ISSN: 2321-2837 (Online)

Research & Reviews: Journal of ISSN: 2321-6505 (Print)

Space Science & Technology Volume 11, Issue 1, 2022

DOI: 10.37591/rrjosst.v11i1.3344
STM JOURNALS
http://sciencejournals.stmjournals.in/index.php/RRJoSST/article/view/3344
https://doi.org/10.37591/rrjosst.v11i1.3344

Research RRJoSST

3D Printed Martian Habitats and Challenges to

Overcome
Yoon-Si Lee1,*, Courtney Keys2, Saratu Terreno3

Abstract
In exploring the potential design and construction of Martian habitats, one of the key factors that
need to be taken into account is the environmental condition on the surface of Mars, which is
drastically different from that of Earth and poses unique challenges. Innovative designs and
construction technologies must be utilized to overcome these obstacles. In addition, the building
materials should be those that can be locally obtained and must possess the properties and
characteristics that would ensure the safety and longevity of the structures. This paper presents an
overall portrayal of various Martian habitat designs, 3D printing technologies, and construction
materials that have been proposed in recent years including the award winning Martian habitat
proposals presented at the NASA’s 3D-Printed Habitat Centennial Challenge. Also presented are
discussions on some of the important considerations that must be thought of in order to successfully
establish the human presence on Mars.

Keywords: Mars; habitat; Martian Concrete; 3D printing; environmental challenges.

INTRODUCTION
In recent decades, Mars has attracted considerable attention as NASA plans to send the first human
to Mars orbit in the early 2030s, followed by trips to the Martian surface coming sometime after that.
Unlike the previous extraterrestrial missions that aimed at a flyby or simple planetary exploration, the
ultimate goal this time is to establish a successful human presence on Mars. With the fast advancing
scientific and engineering technologies, survival on a distant planet within a hostile environment
seems no longer infeasible. Many believe that one of the key technologies that would make this
mission successful is automated 3D printing. The idea of building structures using 3D printing
technologies on Mars has been heavily explored by NASA, academia and other organizations alike
[1]. In 2015, NASA launched a three-phased competition to encourage scientists and engineers around
the world to develop suitable concrete mixes, 3D printing methods, and conceptual habitat designs
(Phase I and II) that could theoretically be
*Author for Correspondence constructed on Mars [2]. The habitat design
Yoon-Si Lee
E-mail: [email protected]
required the use of indigenous materials that can
potentially be salvaged from the initial mission.
1
Associate Professor, Department of Civil Engineering and Following the completion of the first two phases,
Construction, Bradley University, Peoria, Illinois, USA
2
Research Assistant, Department of Civil Engineering and Phase III of the competition took place in 2019 at
Construction, Bradley University, Peoria, Illinois, USA
3
Bradley University [3] and consisted of the
Assistant Professor, Department of Civil Engineering and
Construction, Bradley University, Peoria, Illinois, USA
printing and testing of scale models of Martian
habitats [3, 4]. Each participating team was
Received Date: March 16, 2022 required to 3D print a self-supporting, one-third
Accepted Date: June 02, 2022
Published Date: June 15, 2022 scale model of a Martian habitat, and was
evaluated based upon the overall design as well
Citation: Yoon-Si Lee, Courtney Keys, Saratu Terreno. 3D
Printed Martian Habitats and Challenges to Overcome.
as the strength and durability of their 3D printed
Research & Reviews: Journal of Space Science & Technology. structure. The first place winner of Phase III was
2022; 11(1): 40–49p. “AI SpaceFactory” with their “MARSHA” model

© STM Journals 2022. All Rights Reserved 40

3D Printed Martian Habitats and Challenges to Overcome Lee et al.

shown in Figure 1 [5]. Their mix was composed of melted basaltic rock with basalt fibers and
renewable polylactic acid (PLA) bioplastics that could be produced from plants preliminarily grown
on Mars. The team utilized a stationary 3D printing machine with a robotic arm to craft a multi-floor,
egg-shaped habitat with a dual-shell design that separated the habitable space inside from the outer,
protective shell [6]. The runner up, the team “Penn State” designed a concrete mix made primarily
from river sand having similar properties to Martian soil. The team implemented a printing method
very similar to that of “AI SpaceFactory” and utilized it to print a final habitat comprised of two
connected cylindrical structures with closed conical roofs as shown in Figure 1 [5].

