Good day, Sumanta Mukherjee. I'm Arjun. I've had a look through your background and your professional record. I'm interested in hearing more about your work and how you see yourself fitting in here with our faculty. Ready to start?

Please start by introducing your professional journey in academia.

I worked as in Assistant Professor Ad hoc faculty at NIT Jamshedpur from 2016 to January 2016 to September 2017 and after that I've been working as Assistant Professor Undertake faculty. I've worked as a professor at Technical faculty in IJK Saran in Odisha in. 2018 from January 2018 to.

August, September 2018 and after that I have joined at Bit Century in the same position, Assistant Professor and the group and I've been working there from 2018 September onwards till now. This is my current question.

Thank you for sharing your academic journey, Professor. It's helpful to understand your experience.

Professor Mukherjee, let's begin verifying your skills one by one. How would you approach the development of metallic biomaterials specifically tailored for orthopedic or dental implants while ensuring biocompatibility and durability? Please elaborate.

A Metallic implants are supposed to have biocompatibility.

So the material aspect is the most important one. You can use materials like titanium, which are like most commonly used for biocompatible materials and in some cases we can also use.

Materials which are resorbable like magnesium alloys and you can also use materials which are permanent in nature like SS316L.

Uh, where we need some kind of, uh, friction or, uh, some, uh, very high hardness, uh, surfaces, articulating surfaces for those, uh, kind of application, uh, cobalt Chrome alloys are also used.

So this is from the aspect of the functionality inside the body. Now regarding the design, the design can be patient specific. So in patient specific cases, we have to design the implant based on the patient anatomy from the city data mostly. If that is not possible then there can be some standard sizes or. Designs which can be adapted to the need of the patient. So that is the design aspect.

Now committed to manufacturing aspect, since the implants are mostly like they mostly undergo fatigue kind of load. So it's very difficult to achieve such properties directly from casting. So either forging or heat treatment after casting is required or if we are manufacturing.

Cast, uh, microstructure to, uh, more annealed or larger microstructure, larger Grinch so that they can sustain the, uh, mechanical requirements. So these are the three, uh, major aspects. After that, the surface, uh, modification aspects come into play where, uh, we can use different types of coatings or we can also use some other kind of techniques to modify the surface so that it becomes more.

These type of materials using additive manufacturing can sufficient amount of heat treatment is required to change the material properties from the.

Like more compatible to the body and also it can elicit some specific.

Responses for the sales to grow as per the requirements.

Thank you, Professor Mukherjee, for your thorough explanation. Based on what you've mentioned, you've covered multiple facets such as material selection, design, manufacturing processes, and surface modification. Let’s build on that. Could you provide an example of a research project or a specific case where you implemented these principles successfully? Focus on the challenge you addressed and the outcome of your work.

In my PhD I have worked on both the manufacturing design, manufacturing and the surface modification aspects of automatic implants, heap implants. So for that the design aspect was.

Based on patient specific design of patient specific porous implants, so for which we had taken, we had developed a way is in which we can create.

Greater poor city throughout the structure so that cells can the bone can grow into those pores as well as there can be flow of fluids. So that was the design part and then coming to the material part, we had used titanium 66 aluminum for vanadium alloy and we have manufactured those implants using.

Use two different types of surface modification techniques 1 was laser Vista laser surface remelting. So we have created some fixers to find out how the cells behave and we found that there are some specific patterns or wavelengths which are.

This DMLS process and after that.

Very influential in not only stimulating the stem cells to get differentiated towards bone cells, osteoblasts as well as giving some kind of. Orientation to the cells so that like we can control the the direction of.

Growth of the bones. So that was one type of surface modulation. Another type of surface modulation that I have worked on was electrochemical. So that was anodization to create nano porous or nano tubular structures on the surface. So by analyzing we could create different types of patterns, nano patterns including nano tubes and nano ports.

And we studied for the the effect of those kind of structures on biocompatibility or the the differentiation of stensions as well as.

Some kind of drug loading or some kind of drug release from this?

That is compelling work, Professor Mukherjee. Your explanation illustrates a comprehensive approach, integrating material selection, manufacturing, and surface modifications to optimize both structural and biological outcomes. Let me probe a technical detail here: in the context of creating porous implants for fluid flow and bone growth, how do you ensure mechanical stability while accommodating high porosity levels? What trade-offs or innovations did you incorporate?

