3D printing for construction can be a divisive topic – largely due to the media buzz around 3D printed homes, offices, castles, you name it, some ten years ago. But the technology has found a suitable home for itself in providing rapid housing solutions and large-scale structures from bridges to train stations. So, I asked three experts across architecture, interiors and construction – Hedwig Heinsman (HH), Co-founder & Creative Director, Aectual; Jonathan Rowley (JR), Additive Companion, Associate Lecturer, MA Design for Industry 5.0, Central Saint Martins, UAL, Architect; and Zoë A. C. Knudsen (ZK), Head of Products and Communication, COBOD International – for their takes.
TCT: So, “3D printed houses are a gimmick.” Thoughts?
HH: 3D printed houses are no gimmick, but they don’t make sense in every market. In regions with abundant land, bungalow-style homes can work. In dense urban environments, however, we see more potential in combining highly optimised traditional structures, such as timber or steel, with 3D printed circular interiors and façades. That enables what I call ‘reincarnating architecture’ – buildings with long-lasting structural cores, while interiors and façades can be reprinted, reused, and reimagined as needs evolve, in a fully circular way.
JR: Presenting 3D printing as a quick and affordable silver bullet for housing shortages is simply unrealistic.
