ML18221A109

NUREG/CP-0310, Proceedings of the Public Meeting on Additive Manufacturing for Reactor Materials and Components.

ML18221A109
Person / Time
Issue date:	05/18/2018
From:	Jason Christensen, Harris B, Amy Hull, Carol Moyer Office of New Reactors, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, NRC/RES/DE
To:
Jason A. Chistensen
References
NUREG/CP-0310
Download: ML18221A109 (383)

Text

NUREG/CP-0310 Proceedings of the Public Meeting on Additive Manufacturing for Reactor Materials and Components Held at NRC Headquarters, Rockville, MD November 28-29, 2017 Manuscript Completed: May 18, 2018 Date Published: XXXX 2018 Prepared by Amy Hull, Carol Moyer, Jason Christensen, and Brian Harris Division of Engineering Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research US Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington DC 20555 Sponsored by:

Division of Construction Inspection and Operational Programs Office of New Reactors U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555

ii ABSTRACT The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commissions (NRCs) Offices of Nuclear Regulatory Research (RES), Nuclear Reactor Regulation (NRR) and New Reactors (NRO) organized this Workshop on Additive Manufacturing for Reactor Materials & Components (AM-RMC). The workshop was held November 28-29, 2017, at NRC Headquarters, 11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland.

The NRC had been earlier informed in mid-2017 that reactor components made by additive manufacturing (AM), and especially by powder bed fusion/direct metal laser melting (DMLM)/sintering, were being considered for applications in the operating fleet as early as calendar year 2018. Given the anticipated level of activity, the objectives for this public meeting were to:

(1) Engage with industry and Government counterparts to obtain information needed for anticipated licensing actions related to AM.

(2) Address topics such as:

• The state-of-the-art of AM

• Industry activities in AM

• Irradiation testing & effects on AM

• AM qualification

• Standards for AM

• Nondestructive evaluation (NDE) of components fabricated using AM

• American AM activity in international context

• Cyber-security for AM

• Regulatory perspectives

• Computer modeling

• AM in nuclear fuel iii

iv TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT ................................................................................................................... III TABLE OF CONTENTS.................................................................................................. V ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS .......................................................................... VII

1. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................... 1-1

2. WORKSHOP AGENDA .................................................................................... 2-1

3. SELECTED HIGHLIGHTS FROM PAPERS AND DISCUSSIONS ................... 3-1

4. PROCEEDINGS ................................................................................................ 4-1 Opening Remarks (Michael Weber, NRC)................................................................. 4-1 Introduction (Rob Tregoning, NRC) ........................................................................... 4-3 AM for Reactor Materials & Components: Industry Perspective (Mark RIchter, NEI) ................................................................................................... 4-4 ICME & Process Monitoring for Component Qualification via LPB-AM (Dave Gandy, EPRI) ............................................................................................... 4-11 Regulatory Considerations for AM Qualification and status of FAA AM Roadmap (Michael Gorelik, FAA)............................................................................ 4-28 Industry Insights - Cybersecurity for Additive Manufacturing (Scott Zimmerman, CTC) ........................................................................................ 4-43 Reflections on Fatigue for AM Components. (Bill Mohr, EWI) ................................. 4-56 Selecting the Correct Material and Technology for Metal AM Applications.

(Frank Medina, EWI) ............................................................................................... 4-67 Evaluation of Additively Manufactured Materials for NPP Components.

(Myles Connor, GEH) .............................................................................................. 4-91 The Big Picture Vision for AM in Nuclear Industry (Zeses Karoutas, WEC) ......... 4-107 Current Westinghouse Efforts (Bill Cleary, WEC) .................................................. 4-111 Laboratory Testing & Evaluation of Unirradiated and Neutron Irradiated Additively Manufactured Alloys (Paula Freyer, WEC) ............................................ 4-120 Additive Manufacturing for Nuclear Components (George Pabis and Craig Gramlich, Novatech) ............................................................................................. 4-134 Additive Manufacturing for Reactor Materials and Components (Steven Wolbert, NuScale Power) ...................................................................................... 4-151 Metal Additive Manufacturing Innovations (Brian Matthews, AddiTec) .................. 4-157 Analysis of Seeded Defects in Laser Additive Manufactured 300M Steel (Shannon Farrell, DRDC) ...................................................................................... 4-166 Rolls-Royce Nuclear Developments in AM. (Dave Poole, Rolls-Royce) ................ 4-179 Additive Manufacturing Initiatives (Alison Hahn, DOE-NE AMM) ........................... 4-184 GAIN Gateway for Accelerated Innovation in Nuclear (Andrew Worrall, ORNL) .... 4-190 AM Qualification Paradigm Similarities for Fuel and Components (Isabella van Rooyen, INL).................................................................................... 4-197 Comparisons between 316L SS made using Multiple LPBF Systems (Sam Pratt, NSWC)............................................................................................... 4-213 Qualification and Certification of Metallic Components for NAVSEA (Justin Rettaliata, NAVSEA) .................................................................................. 4-220 Informatics in AM Qualification: Incorporating Databases, Simulation, & Analysis v

(Paul Witherell, NIST) ........................................................................................... 4-225 Ultrasonic Additive Manufacturing & other AM Processes for Nuclear Component Manufacture (S. Suresh Babu, ORNL/UTK).......................................................... 4-238 Standardization in Additive Manufacturing: Challenges in Structural Integrity Assurance (Doug Wells, NASA-MSFC) ................................................................. 4-247 NDE & Inspection Challenges for Additively Manufactured Components (Jess Waller, NASA-WSTF) .................................................................................. 4-256 Measurement Science for Metals-Based Additive Manufacturing (Kevin Jurrens, NIST) ........................................................................................... 4-280 America Makes and ANSI Additive Manufacturing Standardization Collaborative (AMSC) (Jim McCabe, ANSI) ............................................................................... 4-294 ASME Additive Manufacturing Standards (Kate Hyam, ASME) ............................. 4-308 BPTCS/BNCS Special Committee on use of Additive Manufacturing (Dave Rudland, NRC) ........................................................................................... 4-317 The Status of Global Additive Manufacturing Standardization to Support Q&C (Mohsen Seifi, ASTM) ........................................................................................... 4-320 Topics of Interest for AM of Reactor Materials and Components (Allen Hiser, NRC) ................................................................................................ 4-351

5.

SUMMARY

........................................................................................................ 5-1

6. WORKSHOP ATTENDEES .............................................................................. 6-1 vi

ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS AIA Aerospace Industry Association AM Additive manufacturing AMAFT Additive Manufacturing as an Alternative Fabrication Technique AM-RMC Additive Manufacturing for Reactor Materials & Components AMC Additive Manufacturing Consortium AMM Advanced Methods for Manufacturing AMMD Additive Manufacturing Materials Database (NIST).

