Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 103 references

Opportunities for real-time process control of electrode properties in lithium-ion battery manufacturing

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

Pith's one-line read The paper argues that real-time closed-loop control of electrode product properties—not just process variables—is an achievable and commercially promising step for lithium-ion battery electrode lines, potentially cutting cost, energy, and…

desk verdict A well-framed perspective on applying sheet/film process control to electrode manufacturing, but the central cost/yield claim is asserted rather than shown. read the letter →

arxiv 2506.17048 v1 pith:JCJ4G6T4 submitted 2025-06-20 eess.SY cs.SY

Noël Hallemans , Philipp Dechent , David Howey , Simon Clark , Mona Faraji Niri , James Marco , Patrick S. Grant , Stephen R. Duncan This is my paper
classification eess.SYcs.SY
keywords lithium-ionbatterieselectrodemanufacturingreal-timeprocesscontrolclosed-loopfeedbackroll-to-rollprocessingdryingcalenderingsoftsensors
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

Lithium-ion electrode lines today are run to a fixed recipe derived by trial and error; the process variables are regulated, but the electrode product itself is checked offline, so defects are found only after large amounts of material have already passed through. This paper argues that electrode manufacturing should follow paper, film, and steel makers and close a second, outer feedback loop that measures product properties—thickness, coat weight, porosity, coating registration—during production and adjusts the recipe in real time. If this works, electrode lines could operate less conservatively, scrap less material, restart faster after upsets, and save the large energy cost of over-drying, helping to cut battery cost and carbon footprint. The paper identifies drying and geometric properties as the most realistic first targets, while noting that microstructure-level control is harder because online sensors rarely see into the bulk of the coating.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing mechanism is a two-loop control architecture: an inner loop keeps process parameters on their set-points, and an outer product loop takes online measurements or soft-sensor estimates of product parameters and uses them to compute updated process settings in real time. The named pieces are online sensors (infrared, ultrasound, beta-ray and X-ray, cameras, lasers), soft sensors (model-based observers that estimate unmeasurable bulk properties such as porosity from surface measurements), and delay-tolerant controllers such as Smith predictors, internal model control, and model predictive control. Cross-directional control and iterative or repetitive control are identified as the specific mechanisms for edge effects and for intermittent patch coating, respectively. This machinery turns the paper's analogy to sheet and film industries into a concrete control-design task for electrode lines.

What would settle it

Run a pilot electrode line with the proposed sensors and soft sensors, close the outer product loop, and compare the length of out-of-spec electrode produced against the same line running the fixed recipe; if soft-sensor estimation time or accuracy cannot keep up with line speed, the loop will not stabilise the product and the predicted scrap and energy savings will not appear.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that real-time process control of the electrode product is an open opportunity, not something electrode lines currently do. The paper describes how conventional closed-loop control regulates process variables such as line speed, oven temperatures, and roll gap to track a fixed recipe, but does not feed back product parameters such as electrode thickness, coat weight, porosity, or coating registration. It proposes adding an outer control loop in which product parameters are measured or estimated during manufacturing and fed back to adjust the process settings, so the recipe becomes adaptive rather than fixed. Because electrode lines share unit operations—mixing, slot-die coating, drying, and calendering—with paper, film, and metal sheet processes, the paper argues that technology transfer is plausible, while acknowledging that electrodes are functional products whose microstructure must support repeated lithium-ion transfer over many cycles, making them harder to control than purely mechanical sheet products. The expected payoff is higher yield and throughput, lower cost and CO2 emissions, and better tolerance of variable feedstock such as recycled material.

Load-bearing premise

The projection depends on the assumption that online sensors and model-based soft sensors can estimate the electrode product properties that matter—especially bulk microstructure—with enough accuracy and speed to close the outer feedback loop while the line is running.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Electrode lines could move from fixed trial-and-error recipes to adaptive product control, so out-of-spec material is detected and corrected while the line is still running rather than after scrap has accumulated.
  • The first closed-loop implementations would target drying and geometric properties such as thickness and coating registration, which are measurable online, leaving microstructure-dependent properties for later stages.
  • Drying, the most energy-intensive electrode step at roughly 90 percent of line energy use, could be stopped as soon as solvent evaporation is confirmed, reducing energy and cost without the current over-drying safety factor.
  • Cross-directional control of the slot-die lip could correct edge thickening, which would improve cell energy balance and reduce cracking and lithium-plating risks in downstream assembly.
  • For pouch-cell-style patch coating, corrections within a single patch are unlikely because of actuator and sensor delays, so run-to-run or iterative control that learns from one patch to the next is the realistic route.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If closed-loop product control matures, the economic case for large-scale battery recycling could strengthen, because lines that adapt to feedstock variability would tolerate the wider property spread of recycled materials; the paper lists feedstock variability as a driver but does not design for it.
  • The argument implies a concrete breakeven calculation: compare the cost of sensors and actuators (up to roughly $300k per sensor, according to the paper's figures) with the value of scrap avoided and drying energy saved, since a line running at 1 m/s with a minutes-long offline quality delay may produce hundreds of metres of scrapped product per incident.
  • A testable consequence not spelled out in the paper is that the achievable control bandwidth will likely be set by soft-sensor estimation time rather than by controller complexity, so only product properties estimable within the line's residence-time window can be regulated in real time.
  • The same two-loop architecture could plausibly be extended to solvent-free and dry electrode processes, where the outer loop would adjust extrusion screw speed and barrel temperature instead of oven zones, though the paper does not develop that case.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. This paper argues that lithium-ion battery electrode manufacturing could benefit from real-time, closed-loop control of product properties, rather than the current practice of regulating only process variables to follow a fixed recipe. It motivates the idea by drawing analogies to paper, plastic film, coating, printing, and steel sheet processes, and identifies the additional sensors, soft sensors, actuators, models, and control strategies that would be needed to close an outer product-control loop. The paper also discusses specific electrode-manufacturing challenges, including cross-directional edge effects, registration of intermittent coating patches, drying behavior, calendering, and the difficulty of sensing microstructure online. The contribution is primarily a conceptual review and technology-transfer argument; it contains no new control algorithms, no experimental demonstration, and no quantitative case study.

