Structures 18 (2019) 102–108

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Structures
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/structures

Design and production of an arch built of precast stackable components T

Lluís Enrique , Joseph Schwartz
⁎

ETH Zurich, Institute of Technology in Architecture, Switzerland

ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT

Keywords: The CASTonCAST system deals with the design and production of concrete shell structures from precast
Concrete shell structures stackable components. The investigation presented in this paper has the aim of testing the feasibility of this
Precast concrete system at real scale. To do this, a thin free-standing funicular arch composed of twelve stackable components
Post-tensioning was built. The arch has a span of 5.15 m and its thickness varies between 8 cm at the supports and 4 cm at the
Graphic statics
key. The arch was post-tensioned by means of four steel cables of 6 mm diameter in order to obtain stiffness
against point live loads. The results of this investigation show that the CASTonCAST system can easily be applied
in real-scale construction. Problems related to tolerances in construction and concrete shrinkage were observed
and must be addressed in future work.

1. Introduction
Between the 1920s and the 1970s, concrete shell structures were a
commonly used solution for building economically mid-span roof
structures. This structural typology is not only highly efficient in its use
of construction materials, but it also offers expressive highly aesthetic
double-curved forms. After the 1970s, the use of concrete shells de-
clined due to the increasing costs of construction [1], a situation that is
still a problem nowadays. In recent decades, there has been a revival in
the use of concrete shell structures, which has put the problem of
production of these complex forms at the epicenter of research activity.
One solution that is receiving a lot of attention consists in the use of
flexible formwork [2–7]. A recent example of a shell structure built
using this solution is the HiLo shell propotype designed by Block Re-
search Group for the NEST building, which uses as formwork a tailored
fabric supported on a prestressed cable net [7]. Another research path
investigates on additive manufacturing technologies (AM). Relevant
investigations are D-shape [8], contour crafting [9], concrete printing
[10], and smart dynamic casting [11] among others. An alternative
solution to these is the CASTonCAST system, which deals with the de-
sign and production of curved surfaces from precast stackable compo-
nents [12,13]. This system has advantages at all construction phases: it
reduces the number of customized molds, it allows storing and trans-
porting the components to the construction site in an efficient manner
and the assembly can be carried in a short period of time using a cost-
effective resuable scaffolding. In previous research, a 1:10 prototype of
a post-tensioned shell structure composed of sixty precast stackable
components was built as a proof of concept [13]. This paper presents
the design, fabrication and assembly of a new prototype. The goals of
this research are to test the feasibility of the CASTonCAST fabrication
technique at real scale and to find out more about the economic costs of
production.
2. Design
Since the prototype presented in this paper is the first one built at
real scale using the CASTonCAST system, a light, affordable and simple-
to-build structural form was preferred. The prototype is a thin free-
standing funicular arch (Fig. 1). The form of the arch was designed to
support its self-weight. Post-tensioning cables were introduced within
the arch to make it stiff against point loads.
2.1. Geometry
The funicular form of the arch was designed using graphic statics in
order to control the relationship between its form and internal forces.
The arch has a 5.15 m span and a 0.9 m rise, therefore its rise-to-span
ratio is around 0.17. This makes the arch look like arches often used in
bridge design, whose rise-to-span ratio usually lies in the range 0.16 to
0.20. After, an arch composed of stackable components was modelled
by approximating the curvature of the initial funicular form using the
CASTonCAST geometric method. This defined the number of compo-
nents, their angle (same as voussair angle), their width and thickness.
Later, the longitudinal section of the components was designed. In this
modelling process, the material thickness of the components had to be
sufficient to withstand the internal forces obtained in the structural