Figure 1. One-third-scale 3D printed Martian habitats constructed during Phase III of NASA’s 3D-
Printed Habitat Challenge: MARSHA (left) by AI SpaceFactory and Den@Mars (right) by Penn State
(source: Staedter [5]).

All participating groups in this competition were required to present their plans on how to utilize
locally available materials on Mars, and how to overcome the challenges caused by the environmental
conditions that are still unknown or significantly different from that of Earth. For example, the
gravitational acceleration on Mars is approximately 3.71 m/s2 (12.17 ft/s2), almost a third of that felt
on Earth. The surface temperature ranges between -140°C and 30°C (-220°F and 86°F) with an
average surface temperature of approximately -63°C (-81°F), as compared to that of Earth at 14°C
(57°F) [7]. This correlates to the thinner atmosphere of Mars, which is composed of 96% carbon
dioxide [7]. The thinner atmosphere offers less protection from harmful radiation in the form of
galactic cosmic rays and solar proton events [7, 8]. The radiation, as well as the composition of the
atmosphere, could potentially have deteriorating effects on materials used to construct the habitats [9].
Mars also experiences dust storms with wind speeds of about 30 m/s (67.1 mph) [8]. Though the wind
forces themselves have less impact due to the thinner atmosphere, the planet’s dry surface allows for
the winds to pick up loose soil, creating abrasive dust storms [10, 11]. Other critical concerns on Mars
that need to be accounted for include micrometeorites, seismic activity, depressurization, and low
availability of water. These environmental differences pose unique challenges that must be overcome.
Therefore, the most efficient and economical designs and methodologies should be utilized in order to
successfully build Martian habitats that can safely protect the human crews from the extremely hostile
conditions of Mars. The subsequent sections present an overall portrayal of various Martian habitat
designs, 3D printing techniques, and construction materials that have been proposed in recent years.
Also discussed are some of the challenges the mission crews will have to face as well as plausible
solutions to overcome these challenges including how to keep the inhabitants safe and secure in the
extreme conditions of Mars.

© STM Journals 2022. All Rights Reserved 41

Research & Reviews: Journal of Space Science & Technology
Volume 11, Issue 1
ISSN: 2321-2837 (Online), ISSN: 2321-6506 (Print)

MARTIAN HABITAT DESIGN

The establishment of “habitat” on Mars does not just mean a shelter for a short-term structural and
environmental survival. Rather, its longevity should be considered in the design process since
ultimately the goal is to have human presence on Mars over a prolonged period. Commercially
available software such as Building Information Modeling (BIM) and 4D site logistic planning can be
utilized to simulate and analyze various options and scenarios through algorithmic problem
formulation, and optioneering [12] to come up with a most suitable habitat design. Martian habitat
must be structurally and architecturally viable and sustainable for an extremely hostile environment
and, simultaneously, provide human crews with a feeling of “home” and a healthy environment for
both physiological and psychological conditions within a confined structure. As the term denotes, a
“habitat” is considered more than just a shelter, but a dwelling that simulates an environment that is
closest to the conditions of earth, where the astronauts consider as “home” [13].

Martian habitats can be constructed either ‘below’ ground (underground) or ‘above’ ground with a
possibility of a combination of both. When the 2001 Mars Odyssey orbiter found evidence of
underground caves across the red planet that might have the potential to be closed off and converted
into shelters [7], the ‘below’ ground option was initially considered more logical and beneficial in
terms of protecting the inhabitants from the harsh environment. The layer of land above and around
the caves seemed thick enough to shield the inhabitants from radiation, cold, atmospheric toxins and
abrasive dust storms. One of the major concerns with the ‘below’ ground shelter is that the natural
shape of the cave walls makes it difficult to fully seal the structure. In addition, 3D printing the walls
in such a confined space is much too difficult to be effectively executed. A plausible solution may be
to print the walls in pieces outside of the base and make them light enough to be transported into the
caves for assembly. For example, the wall pieces can be printed hollow with a corrugated structure on
the inside to reduce weight while retaining its strength [7].

