundary showed that reduced concrete material consumption in TRC considerably
decreases the cumulative energy demand and environmental impact compared to the
conventional reinforced concrete element [55]. While research on TRC has revealed
many promising attributes from a sustainability point of view, its usage is limited
due to the lack of design tools, standards, and understanding of its long-term behav-
iour. Research efforts spanning experimental, analytical, and numerical investiga-
tions on TRC are ongoing to efficiently design the TRC components.
The behaviour of TRC depends primarily on the strength of the concrete matrix,
the strength of the textile fabric, and the bond between the textile and concrete
matrix [59]. Several researchers have studied the direct tensile behaviour of TRC
by using different setups [60]. Under uniaxial tension, the TRC exhibits trilinear
behaviour, which can be characterized into three zones. Zone I corresponds to the
elastic stage dominated by the matrix, zone II corresponds to the multiple-cracking
stage, and zone III corresponds to the post-multiple-cracking stage, which is domi-
nated by the properties of textiles [61]. The typical behaviour of TRC under flex-
ural loading is categorized into two zones by Zargaran et al. [62]. The first zone is
dominated by the role of concrete where the concrete matrix breaks, and a sudden
drop occurs. Following the drop, the concrete cracks begin to widen, and depending
on the volume fraction of the textile reinforcement shows either deflection harden-
ing or under-reinforced response. Unlike conventional concrete, two types of bonds
must be considered while understanding the bonding behaviour of TRC: (1) the bond
between filaments and concrete, and (2) the bonds between the filaments themselves
[61, 63, 64].
Smitha et al. [65] reported that stretching or prestressing the textile fabric while
preparing TRC can substantially improve the mechanical performance of TRC compo-
nents. While most researchers used expensive AR-glass textiles, Paul et al. [66] explored
the use of E-glass textiles for TRC, with suitable coating and matrix modification. A few
research outcomes of the Building Technology and Construction Management (BTCM)
group of IIT Madras [67] on TRC are shown in Figure 3.5a–d. The TRC water tanks
shown in Figure 3.5d are lighter and more durable than conventional steel tanks,
as they do not corrode. Further, TRC tanks are easier to fabricate as less effort is
Sustainable Construction Technologies 47

FIGURE 3.4 Application of TRC: (a) TRC facade construction in Mumbai, India, by Raina
Industries [57]; (b) cycle shed made of TRC shell elements at Institute of Textile Technology
at RWTH Aachen University, Germany [58].
Photo by Keerthana Kirupakaran.
48 Civil Engineering Innovations for Sustainable Communities

FIGURE 3.5 TRC research at IIT Madras [67]: (a) use of textile mesh to retrofit a concrete
structural column; (b) and (c) a boxed form structure by folding planar TRC components; (d)
modular TRC sewage water tank.

required to bend the textile fabric, unlike steel rebars. With ongoing research efforts
and emerging applications of TRC, large-scale implementation of TRC is envisaged.
While utilizing high-performance, low carbon-intensive materials like FRC and
TRC is one way towards achieving sustainability goals in construction, minimizing
construction waste and reusing them again in new construction is very important for
sustainable construction.

3.6 CONSTRUCTION AND DEMOLITION WASTE

Any waste arising from the construction, repair, remodelling, and demolition of
a civil structure is referred to as construction and demolition (C&D) waste. C&D
waste is composed of non-degradable and inert materials such as concrete, tiles,
brick aggregates, rock particles, glass, plastic, metals, wood, and excavated soil.
Urbanization and modern infrastructure have significantly increased the demand
for natural resources and material consumption. The construction industry uti-
lizes about 32% of the natural resources [68]. Currently, it is estimated that about
75% of C&D waste has a residual value that is neither reused nor recycled [69].
In 2014, China was leading in C&D waste generation worldwide with 1.13 billion
tons. C&D waste generated annually in India is estimated to be 10 to 12 million
tons, which on a per capita basis is around 8.29 to 3.95 kg/year. According to Ram
et al. [70], these projected figures of C&D waste in India are a serious underes-
timation compared to other countries with C&D waste of 110–842 kg capita per
year.
Sustainable Construction Technologies 49

The construction sector is the second largest sector in India in terms of material
consumption [71, 72]. The increase in construction activity has led to high demands
on construction materials, particularly on river sand [73, 74].
High construction material consumption results in high construction waste.
Figure 3.6 shows typical C&D waste composition in India [75]. In the current sce-
nario, C&D waste management is critical owing to its impact on the environment
and public health [76, 77].
Several measures are being taken worldwide to mitigate C&D waste reuse through
the imposition of strict policies for C&D waste management. Some initiatives by the
Indian government to mitigate C&D waste include: (1) The Technology Information,
Forecasting and Assessment Council (TIFAC) [78] published guidelines for man-
aging construction waste, which outlines selling reusable materials obtained after
construction or demolition at a discounted rate in the market, and utilizing only
non-reusable materials for landfill; (2) the Bureau of Indian Standard IS: 383–2016
[79] permitted the use of manufactured sand obtained from C&D wastes and other
industrial wastes as partial replacement of coarse and fine aggregate from natural
sources; and (3) the National Building Code (NBC) of India (2000) [75] included the
provision to use recycled concrete aggregate (RCA) for bank protection, bulk filling
cement, sidewalks, drainage system bases etc. It is further stated that 30% of natural
aggregate could be replaced by RCA, and this percentage can be increased up to 50%
for pavements and other areas under pure compression. With respect to the reuse of
C&D materials, RCA has received a lot of attention. However, RCA shows reduced
strength when used in concrete due to the old mortar particles sticking on its surface.
In order to remove this mortar, thermo-mechanical treatment is necessary, which is

Soil/sand/gravel Bricks and masonry Concrete

Metals Bitumen Wood
Other Items

FIGURE 3.6 Typical C&D waste composition in India,

50 Civil Engineering Innovations for Sustainable Communities

again energy intensive. Rohit et al. [80] used solar power for this purpose and gener-
ated RCA of different sizes.
While research efforts and implementation measures are in place, the Indian con-
struction industry cannot profit adequately from cost savings due to several reasons.
The following are some of the reasons reported by Wildermuth [81]:

• Lack of awareness of the waste management measures and protocols among

local contractors, architects, and construction is a major barrier to the utili-
zation of C&D waste in the industry.
• Lack of interest from the customers/clients to adopt waste minimization
and management measures in the project.
• Lack of adequate training and knowledge on the economic benefits and
social implications of C&D waste management among customers and con-
tractors. To overcome this situation, more technical institutes should adopt
these subjects in the academic curriculum.
• Lack of skilled labour in the construction sector with respect to recycling
and reuse of C&D waste in the new construction.
• Lack of market competition between contractors due to the challenges men-
tioned earlier. If one of the contractors shows profit by implementing C&D
waste management and implementation strategies in their project, that will
inspire others to implement the same. When more contractors see the value,
market competition will grow, thus facilitating effective utilization of C&D
waste.
• Lack of enforcement of policies and legislation on C&D waste management
measures by government bodies.
• Lack of interest from architects to use C&D waste in the new construction
or minimize waste during the design stage.

Given the growth of the construction sector in India, it is imperative that the produc-
tion of C&D waste must increase manyfold. If proper C&D waste management mea-
sures are not adopted, it could pose a serious threat to environmental sustainability
and public health. Government intervention in C&D waste management through
strict rules and regulations is critical to achieve quantifiable results.
While C&D waste management measures are ongoing, a new construction tech-
nology such as concrete 3D printing is gaining a lot of attention. This technology is
discussed in the following section.

3.7 CONCRETE 3D PRINTING TECHNOLOGY

Concrete 3D printing (C3DP) is an upcoming technology that involves the digital
fabrication of concrete structures by eliminating formwork. In conventional rein-
forced concrete construction, formwork constitutes about 40% of the total budget
of concrete. However, in C3DP technology, the formwork cost, associated labour
charges, and time required for setting up formwork are eliminated [82]. While this
technology facilitates the construction of highly customized buildings with complex
designs, there are several challenges concerning scaling, material, and structural
performance and its suitability to severe environmental conditions [83].
Sustainable Construction Technologies 51

Concrete 3D printers are controlled by a machine language called g-codes that

directs the printer until the desired shape is printed. To implement C3DP on-site,
the construction area is initially levelled, and the printer with nozzle and robotic
arms are set up [84]. A hose is connected to the nozzle, through which concrete
is extruded to form layers. In 2018, the first concrete 3D-printed fully functional
house (Figure 3.7) was built at IIT Madras, in Chennai, India, by a startup called
Tvasta [85]. This house was printed using a custom-made 3D printer and took just
five days to complete. It showcased the potential of 3D printing technology for
affordable housing solutions.
One of the challenging aspects of 3D-printable concrete is to maintain specific
properties in its fresh state, such as reduced slump and fast hardening. Since there is
no external formwork, the previously printed concrete layers support the subsequent
layers, thus it is important for the deposited concrete layers to harden faster while
still being extrudable through the nozzle [86]. With the increase in popularity of 3D
printing technology, large-scale printing setups are being designed to build large

FIGURE 3.7 3D-printed concrete house at IIT Madras.

Photo by Roshini Ramanathan, IIT Madras.
52 Civil Engineering Innovations for Sustainable Communities

concrete structures. However, the major challenge in upscaling this technology lies
in the precise design of concrete mix that can maintain the required workability
and buildability properties till the large component is printed [87]. Viktor et al. [88]
developed the CONPrint3D concept for on-site monolithic 3D printing driven by
the demands and boundary conditions of construction practice. The robotic arm 3D
printer developed by Keating et al. [89] uses a multi-axis robotic arm that helps in
navigating the printing nozzle.
Currently, several efforts are underway to upgrade the C3DP technology to pro-
duce reinforced concrete structures [87]. Cohen and Carlson [90] used the pointil-
listic time-based deposition (PTBD) method [91], contrary to using a conventional
linear layering approach for printing. The steel or micro-cables are also being
explored as reinforcement in 3D-printed elements. The reinforcement entrainment
device is used to embed the steel cables into the concrete layers (RED) [92]. Hack
and Lauer [93] proposed a digital fabrication method of building reinforced meshes
and formwork simultaneously with printing.
Hambach et al. [94] added glass, basalt, or carbon fibres to concrete 3DP to increase
the flexural strength to 30 MPa, and Gebhard et al. [95] explored the entrainment of
fibres in the concrete 3DP process. They emphasized that, unlike conventional FRC
mix design, fibres in 3D printable concrete need to be re-engineered with short fibres
to ensure pumpability.
While different reinforcement systems are being explored on the one hand,
research on less-carbon-intensive alternate material systems is being explored
on the other hand. Geopolymer and alkali-activated materials are being widely
explored as mixes for use in concrete 3DP. Shantanu et al. [83] reported that the
rapid hardening nature of geopolymer mixes can improve buildability properties
without the chemical accelerators. Further, the conventional SEMs and limestone-
calcined clay cement (LC3) are also being explored to develop a mix suitable for
C3DP [83, 96]. Shanthanu et al. [83] showed another way to reduce the binder
content by using coarse aggregates in the printable concrete mix. While there are
several challenges in terms of workability, extrudability, and buildability associ-
ated with the use of coarse aggregate, its economic feasibility and low CO2 foot-
print can be beneficial for large-scale 3D printing, particularly from a sustainability
viewpoint.
A detailed cradle-to-gate life-cycle assessment (LCA) performed by Mohamed
et al. [97] revealed that concrete 3D printing technology significantly reduces envi-
ronmental effects in terms of global warming potential, eutrophication potential,
acidification potential, smog formation potential, and fossil fuel depletion, as com-
pared to conventional construction methods. While C3DP technology looks promis-
ing, further research is required to evaluate its long-term performance, and only a
whole LCA from cradle-to-grave or cradle-to-cradle can help in evaluating its true
sustainability potential. Nevertheless, C3DP is a perfect example of where the mod-
ern world of digitization integrates with the construction industry. However, with
the dawn of the 21st century, new technologies like machine learning, automation,
and robotics have engulfed various facets of the construction industry, which are
discussed in the following section.
Sustainable Construction Technologies 53

3.8 ROLE OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE, ROBOTICS, AND

AUTOMATION IN THE CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY
Currently, we are in the fourth generation of the Industrial Revolution, commonly
termed as Industry 4.0. The industrial sector is revolutionizing with the integra-
tion of new technologies such as the Internet of Things, cloud computing, artificial
intelligence (AI), and machine learning. The construction industry is also gradually
adopting these technologies in construction practices. This revolution in the con-
struction sector is commonly termed as construction 4.0.
The construction industry often experiences cost inefficiencies, delays in projects,
poor performance in terms of health, productivity, and safety, uninformed decision-
making, and poor-quality performance [98]. Further, the rate of growth in the con-
struction industry is highly hindered because of the amount of work, labour, safety,
quality, quantity, and specifications required in construction processes [98]. Most
of these processes can be digitized and automated, leading to substantial savings in
time and cost. Construction 4.0 is an amalgamation of trends and technologies that
transform the way built environment assets are designed, constructed, and operated.
There are three primary opportunities where digitization and automation can be
used in construction industries [99]:

• Automation of traditional on-site tasks which are physical: this includes

usage of robots for laying bricks, paving roads using machines, etc.
• Automation of modular construction which includes production in indus-
tries such as 3D printing of components for construction-like facades.
• Automation and digitalization of planning, design, and management
procedures.

