Additive manufacturing (AM) enables the precise and customized fabrication of complex geometries. Among its applications, 3D clay printing is gaining attention in construction, art, and architecture; however, it faces significant challenges related to structural stability, rheological behavior, and process parameter optimization. Key factors such as printing layer height, printing speed, and material properties critically influence the quality of printed parts, often resulting in defects like cracking and warping. This study uses a design of experiments (DoE) methodology to evaluate the effects of the parameters on the quality of 3D-printed clay objects. The analysis identifies optimal parameter settings that reduce dimensional defects, particularly in final thickness ratios. The optimal parameters for printing were set to layer height (A), printing speed (B), nozzle diameter (C), and material preparation time (D), being 0.3 mm, 25 mm/s, 13 mm, and 1 hour, respectively. Results show that optimized configurations enhance both dimensional accuracy and mechanical stability. These findings contribute to the standardization of small-scale 3D clay printing, offering valuable insights for academic research and industrial implementation.
PetryTM and LittleDN.Review of stabilization of clays and expansive soils in pavements and lightly loaded structures—history, practice, and future. J Mater Civ Eng2002; 14(6): 447–460. DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)0899-1561(2002)14:6(447).
2.
LiC, ZhuN, YangS, . A review of clay based photocatalysts: Role of phyllosilicate mineral in interfacial assembly, microstructure control and performance regulation. Chemosphere2021; 273: 129723. DOI: 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2021.129723
3.
SultanN, DelageP and CuiYJ.Temperature effects on the volume change behaviour of Boom clay. Eng Geol2002; 64(2–3): 135–145. DOI: 10.1016/S0013-7952(01)00143-0.
4.
ZhangZ and SoungX.Characterizing the impact of temperature on clay–water angle in geomaterials during extreme events by deep learning enhanced method. In: Geo-Extreme 2021. Reston, VA: ASCE, 2021, pp.160–169. DOI: 10.1061/9780784483701.016
5.
MousaviSS, BhojarajuC and Ouellet-PlamondonC.Clay as a sustainable binder for concrete—A review. Constr Mater2021; 1(3): 134–168. DOI: 10.3390/constrmater1030010
6.
GamageK, FawziaS, ZahraT, . Advancement in sustainable 3D concrete printing: A review on materials, challenges, and current progress in Australia. Buildings2024; 14(2): 1–28. DOI: 10.3390/buildings14020494
7.
ChenY, HeS, ZhangY, . 3D printing of calcined clay-limestone-based cementitious materials. Cem Concr Res2021; 149: 106553. DOI: 10.1016/j.cemconres.2021.106553
8.
AsafO, BenturA, LarianovskyP, . From soil to printed structures: A systematic approach to designing clay-based materials for 3D printing in construction and architecture. Constr Build Mater2023; 408: 133783. DOI: 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2023.133783
9.
NgoTD, KashaniA, ImbalzanoG, . Additive manufacturing (3D printing): A review of materials, methods, applications and challenges. Compos Part B Eng2018; 143: 172–196. DOI: 10.1016/j.compositesb.2018.02.012
10.
AgrawalH and ThompsonJE.Additive manufacturing (3D printing) for analytical chemistry. Talanta Open2021; 3: 100036. DOI: 10.1016/j.talo.2021.100036
11.
FengC, ZhangM and BhandariB.Materials properties of printable edible inks and printing parameters optimization during 3D printing: A review. Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr2019; 59(19): 3074–3081. DOI: 10.1080/10408398.2018.1481823
12.
AngX, TeyJY, YeoWH, . A review on metallic and ceramic material extrusion method: Materials, rheology, and printing parameters. J Manuf Process2023; 90: 28–42. DOI: 10.1016/j.jmapro.2023.01.077
13.
GohGD, YapYL, TanHKJ, . Process–structure–properties in polymer additive manufacturing via material extrusion: A review. Crit Rev Solid State Mater Sci2020; 45(2): 113–133. DOI: 10.1080/10408436.2018.1549977
14.
HeZ, ShenA, WuH, . Research progress on recycled clay brick waste as an alternative to cement for sustainable construction materials. Constr Build Mater2021; 274: 122113. DOI: 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2020.122113
15.
KumarK and PaulB.Towards a sustainable geoliner construction in landfills by potential blending of fly ash with kaolin clay alternative: A review with an insight to Indian scenario. Waste Dispos Sustain Energy2024; 6: 1–16. DOI: 10.1007/s42768-023-00178-8
16.
KleinM, RegevD and SnirS.Using the clay slip game in art therapy: A sensory intervention. Int J Art Ther2020; 25(2): 64–75. DOI: 10.1080/17454832.2020.1713833
17.
ChanSSL, PenningsRM, EdwardsL, . 3D printing of clay for decorative architectural applications: Effect of solids volume fraction on rheology and printability. Addit Manuf2020; 35: 101335. DOI: 10.1016/j.addma.2020.101335
18.
LemougnaPN, IsmailovA, LevanenE, . Upcycling glass wool and spodumene tailings in building ceramics from kaolinitic and illitic clay. J Build Eng2024; 81: 108122. DOI: 10.1016/j.jobe.2023.108122
19.