The printing of pieces, transportation concerns and other physical constrains associated with the
‘below’ ground shelter can be avoided with the ‘above’ ground option. There can be countless,
various habitat design ideas that can be thought of for the ‘above’ ground option, but all would have
the same end goals: withstanding the tensile forces caused by the internal pressure, holding up to the
surrounding environment in the long term, and safely protecting the inhabitants. One of the important
considerations that should be accounted for in the design and construction of Martian habitats is
Martian gravity. Since Martian concrete will be subjected to much less gravitational force when
compared to that of Earth, the primary forces that need to be accounted for will likely be tensile forces
caused by the pressurization of the interior living space of the habitats [14]. Numerous Martian habitat
designs proposed in recent years utilize rounder shapes such as a dome, torus, cylinder, cone,
hyperboloid, or egg-like shape because of these tensile forces [8, 15]. Unlike traditional boxy,
rectangular building structures that are designed primarily to withstand the compressive forces caused
by gravity, a rounder shape, if designed properly, offers effective distribution of the tensile forces of
the internal pressure [8, 15]. Moreover, a rounder shaped structure is known to effectively divert the
wind during possible abrasive dust storms, lessening its impact on the integrity of the structure’s
exterior walls [10, 11] by redirecting the wind dust. The ‘above’ ground option, however, does not
provide the level of a natural protective barrier that the underground case walls do. Therefore,
additional measures will need to be taken to protect the inhabitants against the harsh Martian
environment. Basalt and Martian regolith comprising walls are known to provide sufficient radiation
shielding [8]. Adding a plastic layer to these walls would provide extra protection. An alternative
approach to protecting the habitat's interior from radiation and other harmful aspects of the Martian
environment would be an implementation of an outer shell structure separate from the livable interior.
A simply shaped outer structural shell would provide an additional shield for more complex interior
living spaces, allowing for the interior structure to not be directly exposed to the strain of the extreme
temperature fluctuations. This also keeps the inhabitants safe if the outer shell becomes damaged or
breached. One possible redundancy strategy in the case of a wall failure without the use of an outer

© STM Journals 2022. All Rights Reserved 42

3D Printed Martian Habitats and Challenges to Overcome Lee et al.

shell would be to include a basement underneath the structure. The use of additional resources for this
basement can be avoided or minimized with careful construction planning. For example, large
amounts of Martian land will be excavated to gather the construction materials necessary to form the
concrete to build a habitat, and the resulting holes can be converted into basements with the rest of the
habitat built on top of them [15].

Amongst the numerous contests participated by researchers and engineers throughout the world,
Phase III of the 3D-Printed Habitat Centennial Challenge was the ‘On-Site Habitat Competition’ [3,
4]. It consisted of five levels of competition (three construction levels and two virtual levels) requiring
participants to create sub-scale habitats. For the virtual modeling competition, participants were
tasked with BIM software tools to design a habitat that “combines allowances for both the structure
and systems it must contain,” according to [4]. The habitat must include 93 square meters (1000
square feet) of living shelter constructed with a 3D printer and equipped to house four astronauts for
at least one year, in addition to planning for configuring life supporting systems such as spacesuit,
rover hatches, plumbing, mechanical and electrical. Each design was evaluated based upon the habitat
layout, spatial efficiency, programming, scalability, and constructability. The construction levels
involved the 3D printing of elements of their design that eventually resulted in a one-third scale
printed model of the habitat. After three stages and four years of the 3D-Printed Habitat Challenge,
NASA and partner Bradley University selected five finalist teams: Zopherus, AI SpaceFactory, Kahn-
Yates, SEArch+Apis Cor, and Northwestern University [4]. The winning teams’ Martian habitat
proposals are briefly described subsequently.

Team Zopherus’s model (Figure 2) is a modular shelter that consists of multiple latticed domes.
The team proposed to utilize a lander that houses the 3D printer and concrete mixer for constructing
habitats, and autonomous robots for collecting locally available construction materials such as
Martian rocks, calcium oxide, ice, etc. that will be used to produce Martian concrete. The resulting
modular habitats will be a series of hexagonal structures that are optimized to withstand the harsh
Martian environment.