One question that pops up about the usage of AI, automation, and robots in the construc-
tion industry is “Will AI replace humans?”. The construction industry is the kind of
industry where even a small change in any information/specification provided will lead
to a significant impact on the task. So, there is always a need for human supervision
to ensure everything goes on track. With the amount of work that lies in hand and the
difficulties faced in each one of them, we can make maximum utilization of AI tools
with minimum human supervision. The sophisticated collaboration of machines and
human labour in automated construction creates a more intricate scenario than conven-
tional construction [100]. Robotics and automation technology can be highly beneficial
in repetitive work such as bricklaying. The main advantage is that the task can be done
with a lot more precision, accuracy, and safety. Quantifying and controlling productivity
are essential for efficiently managing time and cost in construction [101]. For example,
the tunnel boring machine (TBM) avoids problems with accuracy and tedious calibration
processes by using the conventional laser station [99, 102]. This can also be extended to
construction quality control, interference management, and data exchange in construc-
tion, development of new tools, schemes, and components in construction [103]. Hence,
to answer the question, AI and other tools can be very beneficial to the construction sec-
tor provided one knows how to use these technologies properly and effectively.
54 Civil Engineering Innovations for Sustainable Communities

In recent times, robots have been used successfully in various construction activi-
ties such as 3D printing and contour crafting, demolition robots, bricklaying robots,
drones, welding robots, forklift robots, robots for roadwork, and humanoid robots
[104]. Research efforts are underway across the globe to integrate AI tools with vari-
ous construction processes. A computer vision (CV)-based textural analysis method
is being researched where the images from a 2D camera are processed to quantify
the textural variations on the surface of concrete 3D-printed layers [105]. Several
machine learning tools are being explored for monitoring the structural stability in an
automated construction through sensor measurements taken from the structure [106].
Small robots are being developed to perform repetitive and time-consuming work at
construction sites, which can lead to savings in labour cost and time [107]. Further,
investigations are underway to automate the work-sampling process for evaluating
labour productivity [101], and automated progress monitoring using a photogrammet-
ric point cloud is being explored to track the construction activity [108].
While using AI tools, automation, and robotics in the construction sector is
largely beneficial, it also comes with a few challenges, which include explainable AI,
cyber security issues, talent shortage among labourers, and high initial costs. The
successful implementation of AI and automation tools in construction will require
efforts from the following three sectors [99]:

• The public sector should take steps to revamp the old education system to
include current trends and emerging technologies.
• The private sector should focus on the skill development of labourers and
workers in the construction industry.
• Industry partners should conduct boot camps and hackathons to help their
employees transition from the conventional methods and train them to work
with construction 4.0 technologies.

As new technologies related to construction 4.0 are emerging rapidly, it is very impor-
tant to assess their sustainability aspects in terms of social, economic, and environ-
mental viewpoints [109, 110]. Construction 4.0 technologies are at the early stage,
and there is a need to further study and examine these technologies to understand
their true impact on the society and environment, and for sustainable development.
While several emerging construction materials and technologies show promising
attributes towards sustainable development in the construction sector, real change can
happen only when these technologies are assessed properly on their impact on the social,
environmental, and economic sustainability front. The technologies with positive impacts
are then implemented at large scale. In this light, standards and policies imposed by the
government have a significant role to play, which is discussed in the following section.

3.9 SIGNIFICANCE OF STANDARDS AND POLICIES

IN SUSTAINABLE CONSTRUCTION
Sustainability in construction can be truly achieved only when the technologies or
ideas that cater to sustainable development are implemented on a large scale. While
Sustainable Construction Technologies 55

there are many sustainable technologies coming up in the construction sector, they
are relatively low compared to other industries. The people adopting sustainable
technologies are classified into three major categories [111]: (1) government—federal,
state, and local governments and related organizations, semi-government organiza-
tions, and political leaders; (2) for-profit and non-profit organizations—large business
houses, multi-national corporations, community groups, media, trade organizations,
etc.; and (3) individuals—general contractors, engineers, architects, owners, devel-
opers, sustainable building consultants, etc. However, the adoption of sustainabil-
ity principles and technologies by these three categories is particularly limited in
the construction market. The major obstacles that limit sustainable construction are
lack of interest from the investors, lack of training and knowledge on sustainable
development and construction, conservatism in the education of architects and civil
engineers, inadequate funding for research in this area, financial problems, and lack
of a well-defined set of norms, standards, and sustainable construction practices that
can be used in projects [112–115]. The government being the major player can bring
transformational changes to enable sustainable construction by imposing standards
and policies. Sustainable construction requires a holistic approach—starting from
the design, construction, operation, and demolition to recycling and reuse of materi-
als, and significant changes in the overall organization of construction, both at the
market and company level [112]. The government’s role in this aspect is critical as it
develops and imposes policies that can influence the construction industry directly
or indirectly. Not just at the industry level, government intervention can also play a
dominant role in factors affecting energy efficiency, waste management, and climate
change as well.
With respect to India, recognizing the importance of sustainable building in
addressing environmental issues and fostering long-term sustainability, the govern-
ment has established certain rules and procedures to help achieve these goals.
These laws include encouraging green building certifications, upholding energy-
efficient construction codes, providing financial incentives and subsidies, boosting
research and development, and enhancing skill development. Some of the organiza-
tions within India related to policies are:

(1) The National Institution for Transforming India (NITI) Aayog is a pol-
icy think tank of the Indian government that provides inputs regarding
the different programs and policies of the government. Some of their key
functions include policy formulation, monitoring, and evaluation, and
sustainable development goals. A few NITI Aayog policies are: (a) Atal
Innovation Mission (AIM), which is an initiative to create and promote a
culture of innovation and entrepreneurship in India; (b) Atal Bhujal Yojana
for sustainable groundwater management; and (c) sustainable infrastruc-
ture development.
(2) The Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MEITY) is
responsible for formulating and implementing policies related to informa-
tion technology, electronics, and the internet. They support work related to
artificial intelligence (AI), augmented reality (AR) vs. virtual reality (VR),
the internet of things, blockchain, robotics, computer vision, drones, etc.
56 Civil Engineering Innovations for Sustainable Communities

