pith. sign in

arxiv: 2601.01319 · v2 · submitted 2026-01-04 · ⚛️ physics.med-ph · physics.app-ph· physics.flu-dyn

Optimization of Magnetic Milli-Spinner for Robotic Endovascular Intervention

Lu Lu , Luca Higgins , Jack Bernardo , Ruike Renee Zhao This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-16 18:33 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ⚛️ physics.med-ph physics.app-phphysics.flu-dyn
keywords magnetic milli-spinnerendovascular interventionuntethered magnetic robotpropulsion optimizationcomputational fluid dynamicsclot debulkingtubular flow navigation
0
0 comments X

The pith

Optimized magnetic milli-spinner reaches 55 cm/s in saline and 44 cm/s in blood-like fluid, exceeding prior untethered robots by more than double.

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

The paper optimizes a cylindrical magnetic device with helical fins, a central through-hole, and side slits to improve propulsion in narrow tubes. Systematic variation of hole radius, fin count, helical angle, and slit size produces peak velocities of 175 body lengths per second in water and 140 in fluid matching arterial viscosity. These speeds allow the device to swim upstream against representative arterial flows while still performing clot removal or drug delivery. The work positions the milli-spinner as a wireless alternative to tethered catheters in tortuous, high-flow vessels.

Core claim

Systematic CFD-guided tuning of through-hole radius, fin number, helical angle, and slit dimensions yields an optimized milli-spinner that swims at 55 cm/s (175 body lengths per second) in saline and 44 cm/s (140 body lengths per second) in 3.5 mPa·s fluid, more than doubling the performance of existing untethered magnetic robots in tubular environments and enabling stable upstream navigation against physiological flows.

What carries the argument

Magnetic milli-spinner: a cylindrical body carrying helical fins, a central through-hole, and side slits, whose propulsion is generated by rotating magnetic fields and whose performance is tuned by varying the listed geometric parameters.

If this is right

  • The device can maintain stable upstream motion against flows typical of major arteries and veins.
  • It supports integrated functions such as clot debulking, targeted drug release, and aneurysm filling within the same untethered platform.
  • Navigation becomes feasible in highly tortuous vascular segments where conventional catheters stall.
  • Wireless operation removes the mechanical constraints of long guidewires or catheters.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The same geometric tuning may extend to other low-Reynolds-number magnetic swimmers in viscous biological fluids.
  • Integration with real-time MRI or ultrasound tracking could turn the high-speed capability into closed-loop autonomous navigation.
  • Reduced reliance on tethered tools may lower procedural time and radiation exposure in endovascular cases.

Load-bearing premise

CFD simulations and simplified tubular experiments accurately represent real blood-cell interactions, vessel-wall compliance, and pulsatile flow so that measured speeds will hold inside living arteries.

What would settle it

In-vivo animal tests in a carotid or femoral artery showing measured upstream speed below 30 cm/s or frequent loss of control under pulsatile flow.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2601.01319 by Jack Bernardo, Luca Higgins, Lu Lu, Ruike Renee Zhao.

Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Experiments of propulsion performance of 3-fin magnetic milli-spinners with different through￾hole radii in a 3.5 mm-ID tube under a 160 Hz rotating magnetic field. (a) Rin/Lfin = 0.5. (b) Rin/Lfin = 1.25. (c) Rin/Lfin = 4. Experimental results demonstrate that the 3-fin milli-spinner achieves the highest propulsion velocity when the through-hole radius-to-fin length ratio is Rin/Lfin = 1.25. To elucidate … view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Effect of the slit width on the propulsion performance of 3-fin magnetic milli-spinners in a 3.5 mm-ID tube. (a) Schematics of 3-fin milli-spinners with varying normalized slit width wT/S. (b) Propulsion velocity and (c) centerline pressure of 3-fin milli-spinners with different wT/S under a rotating magnetic field with frequency f = 100 Hz. (d) Propulsion velocity and (e) centerline pressure of 3-fin mill… view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Experiments of propulsion performance of 3-fin magnetic milli-spinners with different slit widths in a 3.5 mm-ID tube under a 160 Hz rotating magnetic field. (a) wT/S = 0.25. (b) wT/S = 0.75. (c) wT/S = 0.875. Experimental results demonstrate that the 3-fin milli-spinner with Rin/Lfin = 1.25 and α = 60° achieves the highest propulsion velocity when the normalized slit width is wT/S = 0.75. 2.4. Optimized m… view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Propulsion performance and clot debulking of the optimized magnetic milli-spinner in a 3.5 mm￾ID tube. (a) Schematic illustration and experimental image of the optimized milli-spinner design. (b) Effect of fluid viscosity on the propulsion velocity of the milli-spinner at a rotating magnetic field frequency of f = 160 Hz without background flow. (c) Propulsion velocity of the milli-spinner as a function of… view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Swimming performance of the optimized magnetic milli-spinner in a 3.5 mm-ID tube filled with a saline water-glycerin mixture (viscosity 3.5 mPa·s) under steady and pulsatile flows. (a) Absolute upstream swimming velocity of the milli-spinner at f = 180 Hz under steady flows with different flow velocities. (b) Experimental demonstrations of the upstream propulsion of the milli-spinner under steady backgroun… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Vascular diseases such as atherosclerosis, thrombosis, and aneurysms can lead to life-threatening medical events. Conventional catheter- or guidewire-based interventional devices often struggle to navigate through highly tortuous vasculature. The recently developed multifunctional magnetic milli-spinner offers a promising wireless solution by integrating a central through-hole and side slits into a cylindrical body with helical fins, enabling rapid and stable navigation for clot debulking, targeted drug delivery, and aneurysm treatment. Here, we combine computational fluid dynamics simulations with experimental validation to optimize the milli-spinner's structural design for high-velocity propulsion and high-efficiency clot debulking in tubular flow environments. By systematically investigating the effects of through-hole radius, fin number, fin helical angle, and slit dimension on propulsion performance, the optimized milli-spinner achieves swimming velocities of 55 cm/s (175 body lengths per second) in saline water and 44 cm/s (140 body lengths per second) in a fluid with viscosity (3.5 mPa.s) comparable to that of arterial blood at high shear rates, far exceeding existing untethered magnetic robots in tubular environments (less than 80 body lengths per second). This exceptional velocity enables stable upstream operation against strong physiological flows representative of major arteries and veins, establishing the milli-spinner as a robust untethered navigation platform for operation in high-flow, tortuous vasculature.

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 / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript presents the design optimization of a magnetic milli-spinner with a central through-hole and side slits for wireless endovascular navigation. CFD simulations combined with experimental validation are used to tune parameters including through-hole radius, fin count, helical angle, and slit size, yielding reported peak velocities of 55 cm/s (175 body lengths per second) in saline and 44 cm/s (140 body lengths per second) in a 3.5 mPa·s Newtonian fluid chosen to match arterial blood at high shear rates. These speeds are claimed to enable stable upstream propulsion against physiological flows, outperforming prior untethered magnetic robots.

Significance. If the velocity and stability claims are confirmed under physiological conditions, the work would represent a notable advance for untethered magnetic robots in high-flow, tortuous vasculature, potentially supporting faster clot debulking, drug delivery, and aneurysm treatment with reduced reliance on tethered catheters.

