Pith. sign in

REVIEW 5 major objections 5 minor 42 references

An FFT based chemo-mechanical framework with fracture: application to mesoscopic electrode degradation

T0 review · 5 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-12 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read An FFT-based staggered solver claims to simulate coupled ion diffusion, finite-strain deformation, and phase-field fracture in battery particles, matching finite-element results and reproducing observed crack shapes at much lower cost.

desk verdict Genuinely new FFT framework for chemo-mechanical fracture, honestly validated in 2D against FE, but the 3D crack-shape claim rests on an insufficiently validated buffer-layer device. read the letter →

arxiv 2411.16583 v1 pith:YJBRFRMN submitted 2024-11-25 cond-mat.mtrl-sci

Gabriel Zarzoso , Eduardo Roque , Francisco Montero-Chacón , Javier Segurado This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.mtrl-sci
keywords FFThomogenizationphasefieldfracturelithium-ionbatterychemo-mechanicalcouplinggraphiteparticlefinitestrainselectrodedegradationmicromechanics
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

This paper proposes a Fourier-based computational method that simulates the coupled processes behind electrode degradation in lithium-ion batteries: ion diffusion into active particles, large deformation caused by chemical swelling, and fracture of the particle. The authors claim that all three problems, with phase-field damage, can be solved in Fourier space with periodic boundary conditions, using a buffer layer and a volumetric source to emulate a free surface with ion influx, and that the results agree with finite-element predictions 'very close in all the cases.' They further claim the method reproduces the crack shapes observed in real graphite particles, and can solve a 3D particle with over two million voxels in a few hours on a workstation. If the claims hold, mesoscale electrode-degradation studies that previously required expensive finite-element simulations become routine.

What carries the argument

The argument is carried by three coupled spectral solvers plus one numerical device. The device is the buffer-layer emulation of boundary conditions: the particle is embedded in a phase with stiffness and diffusivity reduced by a factor of $10^{-5}$ so it deforms freely and traps ions, while the ion inflow is applied as a volumetric source over a narrow strip of width $\delta_L$ along the boundary, intended to reproduce a Neumann flux and a free surface inside a periodic domain. The three spectral solvers are: Fourier Galerkin in finite strains for mechanical equilibrium (Newton-Raphson with conjugate gradient); a conjugate-gradient solve of the phase-field fracture equation with a spectral preconditioner built from the Helmholtz operator; and a backward-Euler/Newton-Raphson solve of the Fickian diffusion equation using a chemical potential that includes an elastic contribution and a regular solution term.