(3) The Indian Renewable Energy Development Agency (IREDA) facilitates

the development and deployment of renewable energy technologies. This
organization provides various financial assistance mechanisms such as
loans, project financing, and consultancy services to renewable energy
projects across different sectors, including wind energy, solar energy, bio-
energy, small hydropower, and energy efficiency.
(4) The Bureau of Energy Efficiency (BEE) is established under the Ministry
of Power with an objective to promote energy efficiency and conservation
across various sectors of the economy. BEE plays a crucial role in for-
mulating and implementing policies, programs, and initiatives to enhance
India’s energy efficiency standards and practices. Under BEE, the Energy
Conservation Building Code (ECBC) sets minimum energy standards
for new residential buildings. The ECBC does not cover small residential
buildings, whereas these buildings constitute a major part of the residential
building sector in the country [10, 11].
(5) The Indian Green Building Council (IGBC) functions as a separate plat-
form for the promotion of green buildings. Its rating system, called the
green building rating system, assesses the buildings across different
parameters such as energy efficiency, pollution and waste reduction mea-
sures, use of non-toxic materials, indoor air quality, etc.

These government bodies are essential and play an important role in sustainable con-
struction in India. Further, the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change
(MoEF&CC) of the Indian government formulated C&D waste management rules
[75] in 2016, and the Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs published a “Strategy
for promoting processing of construction and demolition waste and utilisation of
recycled products” in 2018 [116].
Strategies and policies play a major role in ensuring that the innovations entering
the market are truly sustainable. They provide a structured framework and guide-
lines to make sure that all the requirements are met. They pave the way for the wide-
spread adoption and deployment of these technologies. They provide benchmarks
for various aspects of sustainable construction, allowing various organizations to
ensure that the requirements are met. The incentives provided by these policies will
help more organizations move towards sustainability and create a healthy living
environment, as market demand moves towards sustainable construction, and they
lead to the development of new technologies that meet sustainable requirements.
Standards and policies are the foundation of India’s journey towards sustainable
construction. Policies also create quality control standards, ensuring that building
projects adhere to necessary requirements. They make sure that the resources are
conserved by the use of sustainable materials. By establishing rules for the procure-
ment and tendering processes, they encourage fair competition. Finally, policies
reduce risk on the legal and financial fronts by establishing a framework for agree-
ments and dispute settlement.
In order to enable the adoption of sustainable construction-related technol-
ogy, standards and policies are crucial, and their importance cannot be overes-
timated. Standards and policies promote innovation, cooperation, and ongoing
Sustainable Construction Technologies 57

development in sustainable construction practices by establishing a favourable

environment. In the end, they play a critical role in developing a more resilient
and sustainable built environment for future generations.

3.10 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION

Sustainable construction technologies play a pivotal role in addressing environmen-
tal concerns, reducing resource consumption, and promoting the long-term viability
of the construction industry. This chapter gives an overview of research, innovation,
application, and implementation efforts that are being carried out in different facets
of the construction sector to achieve sustainability. Several construction materials
and technologies are emerging to promote sustainability in construction. However,
the sustainability potential of any component or technology can be established
only by performing a life-cycle assessment (LCA). With respect to the construction
industry, quantifying embodied and operational carbon in the different stages of
the building life cycle is essential. With respect to sustainable construction materi-
als, the use of supplementary cementitious materials (SCMs) is one of the focus
areas, as the production of Portland cement is a major contributor to CO2 emissions
in the environment. Some of the widely used SCMs include fly ash, ground granu-
lated blast furnace slag, and limestone calcined clay cement (LC3). Another way to
reduce carbon-intensive cement is by constructing thin and lightweight structures
that consume less material. Fibre-reinforced concrete and textile-reinforced concrete
are high-performance materials that enable the construction of thin and lightweight
structures. Further, the construction industry generates large amounts of waste dur-
ing C&D of structures. It is estimated that about 75% of C&D waste which goes
into landfill has residual value. Several research efforts are in place to utilize C&D
in new construction, and guidelines and standards are coming up to promote C&D
utilization. For sustainable construction, waste minimization, recycling, and reuse
are very important. Currently, the construction industry is revolutionizing with digi-
tization, artificial intelligence, automation, and robotics technologies, all of which
are commonly termed as construction 4.0. Several technologies are emerging with
automated systems leading to less human intervention such as 3D printing technol-
ogy, brick-laying robots, surface finish robots, and drones. While these technolo-
gies are largely beneficial, they come with the challenges of cyber security issues,
explainable AI, talent shortage among labourers, and high initial cost. Further, it is
important to perform the LCA of construction 4.0 technologies to truly understand
their sustainability potential and the long-term effects on society. In spite of the
promising developments, real change can happen only when these technologies are
assessed properly on their social, environmental, and economical sustainability and
subsequent implementation of the ones with a positive impact at a large scale. In
light of this, standards and policies imposed by the government play a significant
role. Standards and policies provide a comprehensive roadmap for incorporating sus-
tainable practices into the building industry. They help establish a unified approach
by defining common guidelines, procedures, and benchmarks for sustainable con-
struction. They also encourage consistency and dependability in the use of sustain-
able technology, ensuring that projects achieve their social and environmental goals.
58 Civil Engineering Innovations for Sustainable Communities

Thus, a holistic approach of combining research, innovation, and policies is the way
forward towards achieving sustainable construction.

3.11 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
The author thanks the research scholars and professors of the Building Technology
and Construction Materials and Management (BTCM) group, Department of
Civil Engineering, IIT Madras, Chennai, India. The help of students Roshini
Ramanathan (BTech, IIT Madras), Hariharan N (BTech, NIT Trichy), Anusha
R (BTech, NIT Trichy), Valliappan R M (BTech, NIT Trichy), and S Cyril John
(BTech, NIT Trichy) are highly appreciated. The support from the Institute of
Eminence Research Initiative Grant on Technologies for Low Carbon and Lean
Construction (TLC2) from IIT Madras is acknowledged.

