startup-tips
Sign in
UpcomingR&D programAuto-collected, not reviewed

Computational Frameworks for the Development and Qualification of Additive Manufacturing-Tailored Wire Feedstock for Naval Directed Energy Deposition

🇺🇸 United States·U.S. Department of War — NAVY(Government)
Funding
Needs verification
Deadline
2027.01.06
D-61
Official noticeApplyOverseas applicants not eligible ExportPDF

Overview

What you need to judge this in 30 seconds

STTR · Phase: BOTH · Topic DON27TZ02-NV013 · Solicitation 27.TZ

As the Department of the Navy prepares for contested logistics environments, the ability to manufacture large, mission-critical replacement parts at the point of need has become a strategic imperative. Wire-fed DED is uniquely suited to this role: it operates safely with reactive metal alloys, achieves high deposition rates for large structural volumes, and is robust enough for shipboard and expeditionary deployment. Despite this operational advantage, a persistent and quantifiable performance gap prevents wire DED parts from meeting Navy structural qualification standards without extensive post-processing. The root cause of this gap is a thermal physics and geometric mismatch. Additive manufacturing (AM) processes span approximately five orders of magnitude in solidification cooling rate, which is the master variable governing grain size, phase selection, and precipitate morphology. Current wire feedstock is manufactured to welding wire specifications, engineered for arc welding thermal histories rather than the specific precision and cooling rates of robotic DED. The consequences are well-documented: • Microstructural Deficits: Precipitation-strengthened aluminum alloys exhibit a 40-70% yield strength reduction in DED compared to laser powder bed fusion, driven by insufficient cooling rates to nucleate strengthening dispersoids. Titanium alloys (e.g., Ti-6Al-4V) develop continuous grain boundary alpha films that degrade ductility and fatigue life. • Residual Stress Instability: Residual stresses retained from the wire drawing process cause wire tip instability (cast/helix) in the DED melt zone, producing porosity and build failures. • Geometric and Surface Topography: Macroscopic inconsistencies in wire diameter dictate volumetric feed-rate errors, causing fluctuating energy-to-mass ratios in the melt pool. Simultaneously, surface roughness (poor smoothness) induces micro-stuttering in the robotic feed conduit and scatters laser impingement, severely destabilizing thermal absorption. No existing ICME framework addresses these deficiencies upstream of the melt pool—every published AM modelling chain begins at deposition, leaving the wire manufacturing sub-chain entirely unmodelled. The Navy seeks a comprehensive end-to-end computational framework that closes this gap through alloy-process co-optimization. Proposers should develop a model chain that links the entire wire feedstock lifecycle—from primary alloy synthesis and thermomechanical processing through final drawing and surface conditioning—directly to AM deposition dynamics and deposit properties. This model must account for the coupled effects of advanced state variables (e.g., dislocation density, oxide thickness). The framework should incorporate Artificial Intelligence/Machine Learning (AI/ML) surrogate models that consume upstream feedstock history to predict how a specific wire lot will respond to DED thermal conditions and should employ AI-guided experimental design to identify the minimum number of physical tests required to achieve robust statistical qualification. The ultimate deliverable is a computational materials passport: a traceable digital record linking a wire lot's manufacturing history to its predicted and validated AM performance, supporting the Navy's Digital Engineering Strategy and enabling condition-based qualification for fleet sustainment.

Category
R&D
Industry
Manufacturing, Energy & Climate
Technology
Needs verification
Target stage
Needs verification
Project duration
Needs verification
Estimated preparation
Needs verification

Funding

Award size and how it is paid

Award range
Needs verification
Currency
USD
Total programme budget
Needs verification
Support type
Needs verification
Co-funding
Needs verification
Matching fund
Needs verification
Disbursement
Needs verification
Note
-

Eligibility

Can we actually apply?

Check whether we can applyEnter where you are incorporated, how old you are and how big — we compare it against this announcement and tell you what would unlock it. No sign-in needed.

SBIR/STTR 은 미국 중소기업만 지원할 수 있습니다(Small Business Act 법정 요건). • 계열사를 포함해 상시 종업원 500명 이하 • 미국 시민 또는 영주권자 1인 이상이 50%를 초과해 직접 소유·지배 • 미국 내 사업장을 두고 주로 미국 내에서 사업을 영위할 것 • 수행책임자(PI)의 주된 근무처가 신청 기업일 것 출처: https://www.sbir.gov/faq/eligibility-requirements

Company age
Needs verification
Employees
0명 ~ 500명
Revenue limits
Needs verification
Consortium
Needs verification

Location Requirements

Geography and legal-entity conditions

Primary country
🇺🇸 United States
Also eligible
None
Foreign companies
No
Local entity
Required
Location condition
미국 내 사업장을 두고 미국 시민·영주권자가 50%를 초과해 소유한 중소기업만 신청할 수 있습니다(법정 요건).

Required Documents

Required/optional · issuer · difficulty · validity · cautions

Document requirements were not captured (needs verification). Check the official announcement.

Application Process

How you apply

Application process not captured.

Evaluation

Review process and criteria

Evaluation process not captured.

Timeline

Announcement → intake → review → agreement → execution

Process steps were not captured.

Equity & Financial Terms

Equity, loans and contract conditions

Equity required
Needs verification
Loan
Non-dilutive grant
Duplicate funding
Needs verification
IP ownership
Needs verification
Deliverable ownership
Needs verification
Exclusivity
Needs verification
Right of first refusal
Needs verification
Audit & settlement
Needs verification

Risk Intelligence

Should we apply at all? — five dimensions plus an overall score (lower is safer)

No risk assessment yet. Re-analyse from Admin.

IP / Idea Protection

How much of your technology and idea you must disclose

No IP assessment yet.

AI Analysis

Pros · cons · difficulty · competition · attractiveness

Preparation difficultyNeeds verification

From paperwork and review stages

Competition (estimate)Needs verification

Heuristic from award size and type

AttractivenessNeeds verification

Amount, terms and IP combined

Overall riskNeeds verification

Weighted average of five dimensions

Pros
  • Needs verification
Cons
  • Needs verification
Cautions
  • Nothing flagged

Similar Programs

Comparable by type, country and technology

Source & Provenance

Every value carries its source URL and fetch time

Last fetched
2026.11.06
Human review
Not reviewed — check the official announcement
First seen
2026.11.06
Data status
Auto-collected, not reviewed
AI enrichment
Needs verification
Snapshot history
  • · 4h ago — 최초 수집 (6918e5ee)