Designing for a right to repair
interactionmagic.com
interactionmagic.com
They show a Playstation 3 controller in the article, which is actually easy to get into... if you don't strip the screws. Just a few seconds of using a PH0 bit instead of the required PH00 the other day lost me a controller that probably could have been saved. Is this a case of bad tools? I can definitely believe that when tackling rusty, big screws: larger and higher quality screwdrivers with good grips definitely made the difference for me in the past. But for precision jobs, I have no clue what I'm doing wrong. I was using an iFixit driver kit for this job. How do you avoid this? Do you absolutely have to know the exact bit to use for every screw beforehand? Is just guessing "eh, this looks about right" just asking for trouble?
The much maligned in right-to-repair circles Torx and Apple pentalobe screws are actually great for me. Never in my life I ruined one of those, where sometimes I feel like I damage one out of five Philips or flat head screws I attempt to unscrew.
Similarly I have screws (and adapters) in my toolkit that look a bit like torx, they inspire me with a lot more confidence than Philips heads.
And my TV is mounted to the wall with 8cm deep screw-bolts. That one didn't come with any tools, but we have a set of ratchet bolt thingymajigs that did the job just fine. My drill bit just was a little too short and the hole was on the wonk so it still took far longer than I would like, but, lessons learned.
Similarly they work well for bolt applications with a lock washer or other point of weakness to handle over tightening.
Torx screws really should be used with a driver with an adjustable torque setting, which is pretty standard on most cordless drivers now, but rare for manual ones.
FYI, that's wrong. The proper generic term for Phillips, Frearson, Posidrive, and similar is cruciform or cross drive, not star.
>Best to just use the proper terms.
"Star drive" is the proper generic term inclusive of the trademarked Torx, its security Torx version, and similar 6-sided drivers.
Just as Robertson is a tradename for a type of square drive.
A quick search seems to only list Phillips as "star" drive for some Indian web sites.
[0]The hexalobular socket screw drive, often referred to by the original proprietary brand name Torx or by the alternative generic name star drive, uses a star-shaped recess in the fastener with six rounded points.
Also, as far as I know, Robertson is the only tapered square drive.
There are ways to recover stripped screws, e.g. by using a bit of rubber band between the screwdriver and the head. There are tons of YouTube videos. But if you can't, you are probably better off drilling it out than destroying the case.
> The much maligned in right-to-repair circles Torx and Apple pentalobe screws
I have no idea why they invented those; hex (Allen) screws are better. I don't have these tools and neither does practically anyone else. Oh, that's why they invented them.
Torx bits are much better, and they are very common, at least in Europe.
Pentalobe on the other hand, is just Apple being Apple. They don't want you opening their devices (with some exceptions, like the remarkable RAM upgrade mechanism in the old 27" iMac, or the various fancy ways of opening Mac Pros.
I use some in the shop, but they're exclusively ones where the head can be a full-depth socket, at least as deep as the screw threading is wide. And when I have to tighten or loosen a hex head, it's always with a T-handle wrench to ensure I've got the thing squared.
Torx was specifically designed to allow transferring more torque with less wear and not meant for user hostility. It was certainly used that way for some time in some applications (while in others Torx was chosen mainly for its original intended purpose), but I'd say nowadays the bits are so common that it's not really effective as an annoyance for the user.
You can get away with close enough or lower pressure if the screw is loose. If it is not, one size off and you’re asking for trouble.
If it seems like this is annoying, think of the screw as an interface. One typically works to comply with an interface’s specification, otherwise they likely get unexpected results.
The head stripping instead of the threads or hole is a feature, as the desired point of failure.
A quality screw can spin out without too much damage, but often today cheap screws mean trashing it once that's happened.
How do you repair a broken flat ribbon? They are often custom sizes, including weird shapes going around corners.
It is crucial to get the right type and size of screwdriver - look for the markings on the screw to differentiate Philips from Pozidrive (mixing them up will chew up screws). Give a test wiggle before trying to turn the screw - there should be minimal slop, and the bit shouldn't immediately try to "cam out".