REFERENCES
[1] G. A. for Buildings, I. E. A. Construction, the United Nations Environment Programme,
2019 global status report for buildings and construction: Towards a zero-emission,
efficient and resilient buildings and construction sector (2019). https://www.unep.org/
resources/publication/2019-global-status-report-buildings-and-construction-sector
[2] U. N. E. Programme, Buildings and climate change: Summary for decision makers
(2009). https://wedocs.unep.org/20.500.11822/32152
[3] J. M. Hussin, I. A. Rahman, A. H. Memon, The way forward in sustainable construc-
tion: Issues and challenges, International Journal of Advances in Applied Sciences 2 (1)
(2013) 15–24.
[4] G. Data Report Code: GDTMT-TR-S348,Environmental, social, and governance (esg) frame-
work thematic research (2022). www.globaldata.com/store/report/esg-frameworktheme-
analysis/
[5] P. Huovila, L. Koskela, Contribution of the principles of lean construction to meet the
challenges of sustainable development, in: Proceedings IGLC, vol. 98 (1998). https://
iglc.net/papers/Conference/8
[6] J. Skibsted, R. Snellings, Reactivity of supplementary cementitious materials (scms) in
cement blends, Cement and Concrete Research 124 (2019) 105799.
[7] Embodied carbon. www.holcimfoundation.org/embodiedcarbon
[8] M. K. Dixit, J. L. Fernández-Solís, S. Lavy, C. H. Culp, Need for an embodied energy
measurement protocol for buildings: A review paper, Renewable and Sustainable
Energy Reviews 16 (6) (2012) 3730–3743.
[9] B. Sizirici, Y. Fseha, C.-S. Cho, I. Yildiz, Y.-J. Byon, A review of carbon footprint reduc-
tion in construction industry, from design to operation, Materials 14 (20) (2021) 6094.
[10] T. Ibn-Mohammed, R. Greenough, S. Taylor, L. Ozawa-Meida, A. Acquaye, Operational
vs. embodied emissions in buildings a review of current trends, Energy and Buildings 66
(2013) 232–245.
[11] T. Ramesh, R. Prakash, K. Shukla, Life cycle energy analysis of buildings: An overview,
Energy and Buildings 42 (10) (2010) 1592–1600.
[12] E. C. W. Group, et al., Methodology to calculate embodied carbon of materials,
Information Paper 32 (2012) 2012.
[13] B. Nebel, A. Alcorn, B. Wittstock, Life cycle assessment: adopting and adapting over-
seas LCA data and methodologies for building materials in New Zealand. ISBN: 978-
0-478-37560-2 (online). https://www.mpi.govt.nz/dmsdocument/6280/direct
Sustainable Construction Technologies 59

[14] C. Magwood, T. Huynh, V. Olgyay, The hidden climate impact of residential construc-
tion—zeroing in on embodied carbon emissions for low-rise residential buildings in
the united states (2023). https://rmi.org/insight/hidden-climate-impact-ofresidential-
construction/
[15] B. V. Reddy, K. Jagadish, Embodied energy of common and alternative building materi-
als and technologies, Energy and Buildings 35 (2) (2003) 129–137.
[16] G. P. Hammond, C. I. Jones, Embodied energy and carbon in construction materials,
Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers-Energy 161 (2) (2008) 87–98.
[17] J. G. Olivier, K. Schure, J. Peters, et al., Trends in global co2 and total greenhouse gas
emissions, PBL Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency 5 (2017) 1–11.
[18] K. Scrivener, Issues in sustainability in cements and concrete, American Ceramics
Society Bulletin 91 (2012) 47–50.
[19] J. Skibsted, R. Snellings, Reactivity of supplementary cementitious materials (scms) in
cement blends, Cement and Concrete Research 124 (2019) 105799.
[20] M. C. Juenger, R. Siddique, Recent advances in understanding the role of supplementary
cementitious materials in concrete, Cement and Concrete Research 78 (2015) 71–80.
[21] A. Standard, C618–15 standard specification for coal fly ash and raw or calcined natu-
ral pozzolan for use in concrete, ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA.
[22] M. Thomas, Optimizing the use of fly ash in concrete, Vol. 5420, Portland Cement
Association Skokie, IL, USA, 2007.
[23] D. Suresh, K. Nagaraju, Ground granulated blast slag (ggbs) in concrete—a review,
IOSR Journal of Mechanical and Civil Engineering 12 (4) (2015) 76–82.
[24] P. Chaunsali, Interaction of cement kiln dust (CKD) with fly ash and ground granu-
lated blast furnace slag: A microstructural investigation, Ph.D. thesis, Department of
Civil and Environmental Engineering, Clarkson University, Potsdam, NY, 2010. doi:
10.13140/RG.2.1.3797.0083
[25] P. Chaunsali, S. Peethamparan, Influence of the composition of cement kiln dust on its
interaction with fly ash and slag, Cement and Concrete Research 54 (2013) 106–113.
[26] P. Chaunsali, S. Peethamparan, Novel cementitious binder incorporating cement kiln
dust: Strength and durability, ACI Materials Journal 110 (3) (2013) 297–304.
[27] M. M. Johari, J. Brooks, S. Kabir, P. Rivard, Influence of supplementary cementi-
tious materials on engineering properties of high strength concrete, Construction and
Building Materials 25 (5) (2011) 2639–2648.
[28] P. Dinakar, K. Babu, M. Santhanam, Durability properties of high volume fly ash self
compacting concretes, Cement and Concrete Composites 30 (10) (2008) 880–886.
[29] A. Bahurudeen, D. Kanraj, V. G. Dev, M. Santhanam, Performance evaluation of sugarcane
bagasse ash blended cement in concrete, Cement and Concrete Composites 59 (2015) 77–88.
[30] S. Reynolds, The future of ferrous slag, market forecasts to 2020, Pira International
Ltd., Cleeve Road, Leatherhead, UK.
[31] M. McCarthy, T. Robl, L. Csetenyi, Recovery, processing, and usage of wet-stored fly
ash, in: Coal combustion products (CCP’s), Woodhead Publishing, 2017, pp. 343–367.
https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-100945-1.00014-9
[32] M. C. Juenger, R. Snellings, S. A. Bernal, Supplementary cementitious materials: New
sources, characterization, and performance insights, Cement and Concrete Research
122 (2019) 257–273.
[33] Y. Dhandapani, T. Sakthivel, M. Santhanam, R. Gettu, R. G. Pillai, Mechanical proper-
ties and durability performance of concretes with limestone calcined clay cement (lc3),
Cement and Concrete Research 107 (2018) 136–151.
[34] A. Bahurudeen, M. Santhanam, Influence of different processing methods on the poz-
zolanic performance of sugarcane bagasse ash, Cement and Concrete Composites 56
(2015) 32–45.
60 Civil Engineering Innovations for Sustainable Communities