Figure 2. Team Zopherus’s Martian habitat design proposal (source: NASA [4]).

The ‘Marsha’ habitat by the team AI SpaceFactory (Figure 3) is a double-shell, cylindrical structure
constructed with a 3D printer that utilizes a vertical telescoping arm. The outer shell, made out of
biodegradable, reusable thermoplastic mixed with indigenous rock fibers for reinforcement, will
provide an extra protection from the harsh Martian environment to the inhabitants housed inside the
inner shell. Its cylindrical shape is intended to maximize pressurization efficiency and usable floor
area.

Team Kahn Yates’s design (Figure 3) utilizes a prefabricated core that is plopped down from the
lander. Once landed on the ground, the core extends a five-axis 3D printing arm from its top for
constructing the habitat’s foundation and perforated walls using locally collected materials. Secondary
nozzles will simultaneously 3D print a protective layer made out of high density polyethylene
(HDPE) thermoplastic for protecting the habitat from the red planet’s climate and dust storms.

© STM Journals 2022. All Rights Reserved 43

Research & Reviews: Journal of Space Science & Technology
Volume 11, Issue 1
ISSN: 2321-2837 (Online), ISSN: 2321-6506 (Print)

Figure 3. Habitat designs by AI SpaceFactory (left) and Team Kahn Yates (right) (source: NASA
[4]).

Mars ‘X-House V1’ proposed by the team SEArch+Apis Cor (Figure 4) is a dual-shell housing
module constructed from locally harvested materials including thermoplastic, fibrous, and
cementitious materials. It features a pair of interior “inflatable volumes” that can be deployed to the
Martian surface prior to the arrival of human crews and a 3D printed shell for shielding the inflatable
habitats from radiation. Its innovative design allows natural light to filter into the interior to support
inhabitants’ physiological and psychological wellbeing in a long duration mission.

A team from Northwestern University proposed a 3D printable ‘housing pod’ (Figure 4), which is
an inflatable, dome-shaped pressure vessel featuring an inner spherical living space and a protective
outer parabolic shell to shield the habitat from the harsh Martian climate. The team’s intuitive floor
plan attempts to maximize private and common spaces, and resource efficiency. In order to minimize
the resources needed for construction, the team places all ‘wet rooms’ (bathroom, lab, kitchen) along
one side of the shelter.

Figure 4. X-House V1 (left) and Housing Pod (right) (source: NASA [4]).

3D PRINTING TECHNOLOGY
Though the idea of 3D printing has been around since the 1980s, its adaptation and usage are still
considered to be at an early stage [1]. Yet, efforts to develop and advance the 3D printing
technologies have continued, and the list of 3D printable materials has grown from plastics to some
heavy duty materials such as metal and concrete. For a 3D printer to be used in building Martian
habitats, it must be heavy-duty and capable of enduring the extreme environment on Mars. It would
also require a compound system consisting at least of an end nozzle and a mix-pump for 3D printing
and for supplying the concrete mixture, respectively. In terms of its delivery system and printer
apparatus, there are two types of 3D printing modes that can be considered: a frame-type, and a
mobile robotic-arm-type. The frame-type printer (Figure 5) consists of a basic set of a static platform
(or a frame structure), similar to a gantry system, that supports a printer head and electrical and

© STM Journals 2022. All Rights Reserved 44

3D Printed Martian Habitats and Challenges to Overcome Lee et al.

mechanical components. A printer head is typically attached to rails on the frame and moves around
in three axial plains to 3D print a preprogramed object. The frame-type printer has the advantage of
quickly printing the framework for the structure with high precision, allowing for simpler design,
construction and operation. However, its tradeoff is that it requires a large space for installation due to
the physical footprint of the system, takes longer to setup and teardown, and has a limited printing
capability, only capable of three degrees of freedom to handle complex geometries. In addition, the
effective area or size of the structure it can print is limited to the inside dimension of the gantry
system.

