RESUMO
In a book published in 1906, Richard Meade outlined the history of portland cement up to that point1. Since then there has been great progress in portland cement-based construction materials technologies brought about by advances in the materials science of composites and the development of chemical additives (admixtures) for applications. The resulting functionalities, together with its economy and the sheer abundance of its raw materials, have elevated ordinary portland cement (OPC) concrete to the status of most used synthetic material on Earth. While the 20th century was characterized by the emergence of computer technology, computational science and engineering, and instrumental analysis, the fundamental composition of portland cement has remained surprisingly constant. And, although our understanding of ordinary portland cement (OPC) chemistry has grown tremendously, the intermediate steps in hydration and the nature of calcium silicate hydrate (C-S-H), the major product of OPC hydration, remain clouded in uncertainty. Nonetheless, the century also witnessed great advances in the materials technology of cement despite the uncertain understanding of its most fundamental components. Unfortunately, OPC also has a tremendous consumption-based environmental impact, and concrete made from OPC has a poor strength-to-weight ratio. If these challenges are not addressed, the dominance of OPC could wane over the next 100 years. With this in mind, this paper envisions what the 21st century holds in store for OPC in terms of the driving forces that will shape our continued use of this material. Will a new material replace OPC, and concrete as we know it today, as the preeminent infrastructure construction material?
RESUMO
In 2014, NASA, in partnership with Made In Space, Inc., launched the first 3D printer to the International Space Station. Results of the first phase of operations for this mission demonstrated use of the fused filament fabrication (FFF) process for 3D printing in a microgravity environment. Previously published results indicated differences in density and mechanical properties of specimens printed in microgravity and those manufactured with the printer prior to its launch to ISS. Based on extensive analyses, these differences were hypothesized to be a result of subtle changes in manufacturing process settings rather than a microgravity influence on the FFF process. Phase II operations provided an opportunity to produce additional specimens in microgravity, evaluate the impact of changes in the extruder standoff distance, and ultimate provide a more rigorous assessment of microgravity effects through control of manufacturing process settings. Based on phase II results and a holistic consideration of phase I and phase II flight specimens, no engineering-significant microgravity effects on the process are noted. Results of accompanying material modeling efforts, which simulate the FFF process under a variety of conditions (including microgravity), are also presented. No significant microgravity effects on material outcomes are noted in the physics-based model of the FFF process. The 3D printing in zero G technology demonstration mission represents the first instance of off-world manufacturing. It represents the first step toward transforming logistics for long duration space exploration and is also an important crew safety enhancement for extended space missions where cargo resupply is not readily available. This paper presents the holistic results of phase I and II on-orbit operations and also includes material modeling efforts.