pith. machine review for the scientific record. sign in

arxiv: 2604.07155 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-08 · 💻 cs.CE

Recognition: unknown

Immersed boundary-conformal isogeometric methods for magnetostatics

Yusuf T. Elbadry , Giuliano Guarino , Pablo Antol\'in , Oliver Weeger
Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-10 17:17 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 💻 cs.CE
keywords isogeometric analysisimmersed methodsmagnetostaticsNitsche couplingnon-conformal patchesboundary-conformal quadraturemulti-material domains
0
0 comments X

The pith

Union-based immersed isogeometric methods solve magnetostatic problems accurately while using substantially fewer patches than conformal multi-patch approaches.

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

The paper develops three non-conformal strategies for isogeometric analysis of magnetostatics to avoid the strict requirement that patch interfaces match exactly. These include a fully immersed method, a union of non-conformal patches, and a union with added conformal layers around critical interfaces, all paired with boundary-conformal quadrature for integration. The union variants couple independent material patches weakly via Nitsche's method inside a background domain. Numerical tests on benchmarks and an industrial electric-machine case show the union methods deliver high accuracy comparable to reference solutions, whereas the fully immersed version has difficulty capturing field-gradient jumps at material boundaries. The approaches cut geometric preprocessing time and patch counts compared with conventional conformal multi-patch modeling.

Core claim

We adopt, extend, and evaluate three non-conformal discretization strategies for magnetostatic problems: a fully immersed approach, the union with non-conformal patches, and the union with conformal layers. In all three methods, boundary-conformal high-order quadrature rules are employed for integration over trimmed boundary and interface elements. In the two union approaches, material regions are, as far as possible, represented by independent non-conformal spline patches that are embedded within a background patch and coupled weakly through Nitsche's method. In the latter framework, critical interfaces are additionally surrounded by conformal layers that enable the strong imposition of b

What carries the argument

Union of independent non-conformal spline patches embedded in a background patch and coupled by Nitsche's method, together with boundary-conformal high-order quadrature rules on trimmed elements.

Load-bearing premise

Weak coupling via Nitsche's method plus boundary-conformal quadrature can capture the required discontinuities in field gradients at material interfaces without conformal patch matching.

What would settle it

If the magnetic fields or potentials computed by the union methods differ from a refined conformal reference solution by more than the reported tolerances at material interfaces in the industrial application, the accuracy claim is falsified.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.07155 by Giuliano Guarino, Oliver Weeger, Pablo Antol\'in, Yusuf T. Elbadry.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Coupling of two domains Ω L and Ω R across their common interface ΓLR via Nitsche’s method 2.3. Weak imposition of Dirichlet boundary conditions In immersed boundary method settings, coincidence of the physical domain boundaries with the compu￾tational domain boundaries is not guaranteed. In such cases, strong imposition of the Dirichlet boundary conditions is not possible. There are different methods for … view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Illustration of the fully immersed concept. The physical domain Ω = Ω1 ∪Ω2 is immersed into an extended domain, the background patch Ω □, here consisting of 4 × 4 elements in its parameter domain Ωˆ □. B-reps of the subdomains Ωi consisting of loops of boundary curves ∂Ωi = S k γ k i are used to determine the immersed trimmed regions Ωˆ □ i . To determine the boundary-conformal quadrature points, the trimm… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Illustration of the union with non-conformal patches concept. As in the fully immersed method, the subdomain Ω1 is immersed into the background patch Ω □. However, here Ω2 is parameterized by an individual patch with the mapping F p 2 . Thus, continuity at the interface Γ12 = ∂Ω1 ∩∂Ω2 is weakly enforced using Nitsche’s method It is important to note that the decomposition and re-parameterization of trimmed… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Illustration of the union with conformal layers concept. As in the union with non-conformal patches method, the subdomain Ω2 is parameterized by an individual patch with the mapping F p 2 . Beyond, here the subdomain Ω1 is partitioned into two parts: Along the interface with Ω2, the new subdomain ΩL forms a geometrically conformal layer, which is offset from the boundary Γ12 and also parameterized by an in… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Illustration of the coaxial cable problem setup [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Comparison of convergence behaviors of the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Comparison of the scalar potential Az and the magnitude of the flux density Bθ between the analytical solution and the numerical results obtained using the fully immersed and union with non-conformal patches methods with p = 2 and 32 × 32 elements for each patch corresponding numerical results obtained using both methods [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Schematic drawing of the horseshoe magnet problem. The red rectangular regions denote permanent [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p019_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: These spurious oscillations can be mitigated by employing [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p019_10.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Schematic drawings for the discretizations of the horseshoe magnet problem with standard multi-patch [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p020_9.png] view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Evaluation of the magnetic flux density magnitude along the line [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p021_10.png] view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Evaluation of the magnetic flux density magnitude along the line [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p021_11.png] view at source ↗
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Comparison of convergence behaviors of the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p022_12.png] view at source ↗
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: Contours of scalar potential (left) and magnetic flux density (right) for horseshoe magnet problem [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p023_13.png] view at source ↗
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: Schematic representation of the permanent magnet assembly. The permanent magnets are shown in red, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p024_14.png] view at source ↗
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: Illustration of the different geometric discretizations of the permanent magnet assembly [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p025_15.png] view at source ↗
Figure 16
Figure 16. Figure 16: Evaluation of flux density magnitude in the air gap of the permanent magnet assembly at [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p026_16.png] view at source ↗
Figure 17
Figure 17. Figure 17: Contours of magnetic flux density of the permanent magnet assembly for different methods [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p027_17.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Isogeometric analysis was proposed to bridge the gap between computer-aided design and numerical discretization. However, standard multi-patch isogeometric analysis mandates conformal discretizations across patch interfaces, posing challenges for multi-material domain problems. In the context of electric machines, this requirement becomes evident in a large number of patches needed to represent machines consisting of several domains and materials. In this work, we adopt, extend, and evaluate three non-conformal discretization strategies for magnetostatic problems: a fully immersed approach, the union with non-conformal patches, and the union with conformal layers. In all three methods, boundary-conformal high-order quadrature rules are employed for integration over trimmed boundary and interface elements. In the two union approaches, material regions are, as far as possible, represented by independent non-conformal spline patches that are embedded within a background patch and coupled weakly through Nitsche's method. In the latter framework, critical interfaces are additionally surrounded by conformal layers that enable the strong imposition of boundary conditions and improved resolution of interface behavior. The proposed approaches are assessed through several magnetostatic benchmark problems and an industrial application. The numerical results show that the union methods achieve highly accurate solutions, while the fully immersed approach struggles with discontinuities in field gradients across material interfaces. Nevertheless, these methods significantly reduce the geometric preprocessing effort compared to conventional, conformal multi-patch analysis and require substantially fewer patches. Overall, this demonstrates that our immersed boundary-conformal isogeometric framework possesses great potential for efficient simulation of complex electromagnetic devices.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 0 minor