Significance. If the central opportunity claim is accepted, the paper addresses a timely and industrially relevant gap: electrode manufacturing has lagged behind other sheet and film industries in applying product-level feedback control despite strong economic and environmental drivers. The authors give a clear conceptual distinction between process control and product control, and they correctly identify that closing a product-level loop requires online estimation of product parameters, which is more demanding than traditional process regulation. The paper is useful as a roadmap and awareness-raising document, and it honestly flags many of the key obstacles, including the difficulty of measuring microstructure in the bulk and the latency of soft-sensor estimates. Its main weakness is that the broad cost, CO2, and resource-reduction claims in the abstract and conclusions are supported only by analogy and qualitative reasoning, not by quantitative evidence or a concrete feasibility analysis.

major comments (3)
  1. [Abstract and Section 7] The abstract and conclusions assert that real-time process control 'has the potential to reduce the electrode manufacturing cost, CO2 emissions, usage of resources by increases in process yield, and throughput,' but the manuscript provides no quantitative basis for this claim. Section 4 and Table 3 offer only analogies to paper, film, coating, printing, and steel, while the few numbers present (Table 1 costs and energy shares, line speeds in Table 3) are not connected to any calculation of yield loss, scrap reduction, energy savings, or throughput gain. I recommend either adding a simple quantitative illustration, such as the drying-energy savings achievable by stopping drying when solvent evaporation is complete, or explicitly reframing the abstract and conclusions as presenting an unquantified opportunity whose size remains to be demonstrated.
  2. [Sections 5.1 and 5.5] The load-bearing feasibility assumption is that online sensors plus soft sensors can estimate the product parameters that determine electrode quality with sufficient accuracy and speed to close the outer loop shown in Fig. 5(b). The paper itself identifies the unresolved point: Section 5.1 states that online sensors 'can rarely measure directly within the bulk' and that soft sensors must be 'sufficiently accurate' and that 'a long estimation time may limit the control speed,' while Section 5.5 states that product feedback can only remove disturbances 'occurring over distances of the length of metres.' At line speeds up to 90 m/min, this translates into seconds of available response time. The paper reports no sensor accuracy, update rate, soft-sensor latency, or actuator bandwidth figures, and it cites no closed-loop electrode-line demonstration. I ask the authors to provide quantitative requirements for the outer loop, or to narrow the claim to the geometric and drying properties for which such sensing is currently plausible.
  3. [Section 6] Section 6 itself narrows the near-term application to 'geometric properties, such as the thickness of the electrode or the location of the electrode material on the substrate, or to the drying process,' and it notes that interactions between manufacturing stages are not yet fully understood. That self-assessment should be reflected in the paper's framing. As written, the broad cost, CO2, and resource-reduction claims implicitly depend on controlling microstructure-related product parameters that the authors acknowledge cannot yet be sensed online with the required speed. I recommend restructuring the claims into what is feasible now (geometric and drying control) versus what remains a longer-term research challenge (microstructure and functional-property control), and adjusting the title, abstract, and conclusions accordingly.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Figure 1 caption] The caption contains a typographical artifact: 'V olume-weighted' should read 'Volume-weighted.'
  2. [Table 3] The table presents typical costs and line speeds for several industries, but no source or definition is provided for these values; given the order-of-magnitude differences (e.g., electrode manufacturing listed at 20 000 $/ton), I recommend adding citations or explicitly labeling the values as illustrative.
  3. [Section 4] The text states that a paper making machine costs 'up to $1 million,' which appears inconsistent with the scale of modern paper machinery and with the surrounding argument that the machinery is expensive; this figure should be checked and corrected or removed.
  4. [References] References [20] and [30] appear to be the same book (Featherstone, VanAntwerp, and Braatz, 'Identification and control of sheet and film processes'); the duplicate should be consolidated.
  5. [Throughout] There are multiple formatting artifacts in the reference list, such as 'Y . Zhang' and 'V ol.3,' where spaces appear before periods; these should be cleaned up in the final version.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the paper is a qualitative technology-transfer argument with no fitted parameters, derived predictions, or load-bearing self-citation.

