SBIR/STTR Research Award

SBIR Phase II: Additive Manufacturing in Construction

Award identifier 30b639b8fc8a97e388533d63660c4d2f216daf6d652aa2cf550fa8ee78c6aabdAwarding agency National Science Foundation

Award amount

$750,000

Program and phase

SBIR · Phase II

Award year

2016

Explore This Research Award in CaptureIQ

Research the technology, evaluate the recipient and agency, identify related opportunities, and explore potential follow-on work with CaptureIQ.

Award details

Awarding agency
National Science Foundation
Branch
Not reported
Recipient company
BRANCH TECHNOLOGY, INC.
Proposal award date
2016-09-15
Contract end date
2018-08-31
UEI
N4LZEF494YJ8
Solicitation number
Not reported
Topic code
MN

Research abstract

This Small Business Innovation Research Phase II project is in support of Branch Technology's novel Additive Manufacturing (AM) process that combines 3D printing technology and conventional construction materials to enable a new way to create buildings. The construction market in the US is approximately 8% of GDP. Any portion of the market that could be enhanced would have a large impact in the US economy. To that end, Branch is creating a process similar to building found in the natural world. In the formation of natural systems, material is the most expensive commodity; a structure is derived by the efficient use of material, but shape is free to be created in almost any form. Branch can approach this efficiency with additive manufacturing, where form is created and material is deposited only when needed and little waste is created. At the core of Branch's method of AM-based construction are three key developments: a three-dimensional freeform structure (the cellular matrix or lattice) which serves as a scaffold for other materials, a robotically- controlled extrusion mechanism by which the cellular matrix is produced, and the algorithms necessary to control the robot for successful production. The proof of concept for this process and more have already been demonstrated by Branch in Phase I of this grant. The technical objectives for Phase II focus on improving the procedures and technology already created. The focus areas for this phase are algorithm development, hardware improvements, the application of finishing materials, code compliance testing, and material science experiments. Algorithm development consists of refining and creating the software necessary to extrude the printed matrix and support a client base. Hardware improvements are necessary to improve the speed and efficiency of the process to create a commercially viable workflow. This research will necessitate the purchase of extra hardware for experimentation. American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) testing for load bearing capacity is necessary to enter the market and provide code compliant construction. Experimentation in the application of finished materials to the 3D printed lattice such as spray foam and concrete are vital to the realization of complete buildings.

Technology keywords

Not reported

Other awards by this recipient

Verified by the same UEI. These are other public SBIR/STTR award pages, not a merged company record.

Research funding history

13 SBIR/STTR records share this UEI (2015–2025). Reported award amounts total $7,003,564. Reported amounts are not federal obligations.

Phases: Phase I, Phase II, Phase II – Direct to Phase II

Agencies: Department of Defense, National Science Foundation, National Aeronautics and Space Administration

Agency intelligence

National Science Foundation

Back to SBIR/STTR Research Awards

Don't take our word for it. Ask AI about RFPCapture.

See what leading AI assistants have to say about RFPCapture and CaptureIQ.

Gemini opens without a prefilled question. The question is copied to your clipboard when the button works. You can also copy it here:

What is RFPCapture.com and its CaptureIQ platform from Smart Logic AI? How does it help federal contractors discover opportunities, evaluate bid/no-bid decisions, research government contracts, and prepare proposals? How does it compare with other federal capture platforms? Use independent sources where available.