AMSC Additive Manufacturing Standardization Collaborative ANSI American National Standards Institute AR Advanced reactors ASME American Society of Mechanical Engineers ASTM American Society for Testing and Materials BNCS Board of Nuclear Codes and Standards (ASME)

BOP Balance of Plant BPTCS Board on Pressure Technology Codes and Standards (ASME)

CANM Center for Advanced Nuclear Manufacturing (CTC)

CMB Corrosion & Metallurgy Branch (in NRC/RES)

CF Corrosion fatigue CFCG Corrosion fatigue crack growth CMTR Certified mill test report CT Computed Tomography CTC Concurrent Technologies Corporation CUI controlled unclassified information (CUI)

DED Directed energy deposition DDM Direct digital manufacturing DMD Direct metal deposition DMLR Division of Materials & License Renewal (in NRC/NRR)

DMLM Direct metal laser melting DMLS Direct metal laser sintering DOD Department of Defense DOE- NE/ AMM Department of Energy Office of Nuclear Energy AMM DRDC Defence Research and Development Canada EPRI Electric Power Research Institute EWI Previously known as Edison Welding Institute FAA Federal Aviation Administration FAR Federal Acquisition Regulation FSH Full Screen Height GAIN Gateway for Accelerated Innovation in Nuclear GAMA General Aviation Manufacturers Association GEH General Electric Hitachi HIP Hot isostatic pressing HTGR High temperature gas reactor IASCC Irradiation Assisted Stress Corrosion Cracking ICME Integrated Computational Materials Engineering INL Idaho National Laboratory IR Infrared LAM Laser additive manufacturing LOF Lack of Fusion vii

LPB-AM Laser Powder Bed - Additive Manufacturing LPBF Laser Powder Bed Fusion MARPA Modification and Replacement Parts Association MDF Manufacturing Demonstration Facility, ORNL MMPDS Metallic Materials Properties Development and Standardization MRL Manufacturing Readiness Level MSR Molten salt reactor MVIB Vessels & Internals Branch (in MRC/NRR)

NARA National Archives and Records Administration NASA National Aeronautics and Space Administration NASA-JSC WSTF NASA - Johnson Space Center White Sands Test Facility NASA-MSFC NASA - Marshall Space Flight Center NAVSEA Naval Sea Systems Command NDE Nondestructive evaluation NDI Nondestructive inspection NEET Nuclear Energy Enabling Technologies (DOE program)

NEI Nuclear Energy Institute NF Nuclear fuels NIST National Institute of Standards and Technology NNES National Nuclear Energy Strategy NPM Nuclear plant module NPP Nuclear Power Plant NRC Nuclear Regulatory Commission NRR Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation in NRC NSUF Nuclear Science User Facilities (DOE)

NSWC Naval Surface Warfare Center, Carderock Division OE Operating experience OEM Original equipment manufacturers ORNL Oak Ridge National Laboratory PBF Powder bed fusion PM-HIP Powder metallurgy hot isostatic pressing PWHT Post-weld heat treatment Q&C Qualification & certification RES Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research (in NRC)

RR Rolls Royce SA Surface annealing SBIR Small Business Innovative Research SCC Stress corrosion cracking SMR Small modular reactors TPD Thimble plugging device TRL Technology Readiness Level TVA Tennessee Valley Authority TWG Technology working group (under GAIN)

UAM Ultrasonic additive manufacturing UTK University of Tennessee, Knoxville WEC Westinghouse Electric Company vii

1. INTRODUCTION This NUREG/CP document is designed to summarize the presentations and discussions at an AM-RMC international workshop on November 28-29, 2017 at the NRC Headquarters office in Rockville, MD. Papers associated with the presentations are included, along with brief summary reports for papers within the four sessions of the workshop, which were organized to assess: (1) State-of-the-art of AM, (2) Industry activities in AM, (3) Irradiation testing and effects on AM, (4) AM qualification, (5) Standards for AM, (6) Nondestructive evaluation of components fabricated using AM, (7) American AM activity in international context, (8) cybersecurity of the manufacturing process, (9) Regulatory perspectives on AM, (10) Computer modeling, and (11)

AM in nuclear fuel. It is imperative that the NRC utilize these papers and continue the sharing of information across agencies and private industry when developing regulations for the use of AM components in nuclear applications. The next page of this introduction contains a summary table of the presenters, their company or agency, and the topic(s) on which they presented and have significant knowledge. This table should be used as a guide when gathering information and is not considered a complete representation of the capabilities and knowledge of each presenter.

The views and opinions presented in this report are those of the individual participants and publication of this report does not necessarily constitute NRC approval or agreement with the information contained herein. As such, these proceedings are not a substitute for NRC regulations. Rather, the approaches and methods described in these proceedings and the recommendations from the discussions are provided for information only, and compliance is not required. Moreover, use of product or trade names herein is for identification purposes only and does not constitute endorsement by the NRC.

1-1

Table 1:

Technical Areas of Additive Manufacturing Presentations at November Public Workshop on AM-RMC State of Art Industry Irradiation AM Standards Organization/Speaker of AM Activities Testing & qualifica for AM NDE Processes Effects tion NEI (Mark Richter)

EPRI (Dave Gandy)

FAA (Michael Gorelik)

CTC (Scott Zimmerman)

EWI (Bill Mohr)

EWI (Frank Medina)

GEH (Myles Connor)

WEC (Zeses Karoutas)

WEC (Bill Cleary)

WEC (Paula Freyer)

Novatech (C. Gramlich)

NuScalePower (S. Wolbert)

DRDC (Shannon Farrell)

RollsRoyce (Dave Poole)

DOE (Alison Hahn)

ORNL (Andrew Worrall)

INL (Isabella van Rooyen)

NSWC (Sam Pratt)

NAVSEA (Justin Rettaliata)

NIST (Paul Witherell)

ORNL/UTK (Suresh Babu)

NASA/MSFC (Doug Wells)

NASA/WSTF (Jess Waller)

NIST (Kevin Jurrens)

ANSI (Jim McCabe)

ASME (Kate Hyam)

ASTM (Mohsen Seifi)

NRC/NRR (Dave Rudland)

NRC/NRR (Allen Hiser) 1-2

Table 1 contd:

Technical Areas of Additive Manufacturing Presentations at November Public Workshop on AM-RMC Degradation American/ Cyber- Regulatory Computer Nuclear Organization/Speaker in AM international security Perspective Modeling Fuel components context s NEI (Mark Richter)

EPRI (Dave Gandy)

FAA (Michael Gorelik)

CTC (Scott Zimmerman)

EWI (Bill Mohr)

EWI (Frank Medina)

GEH (Myles Connor)

WEC (Zeses Karoutas)

WEC (Bill Cleary)

WEC (Paula Freyer)

Novatech (C. Gramlich)

NuScalePower (S. Wolbert)

DRDC (Shannon Farrell)

RollsRoyce (Dave Poole)

DOE (Alison Hahn)

ORNL (Andrew Worrall)

INL (Isabella van Rooyen)

NSWC (Sam Pratt)

NAVSEA (Justin Rettaliata)

NIST (Paul Witherell)

ORNL/UTK (Suresh Babu)

NASA/MSFC (Doug Wells)

NASA/WSTF (Jess Waller)

NIST (Kevin Jurrens)

ANSI (Jim McCabe)

ASME (Kate Hyam)

ASTM (Mohsen Seifi)

NRC/NRR (Dave Rudland)

NRC/NRR (Allen Hiser) 1-3

2. WORKSHOP AGENDA Table 2:

Tuesday, November 28, 2017 Industry Activities and Perspectives Time Presentation (#)/Title Organization- Presenter (Session 1 Moderator: Amy Hull, NRC) 0800 (1.00) Opening Remarks. NRC - Mike Weber 0815 (1.0) NRCs AM Workshop: Meeting Logistics. NRC - Rob Tregoning 0830 (1.1) AM for Reactor Materials & Components: Industry Perspective. NEI - Mark Richter 0900 (1.2) ICME & Process Monitoring for Component Qualification via LPB-AM. EPRI - Dave Gandy 0930 (1.3) Regulatory Considerations for AM Qualification and status of FAA AM FAA - Michael Gorelik Roadmap.

1000 Break 1030 (1.4) Industry Insights - Cybersecurity for Additive Manufacturing. CTC - Scott Zimmerman 1100 (1.5) Reflections on Fatigue for AM Components. EWI - Bill Mohr 1130 (1.6) Selecting the Correct Material and Technology for Metal AM EWI - Frank Medina Applications.