full rationale

This paper is a review/perspective that argues for opportunities in real-time product control for electrode manufacturing by analogy with other sheet and film processes. It contains no fitted parameters, no equations whose outputs are equivalent to their inputs, and no claimed prediction that is statistically forced by construction. The central claim that closing an outer product loop could improve yield, cost, and throughput is supported by external literature on papermaking, plastic film, steel rolling, coating, and printing [19–30, 68–77], and the paper repeatedly flags the unresolved feasibility conditions (e.g., Section 5.1: online sensors 'can rarely measure directly within the bulk' and soft sensors 'must be sufficiently accurate and a long estimation time may limit the control speed'; Section 5.5: product control can only remove disturbances 'occurring over distances of the length of metres'). These are limitations, not circular validations. Although several cited references include or are authored by members of the present author team (e.g., [66] Allwood et al., [81] Polyblank et al., [37] Reynolds et al.), none of these citations is load-bearing in the sense of supplying the paper's main premise by fiat; the argument rests on independently documented industrial practice in other sectors and on the paper's own qualitative reasoning. The self-citations are used as supporting background on closed-loop product control in metal forming, not to define the electrode-manufacturing opportunity into existence. No step in the argument reduces, by definition or by fitted input, to the conclusion it is meant to support. The honest finding is therefore no significant circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper introduces no new fitted constants, equations, or entities. Its central claim rests on domain assumptions about sensor feasibility, model linearization, and transferability of control technology from sheet and film processes.

assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption Electrode manufacturing is sufficiently similar to paper, plastic film, steel, and coating processes for product-control strategies to transfer.
    The paper's technology-transfer argument rests on the step comparison in Section 4 and Table 3; no quantitative validation specific to LIB lines is provided.
  • domain assumption Product properties can be measured online with adequate accuracy and speed, including via soft sensors for bulk properties.
    Section 5.1 states online sensors rarely measure within the bulk and soft sensors are required; the paper assumes these can be made accurate enough for closed-loop control.
  • domain assumption Linearized models around set-points are adequate for the inner process-control loop.
    Section 3.1 introduces the linearization assumption and notes it may fail during startup and intermittent coating; the proposed architecture still relies on it for the inner loop.
  • domain assumption Edge effects, feedstock variability, and coating transients can be corrected within actuator bandwidth and sensor delay constraints.
    Sections 5.2, 5.5, and 5.8 acknowledge these constraints and propose control strategies, so the claimed opportunity depends on them being manageable in practice.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Opportunities for real-time process control of electrode properties in lithium-ion battery manufacturing." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/JCJ4G6T4

@misc{pith2026250617048,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Opportunities for real-time process control of electrode properties in lithium-ion battery manufacturing},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/JCJ4G6T4}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2506.17048}
}
read the original abstract

Lithium-ion batteries (LIBs) have an important role in the shift required to achieve a global net-zero carbon target of 2050. Electrode manufacture is amongst the most expensive steps of the LIB manufacturing process and, despite its apparent maturity, optimised manufacturing conditions are arrived at by largely trial and error. Currently, LIB manufacturing plants are controlled to follow the fixed "recipe" obtained by trial and error, which may nonetheless be suboptimal. Moreover, regulating the process as a whole to conform to the set conditions is not widespread. Inspired by control approaches used in other film and sheet processes, we discuss opportunities for implementing real-time process control of electrode-related products, which has the potential to reduce the electrode manufacturing cost, CO2 emissions, usage of resources by increases in process yield, and throughput. We highlight the challenges and significant opportunities of implementing real-time process control in LIB electrode production lines.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2506.17048 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. (a) Potential demand for UK-produced batteries [ [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Illustration of the different steps in electrode manufacturing. Adapted from [33], CC-BY 10.1016/j.matdes.2021.109971. respectively) as binders. The most commonly used sol￾vent for LIB positive electrodes, which are typically based on lithium oxides or phosphates of different types, is N-methyl-2-pyrrolidone (NMP), which dissolves a PVDF (polyvinylidene fluoride) binder. However, NMP is hazardous, expensive, and is … view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. (a) Illustration of edge effects in electrode manufacturing, and indication of the machine and cross directions. (b) Top view of R2R current collector with slot-die coating patches of electrode product. The registration is the placement of the edges of these coat patches, both in machine and cross direction. [50], and hence, faster degradation, and safety issues [51]. These edge effects may also cause problems at th… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (2 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: The electrode drying process. The conductive additive and [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: (a) Control loop for electrode manufacturing [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_5.png]

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

103 extracted references · 80 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    L. S. Martins, L. F. Guimarães, A. B. B. Junior, J. A. S. Tenório, D. C. R. Espinosa, Electric car battery: An overview on global demand, recy- cling and future approaches towards sustainabil- ity, Journal of environmental management 295 (2021) 113091

    2021

  2. [2]

    Fleischmann, M

    J. Fleischmann, M. Hanicke, E. Horetsky, D. Ibrahim, S. Jautelat, M. Linder, P. Schau- fuss, L. Torscht, A. van de Rijt, Battery 2030: Resilient, sustainable, and circular, McKinsey & Company (2023) 2–18

    2023

  3. [3]

    Bloomberg, Electric vehicle outlook 2023,https://about.bnef.com/ electric-vehicle-outlook/, accessed: 24/11/2023 (2023)

    2023

  4. [4]

    The Faraday Institution, UK gigafactory out- look (September 2024): UK electric vehicle and battery production potential to 2040, https://www.faraday.ac.uk/wp-content/ uploads/2024/09/Gigafactory-Report_ 2024_final_17Sept2024.pdf, accessed: 24/09/2024 (2024)

