MENG 471

Failure Analysis

Dr Riaz Muhammad
Assistant Professor
14-109
rmuhammad@[Link]
 Learning outcomes of the course
Failure Analysis MENG 471

• CILO1: Understand and be able to identify the common modes of failure

of engineering components
• CILO2: Have, and be able to use, a framework for assessing engineering
failures, including determining the mode of failure and making
recommendations on failure prevention.
• CILO3: To work as a team member, plan and make decisions through
effective communication and to write a professional engineering
report.

Mechanical Engineering Department, University of Bahrain, Bahrain

 Course Assessment
Failure Analysis MENG 471

• Quizzes (20%)
• Project (10%)
• Tests (30%)
• Final (40%)

Mechanical Engineering Department, University of Bahrain, Bahrain

 Books
Failure Analysis MENG 471

• Applied Engineering Failure Analysis: Theory and Practice

By Hock-Chye Qua

Mechanical Engineering Department, University of Bahrain, Bahrain

Introduction to Failure Analysis

Failure analysis is a systematic approach to identify the fundamental causes of failure so that corrective action can be taken to prevent recurrence

Prevent Loss of Life Protect Property Ensure Reliability

Minimize damage to infrastructure, Maintain consistent performance and

Identify critical failure mechanisms that
equipment, and financial assets operational integrity of systems
could lead to catastrophic consequences

Identify Root Causes Develop Solutions Prevent Recurrence

Engineering Disasters

Major historical failures that highlight the importance of failure analysis

Titanic Ship Failure (1912) St. Francis Dam Failure (1928)

Poor impact resistance of 3 million rivets Located 40 miles from Los Angeles

Failed hours after inspection by engineers

Design flaw: 16 watertight compartments interconnected at ceiling
Resulted in 1,600+ fatalities
Loss of 1,500+ lives

Tacoma Narrows Bridge(1940) Other Notable Disasters

World's third longest suspension bridge Kadalundi Train Disaster: Bridge pier settlement

Failed due to aeroelastic flutter at 40 mph wind Bhopal Gas Tragedy (1984): 11,000+ deaths

Collapse captured on camera Rafi Ganj Rail Bridge: Corrosion & fatigue

F16 Crash
Fukushima Japan Accident
When to Consider a Component Has Failed
Three situations that define component failure in engineering analysis

1 Component is Inoperable
The component cannot perform its basic function at all

Fan doesn't run Car doesn't start Machine doesn't operate

2 Component Operates but Doesn't Perform Intended Function

The component functions but fails to deliver expected results

Fan rotates but no air Lathe produces poor surface finish Tool cuts but surface too rough

3 Component Operates but Reliability and Safety is Compromised

The component functions but poses risks to life, property, or system integrity

Risk to life Risk to property Unreliable performance

Four Ways Mechanical Components Can Fail
Major categories of mechanical failure that require systematic analysis

1 2
Unacceptable Elastic Deformation Unacceptable Plastic Deformation

Component deforms elastically beyond acceptable limits while still Component experiences permanent change in dimensions when stresses
within yield strength exceed yield strength

Automotive shafts affecting valve operation Gear teeth deformation under excessive loading

3 4
Complete Fracture Loss of Dimensions

Component separates into pieces under loading conditions beyond Component dimensions reduce beyond acceptable limits due to wear
material limits and tear

Ductile, brittle, fatigue, or creep fractures Adhesion, abrasion, corrosion, erosion effects
Elastic and Plastic Deformation Failures

Understanding deformation-based failure mechanisms in mechanical components

Unacceptable Elastic Deformation Unacceptable Plastic Deformation

Component deforms beyond acceptable limits while still within yield

Component experiences permanent change in dimensions or shape
strength

Deformation is reversible when load is removed Occurs when stresses exceed yield strength

Causes misalignment and improper functioning

Deformation is irreversible and affects component functionality

Example: Automotive Shafts Example: Gear Teeth

Excessive elastic deformation affects valve operation by changing cam Under excessive loading, gear teeth deform permanently, leading to
position relative to valve mechanism improper meshing and power transmission failure
Fracture Failures
Complete fracture occurs when loading exceeds material limits, causing separation

Ductile Fracture Brittle Fracture

Visible warning before complete separation Catastrophic failure with little or no warning

Occurs with significant plastic deformation Occurs with minimal plastic deformation

