Durability of smartphones: A technical analysis of reliability and repairability aspects

Abstract

Smartphones are available on the market with a variety of design characteristics and purchase prices. Recent trends show that their replacement cycle has become on average shorter than two years, which comes with environmental impacts that could be mitigated through a prolonged use of such devices. This paper analyses limiting states and design trends affecting the durability of smartphones, and identifies reliability and repairability measures to extend the product lifetime. Technical trade-offs between reliability and repairability aspects are also discussed. Smartphones are often replaced prematurely because of socio-economic and technical reasons. Specific hardware parts (e.g. display, battery, back cover), as well as software, can be critical. Improving the reliability of smartphones can reduce the occurrence of early replacements. Apart from the bottom-line consideration of reliability aspects for electronics, this can be pursued through the design of devices which: i) are resistant to mechanical stresses; ii) implement durable batteries; iii) offer sufficient adaptability to future conditions of use (e.g. in terms of software/firmware updates, memory and storage capacity). However, if and when failures occur, repairs have to be rapid and economically viable. This can be facilitated through modular design concepts, ease of disassembly of key parts, availability of spare parts and repair services. As common elements of the two strategies, easily-available instructions on use, maintenance and repair are also needed. The analysis of devices on the market suggests that it is possible to design satisfactorily reliable devices without compromising repairability excessively. However, trade-offs between these two aspects can occur. Considerations about reliability and/or repairability should be integrated in the design of all smartphones. The findings of this paper can be used by decision makers (e.g. manufacturers, designers, consumers and policy makers) interested in enhancing the durability of smartphones. This is particularly timely considering the policy attention on smartphones at the EU level.

Linking product design and durability: A review and research agenda

“…There are several approaches based on CE strategies that relate to product design. Some salient examples are design for upgradability ( Xing and Belusko, 2008 ), design for remanufacturing and refurbishing ( Bakker et al., 2014 ; Charter and Gray, 2008 ; Steeneck and Sarin, 2018 ; W. Wang et al., 2017 ), design for use optimization ( Mont, 2008 ), design for repairing ( Cordella et al., 2021 ; W. Wang et al., 2017 ), and design for longevity ( Carlsson et al., 2021 ). Other approaches encompass CE strategies, aiming to provide various alternatives for consideration by designers during early product development phases ( Bovea and Pérez-Belis, 2018 ), while some other approaches focus on measuring and assessing the greenness of extending the lifespan of products ( Alfieri et al., 2018 ; Desing et al., 2021 ; Franklin-Johnson et al., 2016 ; Hagejärd et al., 2020 ).…”

“…(2017, p. 521) ( den Hollander et al., 2017 ), “ durability is a physical property of a product, ” and it is highly dependent on the material ( Sauerwein et al., 2019 ). Furthermore, Cordella et al. (2021) ( Cordella et al., 2021 )indicated two factors that influence the durability of a product: first, the reliability, which is related to how likely the product is to function as specified without any issues occurring, and second the repair processes, i.e.…”

“…Furthermore, Cordella et al. (2021) ( Cordella et al., 2021 )indicated two factors that influence the durability of a product: first, the reliability, which is related to how likely the product is to function as specified without any issues occurring, and second the repair processes, i.e. returning the product to a functional state.…”

Life Extension of Electronic Products: A Case Study of Smartphones

“…While this may ultimately become a useful metric with which consumers can judge new smartphones, consumers cannot predict remaining lifetime with this information. Cordella et al [96] note that smartphone manufacturers still do not collect and provide information to consumers or refurbishers on the history of the battery usage, or extremes undergone by the hardware. While some OEMs may choose to replace the battery in a refurbished phone, most other major components will not be replaced.…”

Sustainable Circular Micro Index for Evaluating Virtual Substitution Using Machine Learning with the Path Planning Problem as a Case Study

“…In 2017, about 700 million devices were hibernating, meaning they were not being used, and it was estimated that about 5-10% were recycled. Likewise, factors such as embedded batteries, broken screens, and difficulty repairing the devices are some determinants that result in a user using a device only for 21.6 months [14]. In this way, smartphones have an end of life, and four alternatives can be highlighted.…”