    2024

  5. [5]

    Global Battery Alliance, A vision for a sustainable battery value chain in 2030, https://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_ A_Vision_for_a_Sustainable_Battery_ Value_Chain_in_2030_Report.pdf, ac- cessed: 30/11/2023 (2019)

    2019

  6. [6]

    U.S. Department of Energy, National blueprint for lithium batteries 2021–2030,https: //www.energy.gov/sites/default/files/ 2021-06/FCAB%20National%20Blueprint% 20Lithium%20Batteries%200621_0.pdf, accessed: 27/11/2023 (2021)

    2021

  7. [7]

    europa.eu/resource.html?uri=cellar: 0e8b694e-59b5-11e8-ab41-01aa75ed71a1

    European Commission, Strategic action plan on batteries,https://eur-lex. europa.eu/resource.html?uri=cellar: 0e8b694e-59b5-11e8-ab41-01aa75ed71a1. 0003.02/DOC_3&format=PDF#:~:text=The% 20Commission%20is%20promoting%20a, battery%20packs%2C%20and%20their% 20use%2C, accessed: 29/11/2023 (2018)

    2018

  8. [8]

    Bloomberg, Lithium-ion battery pack prices hit record low of $139/kWh, https://about.bnef.com/blog/ lithium-ion-battery-pack-prices-hit-record-low-of-139-kwh/, accessed: 13/01/2025 (2023)

    2023

Show all 103 references
  1. [9]

    gov.uk/government/publications/ uk-battery-strategy, accessed: 27/11/2023 (2023)

    UK Department for Business and Trade, UK battery strategy,https://www. gov.uk/government/publications/ uk-battery-strategy, accessed: 27/11/2023 (2023)

    2023

  2. [10]

    E. A. Olivetti, G. Ceder, G. G. Gaustad, X. Fu, Lithium-ion battery supply chain considerations: Analysis of potential bottlenecks in critical met- als, Joule 1 (2) (2017) 229–243

    2017

  3. [11]

    uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/ Faraday-Annual-Report-2018-19-part2-FINAL-1

    The Faraday Institution, Powering Britain’s battery revolution: Annual re- port 2018/2019,https://faraday.ac. uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/ Faraday-Annual-Report-2018-19-part2-FINAL-1. pdf, accessed: 27/11/2023 (2019)

    2019

  4. [12]

    P. S. Grant, D. Greenwood, K. Pardikar, R. Smith, T. Entwistle, L. A. Middlemiss, G. Murray, S. A. Cussen, M. J. Lain, M. Capener, et al., Roadmap on Li-ion battery manufacturing research, Journal of Physics: Energy 4 (4) (2022) 042006

    2022

  5. [13]

    W. B. Hawley, J. Li, Electrode manufacturing for lithium-ion batteries—Analysis of current and next generation processing, Journal of Energy Storage 25 (2019) 100862. 12

    2019

  6. [14]

    Harper, R

    G. Harper, R. Sommerville, E. Kendrick, L. Driscoll, P. Slater, R. Stolkin, A. Walton, P. Christensen, O. Heidrich, S. Lambert, et al., Recycling lithium-ion batteries from electric ve- hicles, nature 575 (7781) (2019) 75–86

    2019

  7. [15]

    R. E. Ciez, J. Whitacre, Examining different re- cycling processes for lithium-ion batteries, Na- ture Sustainability 2 (2) (2019) 148–156

    2019

  8. [16]

    Sommerville, J

    R. Sommerville, J. Shaw-Stewart, V . Goodship, N. Rowson, E. Kendrick, A review of physical processes used in the safe recycling of lithium ion batteries, Sustainable Materials and Tech- nologies 25 (2020) e00197

    2020

  9. [17]

    Pucker-Singer, C

    J. Pucker-Singer, C. Aichberger, J. Zupan ˇciˇc, C. Neumann, D. N. Bird, G. Jungmeier, A. Gu- bina, A. Tuerk, Greenhouse gas emissions of sta- tionary battery installations in two renewable en- ergy projects, Sustainability 13 (11) (2021) 6330

    2021

  10. [18]

    Kallitsis, J

    E. Kallitsis, J. J. Lindsay, M. Chordia, B. Wu, G. J. Offer, J. S. Edge, Think global act lo- cal: the dependency of global lithium-ion bat- tery emissions on production location and mate- rial sources, Journal of Cleaner Production 449 (2024) 141725

    2024

  11. [19]

    G. A. Dumont, Application of advanced control methods in the pulp and paper industry—A sur- vey, Automatica 22 (2) (1986) 143–153

    1986

  12. [20]

    A. P. Featherstone, J. G. VanAntwerp, R. D. Braatz, Identification and control of sheet and film processes, Advances in industrial control, Springer, London, 2000

    2000

  13. [21]

    G. E. Stewart, D. M. Gorinevsky, G. A. Du- mont, Feedback controller design for a spatially distributed system: The paper machine problem, IEEE Transactions on Control Systems Technol- ogy 11 (5) (2003) 612–628

    2003

  14. [22]

    D. J. Marshman, T. Chmelyk, M. S. Sidhu, R. B. Gopaluni, G. A. Dumont, Energy optimization in a pulp and paper mill cogeneration facility, Ap- plied Energy 87 (11) (2010) 3514–3525