Summary. The paper proposes three non-conformal isogeometric discretization strategies for magnetostatic problems in multi-material domains (e.g., electric machines): a fully immersed approach, a union approach with non-conformal patches, and a union approach with additional conformal layers. All employ boundary-conformal high-order quadrature; the union variants embed independent spline patches in a background domain and couple them weakly via Nitsche's method (with strong enforcement enabled by the conformal layers). The methods are evaluated on several magnetostatic benchmarks and one industrial application, with the claim that the union variants deliver high accuracy while substantially reducing patch count and geometric preprocessing relative to conventional conformal multi-patch IGA, whereas the fully immersed variant struggles at material interfaces.

Significance. If the reported numerical behavior holds, the work offers a practical route to lowering the geometric preprocessing burden that currently limits IGA adoption for complex multi-material electromagnetic devices. The hybrid use of non-conformal patches plus selective conformal layers, combined with boundary-conformal quadrature, addresses a recognized bottleneck without sacrificing interface accuracy. Evaluation on both academic benchmarks and an industrial case adds credibility to the efficiency claims.

major comments (2)
  1. §5 (Numerical results): The central claim that union methods 'achieve highly accurate solutions' while the fully immersed variant 'struggles with discontinuities in field gradients' is load-bearing, yet the manuscript provides no tabulated L2 or H1 error norms, convergence rates, or direct side-by-side comparison against a conformal multi-patch reference solution on the benchmark problems; without these quantitative anchors the accuracy advantage remains qualitative.
  2. §3.2 (Nitsche coupling): The stability and consistency of the Nitsche terms at material interfaces with discontinuous gradients are asserted via the benchmarks, but the paper does not report the sensitivity of results to the Nitsche penalty parameter or demonstrate that the chosen value remains robust across the industrial geometry; this parameter choice is therefore a potential hidden degree of freedom that should be quantified.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive feedback and positive overall assessment. We address the two major comments below and will incorporate the suggested quantitative analyses into a revised manuscript.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: §5 (Numerical results): The central claim that union methods 'achieve highly accurate solutions' while the fully immersed variant 'struggles with discontinuities in field gradients' is load-bearing, yet the manuscript provides no tabulated L2 or H1 error norms, convergence rates, or direct side-by-side comparison against a conformal multi-patch reference solution on the benchmark problems; without these quantitative anchors the accuracy advantage remains qualitative.