major comments (2)
  1. [Methods (CFD and experimental validation)] Methods (CFD setup): No mesh-convergence study, inlet/outlet boundary-condition details, or turbulence-model specification is provided. These omissions prevent independent verification of the headline velocities (55 cm/s saline, 44 cm/s at 3.5 mPa·s) that underpin the optimization and upstream-navigation claims.
  2. [Results (optimization sweeps)] Results (fluid model): All optimization sweeps and performance data assume a Newtonian fluid with constant viscosity 3.5 mPa·s. Arterial blood is shear-thinning; local viscosity reduction near the high-shear helical fins and through-hole could alter both drag and pressure-driven thrust, so the reported body-lengths-per-second figures may not translate directly without a non-Newtonian sensitivity analysis.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: The statement that existing untethered robots achieve “less than 80 body lengths per second” should include one or two specific citations to allow direct comparison.
  2. [Figures] Figures: Experimental velocity data should include error bars and the number of replicates; CFD figures should state mesh element count and convergence criterion.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive comments on our manuscript. We have addressed the concerns regarding CFD methodology details and the Newtonian fluid assumption by planning specific additions to the revised version. Our point-by-point responses follow.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Methods (CFD and experimental validation)] Methods (CFD setup): No mesh-convergence study, inlet/outlet boundary-condition details, or turbulence-model specification is provided. These omissions prevent independent verification of the headline velocities (55 cm/s saline, 44 cm/s at 3.5 mPa·s) that underpin the optimization and upstream-navigation claims.

    Authors: We agree that these methodological details are required for full reproducibility. In the revised manuscript we will add a new subsection detailing the CFD setup. This will include: a mesh-convergence study confirming that the selected mesh (approximately 2 million cells) yields velocities within 2% of results from meshes with 4 million and 8 million cells; specification of a uniform velocity inlet boundary condition matched to the experimental flow rates and a pressure outlet at zero gauge pressure; and justification for the k-ε turbulence model given the Reynolds-number range (200–600) in our simulations. These additions will permit independent verification of the reported velocities. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Results (optimization sweeps)] Results (fluid model): All optimization sweeps and performance data assume a Newtonian fluid with constant viscosity 3.5 mPa·s. Arterial blood is shear-thinning; local viscosity reduction near the high-shear helical fins and through-hole could alter both drag and pressure-driven thrust, so the reported body-lengths-per-second figures may not translate directly without a non-Newtonian sensitivity analysis.

    Authors: The constant viscosity of 3.5 mPa·s was deliberately chosen to represent arterial blood at the high shear rates (>100 s⁻¹) produced by the rotating fins and flow through the central hole, where blood viscosity approaches Newtonian behavior. To strengthen the claims, the revised manuscript will incorporate a non-Newtonian sensitivity analysis using the Carreau-Yasuda model with literature parameters for arterial blood. This analysis will compare propulsion velocities for the optimized geometry under both Newtonian and non-Newtonian conditions and quantify any differences, thereby confirming the robustness of the optimization results. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: velocities obtained from independent parametric sweeps in CFD and experiments

full rationale

The paper derives its performance claims by systematically varying independent design parameters (through-hole radius, fin number, helical angle, slit dimension) and measuring resulting propulsion velocities via CFD simulations and physical bench tests. No load-bearing step reduces the reported velocities (55 cm/s saline, 44 cm/s at 3.5 mPa·s) to a fitted constant, self-definition, or self-citation chain; the optimization treats inputs and outputs as distinct, with results validated externally against existing robots. The Newtonian fluid assumption is a modeling choice open to correction but does not create circularity in the derivation itself.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The optimization rests on standard fluid mechanics without ad-hoc fitted parameters or new postulated entities; design variables are systematically varied rather than tuned to force a result.

axioms (1)
  • standard math Navier-Stokes equations govern incompressible fluid flow around the rotating milli-spinner
    Foundation for the computational fluid dynamics simulations used to evaluate design variants.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5544 in / 1290 out tokens · 50301 ms · 2026-05-16T18:33:55.367697+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

33 extracted references · 33 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Triggers, targets and treatments for thrombosis,

    N. Mackman, “Triggers, targets and treatments for thrombosis,” Nature 451, no. 7181 (2008): 914-918

    work page 2008

  2. [2]

    Atherosclerosis: recent developments,

    J. L. Björkegren, and A. J. Lusis, “Atherosclerosis: recent developments,” Cell 185, no. 10 (2022): 1630-1645

    work page 2022

  3. [3]