What would settle it

Repeat the 3D irregular-particle FFT simulation with the source-strip width $\delta_L$ set to one, three, and six voxels with the total incoming flux held fixed; if crack path or nucleation time changes materially, the buffer-layer emulation of Neumann boundary conditions is not faithful. A stricter version is a finite-element simulation of the same particle with true boundary conditions and a free surface, comparing crack position and timing.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that a fully coupled, finite-strain chemo-mechanical problem with fracture can be solved by an implicit staggered FFT scheme in which each of the three fields is handled with its own spectral solver. Mechanical equilibrium is solved by Fourier Galerkin with Newton-Raphson and conjugate gradient; the phase-field damage equation, a Helmholtz-type equation, is solved by conjugate gradient with a spectral preconditioner; and the diffusion equation with a physically based chemical potential is integrated in time by backward Euler and solved by Newton-Raphson with a conjugate-gradient inner solver. The paper reports that, across benchmarks on Neumann boundary conditions, heterogeneous diffusion, and coupled fracture, the FFT results are essentially indistinguishable from or very close to finite-element results, with concentration differences below about three percent and identical crack positions. On the battery-particle applications, the computed damage patterns match experimentally observed shapes, with cracks nucleating in the tensile-stressed core and crossing the particle from surface to surface.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that a narrow volumetric source placed in a buffer layer of near-zero stiffness and near-zero diffusivity faithfully mimics the real boundary conditions, namely the ion flux from the electrolyte and the stress-free surface, for arbitrary particle shapes, even though the device is calibrated only against a thin-plate benchmark and the strip width is changed from one voxel to six voxels between runs.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • In validation cases, the FFT framework reproduces the finite-element concentration evolution with average errors below 0.14% in the Neumann boundary benchmark and below about 3% peak in heterogeneous diffusion, so it can serve as a cheaper replacement for finite-element methods in such coupled problems.
  • The 3D irregular-particle simulation, with $128^3$ voxels, finishes in a few hours on a single workstation, making mesoscale electrode-degradation simulations practical without a cluster.
  • The method reproduces experimentally observed crack morphologies in graphite particles, including core-initiated cracks that cross the particle, so it can be used to predict fracture under intercalation fluxes.
  • Because the Fourier mechanical solver is material-independent, the same staggered scheme can be reused with any constitutive law, for example elastoplastic particle behavior.
  • The buffer-layer volumetric source reproduces the finite-element Neumann boundary conditions in the thin-plate test, validating the periodic-domain emulation for isolated bodies.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Beyond the paper: because the chemical and mechanical potentials are generic, the same solver structure should transfer to hydrogen-embrittlement and oxidation problems, which the paper names only as future applications.
  • Beyond the paper: the change in source-strip width between the validation (one voxel) and the 2D particle example (six voxels) means the 3D crack predictions should be checked against a $\delta_L$-convergence study before being read quantitatively.
  • Beyond the paper: the near-linear scaling of FFT methods makes statistical studies feasible in practice, such as many-particle simulations, many stochastic draws, or charge-discharge fatigue cycling, which would be computationally out of reach with the finite-element implementations cited in the paper.
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

5 major / 5 minor

Summary. The manuscript proposes an FFT-based framework for coupled chemo-mechanical problems with phase-field fracture at finite strains, targeting lithium-ion battery electrode degradation. The mechanical problem is solved with Fourier Galerkin, damage with a preconditioned conjugate-gradient Helmholtz solver, and diffusion with a Newton-Raphson/Krylov scheme, all coupled in an implicit staggered manner; buffer layers with reduced stiffness and diffusivity are introduced to emulate Neumann boundary conditions and isolated particles. The framework is validated against a FEniCS FE implementation for diffusion in homogeneous and heterogeneous media and for a 2D thin-plate fracture problem, then applied to 2D and 3D graphite particle cracking during ion intercalation. The paper claims that the FFT results are 'very close' to FE in all validation cases and that the method reproduces experimentally observed crack shapes at reduced computational cost.

Significance. If the framework performs as claimed, it would be a valuable tool for mesoscale battery-electrode simulations, where existing FE chemo-mechanical models are computationally expensive. The FE benchmarks for diffusion are genuine external checks, with maximum differences of 1.39% and 2.94%, and the proposed solvers are described in enough detail to be reimplemented. The application to a 3D realistic particle is also timely and of practical interest. However, the significance is currently limited by the lack of quantitative validation for the coupled fracture case, the unvalidated buffer-layer device in the 3D application, and the unsupported computational-cost claim. The core FFT method appears sound, but the load-bearing 3D crack-shape claim is not yet established.

