Abstract—Wire Arc Additive Manufacturing (WAAM) is a high-deposition-rate

technology poised to revolutionise the production of large-scale metallic

components. However, its adoption is hindered by process-induced defects,
notably mechanical anisotropy. This study investigates the relationship between
microstructure and mechanical properties in a large wall structure (200 mm × 80
mm × 9 mm) fabricated from ER70S-6 low-carbon steel using a novel, compact
desktop WAAM system. The system integrates a 3-axis CNC gantry with a Gas
Metal Arc Welding (GMAW) power source. A constant interpass temperature of
300°C was maintained to ensure thermal stability. Microstructural analysis
revealed a characteristic anisotropic structure, with large columnar grains
oriented along the build direction and distinct layer bands. Tensile testing,
conducted in accordance with ASTM E8, confirmed significant mechanical
anisotropy. The ultimate tensile strength (UTS) was 9.1% higher in the
longitudinal (deposition) direction (495 MPa) compared to the transverse (build)
direction (450 MPa). Conversely, elongation at fracture was greater in the
transverse orientation. A uniform microhardness profile along the build height
(approx. 221 HV) demonstrated effective thermal management. The results
correlate the observed anisotropy directly with the directionally solidified
microstructure, highlighting the critical need for process control to produce
reliable, load-bearing components with this emerging desktop technology.
Index Terms—Additive manufacturing, anisotropy, desktop manufacturing,
ER70S-6 steel, mechanical properties, microstructure, Wire Arc Additive
Manufacturing (WAAM).
ADDITIVE MANUFACTURING (AM) is transforming the industrial landscape by
enabling the on-demand production of complex, optimised metallic components
[1]. For large-scale applications in sectors such as aerospace, marine, and
energy, traditional subtractive methods like CNC machining from solid billets
result in substantial material waste—often exceeding 90%—and long lead times
[2]. AM technologies offer a compelling alternative by building parts layer-by-
layer, directly from a digital model [3].
Among the suite of metal AM processes, Wire Arc Additive Manufacturing (WAAM)
has emerged as a particularly promising technology for fabricating large
structures [4]. As a form of Direct Energy Deposition (DED), WAAM utilises a
standard electric arc welding process, such as Gas Metal Arc Welding (GMAW), to
melt a continuous wire feedstock and deposit it onto a substrate [2]. This
approach yields several key advantages over powder-based AM techniques. The
deposition rates are significantly higher, capable of reaching over 5 kg/h,
compared to mere grams per hour for powder bed fusion [5]. Furthermore, the
use of welding wire as feedstock and readily available welding hardware makes
WAAM a highly cost-effective and scalable solution [2]. These attributes position
WAAM as an ideal candidate for producing large, near-net-shape components like
aircraft wing ribs, ship propellers, and pressure vessels [4].
Despite its potential, the widespread adoption of WAAM for structurally critical
applications is impeded by challenges inherent to its underlying physics. The
very mechanism that enables its high deposition rate—a concentrated, high-
energy heat source—is also the root cause of its most significant drawbacks [6].
The process involves complex thermal cycles of rapid, localised heating of the
molten pool followed by cooling and solidification [5]. This repeated process
creates steep thermal gradients between the newly deposited hot layer and the
cooler, previously solidified material below [7]. These gradients drive directional
solidification, resulting in the epitaxial growth of large, columnar grains oriented
along the path of maximum heat dissipation, which is typically the build direction
[8]. This anisotropic grain structure, combined with distinct bands at the
interface between layers, leads to directionally dependent mechanical properties
[9].
Furthermore, the differential thermal expansion and contraction experienced by
the material during these cycles generate significant internal residual stresses
[10]. If unmanaged, these stresses can cause severe distortion, cracking, and
premature failure of the component, compromising its geometric accuracy and
structural integrity [6]. Consequently, understanding and controlling the
interplay between process parameters, thermal history, microstructure, and the
resultant mechanical properties is paramount for qualifying WAAM components
for reliable service [5].
This paper addresses this challenge within the context of a novel, compact
desktop WAAM system. While WAAM is traditionally associated with large,
industrial robotic cells, a smaller, more accessible platform could democratise
high-deposition-rate metal AM for rapid prototyping, research, and small-batch
production. This study aims to systematically fabricate and characterise a large-
scale wall structure using this desktop system. The material chosen is ER70S-6, a
widely available and cost-effective low-carbon steel wire commonly used in
welding and structural applications [7]. The primary objective is to quantify the
mechanical anisotropy by comparing tensile properties in the longitudinal and
transverse directions and to correlate these findings with the underlying
microstructure and hardness profile of the as-fabricated component.