    2010

  15. [23]

    Curry, Lithium-ion battery costs and market, Bloomberg New Energy Finance 5 (4-6) (2017) 43

    C. Curry, Lithium-ion battery costs and market, Bloomberg New Energy Finance 5 (4-6) (2017) 43

    2017

  16. [24]

    S.-H. Hur, R. Katebi, A. Taylor, Modeling and control of a plastic film manufacturing web pro- cess, IEEE Transactions on Industrial Informat- ics 7 (2) (2010) 171–178

    2010

  17. [25]

    G. F. Bryant, Automation of Tandem Mills, The Iron and Steel Institute, Amsterdam, 1973

    1973

  18. [26]

    S. G. Choi, M. A. Johnson, M. Grimble, Poly- nomial LQG control of back-up-roll eccentricity gauge variations in cold rolling mills, Automat- ica 30 (6) (1994) 975–992

    1994

  19. [27]

    Edwards, A

    W. Edwards, A. Carlton, G. Harvey, R. Evans, P. J. McKerrow, Coating mass control system de- sign for a continuous galvanizing line, Automat- ica 12 (3) (1976) 225–235

    1976

  20. [28]

    Englund, A

    C. Englund, A. Verikas, Ink feed control in a web-fed offset printing press, The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology 39 (2008) 919–930

    2008

  21. [29]

    Seshadri, P

    A. Seshadri, P. R. Pagilla, J. E. Lynch, Modeling print registration in roll-to-roll printing presses, Journal of Dynamic Systems, Measurement, and Control 135 (3) (2013) 031016

    2013

  22. [30]

    A. P. Featherstone, J. G. VanAntwerp, R. D. Braatz, Identification and control of sheet and film processes, Springer, 2000

    2000

  23. [31]

    J. Li, J. Fleetwood, W. B. Hawley, W. Kays, From materials to cell: State-of-the-art and prospective technologies for lithium-ion battery electrode processing, Chemical Reviews 122 (1) (2021) 903–956

    2021

  24. [32]

    Gonçalves, S

    R. Gonçalves, S. Lanceros-Méndez, C. Costa, Electrode fabrication process and its influence in lithium-ion battery performance: State of the art and future trends, Electrochemistry Communica- tions 135 (2022) 107210

    2022

  25. [33]

    C. D. Reynolds, P. R. Slater, S. D. Hare, M. J. Simmons, E. Kendrick, A review of metrology in lithium-ion electrode coating processes, Materi- als & Design 209 (2021) 109971

    2021

  26. [34]

    Duquesnoy, I

    M. Duquesnoy, I. Boyano, L. Ganborena, P. Cereijo, E. Ayerbe, A. A. Franco, Machine learning-based assessment of the impact of the manufacturing process on battery electrode het- erogeneity, Energy and AI 5 (2021) 100090

    2021

  27. [35]

    Y . S. Zhang, J. J. Bailey, Y . Sun, A. M. Boyce, W. Dawson, C. D. Reynolds, Z. Zhang, X. Lu, P. Grant, E. Kendrick, et al., Applications of advanced metrology for understanding the ef- fects of drying temperature in the lithium-ion bat- tery electrode manufacturing process, J...

    2022

  28. [36]

    Y . S. Zhang, N. E. Courtier, Z. Zhang, K. Liu, J. J. Bailey, A. M. Boyce, G. Richardson, P. R. Shear- ing, E. Kendrick, D. J. Brett, A review of lithium- ion battery electrode drying: mechanisms and metrology, Advanced Energy Materials 12 (2) (2022) 2102233

    2022

  29. [37]

    Reynolds, M

    C. Reynolds, M. Faraji Niri, M. F. Hidalgo, R. Heymer, L. Roman, G. Alsofi, H. Khanom, B. Pye, J. Marco, E. Kendrick, Impact of for- mulation and slurry properties on lithium-ion electrode manufacturing, Batteries & Supercaps (2023) e202300396

    2023

  30. [38]

    Hidalgo, G

    M. Hidalgo, G. Apachitei, D. Dogaru, M. Faraji- Niri, M. Lain, M. Copley, J. Marco, Design of experiments for optimizing the calendering pro- cess in Li-ion battery manufacturing, Journal of Power Sources 573 (2023) 233091

    2023

  31. [39]

    Y . Liu, R. Zhang, J. Wang, Y . Wang, Cur- rent and future lithium-ion battery manufactur- ing, IScience 24 (4) (2021)

    2021

  32. [40]

    W. B. Hawley, A. Parejiya, Y . Bai, H. M. Meyer III, D. L. Wood III, J. Li, Lithium and transition metal dissolution due to aqueous pro- cessing in lithium-ion battery cathode active ma- terials, Journal of Power Sources 466 (2020) 228315

    2020

  33. [41]

    W. B. Hawley, H. M. Meyer III, J. Li, Enabling aqueous processing for LiNi 0.80Co0.15Al0.05O2 (NCA)-based lithium-ion battery cathodes using polyacrylic acid, Electrochimica Acta 380 (2021) 138203

    2021

  34. [42]

    Y . Liu, X. Gong, C. Podder, F. Wang, Z. Li, J. Liu, J. Fu, X. Ma, P. Vanaphuti, R. Wang, et al., Roll-to-roll solvent-free manufactured electrodes for fast-charging batteries, Joule 7 (5) (2023) 952–970