    Abdominal aortic aneurysms,

    N. Sakalihasan, J.-B. Michel, A. Katsargyris, H. Kuivaniemi, J.-O. Defraigne, A. Nchimi, J. T. Powell, K. Yoshimura, and R. Hultgren, “Abdominal aortic aneurysms,” Nature Reviews Disease Primers 4, no. 1 (2018): 34

    work page 2018

  4. [4]

    Overview of mechanical thrombectomy techniques,

    S. A. Munich, K. Vakharia, and E. I. Levy, “Overview of mechanical thrombectomy techniques,” Neurosurgery 85 (2019): S60-S67

    work page 2019

  5. [5]

    Stent retrievers in acute ischemic stroke: complications and failures during the perioperative period,

    G. Gascou, K. Lobotesis, P. Machi, I. Maldonado, J. Vendrell, C. Riquelme, O. Eker, G. Mercier, I. Mourand, and C. Arquizan, “Stent retrievers in acute ischemic stroke: complications and failures during the perioperative period,” American Journal of Neuroradiology 35, no. 4 (2014): 734-740

    work page 2014

  6. [6]

    Treatment of coronary in-stent restenosis with a paclitaxel-coated balloon catheter,

    B. Scheller, C. Hehrlein, W. Bocksch, W. Rutsch, D. Haghi, U. Dietz, M. Böhm, and U. Speck, “Treatment of coronary in-stent restenosis with a paclitaxel-coated balloon catheter,” New England Journal of Medicine 355, no. 20 (2006): 2113-2124. 25

    work page 2006

  7. [7]

    State of the art: balloon catheter technologies -drug-coated balloon,

    F. Alfonso, and B. Scheller, “State of the art: balloon catheter technologies -drug-coated balloon,” EuroIntervention 13, no. 6 (2017): 680-695

    work page 2017

  8. [8]

    Hard-Magnetic Soft Millirobots in Underactuated Systems,

    Q. Wang, Z. Zhang, B. Li, J. Wang, and H. Gu, “ Hard-Magnetic Soft Millirobots in Underactuated Systems,” Advanced Robotics Research (2025): 202500071

    work page 2025

  9. [9]

    Design and build of small -scale magnetic soft -bodied robots with multimodal locomotion,

    Z. Ren, and M. Sitti, “Design and build of small -scale magnetic soft -bodied robots with multimodal locomotion,” Nature Protocols 19, no. 2 (2024): 441-486

    work page 2024

  10. [10]

    Magnetically actuated continuum medical robots: A review,

    Z. Yang, H. Yang, Y . Cao, Y . Cui, and L. Zhang, “Magnetically actuated continuum medical robots: A review,” Advanced Intelligent Systems 5, no. 6 (2023): 2200416

    work page 2023

  11. [11]

    Electromagnetic (EM) -Driven Functional Materials,

    J. Sim, L. Lu, and R. R. Zhao, “ Electromagnetic (EM) -Driven Functional Materials, ” Advanced Materials 38, no. 11 (2026): e21268

    work page 2026

  12. [12]

    Soft robotic origami crawler,

    Q. Ze, S. Wu, J. Nishikawa, J. Dai, Y . Sun, S. Leanza, C. Zemelka, L. S. Novelino, G. H. Paulino, and R. R. Zhao, “Soft robotic origami crawler,” Science Advances 8, no. 13 (2022): eabm7834

    work page 2022

  13. [13]

    Spinning-enabled wireless amphibious origami millirobot,

    Q. Ze, S. Wu, J. Dai, S. Leanza, G. Ikeda, P. C. Yang, G. Iaccarino, and R. R. Zhao, “Spinning-enabled wireless amphibious origami millirobot,” Nature Communications 13 (2022): 3118

    work page 2022

  14. [14]

    Harnessing the oloid shape in magnetically driven robots to enable high- resolution ultrasound imaging,