    Authors: We agree that tabulated error norms and convergence rates would provide stronger quantitative support for the accuracy claims. In the revised manuscript we will add tables reporting L2 and H1 error norms (with respect to a reference solution) for the benchmark problems, together with observed convergence rates and direct comparisons against a conformal multi-patch IGA solution. These additions will make the accuracy advantage of the union approaches explicit and quantitative. revision: yes

  2. Referee: §3.2 (Nitsche coupling): The stability and consistency of the Nitsche terms at material interfaces with discontinuous gradients are asserted via the benchmarks, but the paper does not report the sensitivity of results to the Nitsche penalty parameter or demonstrate that the chosen value remains robust across the industrial geometry; this parameter choice is therefore a potential hidden degree of freedom that should be quantified.

    Authors: We acknowledge the importance of demonstrating robustness with respect to the Nitsche penalty parameter. In the revision we will include a sensitivity study on the benchmark problems showing the effect of varying the penalty parameter over a range of values, and we will verify that the same parameter choice yields stable and accurate results on the industrial geometry without retuning. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity detected

full rationale

The paper introduces and numerically evaluates three non-conformal IGA discretization strategies (fully immersed, union non-conformal, union with conformal layers) for magnetostatics, using Nitsche coupling and boundary-conformal quadrature. These are presented as extensions of prior immersed/IGA techniques and validated directly against external benchmark problems and an industrial case, with claims of accuracy and reduced preprocessing supported by the reported results rather than by internal redefinitions or self-referential fits. No load-bearing derivation step reduces to a fitted parameter, self-citation chain, or ansatz smuggled via citation; the central claims remain independent of the paper's own inputs.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

Abstract does not introduce new free parameters, axioms, or invented entities beyond standard assumptions of isogeometric analysis and Nitsche's weak enforcement; any penalty parameters in Nitsche's method are not quantified here.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5580 in / 1173 out tokens · 40613 ms · 2026-05-10T17:17:23.997184+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

90 extracted references · 67 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Baiges, R

    J. Baiges, R. Codina, Variational Multiscale error estimators for solid mechanics adaptive simulations: An Orthogonal Subgrid Scale approach, Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering 325 (2017) 37–55.doi:10.1016/j.cma.2017.07.008

    work page doi:10.1016/j.cma.2017.07.008 2017

  2. [2]

    Codony, O

    D. Codony, O. Marco, S. Fernández-Méndez, I. Arias, An immersed boundary hierarchical B-spline method for flexoelectricity, Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering 354 (2019) 750– 782.doi:10.1016/j.cma.2019.05.036

    work page doi:10.1016/j.cma.2019.05.036 2019

  3. [3]

    J. C. Alzate Cobo, X.-L. Peng, B.-X. Xu, O. Weeger, A finite swelling 3D beam model with axial and radial diffusion, Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering 441 (2025) 117983. doi:10.1016/j.cma.2025.117983

    work page doi:10.1016/j.cma.2025.117983 2025

  4. [4]

    Guarino, A

    G. Guarino, A. Milazzo, A discontinuous Galerkin formulation for nonlinear analysis of multilayered shells refined theories, International Journal of Mechanical Sciences 255 (2023) 108426.doi:10.1016/ j.ijmecsci.2023.108426. 27

    work page arXiv 2023

  5. [5]

    Munthe, H

    O. Munthe, H. P. Langtangen, Finite elements and object-oriented implementation techniques in com- putational fluid dynamics, Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering 190 (8) (2000) 865–888.doi:10.1016/S0045-7825(99)00450-8

    work page doi:10.1016/s0045-7825(99)00450-8 2000

  6. [6]

    Bazilevs, V

    Y. Bazilevs, V. M. Calo, J. A. Cottrell, T. J. R. Hughes, A. Reali, G. Scovazzi, Variational multiscale residual-based turbulence modeling for large eddy simulation of incompressible flows, Computer Meth- ods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering 197 (1) (2007) 173–201.doi:10.1016/j.cma.2007.07.016

    work page doi:10.1016/j.cma.2007.07.016 2007

  7. [7]

    A. A. Hamada, M. Fürth, Modeling and Analysis of the Leading-Edge Vortex on Flapping Foil Turbines inSwing-ArmMode, JournalofFluidsEngineering145(061105)(Mar.2023).doi:10.1115/1.4057035

    work page doi:10.1115/1.4057035 2023

  8. [8]

    Merkel, P

    M. Merkel, P. Gangl, S. Schöps, Shape Optimization of Rotating Electric Machines Using Isogeometric Analysis, IEEE Transactions on Energy Conversion 36 (4) (2021) 2683–2690.doi:10.1109/TEC.2021. 3061271

    work page doi:10.1109/tec.2021 2021

  9. [9]

    K., Genda, H.\ 2022.\ Giant impact onto a Vesta-like asteroid and formation of mesosiderites through mixing of metallic core and surface crust.\ Icarus 379

    B. Kapidani, M. Merkel, S. Schöps, R. Vázquez, Tree–cotree decomposition of isogeometric mortared spaces in H(curl) on multi-patch domains, Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering 395 (2022) 114949.doi:10.1016/j.cma.2022.114949

    work page doi:10.1016/j.cma.2022.114949 2022

  10. [10]

    Bontinck, J

    Z. Bontinck, J. Corno, S. Schöps, H. De Gersem, Isogeometric analysis and harmonic stator–rotor coupling for simulating electric machines, Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering 334 (2018) 40–55.doi:10.1016/j.cma.2018.01.047

    work page doi:10.1016/j.cma.2018.01.047 2018

  11. [11]

    Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering194(39–41), 4135–4195 (2005) https://doi

    T. Hughes, J. Cottrell, Y. Bazilevs, Isogeometric analysis: CAD, finite elements, NURBS, exact ge- ometry and mesh refinement, Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering 194 (39-41) (2005) 4135–4195.doi:10.1016/j.cma.2004.10.008

    work page doi:10.1016/j.cma.2004.10.008 2005

  12. [12]

    J. A. Cottrell, T. J. R. Hughes, Y. Bazilevs, Isogeometric Analysis: Toward Integration of CAD and FEA, Wiley, Chichester, West Sussex, U.K Hoboken, NJ, 2009.doi:10.1002/9780470749081

    work page doi:10.1002/9780470749081 2009

  13. [13]

    Piegl and W

    L. Piegl, W. Tiller, The NURBS Book, Monographs in Visual Communication, Springer Berlin Heidel- berg, Berlin, Heidelberg, 1997.doi:10.1007/978-3-642-59223-2

    work page doi:10.1007/978-3-642-59223-2 1997

  14. [14]

    Pauley, D.-M

    M. Pauley, D.-M. Nguyen, D. Mayer, J. Špeh, O. Weeger, B. Jüttler, The isogeometric segmentation pipeline, in: Isogeometric analysis and applications 2014, Springer, 2015, pp. 51–72

    2014

  15. [15]

    J.Guo, C.Park, D.Qian, T.J.R.Hughes, W.K.Liu, Largelanguagemodel-empowerednext-generation computer-aided engineering, Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering 450 (2026) 118591.doi:10.1016/j.cma.2025.118591

    work page doi:10.1016/j.cma.2025.118591 2026

  16. [16]

    C. S. Peskin, Flow patterns around heart valves: A numerical method, Journal of Computational Physics 10 (2) (1972) 252–271.doi:10.1016/0021-9991(72)90065-4

    work page doi:10.1016/0021-9991(72)90065-4 1972

  17. [17]

    Osher, J

    S. Osher, J. A. Sethian, Fronts propagating with curvature-dependent speed: Algorithms based on Hamilton-Jacobi formulations, Journal of Computational Physics 79 (1) (1988) 12–49.doi:10.1016/ 0021-9991(88)90002-2

    1988

  18. [18]

    F. H. Harlow, J. E. Welch, Numerical Calculation of Time-Dependent Viscous Incompressible Flow of Fluid with Free Surface, The Physics of Fluids 8 (12) (1965) 2182–2189.doi:10.1063/1.1761178

    work page doi:10.1063/1.1761178 1965

  19. [19]

    Griebel, T

    M. Griebel, T. Dornseifer, T. Neunhoeffer, Numerical simulation in fluid dynamics: a practical intro- duction, SIAM, 1998

    1998

  20. [20]

    C. Hirt, B. Nichols, Volume of fluid (VOF) method for the dynamics of free boundaries, Journal of Computational Physics 39 (1) (1981) 201–225.doi:10.1016/0021-9991(81)90145-5. 28

    work page doi:10.1016/0021-9991(81)90145-5 1981

  21. [21]

    J. E. Pilliod, E. G. Puckett, Second-order accurate volume-of-fluid algorithms for tracking material interfaces, Journal of Computational Physics 199 (2) (2004) 465–502.doi:10.1016/j.jcp.2003.12. 023

    work page doi:10.1016/j.jcp.2003.12 2004

  22. [22]

    R. J. Leveque, Cartesian grid methods for flow in irregular regions, in: Numerical Methods for Fluid Dynamics III, 1988, pp. 375–382

    1988

  23. [23]

    Ramière, P

    I. Ramière, P. Angot, M. Belliard, A fictitious domain approach with spread interface for elliptic problems with general boundary conditions, Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering 196 (4) (2007) 766–781.doi:10.1016/j.cma.2006.05.012

    work page doi:10.1016/j.cma.2006.05.012 2007

  24. [24]

    Bishop, Rapid stress analysis of geometrically complex domains using implicit meshing, Computa- tional Mechanics 30 (5) (2003) 460–478.doi:10.1007/s00466-003-0424-5

    J. Bishop, Rapid stress analysis of geometrically complex domains using implicit meshing, Computa- tional Mechanics 30 (5) (2003) 460–478.doi:10.1007/s00466-003-0424-5

    work page doi:10.1007/s00466-003-0424-5 2003

  25. [25]

    Sukumar, D

    N. Sukumar, D. L. Chopp, N. Moës, T. Belytschko, Modeling holes and inclusions by level sets in the extended finite-element method, Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering 190 (46) (2001) 6183–6200.doi:10.1016/S0045-7825(01)00215-8

    work page doi:10.1016/s0045-7825(01)00215-8 2001

  26. [26]

    Gerstenberger, W

    A. Gerstenberger, W. A. Wall, An eXtended Finite Element Method/Lagrange multiplier based ap- proach for fluid–structure interaction, Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering 197 (19) (2008) 1699–1714.doi:10.1016/j.cma.2007.07.002

    work page doi:10.1016/j.cma.2007.07.002 2008

  27. [27]

    Becker, E

    R. Becker, E. Burman, P. Hansbo, A hierarchical NXFEM for fictitious domain simulations, Interna- tional Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering 86 (4-5) (2011) 549–559.doi:10.1002/nme.3093

    work page doi:10.1002/nme.3093 2011

  28. [28]

    Schmidt, L

    M. Schmidt, L. Noël, K. Doble, J. A. Evans, K. Maute, Extended isogeometric analysis of multi-material and multi-physics problems using hierarchical B-splines, Computational Mechanics 71 (6) (2023) 1179– 1203.doi:10.1007/s00466-023-02306-x

    work page doi:10.1007/s00466-023-02306-x 2023

  29. [29]

    Burman, S

    E. Burman, S. Claus, P. Hansbo, M. G. Larson, A. Massing, CutFEM: Discretizing geometry and partial differential equations, International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering 104 (7) (2015) 472– 501.doi:10.1002/nme.4823

    work page doi:10.1002/nme.4823 2015

  30. [30]

    Parvizian, A

    J. Parvizian, A. Düster, E. Rank, Finite cell method: h- and p-extension for embedded domain problems in solid mechanics, Computational Mechanics 41 (1) (2007) 121–133.doi:10.1007/ s00466-007-0173-y

    2007

  31. [31]

    Wiesheu, T

    M. Wiesheu, T. Komann, M. Merkel, S. Schöps, S. Ulbrich, I. Cortes Garcia, Combined parameter and shape optimization of electric machines with isogeometric analysis, Optimization and Engineering 26 (2) (2025) 1011–1038.doi:10.1007/s11081-024-09925-0

    work page doi:10.1007/s11081-024-09925-0 2025

  32. [32]

    Komann, M

    T. Komann, M. Wiesheu, S. Ulbrich, S. Schöps, Robust Design Optimization of Electric Machines with Isogeometric Analysis, Mathematics 12 (9) (Apr. 2024).doi:10.3390/math12091299

    work page doi:10.3390/math12091299 2024

  33. [33]

    J. Nitsche, Über ein Variationsprinzip zur Lösung von Dirichlet-Problemen bei Verwendung von Teilräu- men, die keinen Randbedingungen unterworfen sind, Abhandlungen aus dem Mathematischen Seminar der Universität Hamburg 36 (1) (1971) 9–15.doi:10.1007/BF02995904

    work page doi:10.1007/bf02995904 1971

  34. [34]

    V. P. Nguyen, P. Kerfriden, M. Brino, S. P. A. Bordas, E. Bonisoli, Nitsche’s method for two and three dimensional NURBS patch coupling, Computational Mechanics 53 (6) (2014) 1163–1182.doi: 10.1007/s00466-013-0955-3

    work page doi:10.1007/s00466-013-0955-3 2014

  35. [35]

    Razek, Y

    A. Razek, Y. Maday, A. Buffa, L. Santandrea, E. Bouillault, F. Rapetti, Calculation of eddy currents with edge elements on non-matching grids in moving structures, IEEE Transactions on Magnetics 36 (4) (2000) 1351–1355.doi:10.1109/20.877689. 29

    work page doi:10.1109/20.877689 2000

  36. [36]

    Bernardi, Y

    C. Bernardi, Y. Maday, A. Patera, A new nonconforming approach to domain decomposition: the Mortar element method, Brezis, H.(ed.) et al., Nonlinear partial differential equations and their appli- cations. Collège de France Seminar, volume XI. Lectures presented at the weekly seminar on applied mathematics, Paris, France, (1989)

    1989

  37. [37]

    Bernardi, A new nonconforming approach to domain decomposition: ther mortar element method, Nonlinear Partial Differential Equations and their Applications (1994) 1351

    C. Bernardi, A new nonconforming approach to domain decomposition: ther mortar element method, Nonlinear Partial Differential Equations and their Applications (1994) 1351

    1994

  38. [38]

    F. B. Belgacem, A. Buffa, Y. Maday, The mortar method for the Maxwell’s equations in 3D, Comptes Rendus de l’Académie des Sciences - Series I - Mathematics 329 (10) (1999) 903–908.doi:10.1016/ S0764-4442(00)87497-2

    1999

  39. [39]

    Ben Belgacem, A

    F. Ben Belgacem, A. Buffa, Y. Maday, The Mortar Finite Element Method for 3D Maxwell Equa- tions: First Results, SIAM Journal on Numerical Analysis 39 (3) (2001) 880–901.doi:10.1137/ S0036142999357968

    2001

  40. [40]

    F. Rapetti, An overlapping mortar element approach to coupled magneto-mechanical problems, Math- ematics and Computers in Simulation 80 (8) (2010) 1647–1656.doi:10.1016/j.matcom.2009.02.008

    work page doi:10.1016/j.matcom.2009.02.008 2010

  41. [41]

    Alotto, A

    P. Alotto, A. Bertoni, I. Perugia, D. Schotzau, Efficient use of the local discontinuous Galerkin method for meshes sliding on a circular boundary, IEEE Transactions on Magnetics 38 (2) (2002) 405–408. doi:10.1109/20.996108

    work page doi:10.1109/20.996108 2002

  42. [42]

    Lange, F

    E. Lange, F. Henrotte, K. Hameyer, A Variational Formulation for Nonconforming Sliding Interfaces in Finite Element Analysis of Electric Machines, IEEE Transactions on Magnetics 46 (8) (2010) 2755–2758. doi:10.1109/TMAG.2010.2043075

    work page doi:10.1109/tmag.2010.2043075 2010

  43. [43]

    Lange, F

    E. Lange, F. Henrotte, K. Hameyer, Biorthogonal Shape Functions for Nonconforming Sliding Interfaces in 3-D Electrical Machine FE Models With Motion, IEEE Transactions on Magnetics 48 (2) (2012) 855– 858.doi:10.1109/TMAG.2011.2173165

    work page doi:10.1109/tmag.2011.2173165 2012

  44. [44]

    Boehmer, E

    S. Boehmer, E. Lange, K. Hameyer, Non-Conforming Sliding Interfaces for Relative Motion in 3D Finite Element Analysis of Electrical Machines by Magnetic Scalar Potential Formulation Without Cuts, IEEE Transactions on Magnetics 49 (5) (2013) 1833–1836.doi:10.1109/TMAG.2013.2242051

    work page doi:10.1109/tmag.2013.2242051 2013

  45. [45]

    F. Boy, H. Hetzler, A Non-Conformal Mapping to Avoid Mesh Deformation or Remeshing in 2D FEM- Simulation of Electrical Machines with Rotor Eccentricity, in: 2018 XIII International Conference on Electrical Machines (ICEM), IEEE, Alexandroupoli, 2018, pp. 506–512.doi:10.1109/ICELMACH.2018. 8506751

    work page doi:10.1109/icelmach.2018 2018

  46. [46]

    Desenfans, E

    P. Desenfans, E. Vancayseele, J. Bundschuh, H. De Gersem, Z. Gong, D. Vanoost, K. Gryllias, D. Pissoort, A Boundary-Preserving Non-Conformal Mapping for Radial Rotor Eccentricity in Fi- nite Element Simulations of Electrical Machines, IEEE Transactions on Magnetics 60 (8) (2024) 1–8. doi:10.1109/TMAG.2024.3420813

    work page doi:10.1109/tmag.2024.3420813 2024

  47. [47]

    Zhang, A

    S.-U. Zhang, A. V. Kumar, Magnetostatic Analysis Using Implicit Boundary Finite-Element Method, IEEE Transactions on Magnetics 46 (5) (2010) 1159–1166.doi:10.1109/TMAG.2009.2039940

    work page doi:10.1109/tmag.2009.2039940 2010

  48. [48]

    De Gersem, T

    H. De Gersem, T. Weiland, Harmonic weighting functions at the sliding interface of a finite-element machine model incorporating angular displacement, IEEE Transactions on Magnetics 40 (2) (2004) 545–548.doi:10.1109/TMAG.2004.824616

    work page doi:10.1109/tmag.2004.824616 2004

  49. [49]

    X. Wei, B. Marussig, P. Antolin, A. Buffa, Immersed boundary-conformal isogeometric method for linear elliptic problems, Computational Mechanics 68 (6) (2021) 1385–1405.doi:10.1007/ s00466-021-02074-6. 30

    2021

  50. [50]

    Guarino, A

    G. Guarino, A. Milazzo, A. Buffa, P. Antolin, The Immersed Boundary Conformal Method for Kirchhoff–Love and Reissner–Mindlin shells, Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering 432 (2024) 117407.doi:10.1016/j.cma.2024.117407

    work page doi:10.1016/j.cma.2024.117407 2024

  51. [51]

    Lapina, P

    E. Lapina, P. Oumaziz, R. Bouclier, Immersed boundary-conformal isogeometric LaTIn method for multiple non-linear interfaces, Engineering with Computers (Mar. 2024).doi:10.1007/ s00366-024-01946-8

    2024

  52. [52]

    Y. T. Elbadry, P. Antolín, O. Weeger, Immersed isogeometric analysis with boundary conformal quadrature for finite deformation elasticity, Archive of Applied Mechanics 95 (9) (2025) 219.doi: 10.1007/s00419-025-02924-2

    work page doi:10.1007/s00419-025-02924-2 2025

  53. [53]

    Vanoost, H

    D. Vanoost, H. De Gersem, J. Peuteman, G. Gielen, D. Pissoort, Finite-element discretisation of the eddy-current term in a 2D solver for radially symmetric models, International Journal of Numerical Modelling: Electronic Networks, Devices and Fields 27 (3) (2014) 505–516.doi:10.1002/jnm.1955

    work page doi:10.1002/jnm.1955 2014

  54. [54]

    Buffa, H

    A. Buffa, H. Ammari, J. C. Nédélec, A Justification of Eddy Currents Model for the Maxwell Equations, SIAM Journal on Applied Mathematics 60 (5) (2000) 1805–1823.doi:10.1137/S0036139998348979

    work page doi:10.1137/s0036139998348979 2000

  55. [55]

    D. J. Griffiths, Introduction to Electrodynamics, fourth edition Edition, Pearson, Boston, 2013

    2013

  56. [56]

    S. J. Salon, Finite element analysis of electrical machines, Vol. 101, Kluwer academic publishers Boston, 1995

    1995

  57. [57]

    Babuska, The Finite Element Method with Penalty, Mathematics of Computation 27 (1973) 221–228

    I. Babuska, The Finite Element Method with Penalty, Mathematics of Computation 27 (1973) 221–228. doi:10.1090/S0025-5718-1973-0351118-5

    work page doi:10.1090/s0025-5718-1973-0351118-5 1973

  58. [58]

    Babuška, The finite element method with Lagrangian multipliers, Numerische Mathematik 20 (3) (1973) 179–192.doi:10.1007/BF01436561

    I. Babuška, The finite element method with Lagrangian multipliers, Numerische Mathematik 20 (3) (1973) 179–192.doi:10.1007/BF01436561

    work page doi:10.1007/bf01436561 1973

  59. [59]

    J. D. Jackson, Classical electrodynamics, John Wiley & Sons, 2012

    2012

  60. [60]

    T. J. R. Hughes, The Finite Element Method: Linear Static and Dynamic Finite Element Analysis, Dover Publications, Mineola, NY, 2000

    2000

  61. [61]

    P.Antolin, A.Buffa, R.Puppi, X.Wei, OverlappingMultipatchIsogeometricMethodwithMinimalSta- bilization, SIAM Journal on Scientific Computing 43 (1) (2021) A330–A354.doi:10.1137/19M1306750

    work page doi:10.1137/19m1306750 2021

  62. [62]

    Johansson, B

    A. Johansson, B. Kehlet, M. G. Larson, A. Logg, Multimesh finite element methods: Solving PDEs on multiple intersecting meshes, Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering 343 (2019) 672–689

    2019

  63. [63]

    Antolin, A

    P. Antolin, A. Buffa, M. Martinelli, Isogeometric Analysis on V-reps: First results, Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering 355 (2019) 976–1002.doi:10.1016/j.cma.2019.07.015

    work page doi:10.1016/j.cma.2019.07.015 2019

  64. [64]

    Elber, The irit geometric modeling environment,https://csaws.cs.technion.ac.il/~gershon/ irit(2023)

    G. Elber, The irit geometric modeling environment,https://csaws.cs.technion.ac.il/~gershon/ irit(2023)

    2023

  65. [65]

    OpenCASCADESAS, Open cascadetechnology,https://www.opencascade.com, version7.7.0 (2022)

    2022

  66. [66]

    X. Wei, R. Puppi, P. Antolin, A. Buffa, Stabilized isogeometric formulation of the stokes problem on overlapping patches, Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering 417 (2023) 116477

    2023

  67. [67]