    2023

  35. [43]

    Matthews, S

    G. Matthews, S. Wheeler, J. Ramírez-González, P. Grant, Solvent-free NMC electrodes for Li-ion batteries: unravelling the microstructure and for- mation of the PTFE nano-fibril network, Fron- tiers in Energy Research 11 (2024) 1336344

    2024

  36. [44]

    Matthews, B

    G. Matthews, B. Meyer, C. Doerrer, J. Ramirez- Gonzalez, E. Darnbrough, N. Hallemans, D. Armstrong, P. S. Grant, Impact of binder content on particle fracture and microstructure of solvent-free electrodes for Li-ion batteries, Journal of Materials Chemistry A (2025)

    2025

  37. [45]

    M. Ank, A. Sommer, K. A. Gamra, J. Schöberl, M. Leeb, J. Schachtl, N. Streidel, S. Stock, M. Schreiber, P. Bilfinger, et al., Lithium-ion cells in automotive applications: Tesla 4680 cylindrical cell teardown and characterization, Journal of The Electrochemical Society 170 (12...

    2023

  38. [46]

    Schmitt, M

    M. Schmitt, M. Baunach, L. Wengeler, K. Pe- ters, P. Junges, P. Scharfer, W. Schabel, Slot- die processing of lithium-ion battery elec- trodes—coating window characterization, Chem- ical Engineering and Processing: Process Inten- sification 68 (2013) 32–37

    2013

  39. [47]

    X. Gong, J. Han, F. Yan, X. Du, Numerical and experimental investigation on formation of the film for different die lip configurations in lithium- ion battery electrode slot-die coating, Journal of Coatings Technology and Research 21 (2) (2024) 481–492

    2024

  40. [48]

    Schmitt, P

    M. Schmitt, P. Scharfer, W. Schabel, Slot die coating of lithium-ion battery electrodes: investi- gations on edge effect issues for stripe and pat- tern coatings, Journal of Coatings Technology and Research 11 (2014) 57–63

    2014

  41. [49]

    Spiegel, T

    S. Spiegel, T. Heckmann, A. Altvater, R. Diehm, P. Scharfer, W. Schabel, Investigation of edge for- mation during the coating process of Li-ion bat- tery electrodes, Journal of Coatings Technology and Research (2022) 1–10

    2022

  42. [50]

    Deichmann, L

    E. Deichmann, L. Torres-Castro, J. Lamb, M. Karulkar, S. Ivanov, C. Grosso, L. Gray, J. Langendorf, F. Garzon, Investigating the ef- fects of lithium deposition on the abuse response of lithium-ion batteries, Journal of The Electro- chemical Society 167 (9) (2020) 090552

    2020

  43. [51]

    P. M. Attia, E. Moch, P. K. Herring, Challenges and opportunities for high-quality battery pro- duction at scale, Nature Communications 16 (1) (2025) 611

    2025

  44. [52]

    M. D. Bouguern, A. K. Madikere Raghu- natha Reddy, X. Li, S. Deng, H. Laryea, K. Za- ghib, Engineering dry electrode manufacturing for sustainable lithium-ion batteries, Batteries 10 (1) (2024) 39. 14

    2024

  45. [53]

    D. E. Crawford, J. Casaban, Recent develop- ments in mechanochemical materials synthesis by extrusion, Advanced Materials 28 (27) (2016) 5747–5754

    2016

  46. [54]

    El Khakani, N

    S. El Khakani, N. Verdier, D. Lepage, A. Prébé, D. Aymé-Perrot, D. Rochefort, M. Dollé, Melt- processed electrode for lithium ion battery, Jour- nal of Power Sources 454 (2020) 227884

    2020

  47. [55]

    Seeba, S

    J. Seeba, S. Reuber, C. Heubner, A. Müller- Köhn, M. Wolter, A. Michaelis, Extrusion-based fabrication of electrodes for high-energy Li- ion batteries, Chemical Engineering Journal 402 (2020) 125551

    2020

  48. [56]

    Haarmann, D

    M. Haarmann, D. Grießl, A. Kwade, Continu- ous processing of cathode slurry by extrusion for lithium-ion batteries, Energy Technology 9 (10) (2021) 2100250

    2021

  49. [57]

    Wiegmann, H

    E. Wiegmann, H. Cavers, A. Diener, A. Kwade, Semi-dry extrusion-based processing for graphite anodes: Morphological insights and elec- trochemical performance, Energy Technology 11 (9) (2023) 2300341

    2023

  50. [58]

    Jaiser, M

    S. Jaiser, M. Müller, M. Baunach, W. Bauer, P. Scharfer, W. Schabel, Investigation of film so- lidification and binder migration during drying of Li-ion battery anodes, Journal of Power Sources 318 (2016) 210–219

    2016

  51. [59]

    Kumberg, M

    J. Kumberg, M. Müller, R. Diehm, S. Spiegel, C. Wachsmann, W. Bauer, P. Scharfer, W. Scha- bel, Drying of lithium-ion battery anodes for use in high-energy cells: influence of electrode thick- ness on drying time, adhesion, and crack forma- tion, Energy Technology 7 (11) (2019)