1200 Lunch (Session 2 Moderator: Carol Moyer, NRC) 1300 (2.1) Evaluation of Additively Manufactured Materials for NPP Components. GEH - Myles Connor 1330 (2.2) The Big Picture Vision for AM in Nuclear Industry. WEC - Zeses Karoutas 1340 (2.3) Current Westinghouse Efforts. WEC - Bill Cleary 1410 (2.4) Laboratory Testing & Evaluation of Unirradiated and Neutron Irradiated WEC - Paula Freyer Additively Manufactured Alloys.

1430 (2.5) Additive Manufacturing for Nuclear Components. Novatech - George Pabis; Craig Gramlich 1500 Break 1510 (2.6) Additive Manufacturing for Reactor Materials & Components. NuScale Power - Steve Wolbert 1540 (2.7) Metal Additive Manufacturing Innovations. AddiTec - Brian Matthews 1555 (2.8) Analysis of Seeded Defects in Laser Additive Manufactured 300M Steel DRDC -Shannon Farrell 1620 Summarize Day 1, Discussion, Capture Action Items NRC & Participants 1630 Time Allowed for Public Comments Public & NRC 1700 Adjourn for Day NRC 2-1

Wednesday, November 29, 2017 Government Agency Initiatives Time Presentation (#)/Title Organization - Presenter (Session 3 Moderator: Christopher Hovanec, NRC) 0800 Summary of Day 1; Objectives & Guidance for Day 2 NRC 0815 (3.1) Rolls-Royce Nuclear Developments in AM. Rolls-Royce - Dave Poole 0835 (3.2) Additive Manufacturing Initiatives. DOE-NE AMM - Alison 0900 (3.3) GAIN Gateway for Accelerated Innovation in Nuclear. ORNL- Andrew Worrall 0920 (3.4) AM Qualification Paradigm Similarities for Fuel & Components. INL - Isabella van Rooyen 0945 Break 1000 (3.5) Comparisons between 316L SS made using Multiple LPBF Systems. NSWC - Sam Pratt 1030 (3.6) Qualification & Certification of Metallic Components for NAVSEA. NAVSEA - Justin 1100 (3.7) Informatics in AM Qualification: Incorporating Databases, Simulation & NIST - Paul Witherell Analysis.

1130 (3.8) Ultrasonic Additive Manufacturing & other AM Processes for Nuclear ORNL/UTK - S. Suresh Component Manufacture. Babu 1200 Lunch (Session 4 Moderator: Rob Tregoning, NRC) 1300 (4.1) Standardization in Additive Manufacturing: Challenges in Structural NASA-MSFC - Doug Integrity Assurance. Wells 1330 (4.2) NDE & Inspection Challenges for Additively Manufactured Components. NASA-WSTF - Jess 1400 (4.3) Measurement Science for Metals-Based Additive Manufacturing. NIST - Kevin Jurrens 1430 (4.4) America Makes & ANSI Additive Manufacturing Standardization ANSI - Jim McCabe Collaborative (AMSC).

1500 (4.5) ASME Additive Manufacturing Standards. ASME-Kate Hyam 1520 Break 1530 (4.6) BPTCS/BNCS Special Committee on Use of Additive Manufacturing. NRC - Dave Rudland 1545 (4.7) The Status of Global Additive Manufacturing Standardization to Support ASTM - Mohsen Seifi Q&C.

1615 (4.8) Topics of Interest for AM of Reactor Materials & Components. NRC - Allen Hiser 1630 Discussion Participants 1645 Time Allowed for Public Comments Public and NRC 1700 Adjourn Meeting NRC 2-2

3. SELECTED HIGHLIGHTS FROM PAPERS AND DISCUSSIONS On November 28-29, 2017, the Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research (RES), Division of Engineering (DE), hosted the first Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) Workshop on Additive Manufacturing (AM) for Reactor Materials and Components (RMC). As shown in Section 2, the NRC AM-RMC Workshop included a keynote address by the RES Office Director, Michael Weber, as well as presentations by representatives from American and international industry, members of the NRC staff, the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) and its Additive Manufacturing Standardization Collaborative (AMSC), the American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME), the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM), the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI), the Department of Defense (DoD) facilities, Department of Energy (DOE) and National Laboratories, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI), and the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST).

This was the first NRC AM-RMC workshop. It included discussions on such issues as:

(1) The state-of-the-art of AM, (2) Industry activities in AM, (3) Irradiation testing and effects on AM, (4) AM qualification, (5) Standards for AM, (6) Nondestructive evaluation of components fabricated using AM, (7) American AM activity in international context, (8) cybersecurity of the manufacturing process, (9) Regulatory perspectives on AM, (10) Computer modeling, and (11)

AM in nuclear fuel. Proceedings of presentations are included in Section 4. All presentation materials are also available in the NRCs Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) at accession number ML17338880.

The audience included approximately 120 attendees representing companies and organizations from 5 countries, including vendors, industry groups, Government regulatory agencies, and both foreign and domestic utilities (see Section 6).

Tuesday Morning Session Amy Hull, Senior Materials Engineer, Corrosion and Metallurgy Branch (RES/DE/CMB) moderated the first session and introduced the speakers of the morning session (see Section 4, presentations 4.1-4.8). The first speaker, Michael Weber, Director of RES, mentioned that representatives of the nuclear industry, including licensees and vendors, had notified NRC that parts made using direct metal laser melting/sintering may be used in the operating nuclear power plant fleet as early as 2018 and he remarked that NRC was interested in understanding industry plans and the opportunities that industry sees for the use of additive manufacturing in civilian nuclear applications. NRCs collective objective is to ensure that if such parts and materials are used in NPPs, they are used safely and securely. To accomplish this objective, NRC needs to have sufficient information about the safety characteristics and associated monitoring of parts and materials manufactured using additive manufacturing.

Rob Tregoning, Technical Advisor for Materials Engineering, next gave an overview of the meeting logistics and objectives. The primary objectives were to (1) understand the nuclear industrys near-term and long-term strategy and plans for implementing additive manufacturing; (2) discuss opportunities, challenges, and approaches for utilizing additive manufacturing for safety-critical components in other (non-nuclear) industries in both near and long-term; and (3) identify current standardization activities, recognized gaps, and future plans.

3-1

Mark Richter, Senior Project Manager-Fuel and Decommissioning Programs at the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI), gave an industry perspective on additive manufacturing for reactor materials and components. Dr. Richter noted that additive manufacturing has established a decade-long track record serving secondary side and balance of plant (BOP) component needs. He reviewed the National Nuclear Energy Strategy (NNES) and its objectives to preserve, sustain, innovate, and thrive. Within the objective to innovate, commercialize, and deploy new nuclear, the possibility exists to deploy low-risk AM fuel assembly components in a reactor by 2018. He concluded by saying the industry challenge was to develop innovative approaches to refine the manufacturing process, minimize investment and production costs, and work collaboratively with regulatory and consensus standards bodies to achieve acceptance for broad use. Efficiency gained today supports a platform for future new nuclear deployment. In response to a question about the existence of a list of components where the nuclear industry has begun work and any operating experience (OE), Dr. Richter said he did not know of such. He mentioned that he expects fuel applications to come much sooner than pressure-retaining parts.