Characterized by cup-and-cone surface appearance Characterized by flat, grainy fracture surface

Fatigue Failure Creep Failure

Caused by cyclic loading below yield strength Occurs under constant stress at elevated temperatures

Progressive failure through crack initiation and propagation Time-dependent deformation and eventual fracture

Characterized by beach marks on fracture surface Characterized by intergranular fracture surface

Ductile to Brittle Transition Temperature

Temperature at which material behavior changes from ductile to brittle, significantly reducing toughness

-20°C to -30°C for most mild steel and structural steels

Loss of Dimensions Due to Wear and Tear

Component failure occurs when dimensions reduce beyond acceptable limits due to material degradation

Primary Wear Mechanisms Rafi Ganj Rail Bridge Failure

Adhesion Abrasion Failure attributed to poor design and low maintenance

Material transfer between Surface removal by hard Plate girder deterioration over time due to:
surfaces in contact particles or protuberances
Corrosion of steel plate girders

Corrosion Erosion Fatigue from train vibrations causing crack nucleation

Chemical deterioration of Material loss due to fluid or

material properties particle impact Reduced strength led to catastrophic failure under train loading

Key Lessons

Anti-corrosion paints Fatigue analysis

Regular inspection Proper maintenance

Failure Prevention

Industry Impact: Critical for heavy engineering and mechanical component

manufacturing

Service Disruption: Component failures lead to operational stoppages

Safety Concerns: Potential for loss of life and property in catastrophic failures

Reliability Issues: Reduced product reliability and safety

Production Line Impact

Failure at any stage causes material pile-up and production stoppage

Systematic Approach to Failure Analysis

What is Failure Analysis? Failure Analysis Process

Systematic investigation to identify potential causes, determine most

probable causes, and establish root causes of failure 1 Identify failure indicators and symptoms

2 Collect evidence from failure site

Root Cause Analysis (RCA): Methodical process to identify underlying causes
of failure
3 Perform laboratory testing and analysis
Observation: Visual examination of failed component and surrounding
conditions

4 Model behavior under service conditions

Inspection: Detailed examination of fracture surfaces and material properties

5 Determine root causes and mechanisms

Laboratory Testing: Extensive analysis of failed component material and
properties
Multidisciplinary Nature of Failure Analysis

Collaborative Approach

Failure Analysis
Why Multidisciplinary Approach?

Failure analysis requires expertise from multiple fields to effectively identify

root causes and develop solutions

Design Materials

Design Engineer: Ensures component is properly designed for intended

function

Materials/Metallurgical Engineer: Selects appropriate materials for service Manufacturing Maintenance

conditions

Manufacturing Engineer: Ensures proper fabrication and assembly processes

Effective failure analysis requires collaboration across all disciplines

Maintenance Engineer: Ensures proper upkeep and service conditions to identify root causes and implement corrective actions
Benefits of Failure Analysis

Why Conduct Failure Analysis?

Failure Analysis
Systematic failure analysis provides multiple benefits beyond simply
identifying why something failed

Quality Improvement: Prevents recurrence of failures, enhancing product

quality

Increased Reliability: Reduces failure tendency, improving component

Quality Reliability
dependability
Prevents failure recurrence Reduces failure tendency

Enhanced Performance: Optimizes component functionality for longer service

life

Customer Satisfaction: Delivers more reliable products that meet user

expectations
Performance Satisfaction
Optimizes functionality Meets user expectations
Indicators, Causes, Mechanisms, and Remedies

Example: Cutting Tool Failure

Indicators
Chattering, noise, vibrations

Causes
Understanding Failure Relationships
High cutting speed, improper tool geometry

Effective failure analysis requires understanding the connection between

indicators, causes, mechanisms, and remedies
Mechanisms
Flank wear, crater wear, cutting edge fracture

Indicators: Observable symptoms that signal a failure is occurring

Remedies
Proper tool geometry, optimal cutting parameters
Causes: Factors that create conditions leading to failure

Mechanisms: Physical processes through which failure occurs

Remedies: Solutions to prevent failure recurrence

Problem-Solving Approach

5-Step Process for Failure Prevention

Continuous Improvement Cycle

Systematic approach to identify, analyze, and prevent component failures

Identify Analyze

Identify Problem: Recognize failure indicators and symptoms Recognize failure Determine root
1 symptoms causes