major comments (5)
  1. [Sections 4.3 and 5.2] The buffer-layer technique is load-bearing for the 3D crack-shape claim and is not validated for irregular particles. The FE benchmark of Section 4.3 uses a thin plate with straight boundaries, a one-voxel source strip, and a buffer of unspecified thickness; Section 5.1 changes the strip width to six voxels and Section 5.2 back to one voxel, without any convergence study on buffer stiffness, buffer thickness, or strip width. Since Eq. (6) is solved over the whole periodic domain including the buffer, where H=0, the damage field can penetrate the buffer over a length scale about lc (≈2 voxels), and if the buffer is not several lc thick, periodic images interact through the phase field and mechanical constraint. The paper does not report the buffer thickness in the 3D simulation, so the crack pattern in Fig. 13 may be a numerical artifact of the buffer rather than a faithful prediction for an isolated particle.
  2. [Section 5.2 and Conclusions] The central claim that the framework 'reproduces the shape of the cracks observed in real particles' is supported only by a qualitative visual comparison to the literature [43]; no experimental image is shown and no quantitative metric (e.g., crack path distance, damage volume fraction, or orientation error) is used. The Conclusions correctly soften this to 'qualitatively reproduce', but the Abstract does not. Moreover, no FE validation is performed for the 3D case (the text states that computational cost exceeded capacity), so the 3D result is an unvalidated demonstration rather than a validated prediction.
  3. [Section 3.2, 'Global problem'] The chemical subproblem is integrated only once per time step using the deformation gradient and damage of the previous step, as seen in Eq. (42) with C_t and d_t, while the mechanical and phase-field problems are iterated to equilibrium. This semi-implicit approximation is motivated by 'small influence' but no error estimate or time-step convergence study is provided. With a swelling parameter of Ω=1.3, the deformation gradient changes substantially during intercalation, and the mechanical contribution to the chemical potential (Eq. (18)) depends on C; using the previous step's C could bias the concentration gradients that drive fracture. This should be quantified for at least one representative case.
  4. [Section 4.3] The coupled fracture validation is not quantitative. The paper states that crack positions are identical and that FFT predicts a thinner crack than FE, and shows damage images in Figs. 6, 8, and 9, but no numerical comparison is given (e.g., a norm of the damage-field difference, crack length, or dissipated energy). The abstract's claim that results are 'very close in all the cases' is therefore not substantiated for the fracture case.
  5. [Algorithms 1-4 and Section 4.1] Reproducibility is hindered by missing and inconsistent numerical details. The convergence tolerances tolnw, tollin, tolchem, tolcg, and tolst are never assigned values; the buffer thickness in the 3D simulation is not reported; and several unit inconsistencies appear, e.g., Section 4.1 states Lx=0.010 µm but uses diffusivity in mm^2/s, and the stated δL and q_in do not produce the stated c_dot_B=6.5e-7, while Section 4.3 mixes mol/mm^3s and mol/mm^2s. These issues prevent exact reproduction of the validation and application cases.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Eq. (31)] Equation (31) defines errres as the ratio of two identical expressions; the numerator and denominator are the same, so the residual cannot be computed as written. This appears to be a typo, but it affects the reproducibility of Algorithm 1.
  2. [References] References [23] and [24] are the same paper (Zeman et al., 2017) and are duplicated.
  3. [Throughout] There are several typographical errors: 'Gumbell' should be 'Gumbel', 'Butler-Volman' should be 'Butler-Volmer', and 'FEnics' is used inconsistently alongside 'FEniCS'.
  4. [Section 5.2] The qualitative comparison to experiments would be much more convincing if the experimental crack image from [43] were reproduced side-by-side with the simulation result.
  5. [Conclusions] The statement that the 3D problem was 'solved in a few hours on a single workstation' is not accompanied by any wall-clock times for the validation cases or a comparison with FE cost; please provide timing data to support the computational-efficiency claim.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the FFT framework is validated against an independent FE implementation, and prior-work parameters are inputs, not fitted predictions.

full rationale

The derivation chain is self-contained. The central method claim is checked against a FEniCS finite-element implementation of the same model (Section 4), with quantitative agreement on Neumann-flux diffusion (differences 0.047–0.14%), bi-material diffusion, and fracture patterns. That FE benchmark is an external numerical reference, not a re-statement of the FFT solver's own outputs. The material parameters (E, ν, gc, lc, σmax, Ω, D, and the Gumbell distribution exponents) are taken from the authors' prior work [15], but they enter as fixed inputs rather than being fitted in this paper; no equation in the paper redefines a predicted crack shape or concentration field in terms of those parameters (Eqs. 1–50 are constitutive and discretization statements, not fitted relations). The buffer-layer and volumetric-source device (Eqs. 38–40) is an explicit modeling approximation with stated parameter choices (Evoid = 10^-5 Emat, Dvoid = 10^-5 Dmat, δL = 1 or 6 voxels); while its lack of systematic convergence testing for the 3D irregular-particle case is a legitimate validation gap, it is not circularity because the resulting crack pattern is not fed back into any calibration. The paper itself flags that FE simulations were not performed for the 3D application due to computational cost (Section 6), and the qualitative comparison with experimental crack shapes cites external references [43, 42]; the inclusion of [15] in that comparison is a minor self-citation but is not load-bearing for the FFT-vs-FE validation performed here. No self-citation chain, imported uniqueness theorem, or construction-level equivalence forces the claimed results.