Dave Gandy, Technical Executive in EPRIs Nuclear Materials area, discussed integrated computational materials engineering (ICME) & process monitoring for qualification of nuclear components of laser powder bed (LPB) AM. He discussed the results of the first year of a 3-year project funded by DOE Advanced Methods for Manufacturing (AMM) [working collaboratively with the ORNL Manufacturing Demonstration Facility (MDF, https://www.ornl.gov/mdf)]. Examples Dr. Gandy presented for nuclear applications for AM focused on reactor internals and fuel assembly components. A major anticipated deliverable is developing ICME process analytical methods to fuse the modeling, process, in-situ and ex-situ characterization data through Dream3d architecture. If the ICME and in-situ process monitoring qualification methodology for AM components are proven effective, these methodologies will be documented for ASME Code and NRC acceptance. During the discussion, mention was made of controlling defects and the use of hot isostatic pressing (HIP) to treat open and closed voids.

Michael Gorelik, FAA Chief Scientific and Technical Advisor for Fatigue and Damage Tolerance, led the effort to develop the agencys first strategic roadmap for AM. He mentioned that risk factors for AM deployment included surface quality, microstructure variability, powder control, process control, and HIP effectiveness. AM challenges to be addressed include limited understanding of acceptable ranges of variation for key manufacturing parameters, limited understanding of key failure mechanisms and material anomalies, lack of industry databases/allowables, development of capable NDE methods, lack of industry specifications and standards, and new design space. He used the Wohlers Report as a sanity check for the AM Roadmap content and emphasized that collaboration among industry, agencies, and technical societies (such as ASTM, AWS, etc) is needed to ensure safe introduction of AM in major industry sectors. FAA does not anticipate rule changes for AM, but specific guidance documents & policies are expected to be needed. Dr. Gorelik also mentioned DOT/FAA/TC-18/3, Proceedings from the Joint FAA - Air Force Workshop (FAA CSTA Workshop)

Qualification/Certification of Metal Additively Manufactured Parts as a helpful reference.

Scott Zimmerman, the Chief Information Security Officer / Principal Cybersecurity Engineer at Concurrent Technologies Corporation (CTC) discussed the main AM security challenges as being related to loss or theft of intellectual property, compromised process and/or product integrity, productivity disruption, and damage to reputation. The main message was to build in cybersecurity, dont bolt it on at the end. NIST issued cyber safeguards (Special Publication 800-171) in June 2015 to protect controlled unclassified information (CUI) in non-federal information systems. A General FAR Rule is in development that will obligate all 3-2

federal agencies to require cyber protection of CUI, per SP 800-171, in all contracts and agreements.

Mr. Zimmerman also gave an overview of CTCs new Center for Advanced Nuclear Manufacturing (CANM) established in Johnstown, PA in 2017 to utilize existing metalworking capabilities to establish a self-sustaining global resource to develop and deploy applied metalworking and manufacturing capabilities to advance design, fabrication and operation for Small Modular Reactors (SMRs) and Advanced Reactors (ARs). CANM will provide manufacturing and demonstration facilities to support the fabrication and testing of functional prototype systems.

Bill Mohr, a Principal Engineer in the Structural Integrity Group of EWI (https://ewi.org/,

formerly known as the Edison Welding Institute), discussed the issue of fatigue for AM components. He showed that testing of additively-manufactured metal pieces has shown a wide variety of results for many investigators. Categorizing the results according to general, surface, and sub-surface flaws allows the data to be put in more coherent groups and compared across processes. This method also allows better estimation of the effect of post fabrication treatments, such as machining, HIPing, and heat treatment. Optimization of the deposition method to limit pores and regions of incomplete fusion is needed to allow further substantial improvements due to surface finishing and PWHT. While HIPing can overcome some of these imperfections, it is not a cure-all. If initial deposition procedures are optimized to avoid general flaws and surface flaws, then HIPing may provide little or no benefit.

Frank Medina, the EWI technology leader for AM and Director of the Additive Manufacturing Consortium (AMC), gave a detailed presentation on selecting the correct material and technology for metal AM applications. He noted that the ASTM F42 Committee on Additive Manufacturing Technologies was formed in 2009 and categorized AM technologies into seven categories: powder bed fusion, sheet lamination, directed energy deposition, binder jetting, material extrusion, material jetting, and vat photopolymerization. Only the first four are appropriate for metal AM. Tooling and metal part prototyping are common applications. Direct manufacturing of novel designs, compositions, and geometries are being actively pursued.

Direct approaches are becoming increasingly available and reliable, but remain expensive for many types of geometries and volumes. Knowing the technology limitations is key for success.

Tuesday Afternoon Session Carol Moyer, Senior Materials Engineer, (RES/DE/CMB) moderated the second session and introduced the speakers of the afternoon session (see Section 4, presentations 4.9-4.16).

The first speaker, Myles Connor, the GE-Hitachi Lead Materials Engineer responsible for direct metal laser melting (DMLM) AM development, discussed the evaluation of additively manufactured materials for nuclear plant components. He noted that fabrication & unirradiated testing results were shared during the GE-H visit to NRC in June 2017 (ADAMS ML17136A042). He discussed his DOE NEET CFA-15-8309 project with ORNL and University of Michigan to evaluate the SCC susceptibility, corrosion fatigue (CF), and irradiation resistance of the AM 316L stainless steel in nuclear environments. The laser process can have a strong influence on microstructure, even after HIP and high temperature surface annealing have been used to improve SCC resistance. In summary, he found that unrecystallized grains after annealing do not have a significant negative influence on mechanical, SCC, and CF performance and that HIP may not be needed if the laser properties yield low porosity.

3-3

Zeses Karoutas, Westinghouse Electric Company (WEC) Chief Engineer, discussed what is driving AM for nuclear. WEC believes that to deliver the nuclear promise of advancing safety, reliability, and economic performance, the industry needs innovation. AM is innovation in the form of a disruptive technology. The Westinghouse goal is for AM to help transform the nuclear industry and support the nuclear promise.

Bill Cleary, WEC Nuclear Fuels (NF) AM Technical Lead, presented the WEC key areas of AM interest including global technology development efforts, tooling and replacement parts, nuclear fuel components efforts, and the thimble plugging device (TPD) project. The TPD project was not intended for large-scale production but rather for testing and proof of principle.

Mr. Cleary noted that the benefit of AM for tooling and replacement parts, radiation exposure and mechanical testing of 316L, A718, and Zr products look promising. WEC plans to insert the first AM part in reactor in 2018 to gain experience and next wants to focus on building AM parts to obtain benefits in performance, economics and manufacturing relative to current methods.

Paula Freyer, Fellow Engineer/Metallurgist at WEC Global Technology Office Churchill Laboratory Services, discussed her results from laboratory testing and evaluation of unirradiated and neutron irradiated AM alloys. She found that unirradiated and irradiated AM 316L tensile properties exceed ASTM AM 316L specifications, and generally significantly exceed minimum property requirements. The 316L powder that they tested was medical 316, not exactly the same chemistry as rolled 316 from certified mill test reports (CMTRs). Preliminary 1-month corrosion studies had been conducted comparing AM and wrought 316L samples.

George Grabis, Principal Engineer at NovaTech, supported by Craig Gramlich, Mechanical/Fluids Engineer at NovaTech, discussed his small company, founded in 1994, and the work it is doing via Small Business Innovative Research (SBIR) funding to develop AM techniques of powder bed fusion, and laser sintering to manufacture Alloy 718 bottom nozzles and holddown springs. Nozzles can be modified to tune the pressure drop, thus to control the coolant flow to various elements. They partnered with Areva to outfit and test future fuel assembly designs. Further, they are working with ORNL to do material irradiation testing.

Steve Wolbert, Manufacturing Engineer at NuScale Power, presented potential applications for AM in the NuScale nuclear plant module (NPM) including reactor vessel internals, integral safe ends, and sub-supplier components. He anticipates that a NuScale module will include traditional forgings, powder metallurgy- hot isostatic pressing (PM-HIP) complex shapes, AM parts, traditional welds, advanced joining techniques, and laser clad components. NuScale Power is the developer of a 50-MWe light-water SMR. In 2017, it filed the first application with NRC for the design certification of an SMR. NuScale Powers advanced manufacturing cooperation includes EPRI, CTCs CANM, NovaTech, and AddiTec, among others.