2 Determine Root Cause: Conduct failure analysis to identify underlying

causes Correct Validate
Develop solutions Test effectiveness
3
Develop Corrective Action: Create solutions to address root causes

4 Validate Action: Test effectiveness of corrective measures Standardize

Implement as standard practice to prevent recurrence

5
Standardize Action: Implement proven solutions as standard practice
Failure Rate Trends - Bathtub Curve

Bathtub Curve

Product Failure Rate Over Time

Failure rate as a function of service time follows a characteristic pattern

known as the bathtub curve

Early Stage Failures: High initial failure rate that decreases rapidly due to
manufacturing defects and installation issues

Constant Failure Rate: Stable period with low, predictable failure rate during
useful product life

Wear-Out Failures: Increasing failure rate as components reach end of service

life due to wear and tear

Wear-
Early Failures Useful Life
Out

Maintenance Implications
Key Insight
• Early stage: Initial adjustments and calibration
• Constant stage: Regular maintenance Understanding where a component is on the bathtub curve helps determine appropriate
• Wear-out stage: Consider replacement over repair maintenance strategy
Types of Failure Causes

Failure Cause Analysis

Physical Causes
Understanding Failure Categories
• Design flaws
Failures can be attributed to three main categories of causes, each requiring • Material selection errors
different investigation approaches • Manufacturing defects
• Service condition abuse

Physical Causes: Design deficiencies, improper material selection,

manufacturing defects
Human-Related Causes

• Insufficient training
Human-Related Causes: Insufficient training, carelessness, lack of motivation • Operator carelessness
• Lack of motivation
• Improper operation
Latent Causes: Improper installation, inadequate procedures, organizational
issues

Latent Causes

• Improper installation
• Inadequate procedures
• Organizational weaknesses
• Maintenance deficiencies
Focus of Root Cause Analysis

Root Cause Analysis Focus Areas

Comprehensive Investigation Approach

Investigate Physical Evidence
Root cause analysis examines multiple dimensions to identify underlying
factors contributing to failure • Design verification
• Material properties
• Manufacturing quality
• Service condition compliance

Physical Causes: Design adequacy, material selection, manufacturing quality,

assembly integrity

Assess Human Factors

Human Factors: Training adequacy, operator competence, motivation,
supervision effectiveness
• Training adequacy
• Operator competence
• Motivation factors
Latent Factors: Installation quality, procedure adequacy, organizational • Supervision effectiveness
systems, maintenance practices

Identify Latent Causes

Key Objective

Establish evidence-based understanding of failure causes to develop effective • Installation quality

corrective actions • Procedure effectiveness
• Organizational systems
• Maintenance practices
Back
Back
Back
Back
Back
Introduction to Failure Analysis

What is Failure Analysis? Topics Covered

Importance in Mechanical Engineering
Systematic study of component failures
Fracture Mechanics
Safety - Prevent catastrophic failures

Determine the root cause Fatigue Analysis

Reliability - Improve product lifespan
Prevent recurrence Stress Concentration Crack Modes

Cost - Reduce maintenance and replacement

Endurance Limit S-N Diagrams

Fracture Toughness
 Common Failure Modes - Fracture

Definition

Fracture is the separation of a component into two or more parts, by brittle or ductile mechanisms.

Brittle Fracture

Little to no plastic deformation

Bright, shiny, faceted appearance

V-shaped chevron markings point to origin

Low energy absorption

Common in hard materials, low temperatures

Ductile Fracture

Visible yielding and plastic deformation

Necking at the fracture surface

Smooth or silky surface appearance

High energy absorption

Common in ductile materials, higher temperatures

Crack Modes and Stress Intensity Factor

Mode I: Opening Mode II: Sliding Mode III: Tearing

Due to tensile stress field Due to in-plane shear Due to out-of-plane shear

Key Point

Mode I (Opening) is the most common crack mode and is the primary focus of fracture mechanics analysis. Combinations of multiple crack modes a re also possible in
real-world applications.
Failure Examples

1 Truck Driveshaft Spline 2 Lawn-Mower Blade Driver Hub

Failure due to corrosion fatigue Impact failure after hitting a surveying pipe marker

3 Overhead-Pulley Retaining Bolt 4 Chain Test Fixture

Manufacturing error caused gap forcing bolt to take entire moment load
Failed in one cycle after case-hardening to reduce wear complaints

5 Valve-Spring Failure
Caused by spring surge in an oversped engine

Key Observations

Multiple failure mechanisms Manufacturing defects Material selection issues

Operating conditions Design flaws

Stress Concentration

Definition

Localized increase of stress near discontinuities such as holes, notches, sharp corners, or cracks.