    2019

  52. [60]

    Meyer, H

    C. Meyer, H. Bockholt, W. Haselrieder, A. Kwade, Characterization of the calendering process for compaction of electrodes for lithium- ion batteries, Journal of Materials Processing Technology 249 (2017) 172–178

    2017

  53. [61]

    Günther, D

    T. Günther, D. Schreiner, A. Metkar, C. Meyer, A. Kwade, G. Reinhart, Classification of calendering-induced electrode defects and their influence on subsequent processes of lithium- ion battery production, Energy Technology 8 (2) (2020) 1900026

    2020

  54. [62]

    A. C. Ngandjong, T. Lombardo, E. N. Primo, M. Chouchane, A. Shodiev, O. Arcelus, A. A. Franco, Investigating electrode calendering and its impact on electrochemical performance by means of a new discrete element method model: Towards a digital twin of Li-ion battery manu- fact...

    2021

  55. [63]

    F. M. Zanotto, D. Z. Dominguez, E. Ayerbe, I. Boyano, C. Burmeister, M. Duquesnoy, M. Eisentraeger, J. F. Montaño, A. Gallo-Bueno, L. Gold, et al., Data specifications for bat- tery manufacturing digitalization: current status, challenges, and opportunities, Batteries & Super-...

    2022

  56. [64]

    K. J. Åström, T. Hägglund, The future of PID control, Control Engineering Practice 9 (11) (2001) 1163–1175

    2001

  57. [65]

    K. J. Åström, T. Hägglund, Advanced PID con- trol, ISA-International Society of Automation, 2006

    2006

  58. [66]

    J. M. Allwood, S. Duncan, J. Cao, P. Groche, G. Hirt, B. Kinsey, T. Kuboki, M. Liewald, A. Sterzing, A. E. Tekkaya, Closed-loop control of product properties in metal forming, CIRP An- nals 65 (2) (2016) 573–596

    2016

  59. [67]

    D. C. Montgomery, Introduction to statistical quality control, John Wiley & Sons, 2020

    2020

  60. [68]

    M. J. Grimble, Polynomial solution of the stan- dard H2 optimal control problem for machine control system applications: LQG gauge control problem design, Optimal Control Applications and Methods 16 (2) (1995) 77–104

    1995

  61. [69]

    Wellstead, W

    P. Wellstead, W. Heath, A. Kjaer, Identifica- tion and control of web processes: Polymer film extrusion, Control Engineering Practice 6 (3) (1998) 321–331

    1998

  62. [70]

    J. G. VanAntwerp, A. P. Featherstone, R. D. Braatz, B. A. Ogunnaike, Cross-directional con- trol of sheet and film processes, Automatica 43 (2) (2007) 191–211

    2007

  63. [71]

    P. G. Lafleur, B. Vergnes, Polymer extrusion, John Wiley & Sons, 2014

    2014

  64. [72]

    Abeykoon, A novel model-based controller for polymer extrusion, IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems 22 (6) (2014) 1413–1430

    C. Abeykoon, A novel model-based controller for polymer extrusion, IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems 22 (6) (2014) 1413–1430. 15

    2014

  65. [73]

    B. R. Tibbetts, J. T.-Y . Wen, Extrusion pro- cess control: Modeling, identification, and opti- mization, IEEE Transactions on Control Systems technology 6 (2) (1998) 134–145

    1998

  66. [74]

    Jiang, Y

    Z. Jiang, Y . Yang, S. Mo, K. Yao, F. Gao, Poly- mer extrusion: From control system design to product quality, Industrial & engineering chem- istry research 51 (45) (2012) 14759–14770

    2012

  67. [75]

    C. Abeykoon, A novel soft sensor for real-time monitoring of the die melt temperature profile in polymer extrusion, IEEE Transactions on Indus- trial Electronics 61 (12) (2014) 7113–7123

    2014

  68. [76]

    Abeykoon, Single screw extrusion control: A comprehensive review and directions for im- provements, Control Engineering Practice 51 (2016) 69–80

    C. Abeykoon, Single screw extrusion control: A comprehensive review and directions for im- provements, Control Engineering Practice 51 (2016) 69–80

    2016

  69. [77]

    Stenström, Drying of paper: A review 2000– 2018, Drying technology (2020)

    S. Stenström, Drying of paper: A review 2000– 2018, Drying technology (2020)

    2020

  70. [78]

    Stephan, L

    A. Stephan, L. D. Anadon, V . H. Hoffmann, How has external knowledge contributed to lithium- ion batteries for the energy transition?, Iscience 24 (1) (2021)

    2021

  71. [79]

    Y . S. Zhang, A. N. Pallipurath Radhakrishnan, J. B. Robinson, R. E. Owen, T. G. Tranter, E. Kendrick, P. R. Shearing, D. J. Brett, In situ ultrasound acoustic measurement of the lithium- ion battery electrode drying process, ACS Ap- plied Materials & Interfaces 13 (30) (2021)...

    2021

  72. [80]

    E. Guk, M. F. Niri, T. A. Vincent, G. Apachitei, C. Briggs, B. Gulsoy, S. Chao, Z. Guo, J. E. Sansom, J. Marco, Investigation of calendaring parameters on the microstructure of graphite an- odes within lithium-ion batteries: Insights from ultrasonic testing, Journal of Power S...