Assumptions & free parameters 6 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 1 invented entities

The model uses a small set of material parameters (E, nu, gc, sigma_max, Omega, D) taken as inputs from prior literature [15]. The genuinely free choices in this paper are the buffer properties, the source-strip width, the phase-field length scale, the Gumbell exponent, and the solver tolerances. The physics rests on standard ideal-solution diffusion and stress-threshold phase-field fracture, plus two ad hoc numerical devices: the buffer layer and the one-step-per-time semi-implicit chemical update.

free parameters (6)
  • Buffer stiffness ratio E_void/E_mat = 1e-5
    Chosen by hand to make the buffer emulate empty space; sensitivity not analyzed.
  • Buffer diffusivity ratio D_void/D_mat = 1e-5
    Chosen by hand to prevent ion leakage; sensitivity not analyzed.
  • Source strip width delta_L = 1 voxel in validation, 6 voxels in 2D particle example
    Width of the volumetric source emulating the Neumann flux; affects the effective flux distribution.
  • Phase-field length scale lc = 2.5e-4 mm (validation), 2.325e-4 mm (particle)
    Regularization length for the crack; set to about two voxels and affects crack thickness.
  • Gumbell distribution exponent m = 3
    Controls the spread of property heterogeneity; copied from [15].
  • Convergence tolerances (not fully specified) = Not reported
    Algorithm stops when residuals fall below thresholds, but actual tolerance values are not given, affecting reproducibility.
assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption Multiplicative decomposition of deformation gradient F = Fe Fc with purely volumetric isotropic chemical swelling Fc = (1 + Omega c)^(1/3) I (Eq. 1-2).
    Assumes the ion concentration only causes isotropic volume change and does not affect shear or anisotropy.
  • domain assumption Saint-Venant-Kirchhoff hyperelastic material with free energy psi_e0 = (lambda/2) tr^2(E_e) + G tr(E_e^2) (Eq. 4).
    Linear elastic behavior in Green-Lagrange strain; adequate for graphite but restricts applicability.
  • domain assumption Phase-field fracture evolution Eq. (6) with principal-stress driving force Eq. (8).
    The crack criterion is a stress threshold model from Miehe et al., not derived from a variational energy minimization.
  • domain assumption Chemical potential from ideal solution entropy, psi_c = RT c log c + RT(1-c) log(1-c) (Eq. 16), and Fick-type flux with mobility degradation Eq. (20).
    Assumes an ideal solid solution and a specific porosity-mobility degradation law.
  • ad hoc to paper Buffer layers with stiffness and diffusivity reduced by a factor of 1e-5 faithfully emulate isolated particles with Neumann boundary conditions.
    Used throughout Section 5; validated only for a thin plate in Section 4.1.
  • ad hoc to paper The chemical field can be integrated once per time step using the previous step's deformation and damage (semi-implicit staggered coupling).
    Stated in Section 3 (Global problem); the 'small influence' is asserted, not demonstrated by a convergence study.
invented entities (1)
  • Buffer (void) material
    purpose: A low-stiffness, low-diffusivity phase surrounding the particle to break periodicity and emulate an isolated body with Neumann flux.
    Artificial numerical device; its properties are chosen ad hoc (1e-5 ratios) and are not based on physical measurements.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of An FFT based chemo-mechanical framework with fracture: application to mesoscopic electrode degradation." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/YJBRFRMN