Brian Matthews, with a background in reactor physics and nuclear safety, founded AddiTec in 2015, and has focused on reducing cost and expanding of additive technologies beyond current limitations. Of the five technologies in use for metal AM (electron beam melting, direct metal deposition (DMD), direct metal laser sintering (DMLS), binder jetting, and investment casting) AddiTec focused on going beyond the shortcomings of DMD and DMLS.

AddiTecs objective is to develop and reduce the cost of advanced DMD and DMLS systems by a factor of >10; innovate system design and capabilities; and mass produce AM parts using ultra-low cost AddiTec AM systems. There was discussion in the room about exploring hybrid delivery of wire plus powder with the vision that, by changing the chemistry, it may be possible to increase the corrosion resistance of AM material with a particular powder on the surface. For 3-4

example, the concept was raised of building a spent fuel rack with low-cost stainless steel wire, with selective powder application of neutron absorbers as needed.

Shannon Farrell, Canadian Department of National Defence, Defense Research and Development, discussed the analysis of seeded defects in laser AM (LAM) 300M steel.

Canadas Department of National Defence is developing AM to reduce cost of maintenance and improve operational readiness. Their focus is partsondemand and repair and refurbishment of legacy parts. In conclusion, he noted that densification of 300M steel specimens was controlled through modification of LAM fabrication parameters, and that specimens appeared to have a threshold limit of porosity. The Archimedes principle was shown to be an effective tool for simple, rapid assessment of bulk density. Radiography was capable of seeing the 5001000 m defects in the 97.5% density specimens. UT ultrasonic gain is promising for estimation of through-thickness density in LAM materials.

Wednesday Morning Session Christopher Hovanec, Materials Engineer (NRR/DMLR/MVIB), moderated the Wednesday morning session and introduced the speakers (see Section 4, presentations 4.17 -

4.24).

The morning session began with a presentation by Dave Poole of Rolls-Royce (RR) on nuclear developments in additive manufacturing. Rolls-Royce began its AM program in 2008 and has a robust program for production of AM components, using both PBF and DMD systems. No AM components are currently used in pressure boundary applications at nuclear facilities, however. The lead products are manual globe valves and pipework tee fittings, both of which are class 1 fittings designed to ASME Section III code. Rolls-Royce plans to continue development and increase production using AM equipment. They are progressing from less- to more-critical applications, first substituting for existing manufacturing processes, then enhancing, then designing using AM capabilities. Surface finish is a big concern; parts they have made so far are fully finish machined. Partly, this is for corrosion fatigue performance, and also internal flow performance. In-process NDE is especially important for 1-way choice components (see pg. 4-180). Parts that are designed for AM may be difficult or impossible to inspect with conventional techniques (e.g. RT), so RR needs to consider in-process inspection from the start.

Next, Alison Hahn of the Department of Energys Office of Nuclear Energy (NE) presented additive manufacturing initiatives being pursued by her Office. Currently, their main focus is improving methods for the fabrication of nuclear components by reducing cost and lead time and increasing reliability. The NE Advanced Methods for Manufacturing (AMM) program was established in 2012. Projects are selected from competitive solicitations. She noted that more samples are being irradiated in the DOE Nuclear Science User Facilities (NSUFs) than can be post-irradiation-examined (PIEd) under existing work. Those samples will be available in the sample library for work by others. The earlier presentation on near-net-shape forming via PM/HIP (an AMM supported project) generated much interest. PM/HIP samples are to be irradiated through NSUF starting in 2018. NRC staff proposed a follow-up action to have larger/longer discussions examining all the new manufacturing techniques proposed for SMRs including PM/HIP programs.

Andrew Worrall of Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL), and Deputy Director of DOEs Gateway for Accelerated Innovation in Nuclear (GAIN) program talked about the work being done under this private-public partnership (emphasizing reverse focus from public-private partnership) dedicated to accelerating innovative nuclear energy technologies time to market.

3-5

DOE provides support where industry wants to lead. Often additive technologies and irradiation testing are expensive, especially for start-up companies. DOE and the GAIN program are trying to address this, to move the technology forward, by providing access to national laboratory facilities and expertise. GAIN targets both the industry and the supply chain with its 3 pillars of support: modeling & simulation, expertise, and unique facilities. GAIN is intended to be a conduit to everything DOE is doing to support the industry. GAIN, working with NEI and EPRI, has facilitated three technology working groups (TWG): MSR, HTGR, fast reactors. AM might potentially be used for printing metal fuels and TRISO fuels. In discussions, NRC staff noted the importance of inspectability from the start and during service life. NRC staff further noted that a follow-up action would be to discuss NRC participation in the Fall 2018 GAIN workshop on Advanced Manufacturing.

Next, Isabella J. van Rooyen, Distinguished Staff Scientist and Principal Investigator in the Fuels Design and Development Department at Idaho National Laboratory (INL) presented on Additive Manufacturing Qualification Paradigm Similarities for Fuel and Components. She discussed the potential use of additively manufactured components in the nuclear industry. Dr.

van Rooyen discussed the following elements of an AM development program: design (thin-thick, gradient composition, integrated systems), prototyping, fabrication, cladding, welding, novel alloy development, measurement, and repair. Additive Manufacturing as an Alternative Fabrication Technique (AMAFT) was discussed as an integrated modular technique to transform U-based material into accident tolerant fuel. Her work is now focusing on uranium silicide (U3Si2), experiments that have been conducted on U-surrogates (similar properties &

laser absorption of U3Si2). She also discussed other new technologies being tested and the path forward for INLs research in AM.

Sam Pratt of the Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) Carderock Division gave a presentation, written by Caroline Scheck and Bryan Kessel, on the comparisons of components made with 316L SS material using multiple Laser PBF machines. There are multiple original equipment manufacturers (OEMs) for PBF systems and each OEM utilizes its own unique software, system controls, processing parameter options, etc. that can result in material and mechanical variation. This project focused on the results from using three different OEM PBF systems to fabricate 316L austenitic SS. The purpose is understanding variability when a reasonable attempt is made to maintain consistency between build files, and using OEM-recommended system processing parameters and raw materials. Results were analyzed to determine the variability between identical components manufactured with different AM machines. Results include powder feedstock characterization, mechanical and corrosion testing, and microstructural feature comparisons between fabricated coupons from each system. Process qualification is a focus area for the Navy. It is interested in understanding how usage of different AM systems impacts results. Jointly, NSWCs maintain four laser powder bed fusion systems from three different manufacturers.

Justin Rettaliata, the Additive Manufacturing Technical Warrant Holder of Naval Sea Systems Command (NAVSEA), presented on the Qualification and Certification (Q&C) of Metallic Components for NAVSEA. The goal of the NAVSEA program is to develop the ability to qualify and certify AM parts for NAVSEA ships, with the end state ultimately being accelerated qualification and certification of components at a much reduced cost. This will require the establishment of processes, specifications, and standards across NAVSEA and the US Navy Fleet. NAVSEA is preparing a tech pub that will discuss how to implement AM, including metals such as 316L, Ti, Ti 6-4, and a few Inconel alloys. Largely the spec will be material agnostic (independent of material composition). The current focus at NAVSEA has been on replacement components; steam valves and replacements for obsolete trash compactor handles will be the first metal AM in service.