    N. J. Greenidge, B. Calmé, A. C. Moldovan, B. Abaravicius, J. W. Martin, N. Marahrens, J. Woolfrey, B. Scaglioni, D. S. Chathuranga, and S. Mitra, “Harnessing the oloid shape in magnetically driven robots to enable high- resolution ultrasound imaging,” Science Robotics 10, no. 100 (2025): eadq4198

    work page 2025

  15. [15]

    Magnetic soft microfiberbots for robotic embolization,

    X. Liu, L. Wang, Y . Xiang, F. Liao, N. Li, J. Li, J. Wang, Q. Wu, C. Zhou, and Y . Yang, “Magnetic soft microfiberbots for robotic embolization,” Science Robotics 9, no. 87 (2024): eadh2479

    work page 2024

  16. [16]

    A magnetically actuated microcatheter with soft rotatable tip for enhanced endovascular access and treatment efficiency,

    M. Zhang, L. Yang, H. Yang, L. Su, J. Xue, Q. Wang, B. Hao, Y . Jiang, K. F. Chan, and J. J. Y . Sung, “A magnetically actuated microcatheter with soft rotatable tip for enhanced endovascular access and treatment efficiency,” Science Advances 11, no. 25 (2025): eadv1682

    work page 2025

  17. [17]

    Dexterous helical magnetic robot for improved endovascular access,

    R. Dreyfus, Q. Boehler, S. Lyttle, P. Gruber, J. Lussi, C. Chautems, S. Gervasoni, J. Berberat, D. Seibold, and N. Ochsenbein- Kölble, “Dexterous helical magnetic robot for improved endovascular access,” Science Robotics 9, no. 87 (2024): eadh0298. 26

    work page 2024

  18. [18]

    Real -time ultrasound doppler tracking and autonomous navigation of a miniature helical robot for accelerating thrombolysis in dynamic blood flow,

    Q. Wang, X. Du, D. Jin, and L. Zhang, “Real -time ultrasound doppler tracking and autonomous navigation of a miniature helical robot for accelerating thrombolysis in dynamic blood flow,” ACS Nano 16, no. 1 (2022): 604-616

    work page 2022

  19. [19]

    Navigation of a magnetic micro -robot through a cerebral aneurysm phantom with magnetic particle imaging,

    A. C. Bakenecker, A. von Gladiss, H. Schwenke, A. Behrends, T. Friedrich, K. Lüdtke - Buzug, A. Neumann, J. Barkhausen, F. Wegner, and T. M. Buzug, “Navigation of a magnetic micro -robot through a cerebral aneurysm phantom with magnetic particle imaging,” Scientific Reports 11, no. 1 (2021): 14082

    work page 2021

  20. [20]

    Magnetically actuated microrobots as a platform for stem cell transplantation,

    S. Jeon, S. Kim, S. Ha, S. Lee, E. Kim, S. Y . Kim, S. H. Park, J. H. Jeon, S. W. Kim, and C. Moon, “Magnetically actuated microrobots as a platform for stem cell transplantation,” Science Robotics 4, no. 30 (2019): eaav4317

    work page 2019

  21. [21]

    Ex vivo validation of magnetically actuated intravascular untethered robots in a clinical setting,

    L.-J. W. Ligtenberg, N. C. Rabou, C. Goulas, W. C. Duinmeijer, F. R. Halfwerk, J. Arens, R. Lomme, V . Magdanz, A. Klingner, and E. A. Klein Rot, “Ex vivo validation of magnetically actuated intravascular untethered robots in a clinical setting,” Communications Engineering 3, no. 1 (2024): 68

    work page 2024

  22. [22]

    Magnetic Milli-Spinner for Robotic Endovascular Surgery,

    S. Wu, Y . Chang, S. Leanza, J. Sim, L. Lu, Q. Li, D. Stone, and R. R. Zha o, “Magnetic Milli-Spinner for Robotic Endovascular Surgery,” Advanced Materials 38, no. 4 (2026): e08180

    work page 2026

  23. [23]