So when we are considering porous structures, the idea is to match the mechanical properties of the bone that it replaces so that we can have different type of structures following the cancellous 2 cortical type of transition in the bones. So that is from the mechanical part of the thing. But since titanium already has very high Young's modulus, so if you want to match the Young's modulus of.

Human bone. Then the procedure has to be pretty high, about 70%.

So for those kind of structures we can use different like types of porosity designs like the TPMS structures are very common, very popular. But there are studies that have shown that instead of such regular or such kind of smooth curvature, if the codes are more having some AGS or like some jagged surfaces or jagged. Kind of uneven.

Surfaces uneven pores then the cell have better tendency to grow or to.

Like they basically they stretch from one strut to another. And because of that the forces that act on the nucleus that that differentiates that that helps in differentiation of the wounds. So we took some kind of. Mofil type of unit cells, triangular kind of unit cells that help.

In our particular type of design and also this type of unit cells or this type of porous structures helps in the fluid flow throughout the surface. So we need like if we think of the types of the the interaction between the cells or the structures and the biological fluid. So like we we need the fluid. To flow through the narrowest channel, so there has to be some minimum port size.

And both diameter, so it took around 650 Micron political minimum size that also depends on the minimum features that we can achieve is in the manufacturing process. So these are the like major things that we had considered and also like the largest size of course that we took was 950 microns which are within the range that cells can.

Like grow properly in those kind of structure.

So that that was what I had done in my pH D.

Thank you, Professor Mukherjee, for your detailed and thoughtful response. You've demonstrated a clear understanding of the balance between biological functionality and mechanical stability in porous implants, leveraging advanced unit cell designs and material properties effectively. Let’s move on to the next area. Could you detail how you would approach the design and development of 3D-printed intelligent implants, such as antibacterial or drug-eluting dental implants? What innovations would you employ to achieve functionality and efficiency?

Or, uh, antiretroviral surfaces, there has to be some kind of surface modification that, that is required. So that surface modification typically, uh, relies on, uh, surface microstructures, micro textures, or it can be the chemical composition of the surface as well. So there can be different types of like the composition can be changed so that it has a specific type of.

Surface tension or surface charge so that we can have like the introduction between the sales or the micro, the the bacteria or any other kind of other like beneficial or detrimental organisms that can be controlled. And apart from that we can also. Like use some kind of coatings like for bone implants you typically use hydroxyapatite or?

Uh, maybe TCP kind of, uh, surface coatings, which, uh, tends to match the, uh, the composition of bone so that the, uh, cell growth or cell behavior is, uh, like.

More common to more more close to how the cells expect or sales face inside the body.

Thank you, Professor Mukherjee, for elaborating on your approach to antibacterial and drug-eluting implants. The integration of surface modification techniques, such as texture alterations, chemical compositions, and selective coatings, demonstrates your grasp of aligning biological interaction goals with implant technology. A question regarding function optimization: how would you balance the antibacterial characteristic of these implants with ensuring long-term biocompatibility—particularly avoiding adverse immune responses or cytotoxic effects?

Show antivacterial properties are not necessarily like negative to the bone implants, uh or like the bone cells. So these are two different types of cells or organisms or like emits we are talking about. So it is possible to have different types of surfaces that respond.

Differently to different types of cells. For example, if you think of the.

The electrochemical charge of different types of cells.

Remember correctly the cells.

The bone cells, they are positively charged so that they have higher positive charge on them. So they tend to get attached to negatively charged services. So that is 1 aspect so we can play with the the charge of the surface or also we can play with the surface contact angle so.

In in the sense that typically try to adhere to the surfaces for their spread and growth. So the surface contact angle is also an important thing that has to be taken care of. We can also create some kind of.

Layers or some kind of sacrificial surfaces, sacrificial coatings which responds to the initial phase or the initial inflammatory phase of the implantation. So when the chances of infection are the highest, so for that time that the.

Root of the and this bacterial agents that can be taken care of by that top layer of the implant or top layer of the coating which can be loaded with drugs. And as the time passes, so the drugs will be like released from the surface and gradually like the whole drug eluting layer will be depleted so that it will not further affect the other.