An alternative to the frame-type system is a mobile compound robotic-arm 3D printer, which can
take the form of a conventional six-axis robotic arm or a custom-made system. This type of printer
has a concrete extruder mounted on the robot arm effector that can move in six axes to position the
nozzle for material deposition. Because of more achievable geometric complexity and the system’s
mobile capability, the robotic-arm-type 3D printer appears to offer more benefits for building Martian
habitats when compared to the frame-type printer [16]. Its six-axis robotic arm allows for depositing
complex out-of-plane layers in sections rather than printing the entirety of the layer at once. In
addition, by placing a robotic arm and a concrete mixer-pump on a movable platform with all-terrain
wheels or tracks and legs (e.g., caterpillar tracks, robotic legs, etc.), its ability to 3D print in terms of
speed and range will dramatically improve. An example of such a system is a compound robotic 3D
printing system developed by a research team at Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT). The
MIT team’s prototype shown in Figure 5 consists of a track-driven vehicle with a pair of robotic arms
and a flatbed that can carry metal tanks or a concrete mix-pump system [17]. The system features
compound arm systems, known as micro-macro manipulators, which utilize an industrial hydraulic
robotic arm for gross positioning and a smaller electric arm, attached at the end of the larger arm, for
fine-positioning and 3D printing [17]. If needed, it can additionally be equipped with a scoop for
mining local resources or for surface preparation of a construction site. The entire system can be
powered by solar energy and operated electrically. The research team’s ultimate goal is to make the
system automated and self-sufficient so that it can be deployed to a remote place like Mars to
construct structures rapidly [17].

Figure 5. Rendering of a gantry-type 3D printer (left) (source: Lee et al. [1]) and a robotic-arm-type
3D printing system (right) (source: Murray-Nag [18]).

CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS AND MARTIAN CONCRETE

Martian concrete mix and its composition should be carefully designed such that Martian concrete
possesses the properties and characteristics needed to ensure the safety and longevity of the structures
including structural stiffness, durability, radiation blockage, and insulation. Due to the limited payload
the rocket can carry from Earth, the majority of construction materials should be those that can be
locally obtained and/or recycled. Amongst the numerous materials that can be locally extracted on
Mars, sulfur and basalt have received considerable attention in the recent decades. Martian concrete
can be created in the form of melted-basalt, sulfur-regolith, or utilizing both materials. Sulfur is
among the fairly widespread resources on the surface of Mars with a concentration level of

© STM Journals 2022. All Rights Reserved 45

Research & Reviews: Journal of Space Science & Technology
Volume 11, Issue 1
ISSN: 2321-2837 (Online), ISSN: 2321-6506 (Print)

approximately 4% atomic sulfur by weight [19]. Once extracted, sulfur can be mixed with indigenous
Martian regolith and melted down at approximately 121°C (250°F), acting as a binder to produce
Martian concrete. Sulfur-based Martian concrete can be fabricated to become impermeable, and has
properties that naturally block radiation [20]. In addition, it has a low thermal conductivity and a high
frost resistance, allowing it to function more effectively in low Martian temperatures. Although
sulfur-based Martian concrete does not experience shrinkage like conventional concrete does, it can
experience thermal contraction when it cools from a working temperature of 116°C (240°F) to -63°C
(-81°F) on the surface of Mars [20]. Since fluctuating temperatures may cause damaging effects on
the overall strength of the concrete, temperature control must be administered with care during the
curing process to achieve its maximum strength with minimal to no cracking.

Basalt is another abundant material on Mars that was produced as a result of magma extrusions
from lava flows on the planet [15]. As a stone, basalt has natural properties of low permeability and
high strength. It has a low permeability constant of approximately 10-11 and 10-13 depending on the
conditions it is formed under [15, 21]. Basalt concrete can be produced by mining basalt rocks,
melting them at approximately 1100°C (2012°F), and extruding the material out of a 3D printing
device, where it would act as the main concrete [15]. If the walls of a Martian habitat are made of
basalt, its low permeability would allow for the walls to keep out the majority of the toxic atmosphere
and retain the interior pressurization. However, it cannot yet be concluded that the printed materials
alone will be sufficiently impermeable because the exact composition of the basalt native to Mars is
presently unknown. Therefore, a plan to add a secondary layer of protection may be necessary to
ensure that the interior is completely protected.

