Finite Element Analysis of the iPhone 6s

Resistance to Permanent Deformation

Compiled by: Devon Cates, Dan Cho, Cody Crone

Submitted to: Professor I. Smid
The Pennsylvania State University
December 4th, 2014

Abstract
With the recent release of the iPhone 6 there have been user claims and consumer speculation
that the new phone has the potential to undergo irreversible, plastic deformation under relatively
low stresses. To theoretically evaluate the force needed to permanently deform the phone, an
accurate three-dimensional model has been created using SolidWorks CAD software.
Incrementally increasing bending forces were applied to the phone utilizing SolidWorks Finite
Element Analysis (FEA) capability, with multiple iterations for each load at varying node
quantities to converge upon accurate results. The maximum stress and deformation for each load
case were documented and compared to the yield strengths of the materials incorporated in the
iPhone 6 to determine at what point permanent deformation will occur.

Introduction
The iPhone 6 incorporates the thinnest wall thickness to date in a phone released by Apple Inc.
While it may be aesthetically pleasing to consumers, there have been concerns about its
structural integrity. The iPhone body consists of an alloy with material properties similar to
6061-T4 aluminum [2]. Corning Gorilla Glass [3], upgraded from previous iPhones, has been
integrated into the construction of the phones screen. While the strengths of these materials,
which make up a vast majority of the iPhones structure, are considerably high for their weight,
the overall thinness of the device may lead to yielding under forces not substantially greater than
those experienced during everyday operation.

Approach & Formulation

To test at what point the iPhone 6 experiences permanent deformation, an analysis using the
Finite Element Method has been conducted. The first step in approaching this problem was to
find in-depth dimensioned schematics (See Figure 1) of the iPhone 6. The source used to acquire
these drawings is found below in the references section [1]. After obtaining the required
schematics a dimensionally accurate mock version of the device was modeled on computer-aided
design software; in this case Solidworks was utilized.

Figure 1. iPhone 6 Schematics

For simplicity, the internal electrical components of the iPhone 6 were not included in the CAD
model. It is assumed that the contribution to the overall structural integrity of the model from
these components is negligible because they are small and generally not designed to withstand
large forces. However, the volume rocker, volume adjustment, and sleep/wake button cavities in
the aluminum body of the phone were included in the model because they could be the sight of
stress concentrations and therefore could have an impact on the phones integrity. The home
button feature on the glass screen was also included for this reason. The wall thickness of the
model was set to an approximately average value determined by the varying wall geometry of
the actual iPhone 6 shown in Figure 2.

After extensively modeling the

phone, the next challenge was to
determine where the phone should
be constrained and where the
force(s) should be applied to run
the Finite Element simulation. The
two most applicable situations are
as follows: let the phone be
constrained on the top and bottom
with an applied load directly in the
middle of the body, or let the
phone be constrained directly in
the middle with an applied load on
the top and bottom. These are

Figure 2. iPhone 6 Aluminum Body

common situations, and both could

be encountered by a typically consumer. Figure 3. Illustrates the load/constraint configuration
that was chosen for this study. For clarity, green arrows represent fixed geometric constraints,
and purple arrows represent the force applied over the area shown.

Figure 3. Forces and Constraints on the Model

A static FEA was performed using the governing equation shown in Figure 4. This is a simple
yet useful method for calculating the effects of static loads on isotropic materials. A tetrahedral
mesh was used to discretize the body into a series of nodes and elements, each with its own
stiffness equation (defined in Figure 4). Referencing Figure 4, K represents the stiffness
matrix, which is derived from material parameters of the object in question and is assumed to be
constant throughout. x represents the displacement of a particular node which is elicited by
F, the force at that node. These equations are solved simultaneously using linear algebra in the
form shown in Figure 5, where [ ] represents matrix notation and { } represents vector
notation.

[K] {x} = {F}

Figure 4. Spring Element Stiffness Equation

Finite Element Analysis Methodology

SolidWorks 2014 CAE Simulation software was used in the Finite Element portion of this study.
The meshed part (see Figure 5) consisted of basic tetrahedral elements, with an average element
number approaching 18,000 for final-iteration runs (See Figure 6). Material properties for the
aluminum alloy (yield strength = 227.5 MPa) body and Gorilla Glass (yield strength 800 MPa)
screen were obtained from sources [2] and [3] respectively.