[35] G. Xu, X. Shi, Characteristics and applications of fly ash as a sustainable construction
material: A state-of-the-art review, Resources, Conservation and Recycling 136 (2018)
95–109.
[36] E. Aprianti, P. Shafigh, S. Bahri, J. N. Farahani, Supplementary cementitious materi-
als origin from agricultural wastes—a review, Construction and Building Materials 74
(2015) 176–187.
[37] M. Juenger, J. L. Provis, J. Elsen, W. Matthes, R. D. Hooton, J. Duchesne, L. Courard, H.
He, F. Michel, R. Snellings, et al., Supplementary cementitious materials for concrete:
Characterization needs, MRS Online Proceedings Library (OPL) 1488 (2012) 8–22.
[38] C. M. Helepciuc, A. A. Serbanoiu, B. V. Serbanoiu, et al., Fibre reinforced concrete-a
sustainable material in the context of building industry and environmental challenges,
Advances in Environmental Sciences 10 (1) (2018) 1–6.
[39] O. Kayali, Sustainability of fibre composite concrete construction, in: Sustainability of
construction materials, Elsevier (2016) 539–566.
[40] M. Saidani, D. Saraireh, M. Gerges, Behaviour of different types of fibre reinforced
concrete without admixture, Engineering Structures 113 (2016) 328–334.
[41] British Standards Institution, BS EN 14651:2005+A1:2007, Test method for metal-
lic fibre concrete: Measuring the flexural tensile strength (limit of proportionality
(LOP), residual). BSI (British Standard Institution), 2008. ISBN 978 0 580 61052 3.
https://www.en-standard.eu/bs-en-14651-2005-a1-2007-test-method-for-metallic-fibre-
concrete-measuring-the-flexural-tensile-strength-limit-of-proportionality-lop-resid-
ual/
[42] F. Bulletins, Bulletins 55–56: Model code 2010—first complete draft. (2010) asqua-
pro technical booklet en 14651: Test method for metallic fibre concrete, Measuring the
flexural.
[43] A. C. 544, Report on design and construction of fiber reinforced precast concrete tunnel
segments, American Concrete Institute (ACI), Farmington Hills, MI, 2016.
[44] L. Vandewalle, D. Nemegeer, L. Balazs, B. Barr, J. Barros, P. Bartos, N. Banthia, M.
Criswell, E. Denarie, M. Di Prisco, et al., Rilem tc 162tdf: Test and design methods
for steel fibre reinforced concrete’-sigmaepsilon-design method-final recommendation,
Materials and Structures 36 (262) (2003) 560–567.
[45] B. of Indian Standards, Flexural strength and toughness parameters of fibre reinforced
concrete method of test, BIS-CED2, New Delhi, 2020.
[46] S. Mindess, Fibrous concrete reinforcement, Developments in the Formulation and
Reinforcement of Concrete (2008) 154–166.
[47] F. Farhat, D. Nicolaides, A. Kanellopoulos, B. L. Karihaloo, High performance fibre-
reinforced cementitious composite (cardifrc)—performance and application to retrofit-
ting, Engineering Fracture Mechanics 74 (1–2) (2007) 151–167.
[48] S. S. Pendhari, T. Kant, Y. M. Desai, Application of polymer composites in civil con-
struction: A general review, Composite Structures 84 (2) (2008) 114–124.
[49] J. S. Lawler, D. Zampini, S. P. Shah, Permeability of cracked hybrid fiber-reinforced
mortar under load, Materials Journal 99 (4) (2002) 379–385.
[50] S. J. Stephen, R. Gettu, Fatigue fracture of fibre reinforced concrete in flexure, Materials
and Structures 53 (3) (2020) 56.
[51] ACI 544.3R-08 Guide for specifying, proportioning, and production of fiber reinforced
concrete, American Concrete Institute, 2008. https://www.concrete.org/Portals/0/Files/
PDF/Previews/544.3R-08web.pdf
[52] T. Gries, A. Roye, P. Offermann, A. Peled, Textile reinforced concrete-state-of-the-
art report of RILEM TC 201-TRC, Report, Aachen, France, Autumn (2006), Pages
292. ISBN: 2-912143-99-3, e-ISBN: 2351580001. https://www.rilem.net/publication/
publication/100
Sustainable Construction Technologies 61

[53] K. P. Mehta, Reducing the environmental impact of concrete, Concrete International 23