Apart from that, the trick is maximal downward force. Push the screwdriver into the screw as you're turning - most cross-head designs will try to "cam out" due to tapered sections of the interface, and that's what chews up the screws. I rarely strip screw heads, even on cheap consumer products.
It’s particularly important when using power tools. An electric drill with Philips bit will instantly munch a Pozidrive screw.
It is the 45 degree markings you’re looking for, in case that isn’t clear: https://shop4fasteners.co.uk/blog/pozidriv-vs-phillips/
JIS, as far as I know, is the technically superior cross-head design.
I've now used JIS bits for JIS screws and had no issues further than the initial.
I imagine it'll take a while to start to get a feel for it, wonder what's the best way to get a good amount of practice without damaging (useful) things.
This is the number one trick I've learned working at a repair shop. If you learn to do this, you can almost always get the screw out. In a worst case scenario, I've found that a flathead can sometimes get out a stripped torx screw, though don't try this unless there's no other option.
Take for example my front license plate, the flat head screws enabled a random while I was at work to remove the plate from the car, without any specialized screwdriver.
So in some instances flat heads may prove to be useful. Philips however has often led to the screws I need out getting stripped. Torx all the way.
1) If the stripped fastener is accessible (i.e., not down a hole) you can try cutting a new cross slot in a screw head or new flats on a nut using a Dremel tool with a cutoff wheel (or a small file, if you're old-school). This is also an option for any special fasteners that you can't get a driver for.
2) You can (carefully) drill the screw head off, then, once the piece immediately below the screw head is loose and has been removed, grab the stub with a pair of vise grips and turn it out.
3) If it's in plastic, you can heat the screw head with a soldering iron until the plastic surrounding the screw body melts and the whole thing can be pulled off (obviously this is going to result in damaging the plastic to some degree... you may need to use a larger self-tapping screw to put it back together, or you could put a small amount of hot-melt glue down the now-oversized hole, in case you need to do it again).
As others have said, hand drivers are a better choice for this than powered drivers. If you do use a power driver and it has adjustable torque, start at the lowest setting. And yeah, as much downward pressure as you can apply without breaking the case is a good idea.
You might be encountering thread locker too. You’ll notice a residue on the threads of screws.
I’ve used a narrow tip on a hot air reflow gun to heat up fasteners I know have a thread locker on them. Do need to be aware of what is heat sensitive and how the hearts spreading. Is sometimes not an option.
At the factory all the structural screws and bolts go on with torque wrenches (not really necessary for covers etc.). But you can get the feel pretty easily when required in the field - we’ve had so many fewer problems, it’s crazy. I’d never design something with a Phillips screw in it again!
Also pay attention because some Phillips head screwdrivers are pointy and some are more flat tipped. Using a pointy screwdriver on a flat type screw is a good way to strip them.
With the right tools you will almost never strip a Philips head screw that isn't rusty or glued in. In the latter case you're more likely to snap the head off entirely than to strip it. Finally, when removing the screw remember to push down on it (yes this seems counterproductive) to avoid slipping out of the hole.
Guarantee doesn't include cases where the knucklehead before you used the wrong screwdriver and rounded the crap out of the screw head.
For those cases, there's the manual impact driver. Hand-held, whack the end of it with a hammer and it drives the Phillips/whatever bit into the fastener while giving it a little twist. A couple of whacks will remove the most stubborn screw. Or it will tear the head off. Those are the only two outcomes I've ever seen, it never just sits and spins in the rounded slots.
Some Phillips are not Phillips at all. They are JIS. Or pozidriv.
Which, for 99.99% of humanity, equates to "not easy".
I don't have a lathe, but when I run across one, I'll give it a go, or ask a friend.
But also I wonder if they didn't include some glue to hold that chair together originally. Screws in furniture are mostly just there to keep the thing together while the glue cures.
Things wear down, and about the only thing you can hope for is replaceable parts. Chair of Theseus, indeed!