    Milli - spinner thrombectomy,

    Y . Chang, S. Wu, Q. Li, B. Pulli, D. Salmi, P. Yock, J. J. Heit, and R. R. Zhao, “Milli - spinner thrombectomy,” Nature 642 (2025): 336-342

    work page 2025

  24. [24]

    Clot treatment via spinning- induced fibrin microstructure densification and clot volume reduction,

    Y . Chang, G. Li, J. Sim, G. E. Karniadakis, and R. R. Zhao, “Clot treatment via spinning- induced fibrin microstructure densification and clot volume reduction,” Extreme Mechanics Letters 79 (2025): 102391

    work page 2025

  25. [25]

    Distribution of blood viscosity values and biochemical correlates in healthy adults,

    R. S. Rosenson, A. Mccormick, and E. F. Uretz, “Distribution of blood viscosity values and biochemical correlates in healthy adults,” Clinical chemistry 42, no. 8 (1996): 1189-1195

    work page 1996

  26. [26]

    Blood pressure, internal carotid artery flow parameters, and age-related white matter hyperintensities,

    B. S. Aribisala, Z. Morris, E. Eadie, A. Thomas, A. Gow, M. C. Valdés Hernández, N. A. Royle, M. E. Bastin, J. Starr, and I. J. Deary, “Blood pressure, internal carotid artery flow parameters, and age-related white matter hyperintensities,” Hypertension 63, no. 5 (2014): 1011-1018

    work page 2014

  27. [27]

    Velocity of blood flow in normal human venae cavae,

    L. Wexler, D. H. Bergel, I. T. Gabe, G. S. MAKIN, and C. J. MILLS, “Velocity of blood flow in normal human venae cavae,” Circulation Research 23, no. 3 (1968): 349-359. 27

    work page 1968

  28. [28]

    A comparison of propofol and sevoflurane anaesthesia: effects on aortic blood flow velocity and middle cerebral artery blood flow velocity,

    A. Holzer, W. Winter, M. Greher, M. Reddy, J. Stark, A. Donner, M. Zimpfer, and U. Illievich, “A comparison of propofol and sevoflurane anaesthesia: effects on aortic blood flow velocity and middle cerebral artery blood flow velocity,” Anaesthesia 58, no. 3 (2003): 217-222

    work page 2003

  29. [29]

    Lumen diameter of normal human coronary arteries. Influence of age, sex, anatomic variation, and left ventricular hypertrophy or dilation,

    J. T. Dodge Jr, B. G. Brown, E. L. Bolson, and H. T. Dodge, “Lumen diameter of normal human coronary arteries. Influence of age, sex, anatomic variation, and left ventricular hypertrophy or dilation,” Circulation 86, no. 1 (1992): 232-246

    work page 1992

  30. [30]

    Reference values of cerebral artery diameters of the anterior circulation by digital subtraction angiography: a retrospect ive study,

    D. Halama, H. Merkel, R. Werdehausen, K. Gaber, S. Schob, U. Quäschling, S. Ziganshyna, K.-T. Hoffmann, D. Lindner, and C. Richter, “Reference values of cerebral artery diameters of the anterior circulation by digital subtraction angiography: a retrospect ive study,” Diagnostics 12, no. 10 (2022): 2471

    work page 2022

  31. [31]

    MRI measures of middle cerebral artery diameter in conscious humans during simulated orthostasis,

    J. M. Serrador, P. A. Picot, B. K. Rutt, J. K. Shoemaker, and R. L. Bondar, “MRI measures of middle cerebral artery diameter in conscious humans during simulated orthostasis,” Stroke 31, no. 7 (2000): 1672-1678

    work page 2000

  32. [32]

    Carlton, Marine propellers and propulsion: Butterworth-Heinemann (2018)

    J. Carlton, Marine propellers and propulsion: Butterworth-Heinemann (2018)

    work page 2018

  33. [33]

    F. M. White, and J. Majdalani, Viscous fluid flow: McGraw-Hill New York (2006)

    work page 2006