Basalt can also be used in the form of basalt fibers, which can be incorporated into the concrete mix
as reinforcement to obtain desirable properties. Basalt fibers can be created by melting and extruding
basalt rock into fibers thinner than a human hair [7]. This extrusion method will allow the rock to take
on a crystalline structure, making it much stronger than the amorphous structure of natural basalt. One
of the benefits of using basalt fibers is its ability to withstand the considerable tensile force of a
pressurized structure [22]. Basalt fibers have a tensile strength ranging from approximately 1600 to
2000 MPa (232 to 290 ksi) depending on the form of basalt and how the fibers are fabricated [23]. Its
tensile strength is comparable to that of carbon fiber. Recent studies revealed that basalt fibers are 2.5
times and 1.5 times stronger than steel and glass fibers, respectively (Freitas 2018), and that they can
be used in a wide range of temperatures, from -200 to 600°C (-328 to 1112°F) [23], which are well
within the temperature range on the Martian surface. In addition, the use of basalt fibers would
increase the concrete’s resistance to abrasive dust storms [7]. Presented in Table 1 are the properties
for different types of basalt fibers. In Table 1, SB denotes short basalt fibers; CB1, CB2, and CB3 are
continuous basalt fibers from different manufacturers; and GF is E-glass fibers, which was included
for comparison purpose.

Additional materials can be incorporated into the mix to increase the strength as well as to obtain
other desirable properties of Martian concrete. Examples of such materials are high-density
polyethylene (HDPE) and polylactic acid (PLA) plastics. Both HDPE and PLA can theoretically be
produced on Mars and can be either used within the concrete mix itself, or applied directly to the
structures to seal the walls and ensure that they are completely impermeable [14]. There are two
different ways to obtain HDPE. It can be either supplemented with recycled materials from the
missions or produced from scratch on the planet. To manufacture HDPE on site, methane fuel must be
produced through a chemical reaction utilizing carbon dioxide and subsurface water resources. The
methane fuel is then polymerized, resulting in a usable plastic. Adding the right proportion of HDPE
would provide beneficial properties to the Martian concrete. Its use would improve the concrete’s
ability to block radiation and allow for a non-porous boundary layer to keep the habitat’s interior air-
tight, and shield from potential toxic materials within Martian regolith itself. It can also help insulate
the structure much better than the concrete alone would [14]. It is worthwhile to note, however, that
locally producing HDPE will be energy intensive and would require the use of water.

© STM Journals 2022. All Rights Reserved 46

3D Printed Martian Habitats and Challenges to Overcome Lee et al.

Table 1. Properties and Tensile Test Results of Basalt Fiber (source: Deák and Czigány [23])
Maximum Extension at Tensile Breaking Elastic
Diameter Cross-section Density
Force failure strength strain modulus
Marking

SB 2.66
CB1 2.56
CB2 2.64
CB3 2.63
GF 2.61

PLA is a renewable bioplastic that be extracted from plants and is known to have the lowest
coefficient of thermal expansion among all plastics, making it suitable construction material for the
highly fluctuating temperatures of Mars [6]. Moreover, it has a low conductivity, which is a desirable
property for effectively insulating structures. Though this material is very useful, it would be difficult
to procure on Mars and would require a pre-planning and preliminary missions to grow the plants
necessary to produce the plastics. To avoid the mass transport of raw PLA to Mars, plants would have
to be brought to the planet to be grown and processed on Mars before the material can be effectively
utilized.

CONCLUDING REMARKS
With the rapid advancement of scientific and engineering technologies, the establishment of human
presence on Mars seems to have become within reach. Yet, there still exists too much of the specifics
of the composition and conditions on Mars that are unknown or significantly different from that of
Earth, posing unique challenges to overcome. Thus, the most economical construction materials,
efficient 3D printing technologies as well as innovative habitat designs must be utilized to overcome
these challenges. First, it is not viable to transport construction materials from Earth. Therefore, the
use of locally available materials such as Martian soil and regolith must be extensively explored. In
the event that some materials need to be transported from Earth, they must be a minimum amount,
light weight and less space consuming. Considering the resources available on Mars, the use of sulfur,
basalt, or a combination of both seems practical over other possibilities because Martian concrete can
be produced without the need of water. Yet, because these options are hot-mix based and that Mars is
known to have a high temperature swing, a mechanism by which the mix can be kept heated
throughout the mixing and printing process must be incorporated into the 3D printing system.