3-6

Paul Witherell, a Mechanical Engineer in the Systems Integration Division of the Engineering Laboratory at the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), discussed Informatics in AM Qualification: Incorporating Databases, Simulation, and Analysis. Paul manages a project on Systems Integration for Additive Manufacturing and serves as the Associate Program Manager of the Measurement Science for Additive Manufacturing program in the Engineering Laboratory. The main aim of the presentation was to show that, when used and applied correctly, databases, modeling, and simulation have a large role to play in AM part qualification. To use predictive modeling, it is necessary to understand sources of uncertainty, especially when changing processes. Reference models are needed. The AM Bench model is under development by another NIST group and will be the focus of a June 2018 workshop.

Qualification is in the eye of the beholder and subject to the criticality of the part and risk of functional failure. Dr. Witherell addressed the main questions of determining when a part is satisfactorily qualified. What is necessary to qualify against the customers (functional) needs?

What part/process characteristics are most likely to lead to failure? What are the failure modes that will determine how the performance of the part is measured? What data is necessary to establish pedigree? What is good data or an established/quality dataset? Does this have to be done for all parts? Only for different geometries? Only for different maintenance cycles? Only for different machines? Various AM materials databases were discussed including the NIST Additive Manufacturing Materials Database (AMMD). Other participants mentioned that the Metallic Materials Properties Development and Standardization (MMPDS), the primary source of statistically-based design allowable properties for metallic materials and fasteners used in many different commercial and military aerospace applications around the world, does not yet have AM materials, but is waiting for the public standards to be sufficiently mature.

In the final presentation of the morning session, S. Suresh Babu, the UT/ORNL Governors chair of advanced manufacturing at the University of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN, spoke about Ultrasonic Additive Manufacturing (UAM) and other AM Processes for Nuclear Component Manufacture. Dr. Babu acts as a bridge to the ORNLs expertise and infrastructure including the ORNL MDF to develop a collaborative research and education ecosystem locally and to deploy engineering solutions to manufacturing industries. Dr. Babu noted that AM has emerged as a potential route for manufacturing nuclear power components with dissimilar materials. Other applications include control rods, spray nozzles, cooling channels, and instrumentation. The laser direct energy deposition (DED) process allowed ORNL to fabricate transition joints with controlled compositions and phase variations. UAM was successfully used for prototypes with embedded neutron absorbers. It is possible to develop ICME models and to extend in-situ and ex-situ characterization to develop rapid qualification methodologies for both fusion and solid-state AM processes. Building on the existing knowledge base, he said he believed we can get to a nuclear-qualified component within two years.

Wednesday Afternoon Session Rob Tregoning, Senior Technical Adviser for Materials Engineering Issues (RES/DE),

moderated the Wednesday afternoon session and introduced the presenters (see Section 4, presentations 4.15 - 4.232).

The first presentation of the afternoon session was given by Doug Wells, a senior structural engineer at NASAs Marshall Space Flight Center. He noted that he has been peripherally involved with additive manufacturing for all of his 25 years at NASA. In the past five or so years, he has been heavily involved in the transition of additive manufacturing from a prototyping technology to a flight hardware technology with all the ensuing qualification and 3-7

certifications challenges. The subject of his presentation was Standardization in Additive Manufacturing: Challenges in Structural Integrity Assurance. Mr. Wells presented on the need for a standardized, qualified AM process and consensus on definitions of AM quality for consistency. He mentioned that NDE standardization in AM is high priority and would be enhanced by creating a defect catalog for AM. It would be analogous to references used to identify defects in castings or welds and contain correlation of defect type to AM process, NDE method, and reliability of detection, as well as correlation of defect risk to structural integrity.

Jess Waller, a materials scientist from Office of Safety and Mission Assurances (OSMA)

NDE program at NASAs White Sands Test Facility presented on NDE and Inspection Challenges for Additively Manufactured Components. Dr. Waller noted that important technology gaps include: (1) integrated process control (in-situ monitoring during build) (2) material property controls (input materials, qualified material processes) (3) mature process-structure property correlations (design allowables data) (4) mature effect-of-defect (includes fracture mechanics) (5) mature quality control measures (includes NDE tailored to AM). In-process and post-process NDE are vital to qualifying AM components for use in NASA equipment and will also be extremely necessary for the nuclear industry. Standardization across industries will allow for faster time to market and a better understanding of defects in AM components. He discussed key NASA AM Qualification and Certification documents as well as the Additive Manufacturing Roadmap and NDE-Related Technology Gaps documents. Dr.

Waller is the POC for government-industry round-robin testing.

Next, Kevin Jurrens, Deputy Chief of Intelligent Systems Division, Engineering Laboratory of NIST presented on Measurement Science for Metals-Based Additive Manufacturing. The AM field has grown dramatically over the past six years alone, and this is amplifying the need for measurement science and standards for the industry. The NIST Roadmap for Measurement Science for Metal AM, written in 2012, became the input to America Makes, and the basis for the ANSI Additive Manufacturing Standardization Collaborative (AMSC) Roadmap. Currently, no unified standardized process exists and there is no standardized path for Q&C. NIST wants standards that are non-contradictory, not overlapping, and avoiding duplication of effort. For AM to continue to grow and become a major contributor, it is vital for NIST to collaborate with industry partners to develop these standards for many industries.

Jim McCabe of the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) presented on the America Makes and ANSI Additive Manufacturing Standardization Collaborative (AMSC). The AMSC Standardization Roadmap for Additive Manufacturing, Version 1.0, February 2017, listed 89 knowledge gaps - many are in design, process control, and Q&C. He emphasized the importance of the many standards developing organizations (SDOs) to coordinate and create a consistent, harmonized, and non-contradictory set of AM standards and specifications.

AMSCs purpose is to facilitate AM growth across industry and drive standardization among the SDOs.

Kate Hyam of the American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) presented on ASMEs development of Additive Manufacturing Standards. A special committee on the use of additive manufacturing for pressure equipment has been developed by the Board on Pressure Technology Codes and Standards (BPTCS) and the Board on Nuclear Codes and Standards (BNCS) to create standards and requirements for AM pressure-boundary components.

Immediately following, Dave Rudland, Senior Technical Advisor for Nuclear Power Plant Materials at the NRC (NRR/DMLR), presented on the BPTCS/BNCS Special Committee on Use of Additive Manufacturing. The objective of this committee, as defined in their charter, is to 3-8

develop a technical baseline to support development of a proposed Boiler and Pressure Vessel standard or guideline addressing the pressure integrity governing the construction of pressure retaining equipment by additive manufacturing processes. Currently, the board is preparing the future ASME requirements and meeting on a regular basis to discuss these requirements. A member of the NRC staff will be included in the committee.

Next, from ASTM International, Mohsen Seifi presented on The Status of Global Additive Manufacturing Standardization to Support Q & C (qualification and certification). The presentation included information on ASTM International and its progress into standardization of AM processes as well as the partnerships ASTM has created across the industry. Dr. Seifi discussed the competition for the ASTM Additive Manufacturing Center of Excellence (COE). The objective is to facilitate collaboration & coordination among stakeholders, to develop better standards. An ASTM survey noted that much good R&D is being done in industry and universities, but not captured in standards. The AM COE is to work to transition R&D to stakeholders.

In the final presentation of the day, Allen Hiser, NRC Senior Technical Advisor for License Renewal Aging Management (NRR/DMLR), spoke on Topics of Interest for AM of Reactor Materials and Components. During this presentation, the topic areas identified and discussed were the quality of AM materials and components, codes and standards for AM, properties and structural performance of AM components, service performance and aging degradation, and cyber security of the AM process. Addressing all of these areas will be vital to the use of AM components in nuclear power plants.