(10) (2001) 61–66.
[54] P. Domone, J. Illston (Eds.), Construction materials: Their nature and behaviour (4th
ed.), CRC Press, 2010. https://doi.org/10.1201/9781315272436
[55] N. Williams Portal, Sustainability and flexural behaviour of textile reinforced con-
crete. Degree for Licentiate of Engineering, Licentiate thesis, Civil and Environmental
Engineering, Chalmers University of Technology, 2013, p. 53.
[56] S. Tomoscheit, U. Gohil, T. Gries, Textile reinforced concrete-providing sustainabil-
ity for flexible urban concepts, in: 10th international symposium on ferrocement and
thin reinforced cement composites, 2012. Imprint La Habana, Cuba: Palcograf, Scope
49–58, ISBN: 978-959-247-098-9. https://publications.rwth-aachen.de/record/101034
[57] R. Mohit, Raina industries private limited, company website. www.raina-industries.
com/#down
[58] RWTH Aachen University. www.ita.rwth-aachen.de/go/id/jezh/?lidx=1
[59] B. Mobasher, Mechanics of fiber and textile reinforced cement composites (1st ed.),
CRC Press, Boca Raton, 2012. https://doi.org/10.1201/b11181
[60] D. J. Kim, et al., A review paper on direct tensile behavior and test methods of textile
reinforced cementitious composites, Composite Structures 263 (2021) 113661.
[61] J. Hartig, U. Häußler-Combe, K. Schicktanz, Influence of bond properties on the tensile
behaviour of textile reinforced concrete, Cement and Concrete Composites 30 (10) (2008)
898–906.
[62] M. Zargaran, N. K. Attari, S. Alizadeh, P. Teymouri, Minimum reinforcement ratio in
trc panels for deflection hardening flexural performance, Construction and Building
Materials 137 (2017) 459–469.
[63] J. Hartig, F. Jesse, K. Schicktanz, U. Häußler-Combe, Influence of experimental set-
ups on the apparent uniaxial tensile load-bearing capacity of textile reinforced concrete
specimens, Materials and Structures 45 (2012) 433–446.
[64] N. W. Portal, I. F. Perez, L. N. Thrane, K. Lundgren, Pull-out of textile reinforcement in
concrete, Construction and Building Materials 71 (2014) 63–71.
[65] S. Gopinath, R. Gettu, N. R. Iyer, Influence of prestressing the textile on the tensile
behaviour of textile reinforced concrete, Materials and Structures 51 (2018) 1–12.
[66] S. Paul, R. Gettu, D. N. Arnepalli, R. Samanthula, Experimental studies on the
durability of glass textile reinforced concrete. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/
abstract=4451291 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4451291
[67] S. Paul, K. Murugan, R. Samanthula, A. S. Basavaraj, S. J. Stephen, R. Gettu, R. Zerbino,
Development of structural forms using textile reinforced concrete, Indian Concrete
Journal (ICJ) 97 (8) (2023) 43–54.
[68] M. Yeheyis, K. Hewage, M. S. Alam, C. Eskicioglu, R. Sadiq, An overview of construc-
tion and demolition waste management in Canada: A lifecycle analysis approach to sus-
tainability, Clean Technologies and Environmental Policy 15 (2013) 81–91.
[69] C. K. Purchase, D. M. Al Zulayq, B. T. OBrien, M. J. Kowalewski, A. Berenjian, A. H.
Tarighaleslami, M. Seifan, Circular economy of construction and demolition waste: A
literature review on lessons, challenges, and benefits, Materials 15 (1) (2021) 76.
[70] V. Ram, S. N. Kalidindi, Estimation of construction and demolition waste using waste
generation rates in Chennai, India, Waste Management & Research 35 (6) (2017) 610–617.
[71] J.-L. Gálvez-Martos, D. Styles, H. Schoenberger, B. Zeschmar-Lahl, Construction and
demolition waste best management practice in Europe, Resources, Conservation
and Recycling 136 (2018) 166–178.
[72] P. Bhada-Tata, D. Hoornweg, What a waste?: A global review of solid waste manage-
ment, World Bank Group. Retrieved from https://policycommons.net/artifacts/1513146/
what-a-waste/2185670/ on 09 Jun 2024. CID: 20.500.12592/dk0mgg
62 Civil Engineering Innovations for Sustainable Communities

[73] R. Islam, T. H. Nazifa, A. Yuniarto, A. S. Uddin, S. Salmiati, S. Shahid, An empiri-

cal study of construction and demolition waste generation and implication of recycling,
Waste Management 95 (2019) 10–21.
[74] M. Sourabh, S. F. Zia, B. Sandra, T. R. Deep, Sustainable development: A critical review
of construction and demolition waste management rules 2016, Environmental Pollution
Control Journal 20 (1) (2016) 6–21.
[75] C. P. C. BOARD, Guidelines on environmental management of construction & demoli-
tion (c & d) wastes (2017). https://cpcb.nic.in/openpdffile.php?id=TGF0ZXN0RmlsZS8
xNTlfMTQ5NTQ0NjM5N19tZWRpYXBob3RvMTkyLnBkZg
[76] CSTEP, Construction and demolition waste utilisation for recycled products in benga-
luru: Challenges and prospects (2016). www.cstep.in/publications-details.php?id=167
[77] W. Lu, H. Yuan, A framework for understanding waste management studies in construc-
tion, Waste Management 31 (6) (2011) 1252–1260.
[78] F. Technology Information, A. Council. https://tifac.org.in/
[79] B. of Indian Standards, Corase and fine aggregate-specification, BIS-CED02, New
Delhi, 2016.
[80] R. Prajapati, R. Gettu, S. Singh, B. J. Rathod, A novel beneficiation process for pro-
ducing high-quality recycled concrete aggregates using concentrated solar energy,
Materials and Structures 55 (9) (2022) 233.
[81] B. Wildermuth, India-a building industry in transition, Construct 6 (2008) 21–28.
[82] I. Kothman, N. Faber, How 3d printing technology changes the rules of the game: Insights
from the construction sector, Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management 27 (7)
(2016) 932–943.
[83] S. Bhattacherjee, A. S. Basavaraj, A. Rahul, M. Santhanam, R. Gettu, B. Panda, E.
Schlangen, Y. Chen, O. Copuroglu, G. Ma, et al., Sustainable materials for 3d concrete
printing, Cement and Concrete Composites 122 (2021) 104156.
[84] R. Manju, R. Deepika, T. Gokulakrishnan, K. Srinithi, M. Mohamed, A research on
3D printing concrete, International Journal of Recent Technology and Engineering 8
(2019) 1691–1693.
[85] Tvasta construction. https://tvasta.construction/home
[86] F. Bos, R. Wolfs, Z. Ahmed, T. Salet, Additive manufacturing of concrete in construc-
tion: Potentials and challenges of 3d concrete printing, Virtual and Physical Prototyping
11 (3) (2016) 209–225.
[87] B. Raphael, S. Senthilnathan, A. Patel, S. Bhat, A review of concrete 3d printed struc-
tural members, Frontiers in Built Environment 8 (2023) 291.
[88] V. Mechtcherine, V. N. Nerella, F. Will, M. Nather, J. Otto, M. Krause, Large-scale
digital concrete construction—conprint3d concept for on-site, monolithic 3d-printing,
Automation in Construction 107 (2019) 102933.
[89] S. J. Keating, J. C. Leland, L. Cai, N. Oxman, Toward site-specific and self-sufficient
robotic fabrication on architectural scales, Science Robotics 2 (5) (2017) eaam8986.
[90] Z. Cohen, N. Carlson, Piling and pressing: Towards a method of 3d printing reinforced
concrete columns, Construction Robotics 4 (1–2) (2020) 61–73.
[91] Z. Cohen, Hold up: Machine delay in architectural design, in: J. Willmann, P. Block, M.
Hutter, K. Byrne, T. Schork (Eds.), Robotic fabrication in architecture, art and design
2018. ROBARCH 2018, Springer, Cham, 2019. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-92294-
2_10. ISBN: 978-3-319-92293-5.
[92] F. P. Bos, Z. Y. Ahmed, E. R. Jutinov, T. A. Salet, Experimental exploration of metal
cable as reinforcement in 3d printed concrete, Materials 10 (11) (2017) 1314.
[93] N. Hack, W. V. Lauer, Mesh-mould: Robotically fabricated spatial meshes as reinforced
concrete formwork, Architectural Design 84 (3) (2014) 44–53.
Sustainable Construction Technologies 63