⁎
Corresponding author at: ETH Zurich, Institute of Technology in Architecture, Stefano-Franscini-Platz 5, 8093 Zurich, Switzerland.
E-mail address: enrique@arch.ethz.ch (L. Enrique).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.istruc.2018.12.005
Received 16 September 2018; Received in revised form 3 December 2018; Accepted 4 December 2018
Available online 05 December 2018
2352-0124/ © 2018 Institution of Structural Engineers. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
L. Enrique, J. Schwartz
Fig. 1. 3D model. (left) Arch composed of stackable components; (right) components in stacks.
analysis. Furthermore, the components had to weigh less than 50 kg in
order them to be easily moved by two people. In the final design, the
arch is composed of twelve components, which belong to two equal
stacks of six stackable components each (Fig. 1). The angle of the
components is 5.5°. Their width is approximately 0.45 m, their length
0.75 m and their thicknesses varies between 8 cm at the supports and
4 cm at the key. The arch thickness-to-span ratio is smaller than 1/100.
As the thickness, the weight of the components also decreases towards
the center of the arch. Taking into consideration the use of light-weight
aggregates, the weight of the components connected to the supports is
approximately 48 kg, while the components located in the central part
of the arch weigh only around 30 kg. The total weight of the arch is
approximately 470 kg.
2.2. Structure
The next step consisted in confirming that the modelled arch could
withstand its self-weight. To do this, a second analysis of the internal
forces in the arch, this time considering the precise weight of the
components, was conducted using graphic statics (Fig. 2a). The result of
this analysis showed that the thrust line of the arch flowed through the
arch's mass and that the available mass of concrete could withstand the
internal forces. In this analysis, the largest compression force, located at
the supports, has a magnitude of 3.7 kN. A tensile cable connecting the
two supports was added to create an arch-cable structure with vertical
reaction forces.
Then, a point asymmetric load of 200 kg was added at a distance of
1/4 of the span from one of the supports (Fig. 2b). In this case, since the
form of the arch was not designed to withstand point loads and the arch
was very slender, the results showed that the thrust line was no longer
contained inside the mass of concrete. The same problem occurred
when applying the point load in the center of the arch. In order to deal
with this problem, two strategies were implemented. The first one
consisted in providing the arch with a curved transversal section. In this
manner, it was possible to double the effective depth of the arch al-
lowing the internal forces to flow slightly in a three-dimensional way.
This not only provided further stiffness to the structure to withstand
point loads, but also aesthetics qualities. This strategy, however, was
not sufficient to deal with the problem. For this reason, a second
strategy consisting in the use of post-tensioning was implemented. The
goal of using post-tensioning cables was to introduce an internal com-
pression force in the mass of the arch that ensures that the thrust line
created by the effect of the self-weight and the point asymmetric load
stays inside the mass of concrete. Using graphic statics, first the form
and force diagrams of the effect of prestressing in the arch were drawn.
103
Structures 18 (2019) 102–108
Fig. 2c shows the prestressed cable (above) and the compressive force
that the tensioned cable introduces in the mass of concrete (below).
Both subsystems are in equilibrium with each other. Later, the internal
forces created by the action of prestressing were combined with the
internal forces created by the dead loads and the asymmetric point load
(Fig. 2d). In order to find the right amount of prestressing force re-
quired, the analysis started testing the effect of a low prestressing force
and then this value was increased until the thrust of the arch stayed
inside the arch's concrete mass. The required prestressing force ob-
tained was 10 kN. To apply this force, four steel cables of diameter
6 mm and 19 kN of minimum breaking strength were used. The ad-
missible load of the post-tensioning heads used was 7.6 kN. A related
study, focused on the design of externally prestressed frames using
graphic statics is presented in [14].
3. Fabrication
The components of the arch were produced using the CASTonCAST
fabrication technique [12,13]. This casting technique relies on produ-
cing the components one on top of another. In this manner, each
component serves as mold for the next component and, therefore, no
curved complex molds are needed. Once all the components of a stack
are produced, these are detached from each other and assembled to-
gether by connecting their lateral faces. The main steps taken in the
production of the prototype's components were:
1. The lateral molds of the two stacks were produced by cutting their
planar parts from a 3 cm thick timber plate using a CNC machine.
Since the casting process requires a high precision, the molds were
fixed to a simple timber frame in order to improve their stiffness
(Fig. 3).
2. Female-male steel joints and flexible plastic tubes were fixed on the
lateral molds (Fig. 3). The plastic tubes served to create the void in
the mass of concrete to later pass through the post-tensioning cables.
3. The base of the stack was produced in concrete. This served as a
mold to shape the bottom surface of the first component.
4. Once the molds were finished, the components were produced by
filling first the mold with a thick concrete and later shaping
manually the top surface of the component (Fig. 4). The production
of one component was carried out by one person and lasted around
ninety minutes. Once the concrete of the top surface set, a plastic
foil was placed on top to prevent the material from the next casting
to adhere to the previous component. The next component could be
produced around 1 h after finishing the production of the previous
one. However, due to the limited opening time of the concrete lab,
L. Enrique, J. Schwartz Structures 18 (2019) 102–108