When it comes to 3D printing technologies, different 3D printing technology offers different

benefits, challenges and suitability for the varying applications and projects it is used for. For the
Martian habitat project, however, a mobile compound robotic-arm type system appears to be a better
alternative over a gantry-based system in terms of the system’s achievable build volume, as well as its
mobile capability with multi-dimensional extensions that allows for high kinematic flexibility to
fabricate complex structures in varying construction environments. It is important to continue the
effort to recognize the opportunities and limitations to further enhance the system’s capabilities.
These may include adding a secondary robotic arm with a multi-tool capability to allow automated
placement of pre-fabricated reinforcing components into a structure being 3D printed, and integrating
sensors for real-time monitoring of print quality and consistency.

Amongst the numerous Martian habitat designs that have been proposed through the NASA’s 3D-
printed habitat challenge, each design has its own benefits and drawbacks. Thus, further efforts should
be made so that the most efficient design, featuring these various advantageous characteristics, can be
developed before the actual mission takes place. In addition, one of the most important parts of the
Martian habitat is the protection of the interior living space since no human can survive without a
proper protection from the harsh Martian conditions including a high temperature fluctuation, abrasive

© STM Journals 2022. All Rights Reserved 47

Research & Reviews: Journal of Space Science & Technology
Volume 11, Issue 1
ISSN: 2321-2837 (Online), ISSN: 2321-6506 (Print)

dust storms, and deadly solar and cosmic radiation. Thus, such a protective barrier must be designed
and constructed completely airtight with a controlled indoor oxygen level, temperature and air
pressure. Considering the deadly radiation exposure on the Martian surface, an underground habitat
may look like a reasonable solution because constructing the habitat deeper into the Martian soil, the
more efficient it will be in terms of protecting inhabitants from the radiation. However, it may be an
extremely uneconomical and time-consuming construction process (e.g., underground 3D printing). A
better alternative appears to be an ‘above’ (or semi-above) ground habitat that is easy to be 3D printed
and has a safe interior living space with an efficient protective barrier. Sufficient transparent area
should be incorporated in the exterior walls or in the protective barrier (e.g., windows) that would
allow sunlight for growing crops as well as provide a visual connection with the surrounding
landscape to the inhabitants. Another key feature that must be included in the habitat design is a
feeling of ‘home’ that would provide inhabitants with physical and psychological comfort.
Furthermore, other considerations that need to be accounted for include multifunctional space and
possible expansion of the habitat. Finally, the Martian habitat should be designed completely
sustainable. Once built, it must be capable of self-sufficient in energy production and conserving
limited resources such as air, water and other materials with the highest recycling efficiency ever
thought of.