[94] M. Hambach, M. Rutzen, D. Volkmer, Chapter 5: Properties of 3d-printed fiber rein-

forced portland cement paste, in: 3D concrete printing technology, Butterworth-
Heinemann, Elsevier, 2019, pp. 73–113. ISBN 9780128154816, https://doi.org/10.1016/
B978-0-12-815481-6.00005-1. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/
B9780128154816000051
[95] Gebhard, L., Mata-Falcón, J., Anton, A., Burger, J., Lloret-Fritschi, E., Reiter, L.,
Kaufmann, W. Aligned interlayer fibre reinforcement and post-tensioning as a rein-
forcement strategy for digital fabrication, in: F. Bos, S. Lucas, R. Wolfs, T. Salet (Eds.),
Second RILEM international conference on concrete and digital fabrication. DC 2020.
RILEM Bookseries, vol. 28, Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-49916-7_63
[96] T. T. Le, S. A. Austin, S. Lim, R. A. Buswell, A. G. Gibb, T. Thorpe, Mix design and
fresh properties for high-performance printing concrete, Materials and Structures 45
(2012) 1221–1232.
[97] M. Mohammad, E. Masad, S. G. Al-Ghamdi, 3d concrete printing sustainability: A
comparative life cycle assessment of four construction method scenarios, Buildings 10
(12) (2020) 245.
[98] S. O. Abioye, L. O. Oyedele, L. Akanbi, A. Ajayi, J. M. D. Delgado, M. Bilal, O. O.
Akinade, A. Ahmed, Artificial intelligence in the construction industry: A review of
present status, opportunities and future challenges, Journal of Building Engineering 44
(2021) 103299.
[99] M. Chui, J. Mischke, The impact and opportunities of automation in construction,
Voices: Global Infrastructure Initiative (2019) 5.
[100] A. Harichandran, B. Raphael, A. Mukherjee, Determination of automated construction
operations from sensor data using machine learning, in: Proceedings of the 4th international
conference on civil and building engineering informatics, 2019. https://www.research-
gate.net/profile/Aparna_Harichandran/publication/337388054_Determination_of_
Automated_Construction_Operations_from_Sensor_Data_Using_Machine_Learning/
links/5dd4ee58299bf11ec8629bc4/Determination-of-Automated-Construction-
Operations-from-Sensor-Data-Using-Machine-Learning.pdf
[101] L. Joshua, K. Varghese, Accelerometer-based activity recognition in construction,
Journal of Computing in Civil Engineering 25 (5) (2011) 370–379.
[102] S. Mao, X. Shen, M. Lu, Virtual laser target board for alignment control and machine
guidance in tunnel-boring operations, Journal of Intelligent & Robotic Systems 79
(2015) 385–400.
[103] M. J. Kim, H.-L. Chi, X. Wang, L. Ding, Automation and robotics in construction and
civil engineering, Journal of Intelligent and Robotic Systems 79 (3–4) (2015) 347.
[104] St. Laurent, C. Logan, A. N. Ruggiero, S. D. Salvo, Robotics in construction, Worcester
Polytechnic Institute, 2016. https://digitalcommons.wpi.edu/iqp-all/2749
[105] S. Senthilnathan, B. Raphael, Using computer vision for monitoring the quality of
3d-printed concrete structures, Sustainability 14 (23) (2022) 15682.
[106] A. Harichandran, B. Raphael, A. Mukherjee, A hierarchical machine learning frame-
work for the identification of automated construction operations. Journal of Information
Technology in Construction 26 (2021).
[107] B. Raphael, K. S. C. Rao, K. Varghese, Automation of modular assembly of structural
frames for buildings, in: 2016 Proceedings of the 33rd the international symposium on
automation and robotics in construction (ISARC), Auburn, USA, 2016, pp. 412–420.
ISBN 978-1-5108-2992-3, ISSN 2413-5844. https://doi.org/10.22260/ISARC2016/0050
[108] A. Pushkar, M. Senthilvel, K. Varghese, Automated progress monitoring of masonry
activity using photogrammetric point cloud, in: ISARC. Proceedings of the inter-
national symposium on automation and robotics in construction, vol. 35, IAARC
64 Civil Engineering Innovations for Sustainable Communities

Publications, July 20–25, 2018, pp. 1–7. ISBN 978-3-00-060855-1. https://www.iaarc.

org/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/ISARC-2018-Proceedings.pdf
[109] S. Balasubramanian, V. Shukla, N. Islam, S. Manghat, Construction industry 4.0
and sustainability: An enabling framework, IEEE Transactions on Engineering
Management, 71 (2024) 1–19. doi: 10.1109/TEM.2021.3110427
[110] K. Wang, F. Guo, Towards sustainable development through the perspective of con-
struction 4.0: Systematic literature review and bibliometric analysis, Buildings 12 (10)
(2022) 1708.
[111] V. Potbhare, M. Syal, S. Korkmaz, Adoption of green building guidelines in developing
countries based on US and India experiences, Journal of Green Building 4 (2) (2009)
158–174.
[112] A. Marichova, Role of the government for development of sustainable construction,
Ovidius University Annals of Constanta – Series Civil Engineering, 22 (1) (2020)
53–62. https://doi.org/10.2478/ouacsce-2020-0006
[113] X. Zhang, L. Shen, Y. Wu, G. Qi, Barriers to implement green strategy in the process
of developing real estate projects, The Open Waste Management Journal 4 (1).
[114] Q. K. Qian, E. H. Chan, A. G. Khalid, Challenges in delivering green building projects:
Unearthing the transaction costs (TCS), Sustainability 7 (4) (2015) 3615–3636.
[115] A. P. Chan, A. Darko, E. E. Ameyaw, D.-G. Owusu-Manu, Barriers affecting the adop-
tion of green building technologies, Journal of Management in Engineering 33 (3)
(2017) 04016057.
[116] R. Prakash, Strategy for promoting processing of construction and demolition (C&D)
waste and, National Institution for Transforming India (NITI Aayog), India (2018).
Retrieved from https://policycommons.net/artifacts/2436636/strategy-for-promoting-
processing-of-construction-and-demolition-cd-waste-and/3458228/ on 09 Jun 2024.
CID: 20.500.12592/bkzn8d