(caption on next page)

104
L. Enrique, J. Schwartz Structures 18 (2019) 102–108

Fig. 2. Structural analysis of the arch using graphic statics, in which red stands for tension, blue stands for compression, the arch dead load is represented in dark
green and the asymmetric point load in light green. (a) Dead loads; (b) dead loads and asymmetric point load; (c) post-tensioning; and (d) dead loads, asymmetric
point load and post-tensioning. (For interpretation of the references to color in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.)

Fig. 3. Production of the lateral molds. (left) Stack of lateral molds; (right) detail of the female joints and plastic tubes.

Fig. 4. CASTonCAST fabrication technique. (a) Mold ready to be used; (b) filling the mold with concrete; (c) shaping the top surface of the component; (d) finishing
the top surface of the component.

Fig. 5. Stack of components before and after removing the timber molds.

105
L. Enrique, J. Schwartz Structures 18 (2019) 102–108

Fig. 6. Assembly process.

Fig. 7. Detail of the supports.

the production of the twelve components lasted a total of six days,
casting each day one component per stack.
The concrete mixture used was similar to a thick mortar, with a
water-cement ratio lower than 0.35. The main aggregate was
1–4 mm sand. Expanded glass lightweight aggregate was used in
order to reduce the weight of the components. Polypropylene fibers
were added to the concrete mixture to protect the corners and edges
of the components. This concrete mixture allowed shaping manually
the top surface of the component in an easy way and its low content
of water also helped reducing shrinkage.
5. Once all the components were produced, these were stored during
one month to allow the concrete to cure and gain compressive
strength. After, the timber molds were removed and the components
were transported to the construction site to proceed with the as-
sembly (Fig. 5).
In addition to the twelve components, the two supports of the arch
were produced in concrete (Fig. 7). These have a complex geometry
since they have two large voids, inside which the post-tensioning heads
are placed.

106
L. Enrique, J. Schwartz Structures 18 (2019) 102–108

Fig. 8. Free-standing arch built of stackable components.

Fig. 9. Loading the arch with a point load.

4. Assembly
The components of the arch were assembled with the help of a
timber scaffolding. Since the global geometry of the arch is embedded
in the components, the function of this scaffolding was only to support
the components in the right place. The timber scaffolding was sup-
ported in four points by four large steel screws in order to make possible
an easy decentering of the arch. In real scale construction, this scaf-
folding should be built using a reusable scaffolding system to reduce the
economic cost and material waste.
The construction process of the arch started by placing the two
concrete supports in their final position and connecting them by means
of two steel cables. The supports were placed over two stacks of pales to
elevate the arch. Then, the components were placed on the scaffolding
starting from those near the supports and ending with the arch key
(Fig. 6). This process, done by two people with the help of forklift, took
less than 5 h. After, the four post-tensioning cables were inserted inside
the arch and stressed. In this process, the arch became monolithic and
separated from the scaffolding. Therefore, no decentering process was
required. Since the cross section of the steel cables and the mechanical
properties were known, it was possible to calculate how much the
cables should be deformed to obtain the required prestressing force.
Finally, the timber scaffolding was removed (Fig. 8). Once the arch
construction was finished, the arch was loaded with the weight of one
person, which is around a sixth of the arch's self-weight (Fig. 9).