@misc{pith2026241116583,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: An FFT based chemo-mechanical framework with fracture: application to mesoscopic electrode degradation},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/YJBRFRMN}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2411.16583}
}
read the original abstract

An FFT based method is proposed to simulate chemo-mechanical problems at the microscale including fracture, specially suited to predict crack formation during the intercalation process in batteries. The method involves three fields fully coupled, concentration, deformation gradient and damage. The mechanical problem is set in a finite strain framework and solved using Fourier Galerkin for non-linear problems in finite strains. The damage is modeled with Phase Field Fracture using a stress driving force. This problem is solved in Fourier space using conjugate gradient with an ad-hoc preconditioner. The chemical problem is modeled with the second Fick's law and physically based chemical potentials, is integrated using backward Euler and is solved by Newton-Raphson combined with a conjugate gradient solver. Buffer layers are introduced to break the periodicity and emulate Neumann boundary conditions for incoming mass flux. The framework is validated against Finite Elements the results of both methods are very close in all the cases. Finally, the framework is used to simulate the fracture of active particles of graphite during ion intercalation. The method is able to solve large problems at a reduced computational cost and reproduces the shape of the cracks observed in real particles.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2411.16583 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Concentration c distribution with Neumann boundary conditions in FE vs FFT. On the left the concentration at time t = 1000(s) is represented. A flux is set at the lateral boundaries and concentration diffuses to the inner part. On the right the concentration along a horizontal line of the domains at times t = 1000(s) (red), t = 2500(s) (green) and t = 10000(s) (blue) is plotted for both FE and FFT frameworks. In [P… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Concentration values at different points using Neumann boundary conditions in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p019_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Concentration (c) evolution with time at different points in the plane y = L/2 and x/L = 0, 0.2, 0.4, 0.5, 0.6, 0.8 21 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p021_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (10 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Concentration field (c) in a bi-material obtained using FFT and FE solvers. Concentration represented at times t = 0(s), t = 1000(s), t = 7500(s) and t = 25000(s). 22 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p022_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Mesh used in FE formed by triangular elements oriented at 45 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p025_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Flux boundary conditions and resulting crack. Left FE simulation, right FFT [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p025_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Principal stress for an upper-left flux before the nucleation of the crack. Left FE simulation, right FFT results. 26 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p026_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Crack shape result of FE simulations with higher input flux on the different four [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p027_8.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Crack shape result of FFT simulations with higher input flux on the different [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p028_9.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Simulation domain for a 2D circular active particle cracking simulation with [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p030_10.png]
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Fracture process of particle with random distribution of properties. Left column [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p031_11.png]
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Domains representation of a 3D particle simulation. Active particle immersed [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p032_12.png]
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: 3D particle fracture process. On the left the concentration evolution due to the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p033_13.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

42 extracted references · 42 canonical work pages

  1. [43]

    Mesopores inside electrode particles can change the li-ion transport mechanism and diffusion-induced stress

    Stephen Harris, Rutooj Deshpande, Yue Qi, Indrajit Dutta, and Yang- Tse Cheng. Mesopores inside electrode particles can change the li-ion transport mechanism and diffusion-induced stress. Journal of Materials Research, 25, 08 2010. 40

    work page 2010

  2. [1]

    Fast numerical method for comput- ing the linear and nonlinear properties of composites

    Herv´ e Moulinec and Pierre Suquet. Fast numerical method for comput- ing the linear and nonlinear properties of composites. Comptes Rendus de l’Acad´ emie des Sciences. S´ erie II, 318, 04 1994

    work page 1994

  3. [2]

    Fft based ap- proaches in micromechanics: Fundamentals, methods and applications

    Sergio Lucarini, Manas Upadhyay, and Javier Segurado. Fft based ap- proaches in micromechanics: Fundamentals, methods and applications. Modelling and Simulation in Materials Science and Engineering , 30, 10 2021

    work page 2021

  4. [3]

    A review of nonlinear fft-based computational homog- enization methods

    Matti Schneider. A review of nonlinear fft-based computational homog- enization methods. Acta Mechanica, 232:1–50, 03 2021

    work page 2021

  5. [4]