Theoretical Stress Concentration Factor

σmax = Kt · σnom

τmax = Kts · τnom

Key Points about Kt

Purely geometric factor

Depends on notch geometry and loading type

Stress concentration factor increases with sharper geometric discontinuities

Higher Kt at sharper discontinuity radius

Values available in engineering handbooks and graphs

 Theoretical Stress Concentration Factor

Standard Configurations

Graphs available in Appendix A–15 and A–16

More examples in Peterson's Stress-Concentration Factors

Key Trends

Higher Kt at sharper discontinuity radius

Greater disruption leads to higher stress concentration

Factor varies with loading type (tension, bending, torsion)

Design Consideration

Understanding stress concentration factors is critical for

predicting failure points and designing components with
adequate safety margins Stress concentration factor (K t) for a stepped shaft with fillet under bending
moment
Ductile and Brittle Fracture

Ductile Fracture Brittle Fracture

Visible yielding and plastic deformation Little to no plastic deformation

Necking at fracture surface Bright, shiny, faceted appearance

Smooth or silky surface appearance V-shaped chevron markings point to crack origin

High energy absorption during deformation Low energy absorption during fracture
Introduction to Fracture Mechanics

Linear Elastic Fracture Mechanics (LEFM) Material Considerations

Analyzes crack growth during service

Ductile Materials Brittle Materials
Predicts failure and ensures structural integrity
Benefit from fracture mechanics
Local plastic deformation blunts analysis
sharp cracks, often can neglect
crack growth effects

Key Assumptions

Cracks can exist before service begins (flaws, inclusions, defects)

Applications
Attempts to model and predict crack growth behavior

Stress concentration approach inadequate for sharp cracks (K t → ∞) Glass Hard Steels Strong Aluminum Alloys

Steel Below Ductile-to-Brittle Transition Temperature

Quasi-Static Fracture

Fracture Process Energy Balance Concept

Crack growth occurs when energy release rate exceeds crack growth
Brittle fracture takes time to feed energy from stress field to crack
energy rate

Static crack may be stable and not propagate Unstable crack growth when rate of change of energy release rate
exceeds rate of change of crack growth energy
Critical loading level renders crack unstable, causing propagation

Griffith's Work (1921)

Considered infinite plate with elliptical flaw

Maximum stress occurs at (±a, 0)

Key Insight
σmax = σy(1 + 2a/b)
Fracture mechanics provides a framework to predict when cracks will
become unstable and lead to catastrophic failure
Stress Intensity Factor

Definition Stress Field Equations

Common practice to define stress intensity factor for Mode I cracks a   3 

x =  cos 1 − sin sin  (5 - 34a )
2r 2  2 2
Quantifies the magnitude of stress field near crack tip
a   3 
y = cos 1 + sin sin  (5 - 34b)
2r 2  2 2
KI = σ√(πa)
a   3
xy =  sin cos cos (5 - 34c )
2r 2 2 2
Where: σ = applied stress, a = crack length
0 ( for plane stress)
z =  (5 - 34d )
(
v  x +  y ) ( for plane strain )
Mode I Crack Model Equations describe stress distribution near crack tip

Opening mode (most common) Stress field has 1/√r singularity at crack tip

Stress field on dx dy element at crack tip

r = distance from crack tip

θ = angle from crack plane

Stress Intensity Modification Factor

Modification Factor Concept Common Configurations

KI is a function of geometry, size, and shape of crack

Off-center crack in plate Edge crack in plate
Also depends on type of loading

Beam with edge crack Circular hole with cracks

KI = βσ√(πa)