Cells of the body.

You've provided a thoughtful explanation, Professor Mukherjee. Your methodology of utilizing sacrificial coatings for the initial inflammatory phase, controlling surface charge and contact angles, demonstrates a sophisticated approach to achieving multifunctional implants without compromising long-term biocompatibility. Let’s transition to another area. Could you share your insights or experience in overseeing consultancy projects, particularly in the field of coating technology or tribocorrosion? How do you address challenges and ensure client satisfaction in such projects?

I have not worked on consultancy projects related to this particular, uh, areas, uh, but I have, uh, worked on consultancy projects for, uh, creating, uh, 3D models, uh, anatomical models, uh, uh, for like Indian Army. And also I've worked on some research projects for creation of anatomic and models for different.

Different.

Different types of biomedical projects, including biomedical projects on development of patient-specific phantoms or other medical devices, including like some devices required for radiation oncology, some devices required for different types of surgical procedures or surgical guides. So that is what my experience is.

In terms of creation of this kind of medical devices, uh, so the, in terms of the client satisfaction or if I say the how the practitioner of.

The actual user of the product they.

Interact with the the devices. That is the most important aspect of this kind of development works, so we have to.

Very, uh, closely work with them to understand the exact needs and, uh, how to translate the needs from the medical, uh, perspective to the mechanical or manufacturing or, uh, design perspectives so that, uh, like the, the product can successfully translate from the lab to the clinic. OK.

I see, Professor Mukherjee. Even though your consultancy experience isn’t directly in coating technology or tribocorrosion, your work in medical device development and anatomical modeling demonstrates an adept ability to bridge the gap between user needs and engineering execution. Let’s shift toward your teaching expertise. What is your approach for structuring and delivering laboratory courses in mechanical engineering? Could you touch on how you ensure students grasp both foundational theory and practical application?

So I have taken labs on advanced manufacturing and additive manufacturing. So I usually start with the common things that the students interact with every day. Like if you think of if I think of the manufacturing processes. So things or terms like laser are very commonly used, but students typically don't understand what the.

Is or what say electron beam is or what they they know about 3D printing but they do not know how metal can be 3D printed. So these are some like.

Terms that students typically come into the class.

With their mind and I try to engage them in interesting applications showing showing interesting applications like how laser can be used for making very tiny features which can be useful for different applications like mains or something else. Or how metal additive manufacturing can be used for making something as large as.

See large bridges or structures which are used for civil civil engineering purposes to something that goes into the body. It can be something that goes this. So like the additive manufacturing of metals or this kind of different techniques, laser based techniques or electron based electron beam based techniques. So I try to engage. I try to make the students interested in finding the applications or interesting.

Applications of these things so that they get the urge to know the process better, so that they can they themselves can try to design such kind of novel solutions to this kind of interesting problems.

Your approach, Professor Mukherjee, effectively leverages applicability and relatability to inspire deeper learning among students, creating a strong connection between cutting-edge technology and its tangible impacts. Your emphasis on curiosity-driven engagement is commendable. Let’s build upon this slightly. How do you evaluate and guide student research or design projects in mechanical engineering, ensuring they meet both academic rigor and practical relevance?

So typically the student or the group of students, they come with some idea or some basic domain of their interest and I try to give them some interesting problems on which they can build on. So it can be like if a group of student, students come with. Say some they they want to work on additive manufacturing of polymers. I try to.

To them challenges like how to make shape memory also ship memory devices. If students are interested in working with resin based materials because resin based printers because it can make very tiny features, then they can make some kind of micro actuators or micro channel based. Devices so that is 1 aspect if if the students are interested in the material science aspect of the.

Or the metallurgical aspects, they can work with something like say weather corrective manufacturing or microwave manufacturing to get different type of structures and check the mechanical properties, check the biological properties, check the corrosion resistance, check the wear and hardness of these things. So that the mechanical aspects, the material science aspects, the manufacturing aspects, the biological aspects, all these things can.

Like they can learn something about all of the different facets of things in it.