A. Desktop WAAM System Configuration
The experimental work was conducted on a custom-built desktop WAAM system,
designed to provide a low-cost, accessible platform for DED research and
fabrication. The system integrates a 3-axis CNC gantry with a commercial GMAW
power source. The gantry provides a work area of 360 mm × 240 mm × 140 mm
(X×Y×Z) and utilises high-precision ball screws and linear rails for motion
control, ensuring positional accuracy. The motion system is controlled via
standard G-code, allowing for complex toolpath generation.
The welding subsystem consists of a compact, inverter-based GMAW power
source with a 120V single-phase input, capable of delivering a continuously
adjustable output current from 30 A to 140 A. A wire feeding unit is synchronised
with the power source to deliver the feedstock material through a standard
GMAW torch mounted to the Z-axis of the CNC gantry. A schematic and
photograph of the complete experimental setup are conceptualised in Fig. 1.
B. Component Fabrication
The feedstock material used for this study was a 1.2 mm diameter ER70S-6 low-
carbon steel wire, selected for its excellent weldability and widespread industrial
use [11]. A 250 mm × 100 mm × 10 mm plate of S235JR structural steel was
used as the substrate. Prior to deposition, the substrate surface was ground and
cleaned with acetone to remove oxides and contaminants.
A single-bead wall structure with final dimensions of approximately 200 mm in
length, 80 mm in height, and 9 mm in width was fabricated. The deposition
strategy involved a reciprocating (zigzag) toolpath along the length of the
substrate. To mitigate the effects of heat accumulation and residual stress, a
critical process control strategy was implemented: maintaining a constant
interpass temperature [7]. A non-contact thermal imaging camera was used to
monitor the temperature of the previously deposited layer. A dwell time was
introduced after each layer to allow the part to cool to a target interpass
temperature of 300 ± 10°C before the subsequent layer was deposited [7]. This
approach helps to homogenise the thermal history throughout the build, reducing
microstructural variability and distortion [7]. The key deposition parameters are
summarised in TABLE I. An image of the final as-fabricated wall is shown in Fig. 2.
C. Characterisation Methods
After fabrication, the wall was removed from the substrate and sectioned for
analysis. Test specimens were extracted from the central region of the wall to
avoid end-of-path effects.
Metallographic Preparation: Specimens for microstructural analysis were
prepared following the standard procedures outlined in ASTM E3 [12]. Samples
were sectioned, mounted in conductive phenolic resin, and then subjected to a
series of grinding steps using successively finer silicon carbide papers (from 240
to 1200 grit). Final polishing was performed using diamond suspensions down to
1 µm to achieve a mirror-like surface. The microstructure was revealed by
etching the polished surface with a 2% Nital solution (2 ml nitric acid in 98 ml
ethanol) [13]. Microstructural examination was conducted using optical
microscopy (OM) and scanning electron microscopy (SEM).
Mechanical Testing: Tensile properties were evaluated in accordance with ASTM
E8 / E8M [14]. Flat, dog-bone shaped specimens were machined from the wall in
two orthogonal orientations: longitudinal (0°), with the tensile axis parallel to the
deposition direction, and transverse (90°), with the tensile axis parallel to the
build direction. Three specimens were tested for each orientation on a universal
testing machine at a constant crosshead displacement rate of 1 mm/min. An
extensometer was used to accurately measure strain. From the resulting stress-
strain curves, the 0.2% offset yield strength (YS), ultimate tensile strength (UTS),
and percentage elongation at fracture were determined.
Vickers microhardness testing was performed on a polished cross-section of the
wall using a load of 500 gf (HV0.5) and a dwell time of 15 seconds [15]. Hardness
profiles were measured along the central axis of the build height, with
indentations made at the bottom (10 mm from base), middle (40 mm), and top
(70 mm) regions to assess hardness uniformity.
A. Microstructural Analysis
The microstructure of the as-fabricated ER70S-6 wall, shown in Fig. 3, is
characteristic of components produced by WAAM. The optical micrograph of the
transverse (XZ) plane (Fig. 3a) reveals a distinct layered structure. Each curved
band corresponds to a single deposited bead. Within this structure, large
columnar grains are clearly visible, elongated vertically along the build direction
(Z-axis). This morphology is a direct consequence of the thermal conditions
during deposition. Heat flows preferentially from the hot, newly deposited layer
down through the previously solidified, cooler layers towards the substrate,
establishing a strong vertical thermal gradient [7]. This gradient promotes
directional solidification and epitaxial growth, where new grains nucleate on
existing ones from the layer below and grow in the direction opposite to the heat
flow, resulting in the observed columnar structure [8].