The public meeting concluded with a group discussion and time for public comments and questions and was adjourned around 1700.

3-9

4. PROCEEDINGS Opening Remarks (Michael Weber, NRC)

Opening Remarks Michael Weber, NRC Public Meeting on Additive Manufacturing for Reactor Materials & Components November 28-29, 2017 8:00 AM - 5:00 PM

• Good morning, thank you for coming, and thank you for your interest in participating in this meeting. I am Michael Weber the Director of Nuclear Regulatory Research and it is a privilege to welcome you to this meeting today.

• One of the aspects that I thoroughly enjoy in working on research is the opportunity to learn about and understand cutting edge scientific and engineering information in partnership with our regulatory counterparts to accomplish NRCs nuclear safety and security mission. This meeting is a prime example.

• Welcome to this first NRC public meeting about plans for using additive manufacturing to produce systems, structures, and components for nuclear power reactors and other potential applications. For example, representatives of the nuclear industry, including licensees and vendors, have notified NRC that parts made using direct metal laser melting/sintering may be used in the operating nuclear power plant fleet as early as next year. We are working with our colleagues in NRR and NRO to make sure that the NRC will be ready to review such submittals for safety-significant regulatory applications.

Therefore, we would like to understand your plans and the opportunities that you see for the use of additive manufacturing in civilian nuclear applications.

• I have great expectations for the success of this meeting. We are building on the catalyst created when a team from GE-Hitachi arranged a public meeting with NRC in June of this year to discuss general aspects of additive manufacturing. We are aware that other vendors are also considering similar applications. Our collective objective is to ensure that if such parts and materials are used in nuclear power plants that they are used safely and securely. To accomplish this objective, we need to have sufficient information about the 4-1

safety characteristics and associated monitoring of parts and materials manufactured using additive manufacturing.

• We had the opportunity to meet with many of you at the ANSI Additive Manufacturing Standardization Collaborative Forum in September, at the meetings in Idaho sponsored by the US Nuclear Infrastructure Council (NIC) and Department of Energy (DOE) early October, at the Westinghouse Churchill facility later in October, at ASME meetings, and at the ASTM Symposium on Additive Manufacturing this month. We recognize and appreciate these interactions. Your willingness to share insights and plans with the NRC at this stage of deployment help us prepare and be ready to review.

• Our meeting during the next couple of days provides another opportunity to interact with you regarding additive manufacturing. We look forward to listening to presentations and discussing such topics as qualification and quality control, Non-Destructive Examination, and inspection, materials properties, cybersecurity, and reverse engineering to the extent that we can have these discussions in a public forum while protecting sensitive information.

• The first day of our meeting will mainly focus on industry activities and perspectives; during the second day, we will explore complementary government agency initiatives.

• We are excited to hear from the many organizations involved in Additive Manufacturing, including ANSI, ASME, ASTM, Concurrent Technologies, DOD Labs, DOE Labs, EPRI, EWI, FAA, GE-Hitachi, NASA, NEI, Novatech, NuScale Power, and Westinghouse, to mention a few.

• So engage, collaborate, share to the extent that you can and thank you again for your active participation. Together we achieve nuclear safety and security 4-2

Introduction (Rob Tregoning, NRC) 4-3

AM for Reactor Materials & Components: Industry Perspective (Mark Richter, NEI) 4-4

4-5 4-6 4-7 4-8 4-9 4-10 ICME & Process Monitoring for Component Qualification via LPB-AM (Dave Gandy, EPRI) 4-11

4-12 4-13 4-14 4-15 4-16 4-17 4-18 4-19 4-20 4-21 4-22 4-23 4-24 4-25 4-26 4-27 Regulatory Considerations for AM Qualification and status of FAA AM Roadmap (Michael Gorelik, FAA) 4-28

4-29 4-30 4-31 4-32 4-33 4-34 4-35 4-36 4-37 4-38 4-39 4-40 4-41 4-42 Industry Insights - Cybersecurity for Additive Manufacturing (Scott Zimmerman, CTC) 4-43

4-44 4-45 4-46 4-47 4-48 4-49 4-50 4-51 4-52 4-53 4-54 4-55 Reflections on Fatigue for AM Components. (Bill Mohr, EWI) 4-56

4-57 4-58 4-59 4-60 4-61 4-62 4-63 4-64 4-65 4-66 Selecting the Correct Material and Technology for Metal AM Applications.

(Frank Medina, EWI) 4-67

4-68 4-69 4-70 4-71 4-72 4-73 4-74 4-75 4-76 4-77 4-78 4-79 4-80 4-81 4-82 4-83 4-84 4-85 4-86 4-87 4-88 4-89 4-90 Evaluation of Additively Manufactured Materials for NPP Components.

(Myles Connor, GEH) 4-91

4-92 4-93 4-94 4-95 4-96 4-97 4-98 4-99 4-100 4-101 4-102 4-103 4-104 4-105 4-106 The Big Picture Vision for AM in Nuclear Industry (Zeses Karoutas, WEC) 4-107

4-108 4-109 4-110 Current Westinghouse Efforts (Bill Cleary, WEC) 4-111

4-112 4-113 4-114 4-115 4-116 4-117 4-118 4-119 Laboratory Testing & Evaluation of Unirradiated and Neutron Irradiated Additively Manufactured Alloys (Paula Freyer, WEC) 4-120

4-121 4-122 4-123 4-124 4-125 4-126 4-127 4-128 4-129 4-130 4-131 4-132 4-133 Additive Manufacturing for Nuclear Components (George Pabis and Craig Gramlich, Novatech) 4-134

4-135 4-136 4-137 4-138 4-139 4-140 4-141 4-142 4-143 4-144 4-145 4-146 4-147 4-148 4-149 4-150 Additive Manufacturing for Reactor Materials and Components (Steven Wolbert, NuScale Power) 4-151

4-152 4-153 4-154 4-155 4-156 Metal Additive Manufacturing Innovations (Brian Matthews, AddiTec) 4-157

4-158 4-159 4-160 4-161 4-162 4-163 4-164 4-165 Analysis of Seeded Defects in Laser Additive Manufactured 300M Steel (Shannon Farrell, DRDC) 4-166

4-167 4-168 4-169 4-170 4-171 4-172 4-173 4-174 4-175 4-176 4-177 4-178 Rolls-Royce Nuclear Developments in AM. (Dave Poole, Rolls-Royce) 4-179

4-180 4-181 4-182 4-183 Additive Manufacturing Initiatives (Alison Hahn, DOE-NE AMM) 4-184

4-185 4-186 4-187 4-188 4-189 GAIN Gateway for Accelerated Innovation in Nuclear (Andrew Worrall, ORNL) 4-190

4-191 4-192 4-193 4-194 4-195 4-196 AM Qualification Paradigm Similarities for Fuel and Components (Isabella van Rooyen, INL) 4-197

4-198 4-199 4-200 4-201 4-202 4-203 4-204 4-205 4-206 4-207 4-208 4-209 4-210 4-211 4-212 Comparisons between 316L SS made using Multiple LPBF Systems (Sam Pratt, NSWC) 4-213

4-214 4-215 4-216 4-217 4-218 4-219 Qualification and Certification of Metallic Components for NAVSEA (Justin Rettaliata, NAVSEA) 4-220

4-221 4-222 4-223 4-224 Informatics in AM Qualification: Incorporating Databases, Simulation, &

Analysis (Paul Witherell, NIST) 4-225

4-226 4-227 4-228 4-229 4-230 4-231 4-232 4-233 4-234 4-235 4-236 4-237 Ultrasonic Additive Manufacturing & other AM Processes for Nuclear Component Manufacture (S. Suresh Babu, ORNL/UTK) 4-238