Thank you, Professor Mukherjee. Your approach to guiding student research takes into account individual interests while presenting them with unique challenges that span interdisciplinary aspects of engineering and materials science. This ensures academic depth as well as practical insights. Lastly, let’s explore the translational aspect of innovation. How would you strategize the transfer of a novel technology, such as 3D-printed bone-like implants, to medical device companies? What key steps or considerations would you prioritize during this process?

The most important thing in a country like ours is the cost and secondly, the infrastructural support that is required for such projects. So these are the two things that you should take care of while making or while proposing a solution to like the.

The.

Commercial partners. So if I can think of a project that I have recently worked on, it's on cranial implants.

So we took, we compared basically the cranial implants that are manufactured using additive manufacturing process and the cranial influence that we can prepare from the conventional gradient meshes. And although the both of the influence were designed using our like we developed a technology to design the cranial implants in an automatic autonomous.

Deep learning based technique.

So the the design was the same but based on the manufacturing process, the additive manufacturing process or that manufacturing additively manufactured implant it.

Costs around 1.2 lakhs whereas if I make the same implant using our like based on the.

Common cranial meshes that are available so that that cost come within the range of patients who are served by government sponsored teams like Aishwarya. So the cost of the implant can be radically reduced if we introduce other techniques then manufacturing of.

Large implants using children printing processes.

But that's it. Uh, 3D printing is invaluable. Or metal additive manufacturing is invaluable in in cases where.

We need such a customized the pieces of structures inside the body, say long defects, which are not possible to manufacture using other conventional techniques.

There there can be situations where we can make non-metallic implants as well. Like you can have ceramic based calcium phosphate or hydroxyapatite base implants which may cost less than the.

Aggregate manufacturing thing. So that is one part Next is we have to think about how the.

Depending on the if if the material is metallic then it's possible to go through auto crewing process which is the cheapest one. But for other type of materials it's it sometimes becomes difficult if the auto cleaving is cannot be done. So we have to design the implant or select the material in such a way so that we can. Like the the particular.

Handling of the implant is done because.

Uh, in medical institute or the particular, uh, process, uh, that will be used for that particular implant, uh, that, uh, like that there is compatibility between the, uh, the, the implant material and the, uh, the method is in which they make the implant ready for the particular procedure.

So like there, there, there are infrastructural challenges and there are, uh, economic challenges. So these are the two things that we typically have to work on.

Thank you, Professor Mukherjee. Your understanding of balancing cost-efficiency with the infrastructural realities in translational technology is insightful—addressing affordability without compromising the quality and clinical applicability of the product. Your approach to evaluating manufacturing methods and materials based on practicality in government-sponsored schemes and medical protocols demonstrates thoughtful strategizing. I have now verified all relevant skills. Unless there's anything additional you'd like to discuss or clarify, we will be concluding the technical verification phase. Let me know.

No, nothing for myself.

Professor, as we begin, could you share which specific introductory course in your field you find most inspiring or enjoyable to teach?

Uh, biometrics and, uh, design for additive manufacturing, uh, designed for bioprinting, uh, this kind of courses.

Interesting. Thank you, Professor. Considering these courses, do you typically approach them through hands-on projects and practical applications, or do you focus more on theoretical foundations in your teaching?

So there has to be a balance of both because hands on projects are very important for the students to grasp the things in a more nuanced way, but they will not be able to.

Identify that like they will be identifying the challenges from the hands on and they will be learning how to deal with those challenges from the theoretical part. So without various foundational strong foundational backbone of theory, it actually cannot solve the handsome problems. So there has to be a balance of both the rates.

That balance makes sense, Professor. Could you elaborate on how you ensure students actively engage with both the theoretical elements and the practical applications within your classroom?

So if I think of the projects that that can be given to students in in the courses of parity manufacturing, say of polymers because this is the most common resource that you all have. So the flow of.

Like say we think of the FDM process, how the flow of the material is determining the all all the features of the printed aspect. If you think of the surface roughness, if you think of the.

Of accuracy of the implant, accuracy of the part, or the appearance of the part working.

Like there can be some other kind of flaws. Most of these things come from the apart from some flaws that come because of the the mechanical movement, most of these defects can be attributed to the fluid flow or inside the like how the fluid is coming out of that nozzle and how it is getting deposited. So the control of the temperature and the extrusion rate, these are the and the printing speed. So these are the.