Higher magnification SEM imaging (Fig. 3b) resolves the phases within the
deposited layers. The microstructure is predominantly composed of acicular
ferrite and Widmanstätten ferrite, with regions of bainite. This complex, non-
equilibrium microstructure is typical for low-carbon steels subjected to the rapid
cooling and reheating cycles inherent to the WAAM process [7]. The region
between successive layers, often referred to as the heat-affected zone (HAZ) of
the layer below, exhibits some grain refinement due to the reheating effect of
the subsequent deposition pass (Fig. 3c). This cyclic thermal processing results in
a heterogeneous but periodic microstructure throughout the build height.
B. Mechanical Properties
The results of the uniaxial tensile tests are summarised in TABLE II. The data
clearly demonstrates a significant anisotropy in the mechanical behaviour of the
WAAM-fabricated ER70S-6 steel. The average UTS in the longitudinal (0°)
direction was 495 MPa, which is 9.1% higher than the 450 MPa measured in the
transverse (90°) direction. A similar trend was observed for the yield strength,
with the longitudinal specimens exhibiting a 6.8% higher value (365 MPa)
compared to the transverse specimens (340 MPa).
In contrast, the ductility of the material showed an opposite trend. The
elongation at fracture was significantly higher for the transverse specimens
(33%) compared to the longitudinal specimens (28%). These values are
consistent with findings for WAAM-produced low-carbon steels, where strength is
often superior along the deposition path, while ductility can be enhanced along
the build direction [7].
The microhardness profile along the build height is presented in TABLE III. The
average hardness values at the bottom, middle, and top of the wall are
remarkably consistent, ranging from 218 HV to 225 HV. This uniformity indicates
that the interpass temperature control strategy was effective. Without such
control, heat can accumulate in the lower sections of the build, leading to an in-
situ annealing effect that coarsens the microstructure and significantly reduces
hardness [7]. The stable hardness profile suggests a relatively homogenous
microstructure was achieved throughout the component's height.
C. Analysis of Anisotropy and Process Influence
The observed mechanical anisotropy is a direct manifestation of the anisotropic
microstructure. When a tensile load is applied in the longitudinal (0°) direction, it
acts parallel to the deposition beads and along the length of the strong columnar
grains. In this orientation, the weaker interlayer boundaries are loaded in shear,
and the material's strength is dominated by the resistance of the bulk solidified
metal to deformation [16].
Conversely, when the load is applied in the transverse (90°) direction, it acts
perpendicular to the deposition layers. The interlayer boundaries, which contain
periodically refined and reheated microstructures, are now subjected to normal
tensile stress. These interfaces can act as preferential sites for strain localisation
and damage initiation, effectively behaving as planes of relative weakness within
the material [9]. This explains the lower yield and ultimate tensile strengths
observed in the transverse orientation. The higher ductility in this direction is a
more complex phenomenon but may be attributed to the crack path being forced
to deflect as it encounters each successive layer band, a process that can absorb
more energy before final fracture compared to a more direct crack path through
the columnar grains [17].
The successful fabrication of this component on a compact, desktop system
carries significant implications. Traditionally, WAAM is performed using large,
expensive industrial robots, limiting its use to factory settings [2]. Desktop metal
AM systems, such as those from Desktop Metal or Markforged, typically rely on
binder jetting or bound metal deposition, which offer high resolution but lower
deposition rates and require multi-stage post-processing (debinding and
sintering) to achieve full density [18]. The system used in this study
demonstrates a unique middle ground: combining the high deposition rate and
direct production of fully dense parts characteristic of WAAM with the
accessibility, smaller footprint, and lower capital cost of a desktop machine. This
opens new possibilities for rapid, in-house fabrication of robust, large-scale metal
prototypes, custom tooling, and functional end-use parts in research laboratories,
workshops, and small enterprises, thereby democratising access to high-
performance metal AM.
This study successfully demonstrated the fabrication of a large-scale ER70S-6
low-carbon steel component using a novel desktop Wire Arc Additive
Manufacturing system. The work provides a systematic characterisation of the
resulting microstructure and anisotropic mechanical properties. The key findings
are as follows:
The as-fabricated component exhibited a characteristic anisotropic
microstructure dominated by large columnar grains oriented along the build
direction, a direct result of directional heat dissipation during the layer-by-layer
deposition process.