Cylinder with longitudinal

Cylinder with radial crack
crack
Factor Selection Process

1 Identify crack geometry and loading conditions

2 Select appropriate configuration from literature

3 Calculate dimensionless parameters (a/W, a/t, etc.)

4 Determine β value from graphs or equations

5 Apply to stress intensity factor calculation

Fracture Toughness

Typical KIc Values

Critical Stress Intensity Factor Material KIc, MPa Sy, MPa
Crack propagation initiates when KI reaches critical value KIc Aluminum
KIc is a material property dependent on: 2024 26 455
Material type 7075 24 495
Crack mode, Processing, Temperature 7178 33 490
Loading rate, State of stress Titanium
n = KIc / KI Ti-6AL-4V 115 910
Ti-6AL-4V 55 1035
Factor of safety for brittle fracture
Steel
4340 99 860
4340 60 1515
Key Observation 52100 14 2070

Higher strength materials often have lower fracture toughness, creating a

trade-off in material selection
Brittle Fracture Considerations

Design Principle
Consider Brittle Fracture As Failure Mode For:

Low-temperature operation

Materials with high Sy/Su ratio

Design for detectable flaws before critical size
High loading rates (impact)

Key Design Considerations

Factor of Safety Regular inspection intervals

Proper material selection

n = KIc/KI
Avoid sharp corners and notches
Where KIc = fracture toughness, K I = stress intensity factor
 Problem
A cylinder subjected to internal pressure pi has an outer diameter of 14 in and a 1-in wall thickness. For the
cylinder material, , Sy = 170 kpsi, and Sut = 192 kpsi. If the cylinder contains a radial crack in the longitudinal
direction of depth 0.5 in, determine the pressure that will cause uncontrollable crack growth.
 Problem
A plate 100 mm wide, 200 mm long, and 12 mm thick is loaded in tension in the direction of the length. The
plate contains a crack as shown in Figure 5–26 with the crack length of 16 mm. The material is steel-4340 with ,
and Sy = 860 MPa. Determine the maximum possible load that can be applied before the plate (a) yields, and (b)
has uncontrollable crack growth.
Common Failure Modes - Fatigue

What is Fatigue?
Fatigue Process
Failure that occurs under cyclic loading

Often at stress levels below yield strength 1 Crack Initiation

Micro-cracks form at stress concentrations
Key Characteristics

Progressive and localized structural damage Crack Growth

2

Occurs after repeated stress cycles Cracks propagate with each cycle

Common cause of failure in mechanical components

3 Final Fracture
Often unexpected due to low stress levels
Sudden failure when critical size reached

Factors Affecting Fatigue

Stress amplitude Mean stress

Surface finish Geometry

Stress concentrations Environment

Constant Amplitude Stress Terminology

Key Stress Parameters Key Formulas

Alternating Stress
σmin = minimum stress.
 max −  min
σmax = maximum stress. a = (6 - 8)
2
σm = mean stress, or midrange stress.
σa = alternating stress, or stress amplitude.
σr = stress range.
Mean Stress

 max +  min
m = (6 - 9)
2

Important Notes

Mean stress can be positive (tensile) or negative (compressive)

Alternating stress is always a positive magnitude of fluctuation around the

mean stress
Completely Reversed Stress Testing

Testing Approach R. R. Moore Rotating-Beam Machine

Common test machine for fatigue testing

Most stress-life fatigue testing uses completely reversed stresses

High-speed rotation Pure bending load

Modifying effect of nonzero mean stress considered separately

Standardized method for material comparison No transverse shear Complete stress reversal

Each rotation subjects surface element to completely reversed

bending stress
Provides consistent, repeatable results for establishing
Specimens are carefully machined and polished
material fatigue properties
The S-N Diagram

Definition & Purpose

Plots number of cycles to failure at varying stress levels

Uses log-log scale

Fundamental tool for fatigue analysis

Shows relationship between stress amplitude and fatigue life

Stress-life diagram

Typical S-N diagram showing low-cycle fatigue, high-cycle fatigue, and endurance
limit
Low-Cycle Fatigue and Endurance Limit

Low-Cycle Fatigue Endurance Limit

Failure with less than 1000 cycles Ferrous metals exhibit "knee" in S-N diagram

Often considered quasi-static Fatigue strength at knee = endurance limit (Se)

Yielding usually occurs before fatigue Stress levels below Se predict infinite life

Includes plastic strain

Ferrous Metals Nonferrous Metals
Better modeled with strain-life method
Have endurance limit No clear endurance limit