REFERENCES
1. Lee YS, Kim SH, Hischke G. 3D Printing in Concrete Materials and its Applications.
International Journal of Civil and Structural Engineering and Research. 2018; 6 (1): 187–189.
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6015030
2. NASA 2021. STMD: Centennial Challenges. Available from: https://www.nasa.gov/directorates/
spacetech/centennial_challenges/3DPHab/index.html
3. Bradley University 2019. NASA’s 3D-Printed Habitat Challenge–Phase 3. Available from:
https://www.bradley.edu/sites/challenge/
4. NASA 2018. Top Five Teams Win a Share of $100,000 in Virtual Modeling Stage of NASA’s
3D-Printed Habitat Competition. Available from: https://www.nasa.gov/directorates/spacetech/
centennial_challenges/3DPHab/five-teams-win-a-share-of-100000-in-virtual-modeling-stage
5. Staedter T. AI SpaceFactory Wins NASA's 3D-Printed Extraterrestrial Habitats Challenge (IEEE
Spectrum 2019). Available from: https://spectrum.ieee.org/3d-printers-could-build-future-homes-
on-mars
6. AI Spacefactory 2020. Marsha by AI Spacefactory’s MARS Habitat. Available from:
https://www.aispacefactory.com/marsha
7. Freitas FS. Going Mars, the beginning of a printed living machine development of 3D printed
structures with in-situ resources. Master’s Thesis (Universidade do Porto, Portugal, 2018).
https://sigarra.up.pt/faup/pt/pub_geral.pub_view?pi_pub_base_id=303208
8. Fisher GC. Torus or Dome: Which Makes the Better Martian Home, On to Mars-Colonizing a
New World. Proceedings of the 1999 Conventions of the Mars Society (1999).
https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.581.331&rep=rep1&type=pdf
9. Brett AS, Cheng LCH. A Civil Engineering Approach to Development of the Built Martian
Environment. Earth and Space 2014 Conference (2014). https://doi.org/10.1061/
9780784479179.035
10. Leach N. Space Architecture: The new frontier for design research. Architectural Design. 2014;
84 (6): 8–8p. https://doi.org/10.1002/ad.1826
11. McKay DS, Allen CC. Concrete-A Practical Construction Material for Mars: Engineering,
Construction, and Operations in Space V. 5th International Conference on Space (1996).
https://doi.org/10.1061/40177(207)78
12. Muthumanickam N, Park K, Duarte J, Nazarian S. BIM for parametric problem formulation,
optioneering and 4D simulation of 3D printed Martian habitat. 5th Residential Building Design
and Construction Conference. State College, Pennsylvania, March 4–6 (2020).
13. Tithi KN. Mars habitation: Design for extreme condition, Master’s Thesis (Miami University,
2017). http://hdl.handle.net/2374.MIA/6146

© STM Journals 2022. All Rights Reserved 48

3D Printed Martian Habitats and Challenges to Overcome Lee et al.

14. Yashar M, Ciardullo C, Morris M, Pailes_Friedman R, Moses R, Case D. Mars X-House: Design
Principles for an Autonomously 3D-Printed ISRU Surface Habitat. ICES2019. Boston,
Massachusetts, July 7-11 (2019). https://ttu-ir.tdl.org/handle/2346/84478
15. Kading B, Straub J. Utilizing in-Situ Resources and 3D Printing Structures for a Manned Mars
Mission. Acta Astronautica. 2015; 107: 317–10p. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actaastro.2014.11.036
16. Watson ND, Meisel NA, Bilen SG, Duarte J. Large-scale additive manufacturing of concrete
using a 6-axis robotic arm for autonomous habitat construction. 2019 Annual International Solid
Freeform Fabrication Symposium–An Additive Manufacturing Conference. Austin, Texas,
August 12–14 (2019). http://dx.doi.org/10.26153/tsw/17383
17. Keating SJ, Leland JC, Cai L, Oxman N. Toward site-specific and self-sufficient robotic
fabrication on architectural scale. Science Robotics. 2017; 2 (5): 1–16p. http://doi.org/10.1126/
scirobotics.aam8986
18. Murray-Nag B. MIT develops solar-powered rolling robot that can 3D print entire buildings
(Designboom 2017). Available from: https://www.designboom.com/technology/mit-dcp-3d-print-
buildings-04-28-2017
19. Johnson SW. Construction Materials from in-Situ Resources on the Moon and Mars. SPACE
2000: 7th International Conference and Exposition on Engineering, Construction, Operations and
Business in Space. Albuquerque, New Mexico, February 27-March 2 (2020).
20. Loov RE, Vroom AH, Ward MA. Sulfur Concrete-A New Construction Material. PCI Journal.
1974; 19 (1): 86–10p. https://doi.org/10.15554/pcij.01011974.86.95
21. Saar MO, Manga M. Permeability-Porosity Relationship in Vesicular Basalts. Geophysical
Research Letters. 1999; 26 (1): 111–4p. https://doi.org/10.1029/1998GL900256
22. Sim JS, Park CW, Moon DY. Characteristics of basalt fiber as a strengthening material for
concrete structures, Composites Part B: Engineering. 2005; 6 (6–7): 504-9p.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesb.2005.02.002
23. Deák T, Czigány T. Chemical Composition and Mechanical Properties of Basalt and Glass Fibers:
A Comparison. Textile Research Journal. 2009; 79 (7): 645–7p. https://doi.org/10.1177/
0040517508095597

© STM Journals 2022. All Rights Reserved 49