107
L. Enrique, J. Schwartz
Fig. 10. Problems in production observed. (left) Due to imprecisions during production, adjacent components do not always perfectly touch each other; (right)
Shrinkage observed in the last component of the stack.
5. Conclusions
The application of the CASTonCAST fabrication technique for the
production of the components of the prototype was successful: the
concrete mixture required was standard, easy-to-produce and in-
expensive; the workability allowed producing the components easily;
and the casting timing was short. However, at this scale, the following
two important problems were detected:
• Due to lack of stiffness of the timber lateral molds, the lateral faces
of the components were not perfectly planar and, therefore, the
components in the arch were not always fully touching each other
(Fig. 10 left). Due to this, the arch could not effectively use its entire
cross-section to transfer loads, thus creating hinges. When a person
walked on the arch, deformations could be observed due to this
problem. Future research will have the aim of minimizing the effect
of this problem by creating a stiffer mold and/or placing a thin
neoprene layer between the components during the assembly.
• At the scale of the prototype described in this paper, the effect of
shrinkage was visible. It was interesting to observe that this un-
desirable effect was affecting mainly the last component of the stack
(Fig. 10 right). We believe that this occurs because the last com-
ponent is the only one that is not covered by a layer of concrete. For
this reason, in future work, a thin additional layer of concrete or
sand will be added on top of the last component to prevent this
effect from appearing.
Regarding the economic cost, the approximate total cost of the main
materials used: timber plates, timber sections, cement, sand, light-
weight aggregates and steel elements did not exceed 1000 €. This cost
would be lower if a reusable scaffolding system and only one timber
lateral mold had been used. Future research will measure precisely the
economic costs for different shell types.
The free-standing arch presented in this paper is the first prototype
produced using the CASTonCAST system that is built at an architectural
scale. This system is, however, intended for the production of larger
scale structures composed of larger scale components. Future research
will study the feasibility of the system when applied in the construction
of large scale shells.
108
Structures 18 (2019) 102–108
Acknowledgements
This research has been supported by Holcim (Switzerland) AG (ce-
ment), Jakob AG (steel cables) and Liaver GmbH & co. KG (lightweight
aggregates). The authors would like to thank the Raplab at ETH Zurich,
Andreas Reusser and Heinz Richner for their very helpful support in the
production of this prototype.
References
[1] Chilton JC, Isler H. The engineer's contribution to contemporary architecture: Heinz
Isler. London: Thomas Telford; 2000.
[2] West M. Fabric-formed concrete structures. Paper presented at First International
Conference on Concrete and Development, Tehran. 2001, April.
[3] Orr JJ, Darby AP, Ibell TJ, Evernden MC, Otlet M. Concrete structures using fabric
formwork. Struct Eng 2011;89(8):20–6.
[4] Pronk A, Van Rooy I, Schinkel P. Double-curved surfaces using a membrane mould.
Paper presented at IASS 2009 Symposium, Valencia. 2009, September.
[5] Schipper HR, Janssen B. Manufacturing double-curved elements in precast concrete
using a flexible mould: first experimental results. Paper presented at FIB
Symposium: Concrete Engineering for Excellence and Efficiency, Prague. 2011,
June.
[6] Raun C, Kirkegaard PH. Reconfigurable double-curved mould. Paper presented at
Second International Conference on Flexible Formwork. Bath. 2012, June.
[7] Echenagucia TM, Pigram D, Liew A, Van Mele T, Block P. A cable-net and fabric
formwork system for the construction of concrete shells: design, fabrication and
construction of a full scale prototype. Structures 2018.
[8] Dini E. D-Shape. http://www.d-shape.com; 2006.
[9] Khoshnevis B. Automated construction by contour crafting-related robotics and
information technologies. Autom Constr 2004;13(1):5–19.
[10] Sungwoo L, Le T, Webster J, Buswell R, Austin S, Gibb A, et al. Fabricating con-
struction components using layered manufacturing technology. Paper presented at
Global Innovation in Construction Conference, Loughborough. 2009.
[11] Lloret E, Shahab AR, Linus M, Flatt RJ, Gramazio F, Kohler M, et al. Complex
concrete structures: merging existing casting techniques with digital fabrication.
Comput Aided Des 2015;60:40–9.
[12] Enrique L, Cepaitis P, Ordoñez D, Piles C. CASTonCAST: architectural freeform
shapes from precast stackable components. VLC arquitectura Res J
2016;3(1):85–102.
[13] Enrique L, Schwartz J. CASTonCAST shell structures: realisation of a 1:10 prototype
of a post-tensioned shell structure from precast stackable components. Paper pre-
sented at AAG16, Zurich. 2016, September.
[14] Todisco L, Peiretti HC, Mueller C. Funicularity through external posttensioning:
design philosophy and computational tool. J Struct Eng 2015;142(2).