:-( :-( :-(
Only if your country / region's waste processing sucks. There are separate hand-in points for things like electronics, and garbage should be sorted before yote into landfill to sort out recyclables and toxins. I believe that they can't just put chemical waste (e.g. batteries) into landfills in most countries.
There are reasons to sort out certain waste, usually as a precaution to chemical reactions, but not leeching, but its mistaken to assume only "toxic" waste is isolated from the environment,
The reason they are called "sanitary" landfills is that they already safely contain concentrated sewage, and prevent it from infiltrating water supplies.
Another work of design beauty was the NeXTstation, NeXT's pizza-box shaped workstation. A solid magnesium case with an elegant molded heat sink on bottom, opens with a single screw in the back. Inside there's a fan (two screws), a power supply attached directly to the case over the heat sink (one screw), a mount for the floppy drive (one screw), a mount for the hard drive (one screw), and the motherboard (one or two screws). And that's it -- that's the entire thing! You can break down the entire machine in less than five minutes. Did I mention it's made of solid magnesium?
How NeXT/Apple has fallen.
Not sure what the article is implying by saying the Prophet has interesting silkscreen designs or instructions - that may help remove the right components to send back to DSI, but doesn't help someone diagnose and repair the board themselves. Oh, also, I have successfully replaced the battery in a Sonicare toothbrush without destroying it - still working to this day.
Seriously though, I build patch editors in my spare time (https://github.com/eclab/edisyn) and would really like to make an editor for the PolyEvolver.
Woah - you wrote and maintain Edisyn? Excellent software, and pretty much vital to the productivity (and sanity) of synthesists worldwide; thanks very much for your work!
I use Edisyn for my Kawai K3 (which has an unusable button-and-dial interface for wavetable editing), although it's not on your list in GitHub for some reason. I have the SoundTower PolyEvolver editor, and it's quite functional (albeit within a quirky interface). It also 'unlocks' custom user wavetables, which is helpful. Not sure if that influences your decision to tackle another editor, but I'm sure it would round out your DSI list (and the MonoEvolver would be a natural leader/follower).
Oddly enough, someone else mentioned the other day that Sequential started a cloud-based service for converting wavetables to a usable format for the new Pro3 [0] - it's free now, but maybe a service after DSI was bought out by Focusrite?
As for source code, updates are still downloadable from DSI, plus the microcontroller has an I2C or JTAG interface and isn't protected AFAIK; wouldn't be overly difficult to extract the source (albeit in machine code). I think I previously ordered backups of the DSP and microcontroller when they were still available - just in case, but there are a bunch of components that aren't available from DSI or supply shops anymore (e.g., the custom CEM chips). I think that's an aspect of the right to repair that may be overlooked - component availability.
The current Mac Pro gets a 9/10 repairability score on iFixit[1]
[1] https://www.ifixit.com/Teardown/Mac+Pro+2019+Teardown/128922
There is currently no push to make parts repairable.
What our cusomers (OEMs) care is: price, safety, reliability, quality, performance, compliance to standards, fast developmnent, fast introduction to production
In my 20 year career I never ever got a request regarding making parts repairable. The target is that the part must not break down in the life of the product (10-15 years). After that nobody cares.
We are more or less moving away from screwing parts together - instead of this welding/gluing/press fiting joints are used. This is just to save 0.1-0.2 € per part by removing few screws, using lower quality polymeric materials, etc. (the cost of complete assembly for OEM is in the range of 20-30€).
As long as the part is cheap, meets performance, safety, life requirements the OEMs are happy.
Until there will be no law that will require manufacturers to make parts repairable nothing will change. We as parts suppliers will strive to make parts as reliable as possible, but just enough to meet life requirements and not comprimise safety.
I thought this a great idea until I have seen step 5. This step is exactly the reason why I opened the document as every other step is straight forward. "Just magically remove the 18 nails that you hammered into the back." If you have ever tried to do that you have noticed that this is hard to do without damaging yourself or your furniture. On the same level the instructions could tell me to remove the glue or unweld a seam.