    Energy production and consumption

    Hannah Ritchie, Pablo Rosado, and Max Roser. Energy production and consumption. Our World in Data , 2020. https://ourworldindata.org/energy-production-consumption

    work page 2020

  6. [5]

    World Energy Outlook 2023

    OECD. World Energy Outlook 2023 . 2023

    work page 2023

  7. [6]

    IEA (2023) Global EV Outlook 2023 IEA Paris https://www.iea.org/reports/global-ev-outlook 2023 Licence: CC BY 4.0

    work page 2023

  8. [7]

    Review on the numerical modeling of fracture in active mate- rials for lithium ion batteries

    Francesca Pistorio, Davide Clerici, Francesco Mocera, and Aurelio Som` a. Review on the numerical modeling of fracture in active mate- rials for lithium ion batteries. Journal of Power Sources , 566:232875, 2023

    work page 2023

Show all 42 references
  1. [8]

    Configurational-force-based adaptive fe solver for a phase field model of fracture

    Fabian Welschinger, Martina Hofacker, and Christian Miehe. Configurational-force-based adaptive fe solver for a phase field model of fracture. PAMM, 10, 12 2010

    2010

  2. [9]

    A thermo- dynamically consistent phase field model for electromechanical diffusive crack propagation

    Martina Hofacker, Christian Miehe, and Fabian Welschinger. A thermo- dynamically consistent phase field model for electromechanical diffusive crack propagation. PAMM, 10, 12 2010

    2010

  3. [10]

    A phase field model coupling lithium dif- fusion and stress evolution with crack propagation and application in lithium ion batteries

    Peng Zuo and Ya-Pu Zhao. A phase field model coupling lithium dif- fusion and stress evolution with crack propagation and application in lithium ion batteries. Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. , 17:287–297, 2015. 36

    2015

  4. [11]

    A phase field model for chemo-mechanical induced fracture in lithium-ion battery electrode par- ticles

    Chistian Miehe, H¨ usn¨ u Dal, and Arun Raina. A phase field model for chemo-mechanical induced fracture in lithium-ion battery electrode par- ticles. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering, 106, 09 2015

    2015

  5. [12]

    Phase field modeling of fracture in multi-physics problems

    Christian Miehe, Lisa-Marie Sch¨ anzel, and Heike Ulmer. Phase field modeling of fracture in multi-physics problems. part i. balance of crack surface and failure criteria for brittle crack propagation in thermo-elastic solids. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineer...

    2014

  6. [13]

    Phase field modeling of fracture in multi-physics problems

    Christian Miehe, Martina Hofacker, Lisa Sch¨ anzel, and Fadi Aldakheel. Phase field modeling of fracture in multi-physics problems. part ii. cou- pled brittle-to-ductile failure criteria and crack propagation in thermo- elastic-plastic solids. Computer Methods in Applied Mecha...

    2014

  7. [14]

    A coupled phase field formulation for modelling fatigue cracking in lithium-ion battery electrode particles

    Weilong Ai, Billy Wu, and Emilio Mart ´ ınez-Pa˜ neda. A coupled phase field formulation for modelling fatigue cracking in lithium-ion battery electrode particles. Journal of Power Sources , 544:231805, 2022

    2022

  8. [15]

    Mod- eling diffusion-induced mechanical degradation in dual-graphite battery cathodes: Application to pf − 6 intercalation

    Eduardo Roque, Javier Segurado, and Francisco Montero-Chac´ on. Mod- eling diffusion-induced mechanical degradation in dual-graphite battery cathodes: Application to pf − 6 intercalation. Journal of The Electrochem- ical Society, 170(11):110526, nov 2023

    2023

  9. [16]

    A two-scale fe-fft approach to nonlinear magneto- elasticity

    Matthias Rambausek, Felix Selim G¨ ok¨ uz¨ um, Lu Trong Khiem Nguyen, and Marc-Andr´ e Keip. A two-scale fe-fft approach to nonlinear magneto- elasticity. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering , 117(11):1117–1142, 2019