MoroC, MillsKA and PhelpsC.The CRAFTS learning framework: Equipping learners to create relevant, accessible, fun, tailored and scholarly activities in higher education. Interact Learn Environ2024; 32: 1–12. DOI: 10.1080/10494820.2024.2308100
20.
ManikandanK, JiangX, SinghAA, . Effects of nozzle geometries on 3D printing of clay constructs: Quantifying contour deviation and mechanical properties. In: 48th SME North American Manufacturing Research Conference (NAMRC 48). Amsterdam: Elsevier, 2020, pp.678–683. DOI: 10.1016/j.promfg.2020.05.160
21.
KontovourkisO and TryfonosG.Robotic 3D clay printing of prefabricated non-conventional wall components based on a parametric-integrated design. Autom Constr2020; 110: 103005. DOI: 10.1016/j.autcon.2019.103005
22.
Alonso MadridJ, Sotorrío OrtegaG, Gorostiza CarabañoJ, . 3D claying: 3D printing and recycling clay. Crystals2023; 13(3): 375. DOI: 10.3390/cryst13030375
23.
TüylüD and GüneriAF.Additive manufacturing: Fuzzy logic strategies in the manufacturing of the future. In: Kahraman C et al. (eds)International conference on intelligent and fuzzy systems. Cham: Springer Nature, 2024, pp.49–56. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-031-67195-1_7
24.
Morán-ZabalaJP, Restrepo-HenaoJA, Correa-EspinalAA, . Analyzing 3D printing variables for small-scale clay objects using fuzzy cognitive maps. J Micromanuf2025; 25: 1–12. DOI: 10.1177/25165984251351098
25.
EslamiA and AkbarimehrD.Failure analysis of clay soil–rubber waste mixture as a sustainable construction material. Constr Build Mater2021; 310: 125274. DOI: 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2021.125274
26.
KanagarajB, AnandN, Samuvel RajR, . Techno-socio-economic aspects of Portland cement, geopolymer, and limestone calcined clay cement (LC3) composite systems: A state-of-art review. Constr Build Mater2023; 398: 132484. DOI: 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2023.132484
27.
AvizovasR, BaskutisS, NavickasV, . Effect of chemical composition of clay on physical-mechanical properties of clay paving blocks. Buildings2022; 12(7): 943–963. DOI: 10.3390/buildings12070943
28.
BeroyaMAA, AydinA and KatzenbachR.Insight into the effects of clay mineralogy on the cyclic behavior of silt-clay mixtures. Eng Geol2009; 106(3–4): 154–162. DOI: 10.1016/j.enggeo.2009.03.006
29.
XieS, Harkin-JonesE, ShenY, . Quantitative characterization of clay dispersion in polypropylene-clay nanocomposites. Mater Lett2010; 64(2): 185–188. DOI: 10.1016/j.matlet.2009.10.042
30.
ZhaoY, GaoY, ChenG, . Development of low-carbon materials from GGBS and clay brick powder for 3D concrete printing. Constr Build Mater2023; 383: 131232. DOI: 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2023.131232
31.
YinZY, JinYF, ShenSL, . An efficient optimization method for identifying parameters of soft structured clay by an enhanced genetic algorithm and elastic–viscoplastic model. Acta Geotech2017; 12(4): 849–867. DOI: 10.1007/s11440-016-0486-0
RahimMS and EhsanAA.Optimization of micromilling parameters using Taguchi method for the fabrication of PMMA-based microchannels. Int J Nanoelectron Mater2020; 13: 151–158.
34.
JanmaneeP, SaodaenR and NimvongsaJ.Analysis of optimization parameters for plastic injection molding using genetic algorithm. Manag Prod Eng Rev2024; 15(3): 1–10. DOI: 10.24425/mper.2024.151488
35.
KumarG and DeviD.The study focus on optimizing processing parameters for 3D printed composites using Taguchi. Manag Prod Eng Rev2024; 15(3): 1–7. DOI: 10.24425/mper.2024.151492
36.
BoxGEP and DraperNR.A basis for the selection of a response surface design. J Am Stat Assoc1959; 54(287): 622–654. DOI: 10.1080/01621459.1959.10501525
37.
KrishnaA, RoshanJ, BaS, . Robust experimental designs for model calibration. J Qual Technol2022; 54(4): 441–452. DOI: 10.1080/00224065.2021.1930618
38.
MontgomeryDC.Diseño y análisis de experimentos. 2nd ed.New York: Wiley, 2004, pp.1–692
39.
ChenS, XiaoC, LiuK, . Investigation of debinding sintering strategy and analysis of different structure properties of printed ceramic clay materials. Discover Appl Sci2024; 6(3): 106. DOI: 10.1007/s42452-024-05753-0
40.
WiK, SureshV, WangK, . Quantifying quality of 3D printed clay objects using a 3D structured light scanning system. Addit Manuf2020; 32: 100978. DOI: 10.1016/j.addma.2019.100987
41.
Correa-EspinalAA, GrimaP and Tort-MartorellX.Experimentation order with good properties for 2k factorial designs. J Appl Stat2009; 36(7): 743–754. DOI: 10.1080/02664760802499337
