The U.S. Department of Defense has awarded $4.5 million through America Makes’ IMPACT 3.0 project call to push additive manufacturing (AM) into two of the most stubborn pain points in the Defense Industrial Base: casting and forging. Three awards span a “Digital Foundry” track and Wire Arc DED sensing & control, with teams led by Penn State, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, and RTX Technology Research Center. The aim is straightforward and overdue: cut lead times, boost productivity & yields, and de-risk supply chains for critical metal parts across air, land, sea, and munitions.
Why this matters now
If you build ships, engines, missile canisters—or try to repair them in wartime surge—you live and die by castings and forgings. These parts are capital-intensive, labor-scarce, and notoriously long-lead. A single late pump housing, nozzle guide vane, or propulsor component can idle a production line or delay a deployer by months. IMPACT 3.0 explicitly targets these bottlenecks by validating additive-enabled molds, cores, tooling, near-net shapes, and sensing-driven process control as a scalable, repeatable part of the chain—not a lab curiosity. The program is funded by the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense, Manufacturing Technology (OSD ManTech), signaling DoD intent to translate AM into industrial throughput, not one-off prototypes.
The program at a glance
Total funding: $4.5M (IMPACT 3.0)
Sponsor: OUSD(R&E) Manufacturing Technology Office (OSD ManTech)
Administrator: America Makes (National Additive Manufacturing Innovation Institute) & NCDMM
Focus: Demonstrate lead time, productivity, and yield improvements in casting & forging via AM; perform techno-economic analyses to prove business cases
Call released: April 2025; three awards anticipated and selected
Reporting: Teams will brief at America Makes TRX and other technical venues during execution.
The three awards — who won and what they’re tackling
Topic 1 — AM in the Digital Foundry
Team Lead: The Pennsylvania State University
Team: Donsco, 3D Systems, Skuld, Element Materials Technology, Tethon 3D, foundries in Penn State’s Cast Metals Industrial Advisory Committee, Marotta Controls, Parker-Hannifin.
What it means: “Digital foundry” work blends AM with foundry workflows—think printed sand molds/cores, rapid tooling, topology-optimized gating/risers, and metrology-driven feedback loops—to compress weeks into days and tackle complex geometries without re-fixturing the planet. Expect validated guidance on when AM saves time vs. adds cost, and data-backed recipes a foundry can adopt without a PhD.
Topic 2 — Wire Arc DED Process Sensing & Control (two awards)
Team Lead: Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute
Team: GE Aerospace Research, Wason TechnologyTeam Lead: RTX Technology Research Center
Team: FasTech
What it means: Wire Arc Directed Energy Deposition (DED) is a high-deposition, arc-based metal AM method using wire as feedstock. It’s fast and relatively inexpensive—but process variability (bead geometry, porosity, distortion) can undermine repeatability. These projects center on real-time sensing (thermal/optical/acoustic), closed-loop control, and in-situ quality metrics—the difference between lab-nice and production-ready. If successful, they lower rework, stabilize throughput, and unlock near-net forging preforms or repair ops that shave months off sustainment schedules.
Context: this is not a one-off
IMPACT 3.0 follows earlier DoD-backed IMPACT calls (2.0 and prior) that seeded best practices for 3D-printed molds/cores, techno-economic analyses of metal AM, and bridging parts where traditional sourcing is weak. Those earlier tranches totaled $6.6M and $11.7M across multiple topics and consortia—evidence that DoD is iterating toward production-scale adoption, not just funding pilots.
What success looks like (and how we’ll know)
America Makes is asking the right questions: do additive steps measurably move the needle on the metrics that matter to program managers and plant schedulers?
Lead time: Can a printed mold/core/tooling set cut a 16-week schedule to 4–6 weeks consistently?
Productivity: Do printed cores reduce scrap and rework, enabling longer casting runs without stoppages?
Yield: Are first-pass yields and dimensional conformance measurably higher with AM-enabled gating, risers, or WAAM/DED preforms?
Unit cost (TEA): Does the techno-economic analysis (TEA) still show savings when you include consumables, QA, and labor—not just machine time?
The deliverables include not only technical demonstrations but TEA playbooks—how to decide when AM belongs in a foundry/forge flow and when it doesn’t. That’s what unlocks adoption at scale.
Impact by domain
Aerospace engines: AM-assisted investment casting and core complexity for hot-section parts; WAAM/DED for large housings, frames, cases, and repair.
Shipbuilding: Cast/forged propulsors, pump housings, valve bodies, and complex manifolds with long qualification cycles—prime candidates for AM-enabled tooling and preforms.
Ground combat systems: Forged suspension components and cast transmission housings could see schedule relief via AM tooling and rapid pattern iteration.
Missiles & munitions: Complex nozzles, liners, domes—pattern/tooling lead times dominate; AM shortens the critical path.
(Analyst’s note: these are the classes of parts where DoD surge demand collides with foundry/forge capacity—and where AM can best compress time-to-hardware.)
What could go wrong (and how to de-risk it)
The “valley of death” — TRL 6–7 demos that don’t cross into line-rate production.
Mitigation: Early OEM/prime involvement (GE Aerospace, RTX) and TRX reporting tie results to real qualification pathways.
Qualification drag — certifying AM-touched cast/forge parts can take longer than making them.
Mitigation: Bake materials allowables, NDE protocols, and process windows into deliverables; use consortia data to accelerate consensus.
Unit cost surprise — AM looks cheap in a slide but loses to a mature foundry line at scale.
Mitigation: Techno-economic analysis with realistic labor, QA, scrap, and energy inputs—not just machine hour rates.
Supply chain gaps — powder/wire feedstocks, sand/binder availability, post-processing chokepoints.
Mitigation: Tie projects to domestic suppliers and ensure dual-sourcing for critical consumables.
Signals from the ecosystem
Trade media and regional outlets covering the awards emphasize the casting/forging focus, the $4.5M envelope, and the named teams—a level of specificity that helps industry track who is solving which problem and suggests rapid knowledge transfer to a broader base of foundries and forges.
America Makes’ own timeline confirms IMPACT 3.0 as a follow-on to earlier, larger calls (including $11.7M under prior IMPACT topics) and runs in parallel with other micro-calls (e.g., AACAMS at $450K) to address composites and other niches—proof of a portfolio approach rather than a monolith.
Analyst’s take: why this tranche could actually move the needle
Many AM announcements stall in prototype purgatory. IMPACT 3.0 is different for three reasons:
It targets bottlenecks everyone feels (molds/cores, preforms, repair, NDE), not exotic one-offs.
It bakes in TEA to kill hype and justify adoption to CFOs and program offices.
It puts primes and Tier-1s in the room (GE Aerospace Research, RTX), shortening the quals path.
If the teams demonstrate repeatable lead-time compression and publish portable process windows, expect rapid spillover to Navy shipbuilding and aerospace engine sustainment, where foundry/forge availability routinely gates delivery.
What to watch next
First TRX briefings: Look for baseline vs. delta on lead time, yield, and cost—and NDE sign-offs.
Down-selects into OEM programs: Movement from demo to engineering change orders (ECOs) inside primes.
Standards & data models: Any progress toward standardized QA datasets (thermal histories, bead geometries) that purchasing agents will accept.
Follow-on funding: Continuity is everything; expect targeted scale-up calls if metrics are strong.
Sources (key)
Official announcement + winners list (America Makes/NCDMM): awards, teams, goals, TRX reporting.
Manufacturing USA notice: objectives and April 2025 call information.
Regional coverage (Business Journal Daily): topic breakdowns and partner rosters.
Prior IMPACT calls for context: scope and funding history.