    2019

  10. [17]

    A multiscale fe-fft framework for electro-active materials at finite strains

    Felix G¨ ok¨ uz¨ um, Lu Trong Khiem Nguyen, and Marc-Andr´ e Keip. A multiscale fe-fft framework for electro-active materials at finite strains. Computational Mechanics, 07 2019

    2019

  11. [18]

    Two-scale fe-fft-based thermo-mechanically coupled modeling of elasto-viscoplastic polycrystalline materials at finite strains

    Annika Schmidt, Christian Gierden, Johanna Waimann, Bob Svendsen, and Stefanie Reese. Two-scale fe-fft-based thermo-mechanically coupled modeling of elasto-viscoplastic polycrystalline materials at finite strains. PAMM, 22(1):e202200172, 2023. 37

    2023

  12. [19]

    Computational homogenisation of thermo-viscoplastic composites: Large strain formulation and weak micro-periodicity

    Rolf Berthelsen and Andreas Menzel. Computational homogenisation of thermo-viscoplastic composites: Large strain formulation and weak micro-periodicity. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engi- neering, 348:575–603, 2019

    2019

  13. [20]

    Lebensohn, and Laurent Capolungo

    Aritra Chakraborty, Ricardo A. Lebensohn, and Laurent Capolungo. Coupled chemo-mechanical modeling of point-defect diffusion in a crys- tal plasticity fast fourier transform framework. Journal of the Mechanics and Physics of Solids , 173:105190, 2023

    2023

  14. [21]

    Kammer, and Ueli Angst

    Mohit Pundir, David S. Kammer, and Ueli Angst. An fft-based frame- work for predicting corrosion-driven damage in fractal porous media. Journal of the Mechanics and Physics of Solids , 179:105388, 2023

    2023

  15. [22]

    An fft-based galerkin method for homogenization of periodic media

    Jaroslav Vondrejc, Jan Zeman, and Ivo Marek. An fft-based galerkin method for homogenization of periodic media. Computers and Mathe- matics with Applications , 68:156–, 08 2014

    2014

  16. [24]

    Peerlings, and Marc Geers

    Jan Zeman, Tom de Geus, Jaroslav Vondrejc, R. Peerlings, and Marc Geers. A finite element perspective on non-linear fft-based microme- chanical simulations. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering, 111:903–, 09 2017

    2017

  17. [25]

    An algorithm for stress and mixed control in galerkin based fft homogenization

    Sergio Lucarini and Javier Segurado. An algorithm for stress and mixed control in galerkin based fft homogenization. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering , 119, 03 2019

    2019

  18. [26]

    On the accuracy of spectral solvers for micromechanics based fatigue modeling

    Sergio Lucarini and Javier Segurado. On the accuracy of spectral solvers for micromechanics based fatigue modeling. Computational Mechanics, 63:365–382, 02 2019

    2019

  19. [27]

    Revisiting brittle fracture as an energy minimization problem

    Gilles Francfort and Jean-Jacques Marigo. Revisiting brittle fracture as an energy minimization problem. Journal of The Mechanics and Physics of Solids, 46, 08 1998. 38

    1998

  20. [28]

    Numerical experiments in revisited brittle fracture

    Blaise Bourdin, Gilles Francfort, and Jean-Jacques Marigo. Numerical experiments in revisited brittle fracture. Journal of the Mechanics and Physics of Solids , 48:797–826, 04 2000

    2000

  21. [29]

    The varia- tional approach to fracture

    Blaise Bourdin, Gilles Francfort, and Jean-Jacques Marigo. The varia- tional approach to fracture. Journal of Elasticity , 91:5–148, 04 2008

    2008

  22. [30]

    Fourier-based schemes for computing the mechani- cal response of composites with accurate local fields

    Fran¸ cois Willot. Fourier-based schemes for computing the mechani- cal response of composites with accurate local fields. Comptes Rendus M´ ecanique, 343(3):232–245, 2015

    2015

  23. [31]