The disassembly instructions are not more than the assembly in descending order.
If the backing fails then you can remove the nails using a pair of pliers but you'll need to find a new backing.
This of course assumes the person who assembled the furniture originally didn't use glue on all of the joints like I do. I've found that if you glue all of the joints in a flat pack when building it the expected lifetime can be improved by an order of magnitude or more, especially if you're moving it around regularly. Seriously it is night and day between the wobbly one you only followed the directions on and completely solid one that's fully glued.
This is actually very hard to define. Ideally it would also include any code that's updateable including firmware, but then are you including things like CPU firmware?
I've been preaching this exact thing for a long time. Little annoys me more than a design that is not repairable.
As an aside, Österreich has two R's, and "Österreich Post" isn't inflected correctly, and would more likely be something like "Österreichische Post" (depending on the context, but mixing languages makes inflection weird).
I am sensitive to environmental problems but hadn't ever really thought about it at the level of these products, thinking such waste was just an inevitable feature of Capitalism. I'm very heartened to learn that there is a legislative effort in the EU, however nascent, to try and change these patterns and create a better future through design. I will never think about "right to repair" the same way again.
Like there wasn't even a thought in his mind that making it possible to disassemble and reassemble an engine is a good thing.
Nobody does design for disassembly better than the Phillips Sonicare toothbrush, whose manual notes "this process is not reversible" before graphically wrapping the toothbrush in a cloth and smashing with a hammer to access the battery.
I've seen ones where the bottom is screwed on and they supply the "wrench" as part of the base, although it is intended for "recycling":
http://www.davidgunter.com/2021/01/25/braun-oral-b-electric-...
Thinking about the design, it's clear that they actively designed against you replacing the batteries or attempting to repair --- instead of a simple threaded cap with an o-ring for sealing and spring contacts for the battery inside, like a flashlight or vape mod, they decided to solder the battery and make it harder to or even impossible to open non-destructively. In other words, they decided to make their own assembly process slightly harder as well.
The only axiom that holds true is a cable’s wiring is only how it probes out, and whether that is correct or not is an exercise for the engineer to determine.
- Top image search results for USB wiring show green and white flipped, and they are not wrong, because they often are. The standard is only between the connectors, the exact wiring doesn’t matter if it works.
- Cheap cables won’t have a black wire, they reuse the cable shield as ground return. Funnily enough, cheap cables also use a cheap shield bread which isn’t flex appropriate, so 95% this will fail first.
- Cheap products that come with their own appropriately cheap USB cable often take liberties with USB standards, such as actually using the connector shield as ground return and leave the ground pin disconnect, because they know their product does this internally. You will have a great day when you pull this cable out of your draw.
The industry as a whole has this odd desire to always push for better hardware and newer things, to the point where Windows 11 refused to support older AMD processors and whatnot. At the same time, Android 8.1 (the OS on one of my older phones) has been abandoned and thus makes the device not an entirely viable backup phone; unless i'm okay with running insecure software, or want to install custom ROMs that will break things, especially in the case of a non-mainstream vendor.
To me, it feels like we should stop forcing progress before its time has come, which we currently do with better hardware that is used in suboptimal ways and tossing aside everything that can't keep up, as opposed to actually investing decades to write better software.
Right now, my desktop PC has a 1st gen Ryzen 3 1200. If it were not for the OS, the browser and almost every piece of software and even game that i want to play becoming more bloated, i could safely use it for a decade with no issues, Wirth's law be damned. In my servers i have 200GEs that are similarly old and yet, are fully sufficient for my homelab needs, but eventually you won't be able to buy any old new stock for reasonable prices, because AMD will be off chasing whatever new skew or technology they need to remain competitive.