Key Point

Endurance limit is a critical design parameter for components subjected to

cyclic loading
S-N Diagram for Nonferrous Metals

Key Differences Typical S-N Diagram for Aluminum

Fatigue strength typically reported at 107 cycles

Nonferrous metals and plastics do not have an endurance limit

No horizontal asymptote as seen in ferrous metals

Fatigue strength Sf reported at specific number of cycles

Aluminum Copper Titanium alloys

Continuous decrease in fatigue strength with increasing cycles

Ferrous Metals Nonferrous Metals

Endurance limit exists No endurance limit

Design Implication

Components made from nonferrous metals must be designed for a finite

life, not infinite life

Typical S-N diagram for aluminum and other nonferrous metals showing continuous decrease
in fatigue strength
Estimating the Endurance Limit

Relationship to Ultimate Strength

Endurance limit for steels has strong correlation to ultimate

strength

Endurance Limit Estimation

 0.5Sut Sut  200 kpsi (1400 MPa )


Se =  100 kpsi Sut  200 kpsi (6 - 10)
700 MPa Sut  1400 MPa


S f = aN b (6 - 12)

a=
( f Sut )
2

(6 - 13)
Se
1  fS 
b = − log  ut  (6 -14)
3  Se 

( )
f = 1.06 − 2.8 10−3 Sut + 6.9 10−6 Sut2 ( ) 70  Sut  200 kpsi
(6 - 11)
f = 1.06 − 4.1(10 ) S
−4
ut (
+ 1.5 10 −7
)S 2
ut 500  Sut  1400 MPa
Problem 6-3
A steel rotating-beam test specimen has an ultimate strength of 120 kpsi. Estimate the life of the
specimen if it is tested at a completely reversed stress amplitude of 70 kpsi.
Problem 6.5
A steel rotating-beam test specimen has an ultimate strength of 230 kpsi. Estimate the fatigue strength corresponding to a life of
150 kilo cycles of stress reversal.
Endurance Limit Modifying Factors

Marin Factors Modifying Factors

S'e is for carefully prepared test specimens

When testing actual parts is not practical, use Marin factors ka: Surface Factor kb: Size Factor
Accounts for surface finish Considers effect of

Se = ka kb kc kd ke Se (6 -17) and treatment component size

kc: Load Factor

Where Se = endurance limit at critical location of actual part kd: Temperature Factor
Adjusts for different
loading types Accounts for temperature
effects

ke: Reliability Factor S'e: Test Specimen Limit

Adjusts for desired

Rotary-beam test specimen
reliability level
endurance limit
Surface Factor ka

Surface Impact on Fatigue

Loading Factor Concept
ka = aS b
ut (6 -18)
1 bending

Factor a Factor a kc = 0.85 axial (6 - 25)
0.59 torsion
Surface Finish Sut , kpsi Sut , MPa Exponen 
tb
All Other factor is assumed to 1
Ground 1.21 1.38 −0.067
Machined or 2.00 3.04 −0.217
cold-drawn
Hot-rolled 11.0 38.6 −0.650
As-forged 12.7 54.9 −0.758
Size Effect on Endurance Limit
( d 0.3) −0.107 = 0.879d −0.107 0.3  d  2 in
 −0.157
0.91d 2  d  10 in
kb =  (6 - 19)
( d 7.62)
−0.107
= 1.24d −0.107 7.62  d  51 mm
1.51d −0.157 51  d  254 mm

Problem 6-12
A 1-in-diameter solid round bar has a groove 0.1-in deep with a 0.1-in radius machined into it. The bar is made of AISI 1020
CD steel and is subjected to a purely reversing torque of 1800 lbf ∙ in. where as 𝑎 = 0.07335
(a)Estimate the number of cycles to failure.
(b)If the bar is also placed in an environment with a temperature of 750°F, estimate the number of cycles to failure.
Problem 6-10
A rotating shaft of 25-mm diameter is simply supported by bearing reaction forces R1 and R2. The shaft is loaded with a
transverse load of 13 kN as shown in the figure. The shaft is made from AISI 1045 hot-rolled steel. The surface has been
machined. Determine
(a)the minimum static factor of safety based on yielding.
(b)the endurance limit, adjusted as necessary with Marin factors.
(c) the minimum fatigue factor of safety based on achieving infinite life.
(d)If the fatigue factor of safety is less than 1 (hint: it should be for this problem), then estimate the life of the part in number
of rotations.
Back
Back
Back