    Accelerating a fft-based solver for numerical homogenization of periodic media by conjugate gradients

    Jan Zeman, Jaroslav Vondrejc, Jan Nov´ ak, and Ivo Marek. Accelerating a fft-based solver for numerical homogenization of periodic media by conjugate gradients. Journal of Computational Physics , 229:8065–8071, 10 2010

    2010

  24. [32]

    A numerical method for com- puting the overall response of nonlinear composites with complex mi- crostructure

    Herv´ e Moulinec and Pierre Suquet. A numerical method for com- puting the overall response of nonlinear composites with complex mi- crostructure. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 157(1):69–94, 1998

    1998

  25. [33]

    Fast fourier transform com- putations and build-up of plastic deformation in 2d, elastic-perfectly plastic, pixelwise disordered porous media

    Fran¸ cois Willot and Yves-Patrick Pellegrini. Fast fourier transform com- putations and build-up of plastic deformation in 2d, elastic-perfectly plastic, pixelwise disordered porous media. Continuum Models and Dis- crete Systems, 03 2008

    2008

  26. [34]

    Dbfft: A displacement based fft approach for non-linear homogenization of the mechanical behavior

    Sergio Lucarini and Javier Segurado. Dbfft: A displacement based fft approach for non-linear homogenization of the mechanical behavior. In- ternational Journal of Engineering Science , 144:103131, 09 2019

    2019

  27. [35]

    An implicit fft-based method for wave prop- agation in elastic heterogeneous media

    Rafael Sancho, Victor Rey de Pedraza, Paul Lafourcade, Ricardo Leben- sohn, and Javier Segurado. An implicit fft-based method for wave prop- agation in elastic heterogeneous media. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering , 404:115772, 02 2023

    2023

  28. [36]

    Lebensohn, and Laurent Capolungo

    Miroslav Zecevic, Ricardo A. Lebensohn, and Laurent Capolungo. New large-strain fft-based formulation and its application to model strain localization in nano-metallic laminates and other strongly anisotropic crystalline materials. Mechanics of Materials , 166:104208, 2022. 39

    2022

  29. [37]

    Use of compos- ite voxels in fft-based homogenization

    Matthias Kabel, Dennis Merkert, and Matti Schneider. Use of compos- ite voxels in fft-based homogenization. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering , 294:168–188, 2015

    2015

  30. [38]

    Adaptation and validation of fft methods for homogenization of lattice based materials

    Sergio Lucarini, Lucia Cobian, Anthony Voitus, and Javier Segurado. Adaptation and validation of fft methods for homogenization of lattice based materials. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engi- neering, 388:114223, 2022

    2022

  31. [39]

    A comparative review of xfem, mixed fem and phase-field models for quasi-brittle cracking

    Miguel Cervera, Gabriel Barbat, Michele Chiumenti, and Jian-Ying Wu. A comparative review of xfem, mixed fem and phase-field models for quasi-brittle cracking. Archives of Computational Methods in Engineer- ing, 29, 09 2021

    2021

  32. [40]

    Length scale and mesh bias sensitivity of phase-field models for brittle and cohesive fracture

    Tushar Mandal, Vinh Phu Nguyen, and Jian-Ying Wu. Length scale and mesh bias sensitivity of phase-field models for brittle and cohesive fracture. Engineering Fracture Mechanics, 217, 06 2019

    2019

  33. [41]

    Mesh refinement procedures for the phase field approach to brittle fracture

    Francesco Freddi and Lorenzo Mingazzi. Mesh refinement procedures for the phase field approach to brittle fracture. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering , 388:114214, 2022

    2022

  34. [42]

    Hoon-Hee Ryu, Kang-Joon Park, Chong Yoon, and Yang-Kook Sun. Ca- pacity fading of ni-rich li [NixCoyMn1–x–y]O2 (0.6 < x <0.95) cathodes for high-energy-density lithium-ion batteries: Bulk or surface degrada- tion? Chemistry of Materials , 30, 01 2018

    2018

Pith tools

Reviewed August 12, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.