Even Firefox, the browser that was supposed to be "the good one" (e.g. default in most Linux distros, less controversial than Chrome/Chromium) got noticeably worse sometime around the Quantum upgrade in regards to its RAM usage, even when you limit its content process count to just 1. Similarly, it feels like most IDEs nowadays are also somewhat heavyweight - why can't i have exceedingly boring looking software that has a lot of the smart autocomplete that i'd expect, yet doesn't slow the whole machine down when things need to be re-rendered because of a non-native UI toolkit? Just look at how snappy Lazarus is: https://www.lazarus-ide.org/ And yet, i cannot feasibly do webdev or many projects with it, because no hype means no new tools, no ecosystem support and so on, so i'm essentially dragged along to use whatever the modern tech choices are, like JetBrains products which are admittedly otherwise great and allow me to work with almost every popular tech stack, yet still eat lots of RAM.
I guess this is less of a rant and more of a question to the people here: how do you fight back against this supposed progress, that somehow manages to couple security updates and feature updates with otherwise unnecessary bells, whistles and unreasonable amount of browser tech and whitespace in most software? How do you fight back against your hand being forced to create e-waste?
Do you use Alpine, Debian (LXDE, LXQt or even XFCE) or another lightweight Linux distro (or even something of the BSD variety) as a daily driver and live with the fact that some software and most of gaming will often be a no-go (about 30/120 games that i have on Steam are even supported on Linux)? Do you do complicated setups with Windows VMs and GPU passthrough and relative mouse movement modes or something? Maybe you try to cut down your Windows installs as much as possible, removing bloat regularly, attempting to match Microsoft's ability to put it in, in combination with dual booting? Or do you just have a dedicated machine or two that (hopefully) aren't connected to the network and run EOL software (i've personally seen folks doing that with Windows XP), thus freeing you from updates that do things that you don't want? Or is there a really nice solution that i'm not aware of?
This particular problem generates hundreds of millions of tons of e-waste every single year. The constant churn strips resources during production, and it pollutes during production and disposal as most of this waste is just tossed to the third world and never truly dealt with.
A major driving force behind all of this churn is actually financial. The global financial system is run by a debt based currency. More of this currency is created constantly due to fractional reserve lending, and due to government spending (all government spending in the current system creates money, and the government bonds are treated as an asset by central governments against which still more money is lent and thus created in fractional reserve systems, US dollars are then used by foreign banks as an asset to create still more money). With constant inflation, money must go somewhere. If money is sat on it loses value, thus all investment class assets see ever higher climbing valuations and any dip is temporary even though it shouldn’t be. Companies can therefore get billion dollar valuations without even having revenue (in a rational world the value of such a company is zero or even negative), and they can run off of investment despite losing money year over year. When some of these companies finally go bankrupt it’s only a momentary down turn for a given index of stocks, and nothing else really happens. This is also why, despite the 2008 crash, the housing market is still bananas and over valued. Money must go somewhere and as investors get wary of stocks they drive funds into housing. People buy properties without even seeing them because they know that land at least has some value and inflation is getting stupid… they need to put their money _somewhere_. When people have no real method of holding value and are also too poor to invest, they are incentivized to spend. If some bank actually offered interest on savings that was higher than inflation, people might save. As it is, the poor have no recourse. Spend it is. By spending, businesses get a signal to produce. The production will keep increasing in speed until either the global financial system collapses or until too many jobs are eliminated by automation. The companies using such automation to produce will then be driven into bankruptcy (not enough buyers to pay the bills), people will again gain employment (because the automated companies are no more), and the cycle will repeat. The only way to put a stop to recklessness like this is to have money _cost something_. Either governments must be responsible and have low debt to earnings (think Singapore), or countries must have hard currencies where more is only produced when the value is high enough to warrant very expensive mining operations. Such economic conditions allow for savings and more gradual paces of innovation and development where things actually get tested, go through QA, and so on (as opposed to millions of laptops being shipped with keyboards that are broken by bread crumbs or software that is so bad it allows root access if you knock on the door properly). As it is, companies cannot do those things lest they miss revenue targets and lose whatever the inflation rate is in real terms year over year.
As for dealing with it? I just accept that I will have lower performance starting year 2 of ownership of any new device, and on-going until it is finally not truly usable in the modern world.