Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Controlled comparison evaluates defect detection in additive manufacturing using voxel and mesh methods, suggesting optimal inspection pathways.
Additive manufacturing is increasingly used in construction, yet reliable quality assurance for three-dimensional-printed concrete elements remains a major challenge. Existing digital defect-detection methods, particularly voxel-based and mesh-based approaches, are often evaluated separately, which limits understanding of their relative capabilities for construction-scale inspection. This study establishes a controlled comparison of the two representations using identical scan-to-design data, consistent preprocessing, and unified defect thresholding. A voxel pipeline employing signed distance fields and a three-dimensional convolutional neural network, and a mesh pipeline using triangular surface reconstruction, geometric surface descriptors, and MeshCNN, were applied to structured-light scans of printed clay wall segments containing intentional voids, material buildup, and layer-height inconsistencies. Across common performance metrics, the voxel-based method achieved a recall of 95% for spatially coherent, volumetric-consistent void-related anomalies inferred from surface geometry, reflecting improved aggregation of distributed deviations, while the mesh-based method attained a mean surface defect localization error of 0.32 mm with a substantially lower computational cost in runtime and memory. These results clarify representation-dependent trade-offs and provide guidance for selecting appropriate inspection pipelines in extrusion-based construction. The findings establish a controlled, construction-oriented comparative framework for digital defect detection and support more efficient, reliable, and scalable quality-assurance workflows for sustainable additive manufacturing.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Mirmotalebi et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: