It is necessary to include a study of the interfacial contact area evolution between the different materials present in the cathode upon calendering. The interfacial contacts determine the effectiveness of the intercalation/de-intercalation reactions of lithium at the interface between AM and SE. It is worth to mention that such an effectiveness might evolve upon electrochemical cycling due to the cyclic variation of AM particles volume and consequent materials interfaces delamination. In the work reported in this article, we do not simulate the electrochemical cycling, but only the interfacial contact evolution during calendering. For better representability, we introduce the concept of a normalized interfacial area A norm , which is defined as the ratio between the total interfacial area A interface between two distinct materials in the cathode volume and the base area of the cathode, A base , in the studied ensemble. We depict the value A norm for different calendering degrees and for the six types of interfaces present between all four phases types, including pores, in our simulation in Figure . We begin with the analysis of the interfacial area between the materials and pores. We observe that as the calendering degree increases, the interfacial area between each material and pore decreases. Such a trend is in line with the observations made in Figure . Namely, as the calendering degree increases and pores begin to shrink, so does the interfacial area between material and pore. Thereby, as the pores shrink, there is less volume occupied by the pore and less possible area of contact between pore and material, thus the interfacial area between pore and material begins to decrease. The magnitude of the value of A norm depends on the volume of the material present, since SE has the highest volume, it also has the largest value in the beginning. For the interfacial area between the different materials, we observe a trend, which we attribute to a some of the approximations of our simulation. It appears that despite a larger calendering degree, the interfacial area between the different materials does not seem to increase, but rather remains constant. This is counter-intuitive to our experimental understanding, because as the material is compressed more and more, we would expect particularly the binder and solid electrolyte phase to deform and increase its interfacial contact with the other materials. In our simulations, we do not observe this trend on account of the spherical nature of these particles in our simulations. In essence, once contact has been established between two or more spheres, no matter how much the microstructure is compressed, two phases will not be able to increase their contact area, since we do not allow for much overlap between the different spheres during the calendering stage in the first place.