4-239 4-240 4-241 4-242 4-243 4-244 4-245 4-246 Standardization in Additive Manufacturing: Challenges in Structural Integrity Assurance (Doug Wells, NASA-MSFC) 4-247

4-248 4-249 4-250 4-251 4-252 4-253 4-254 4-255 NDE & Inspection Challenges for Additively Manufactured Components (Jess Waller, NASA-WSTF) 4-256

4-257 4-258 4-259 4-260 4-261 4-262 4-263 4-264 4-265 4-266 4-267 4-268 4-269 4-270 4-271 4-272 4-273 4-274 4-275 4-276 4-277 4-278 4-279 Measurement Science for Metals-Based Additive Manufacturing (Kevin Jurrens, NIST) 4-280

4-281 4-282 4-283 4-284 4-285 4-286 4-287 4-288 4-289 4-290 4-291 4-292 4-293 America Makes and ANSI Additive Manufacturing Standardization Collaborative (AMSC) (Jim McCabe, ANSI) 4-294

4-295 4-296 4-297 4-298 4-299 4-300 4-301 4-302 4-303 4-304 4-305 4-306 4-307 ASME Additive Manufacturing Standards (Kate Hyam, ASME) 4-308

4-309 4-310 4-311 4-312 4-313 4-314 4-315 4-316 BPTCS/BNCS Special Committee on use of Additive Manufacturing (Dave Rudland, NRC) 4-317

4-318 4-319 The Status of Global Additive Manufacturing Standardization to Support Q&C (Mohsen Seifi, ASTM) 4-320

4-321 4-322 4-323 4-324 4-325 4-326 4-327 4-328 4-329 4-330 4-331 4-332 4-333 4-334 4-335 4-336 4-337 4-338 4-339 4-340 4-341 4-342 4-343 4-344 4-345 4-346 4-347 4-348 4-349 4-350 Topics of Interest for AM of Reactor Materials and Components (Allen Hiser, NRC) 4-351

4-352

4-353 4-354 4-355 4-356

5.

SUMMARY

This conference was a large success due to the participation of those members of the industry and NRC that presented. Valuable information was gathered and many important questions were raised, answered, and collected. Section 4 of this document provided the presentations given during the conference. Once again, the views, opinions, and recommendations presented in this document do not constitute any NRC approval or agreement and do not provide regulatory guidance for Additive Manufacturing. Thank you to those that participated in this conference and provided the valuable data necessary for the NRC to understand Additive Manufacturing and its role in nuclear power plants.

NRC staff are in the early stages of developing an agency action plan. This action plan will (1) address preparation of NRC readiness for review of AM parts; (2) provide for interoffice coordination; and (3) guide agency involvement in codes and standards organizations.

Next steps include further engagement with industry to understand potential implementation and with other organizations to understand expertise and resources. Discussions are underway about possibly conducting a modified PIRT-type process of the vast amount of information captured from this meetings and others similar to it. Tables would be constructed similar to that shown below.

Example of Significant Knowledge Gaps concerning Advanced Methods of Manufacturing (modified from NUREG/CR-6944, Next Generation Nuclear Plant Phenomena Identification and Ranking Tables (PIRTS), Vol 4: High-Temperature Materials PIRTS, 40 pp.,

November 2007)

ID Phenomena Phenome Rationale for Knowledge Rationale for Suggested Reference No. na Rankings of Level (H, Rankings of Additional (paper)

Importan Phenomenon M, L or Knowledge Research ce (H, M, Importance NR=Not L or Ranked)

NR=Not Ranked) 1 Radiation H Use of L Insufficient Perform radiation 4,2, 4.18 Degradation components in data exists to degradation testing pressure support the use in a qualified boundaries and of AM laboratory to ASME Class 1 components in determine the systems makes pressure effect of radiation radiation boundary and over time on AM degradation ASME Class 1 components.

testing a systems.

requirement 2 Crack H Change in L Hard to Further testing. 4.3 Initiation & porosity can appraise subcritical increase SCC incomplete crack growth and CGR. recrystallization affects SCC.

3 Welding H Transition joint L AM data has Further testing. 4.24 produced by non- much equilibrium weld, commonality solid-state phase with weld data.

transformations occur.

5-1

6. WORKSHOP ATTENDEES First Name Last Name Organization Magnus Ahlfors Quintus Technologies LLC Robert Akans CTC Brian Allik NRC Nate Ames Ohio State University Clint Armstrong Westinghouse S. Suresh Babu UTK/ORNL Stewart Bailey NRC Mekonen Bayssie NRC Brian Bishop Oerlikon AM Steven Bloom NRC Lauren Boldon ANL Fran Bolger GEH John Burke NRC Charles Carpenter Nuclear AMRC Wei-Ying Chen ANL Yiren Chen ANL William Cleary Westinghouse Myles Connor GE Hitachi Giovanni Facco NRC Shannon Farrell DRDC Kevin Field ORNL Istvan Frankl NRC Pauia Freyer Westinghouse Dave Gandy EPRI Donna Gilmore public Michael Gorelik FAA Craig Gramlich NovaTech James Grudzinski ANL Harvey Hack Northrup Grumman Corp 6-1

First Name Last Name Organization Alison Hahn DOE-NE Evan Handler NSWC Carderock Nick Hansing NRC Thomas Hare Rolls Royce Brian Harris NRC Jim Hartnett Moog Allen Hiser NRC Matthew Hiser NRC John Honcharik NRC Christopher Hovanec NRC Susan Hovanec NSWC Carderock Cameron Howard Colorado School of Mines Richard Howard ORNL Jason Huang NRC Amy Hull NRC Katherine Hyam ASME Raj Iyengar NRC Terry Jackson NRC Theron James NRC Chris Jastrzembski moog Joel Jenkins NRC Jon Johnson Lightbridge Kevin Jurrens NIST Zeses Karoutas Westinghouse Jeff King Colorado School of Mines Bruce Landrey DOE/NE AMM Graeme Leitch AREVA M. Li ANL Jim Luehman Public William Lum Army Research Lab Tim Lupold NRC 6-2

First Name Last Name Organization Shah Malik NRC Brian Matthews AddiTec Jim McCabe ANSI Richard McIntyre NRC Michael McMurtrey INL Francisco Medina EWI Tom Miller DOE-NE Tom Miller DOE Matt Mitchell NRC Kun Mo ANL William Mohr EWI Carol Moyer NRC Ken Natesan ANL Mark Nichol NEI Russell Nietert ANL Carol Nove NRC Greg Oberson NRC Todd Oswald BWXT George Pabis NovaTech Candido Pereira ANL Christian Petrie ORNL David Poole Rolls Royce Sam Pratt NSWC Carderock Iouri Prokofiev NRC James Reck NAVSEA 08 Claude Reed ANL Justin Rettaliata NAVSEA Mark Richter NEI Dave Rudland NRC Mohsen Seifi astm David Senor PNNL 6-3

First Name Last Name Organization Scott Shargots BWXT Roy Sheppard ATC Craig Stover EPRI Temitope Taiwo ANL Kurt Terrani ORNL Leslie Terry NRC Brian Thomas NRC Stacy Torrey AREVA Rob Tregoning NRC Isabella van Rooyen INL Jay Wallace NRC Jess Waller NASA Michael Weber NRC Douglas Wells NASA Dan Widrevitz NRC Paul Witherell NIST Steve Wolbert NuScale Power Andy Worrall ORNL/GAIN Abdellatif Yacout ANL On Yee NRC Andrew Yeshnik NRC Mark Yoo NRC Austin Young NRC Ryan Ziegler BWXT Scott Zimmerman CTC 6-4