    M. G. Larson, A. Logg, C. Lundholm, Space-time CutFEM on overlapping meshes I: Simple continuous mesh motion, Numerische Mathematik 156 (3) (2024) 1015–1054.doi:10.1007/s00211-024-01417-8

    work page doi:10.1007/s00211-024-01417-8 2024

  68. [68]

    M. G. Larson, C. Lundholm, Space-time CutFEM on overlapping meshes II: Simple discontinuous mesh evolution, Numerische Mathematik 156 (3) (2024) 1055–1083.doi:10.1007/s00211-024-01413-y. 31

    work page doi:10.1007/s00211-024-01413-y 2024

  69. [69]

    de Prenter, C

    F. de Prenter, C. V. Verhoosel, E. H. van Brummelen, M. G. Larson, S. Badia, Stability and Condition- ing of Immersed Finite Element Methods: Analysis and Remedies, Archives of Computational Methods in Engineering 30 (6) (2023) 3617–3656.doi:10.1007/s11831-023-09913-0

    work page doi:10.1007/s11831-023-09913-0 2023

  70. [70]

    Buffa, R

    A. Buffa, R. Puppi, R. Vázquez, A Minimal Stabilization Procedure for Isogeometric Methods on Trimmed Geometries, SIAM Journal on Numerical Analysis 58 (5) (2020) 2711–2735.doi:10.1137/ 19M1244718

    2020

  71. [71]

    De Prenter, C

    F. De Prenter, C. Lehrenfeld, A. Massing, A note on the stability parameter in Nitsche’s method for unfitted boundary value problems, Computers & Mathematics with Applications 75 (12) (2018) 4322–4336.doi:10.1016/j.camwa.2018.03.032

    work page doi:10.1016/j.camwa.2018.03.032 2018

  72. [72]

    Höllig, U

    K. Höllig, U. Reif, J. Wipper, Weighted Extended B-Spline Approximation of Dirichlet Problems, SIAM Journal on Numerical Analysis 39 (2) (2001) 442–462.doi:10.1137/S0036142900373208

    work page doi:10.1137/s0036142900373208 2001

  73. [73]

    Elfverson, M

    D. Elfverson, M. G. Larson, K. Larsson, A new least squares stabilized Nitsche method for cut isogeometric analysis, Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering 349 (2019) 1–16. doi:10.1016/j.cma.2019.02.011

    work page doi:10.1016/j.cma.2019.02.011 2019

  74. [74]

    Jonsson, M

    T. Jonsson, M. G. Larson, K. Larsson, Graded parametric CutFEM and CutIGA for elliptic boundary value problems in domains with corners, Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering 354 (2019) 331–350.doi:10.1016/j.cma.2019.05.024

    work page doi:10.1016/j.cma.2019.05.024 2019

  75. [75]

    Spence, T

    B. Marussig, J. Zechner, G. Beer, T.-P. Fries, Stable isogeometric analysis of trimmed geometries, Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering 316 (2017) 497–521.doi:10.1016/j.cma. 2016.07.040

    work page doi:10.1016/j.cma 2017

  76. [76]

    Marussig, R

    B. Marussig, R. Hiemstra, T. J. R. Hughes, Improved conditioning of isogeometric analysis matrices for trimmed geometries, Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering 334 (2018) 79–110. doi:10.1016/j.cma.2018.01.052

    work page doi:10.1016/j.cma.2018.01.052 2018

  77. [77]

    C. Lang, D. Makhija, A. Doostan, K. Maute, A simple and efficient preconditioning scheme for heaviside enriched XFEM, Computational Mechanics 54 (5) (2014) 1357–1374.doi:10.1007/ s00466-014-1063-8

    2014

  78. [78]

    Lehrenfeld, A

    C. Lehrenfeld, A. Reusken, Optimal preconditioners for Nitsche-XFEM discretizations of interface prob- lems, Numerische Mathematik 135 (2) (2017) 313–332.doi:10.1007/s00211-016-0801-6

    work page doi:10.1007/s00211-016-0801-6 2017

  79. [79]

    de Prenter, C

    F. de Prenter, C. V. Verhoosel, G. J. van Zwieten, E. H. van Brummelen, Condition number analysis and preconditioning of the finite cell method, Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering 316 (2017) 297–327.doi:10.1016/j.cma.2016.07.006

    work page doi:10.1016/j.cma.2016.07.006 2017

  80. [80]

    de Prenter, C

    F. de Prenter, C. V. Verhoosel, E. H. van Brummelen, J. A. Evans, C. Messe, J. Benzaken, K. Maute, Multigrid solvers for immersed finite element methods and immersed isogeometric analysis, Computa- tional Mechanics 65 (3) (2020) 807–838.doi:10.1007/s00466-019-01796-y

    work page doi:10.1007/s00466-019-01796-y 2020

Showing first 80 references.