This microstructural anisotropy translated directly into directionally dependent
mechanical properties. The ultimate tensile strength was 9.1% greater in the
longitudinal (0°) direction (495 MPa) than in the transverse (90°) direction (450
MPa). In contrast, ductility was higher in the transverse direction.
The implementation of a strict interpass temperature control strategy (300°C)
was shown to be highly effective. The resulting uniform microhardness profile
along the build height indicates that detrimental heat accumulation and in-situ
annealing effects were successfully mitigated.
The research validates the potential of compact, desktop WAAM systems as a
viable and cost-effective technology for the rapid manufacturing of large,
structurally sound metallic components.
For such components to be qualified for load-bearing applications, a
comprehensive understanding of the process-microstructure-property
relationships is essential. Future work should focus on exploring strategies to
mitigate anisotropy, such as inter-layer cold working or the use of alternative
deposition paths, to produce more isotropic and reliable parts.
References
[1] I. Gibson, D. Rosen, and B. Stucker, Additive Manufacturing Technologies: 3D
Printing, Rapid Prototyping, and Direct Digital Manufacturing, 2nd ed. Springer,
2015.
[2] S. W. Williams, F. Martina, A. C. Addison, J. Ding, and G. Pardal, "Wire + Arc
Additive Manufacturing," Materials Science and Technology, vol. 32, no. 7, pp.
641–647, 2016.
[3] W. E. Frazier, "Metal Additive Manufacturing: A Review," Journal of Materials
Engineering and Performance, vol. 23, no. 6, pp. 1917–1928, 2014.
[4] D. Ding, Z. Pan, D. Cuiuri, and H. Li, "Wire-feed additive manufacturing of
metal components: technologies, developments and future trends," The
International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, vol. 81, no. 1-4, pp.
465–481, 2015.
[5] T. A. Rodrigues, V. Duarte, R. M. Miranda, T. G. Santos, and J. P. Oliveira,
"Current Status and Perspectives on Wire and Arc Additive Manufacturing
(WAAM)," Materials, vol. 12, no. 7, p. 1121, 2019.
[6] K. S. Derekar, "A review of wire arc additive manufacturing (WAAM) for steel,"
The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, vol. 97, no. 5-8,
pp. 2699–2717, 2018.
[7] X. Bai, G. Zhang, S. Lin, X. Fang, and D. You, "Microstructure and mechanical
properties of wire arc additively manufactured ER70S-6 steel components with
different interpass cooling conditions," Materials Science and Engineering: A, vol.
770, p. 138548, 2020.
[8] F. Wang, S. Williams, and P. Colegrove, "Microstructure and mechanical
properties of wire and arc additive manufactured Ti-6Al-4V," Metallurgical and
Materials Transactions A, vol. 44, no. 2, pp. 968–977, 2013.
[9] M. Köhler, V. A. Popovich, and I. M. Richardson, "Anisotropy of wire-arc
additively manufactured steel," Materials & Design, vol. 162, pp. 257-269, 2019.
[10] T. Mukherjee, V. Manvatkar, A. De, and T. DebRoy, "Mitigation of residual
stress in additive manufacturing," Journal of Materials Processing Technology,
vol. 240, pp. 45-54, 2017.
[11] ESAB, "OK AristoRod 12.50 / ER70S-6 Specification Sheet," ESAB Welding &
Cutting Products, 2021.
[12] ASTM E3-11(2017), "Standard Guide for Preparation of Metallographic
Specimens," ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2017.
[13] K. Panchagnula and S. Simhambhatla, "Microstructure and mechanical
properties of wire arc additively manufactured dual-phase steel components,"
Journal of Materials Processing Technology, vol. 255, pp. 307–316, 2018.
[14] ASTM E8 / E8M-16a, "Standard Test Methods for Tension Testing of Metallic
Materials," ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2016.
[15] ASTM E384-17, "Standard Test Method for Microindentation Hardness of
Materials," ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2017.
[16] T. DebRoy et al., "Additive manufacturing of metallic components – Process,
structure and properties," Progress in Materials Science, vol. 92, pp. 112–224,
2018.
[17] M. N. Ahsan, J. A. Gonzalez, R. D. D. C. F. Lopez, J. M. Chacón, and E. A. S.
Zapico, "On the anisotropic ductile fracture of wire and arc additively
manufactured Al-Mg alloys," Engineering Fracture Mechanics, vol. 245, p.
107604, 2021.
[18] J. A. Gonzalez, J. Mireles, M. A. Hinojosa, and J. M. Chacón, "Additive
manufacturing of metallic components: A review of the most used techniques,"
Acta Metallurgica Sinica (English Letters), vol. 34, no. 11, pp. 1459–1478, 2021.