    2024

  73. [81]

    J. A. Polyblank, J. M. Allwood, S. R. Dun- can, Closed-loop control of product properties in metal forming: A review and prospectus, Jour- nal of Materials Processing Technology 214 (11) (2014) 2333–2348

    2014

  74. [82]

    Ayerbe, M

    E. Ayerbe, M. Berecibar, S. Clark, A. A. Franco, J. Ruhland, Digitalization of battery manufactur- ing: current status, challenges, and opportuni- ties, Advanced Energy Materials 12 (17) (2022) 2102696

    2022

  75. [83]

    Pintelon, P

    R. Pintelon, P. Guillaume, Y . Rolain, J. Schoukens, H. Van Hamme, Parametric identification of transfer functions in the fre- quency domain—A survey, IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control 39 (11) (1994) 2245–2260

    1994

  76. [84]

    Ljung, System Identification: Theory for the User, Prentice Hall, 1999

    L. Ljung, System Identification: Theory for the User, Prentice Hall, 1999

    1999

  77. [85]

    Pintelon, J

    R. Pintelon, J. Schoukens, System Identification: A Frequency Domain Approach, John Wiley & Sons, 2012

    2012

  78. [86]

    Coulson, J

    J. Coulson, J. Lygeros, F. Dörfler, Data-enabled predictive control: In the shallows of the DeePC, in: 2019 18th European Control Conference (ECC), IEEE, 2019, pp. 307–312

    2019

  79. [87]

    K. J. Åström, T. Hägglund, Revisiting the Ziegler–Nichols step response method for PID control, Journal of process control 14 (6) (2004) 635–650

    2004

  80. [88]

    C. E. Garcia, M. Morari, Internal model control. A unifying review and some new results, Indus- trial & Engineering Chemistry Process Design and Development 21 (2) (1982) 308–323

    1982

  81. [89]

    Morari, E

    M. Morari, E. Zafiriou, Robust Process Control, Prentice-Hall, 1989

    1989

  82. [90]

    W. Tang, M. Wang, Y . Chao, L. He, H. Itoh, A study on the internal relationship among Smith predictor, Dahlin controller & PID, in: 2007 IEEE International Conference on Automation and Logistics, IEEE, 2007, pp. 3101–3106

    2007

  83. [91]

    O. J. Smith, Closer control of loops with dead time, Chemistry Engineering Progress (5) (1957) 217–219

    1957

  84. [92]

    C. B. Brosilow, The structure and design of Smith predictors from the viewpoint of inferential con- trol, in: Joint Automatic Control Conference, no. 16, 1979, p. 288

    1979

  85. [93]

    K. J. Astrom, C. C. Hang, B. Lim, A new Smith predictor for controlling a process with an inte- grator and long dead-time, IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control 39 (2) (1994) 343–345

    1994

  86. [94]

    Kouvaritakis, M

    B. Kouvaritakis, M. Cannon, Model predictive control, Switzerland: Springer International Pub- lishing 38 (2016) 13–56. 16

    2016

  87. [95]

    Johnson, Accomodation of external distur- bances in linear regulator and servomechanism problems, IEEE Transactions on automatic con- trol 16 (6) (1971) 635–644

    C. Johnson, Accomodation of external distur- bances in linear regulator and servomechanism problems, IEEE Transactions on automatic con- trol 16 (6) (1971) 635–644

    1971

  88. [96]

    K. J. Åström, R. Murray, Feedback systems: an introduction for scientists and engineers, Prince- ton University Press, 2021

    2021

  89. [97]

    A. Mayr, D. Schreiner, B. Stumper, R. Daub, In- line sensor-based process control of the calen- dering process for lithium-ion batteries, Procedia CIRP 107 (2022) 295–301

    2022

  90. [98]

    J. Lee, J. Seong, J. Park, S. Park, D. Lee, K.- H. Shin, Register control algorithm for high res- olution multilayer printing in the roll-to-roll pro- cess, Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing 60 (2015) 706–714

    2015

  91. [99]

    Z. Chen, Y . Zheng, T. Zhang, D. S.-H. Wong, Z. Deng, Modeling and register control of the speed-up phase in roll-to-roll printing systems, IEEE Transactions on Automation Science and Engineering 16 (3) (2018) 1438–1449

    2018

  92. [100]

    Garimella, K

    S. Garimella, K. Srinivasan, Application of repet- itive control to eccentricity compensation in rolling, in: Proceedings of 1994 American Con- trol Conference - ACC ’94, V ol. 3, 1994, pp. 2904–2908 vol.3

    1994

  93. [101]

    R. W. Longman, Iterative learning control and repetitive control for engineering practice, Inter- national Journal of Control 73 (2000) 930–954

    2000

  94. [102]

    A. K. Rzepniewski, D. E. Hardt, Development of general multivariable run-by-run control meth- ods with application to a sheet metal forming pro- cess, International Journal of Machine Tools and Manufacture 48 (5) (2008) 599–608, advances in Sheet Metal Forming Applications

    2008

  95. [103]

    Y . Wang, F. Gao, F. J. Doyle, Survey on itera- tive learning control, repetitive control, and run- to-run control, Journal of Process Control 19 (10) (2009) 1589–1600. 17

    2009

Pith tools

Reviewed August 6, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.