## 2 Materials and Methods  
### Method of Sample Preparation  
The samples were produced by Fortus 400 mc (Stratasys(r), Eden Prairie, MN, USA) 3D printer, with default melting temperature of 380 \({}^{\circ}\)C. ULTEM9085 (Stratasys(r), Eden Prairie, MN, USA) was chosen as the test material, which is a highly effective thermoplastic material suitable for digital production and rapid prototyping. It is ideal for the transport industry due to its high strength-to-weight ratio and flame, smoke, and toxicity (FST) rating [35].  
The sample preparation experiment was conducted using two types of thermoplastic layer extrusions, with five deposition strategies in terms of individual fibers' orientations. Three identical samples were made for each fiber type and orientation, for a total of 30 samples. The samples were block shaped, each with a size of 70 \(\times\) 20 \(\times\) 6 mm (a \(\times\) b \(\times\) c) (Figure.1) and the contact surface in contact with the rotating disc was a 70 \(\times\) 20 mm wall of the sample that was compatible with the tribometer sample holder. The extruded samples were all 6 mm thick. The samples marked with an X were printed in the horizontal direction, while samples marked with a Z were printed in the vertical direction (Figure 1).  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c} \hline
**Authors** & **Research Objective** & **Materials** & **Methodology** & **Findings** \\ \hline \hline \multirow{7}{*}{[PERSON] et al., 2020} & \multirow{7}{*}{Performance and tribological properties} & 50 wt\% PEEK, 30 wt\% 3 mm (GF), and 20 wt\% & Injection moulding (I) and compression & Final fiber length of 200–300 \(\upmu\) and 1.5 mm were observed for I and C composites, respectively, based on thermal degradation of composites at 600 \({}^{\circ}\)C. Low specific wear rate (K0) (\(\sim\)10–16 m\({}^{3}\)/Nm) and friction coefficient (\(\upmu\)) (\(\sim\)0.03–0.05) were observed in both composites. Similarly, \(\sim\)10–10 m\({}^{3}\)/Nm and \(\sim\)0.5–0.7, correspondingly, were observed for abrasive wear. For K0 and \(\upmu\), both cases, the \(\upmu\) of the I composite was smaller. The C composite was superior to the I composite in adhesive wear efficiency, but not in abrasive wear. \\ \hline \hline \multirow{7}{*}{[PERSON] et al., 2020} & \multirow{7}{*}{Yield strength and friction phenomena at high strain rate using uniaxial and oblique impact configurations} & \multirow{7}{*}{PUD and epoxy} & \multirow{7}{*}{Impact velocities: 50 to 120 m/s for oblique, up to 1200 m/s for uniaxial} & At a high strain rate, the COF values for both polymers were found to be inversely proportional to pressure. For PU and epoxy, respectively, minimum values of 0.11 and 0.26 were measured under maximum pressure. \\  & & & & Pressure dependency of shear strength persisted at high strain rate for both PU and epoxy. \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table}
Table 1: _Cont._After the sample preparation experiment, samples were cleaned with an ultrasonic cleaner for 30 min in a pure ethanol bath and their surfaces were observed under a Leica 59i microscope. Preprocessing was done using the INSIGHT software under default settings for the material used.