Because the strength of the

aluminum is lower than that of the Gorilla Glass, it was the first component to plastically deform
under loading and was used as a metric for determining whether permanent damage to the device
had occurred at a given load (see Table 1 under Results and Discussion). CPU time for one
meaningful simulation run was approximately 10 minutes on a 64-bit DELL Optiplex 7010
computer with 8.0 GB of RAM. Mesh iterations were made until the maximum stress (shown in
Figure 6) and maximum displacement (not shown) remained at approximately (+/- 0.2%)
constant values.

Figure 5. Mesh With Loads and Geometric Constraints

Figure 6. Result Accuracy vs. Number of Mesh Elements

The main design assumptions/approximations that were made during the modeling process are
detailed in the Approach and Formulation section of this report (see Figure 7 for illustration).
Additionally, minor features such as the camera, flash housing, speakers, headphone jack and
charge port were not included because they are not located in areas of high force/displacement.
All relevant dimensions match Apple Inc. nominal values for the iPhone 6 according to
schematics from reference [1]. It is understood that the Finite Element Method is not currently
capable of generating results that match experimental data with 100% accuracy, but the stress
and displacement values achieved in this analysis lie within a plausible and meaningful range. It
is also understood that the simplifications made to remain within time/resource constraints have
sacrificed some of the accuracy of the results. With more time and/or better computers/software,
the accuracy of the results would likely be marginally improved.

Figure 7. Cutaway Showing Cavities for Volume and Sleep/Wake Buttons

Results and Discussion

In order to generate results with the highest level of accuracy possible, the iPhone 6 model
underwent several Finite Element simulations with incrementally increasing loads (shown in
Table 1). The purpose of these simulations was to ascertain the minimum load that would elicit
plastic deformation in the device. In Table 1 it is shown that starting from 116.1 N, the aluminum
body of the iPhone 6 will exhibit plastic deformation under the load/constraint configuration
illustrated in Figures 5 & 3.
Load

Number of

Max. Displacement Max. Stress Yield Strength

Plastic

[N]

Iterations

[mm]

[MPa]

[MPa]

Deformation?

100

0.5879

179.8

227.5

No

105

0.6743

205.9

227.5

No

110

0.7065

215.8

227.5

No

115

0.7386

225.5

227.5

No

116

0.745

227.4

227.5

No

116.1

0.7456

227.6

227.5

Yes

200

1.176

359.6

227.5

Yes

300

1.764

538.8

227.5

Yes

400

2.042

655.3

227.5

Yes

500

2.52

722

227.5

Yes

Table 1. Simulation Results

As evidenced in Table 1, the Finite Element model behaved as expected. The iPhone 6 was
hypothesized to be permanently deformed under relatively low forces due to its overall wall
thinness, low moment of inertia in the bending direction, insubstantial material properties, and
abundance of geometric features that could result in stress concentration. The maximum stress
was located at the volume button cavities (shown in Figure 8), as expected. This is because these
features include small radii in the filleted corners, and are more likely to experience increased
stress at these areas. Therefore, these areas will be the first to experience plastic deformation,

although a small amount of deformation here would not present a serious risk of compromising
the functionality of the device.

Figure 8. Stress Concentrations Around Button Cavities

Although the maximum stress was located at the volume buttons, the maximum displacement
(shown in red) was located in the center of the model where the load was applied (see Figure 9).
This has been verified by numerous physical tests on iPhone 6 bending that can be found on the
Internet, and thus the results achieved in this analysis were again observed to be accurate at least
in terms of overall mechanical and geometric behavior. The advantage of the Finite Element
Method in this application is its ability to locate and quantify specific amounts of deformation in
any given area with a relatively high amount of precision compared to physical testing.

Figure 9. Displacement Gradient

Conclusions
This study illustrates the compromises that Apple Inc. designers and engineers have had to make
during the conceptualization and development of the iPhone 6. Due to rapid advancements in
microprocessor and energy storage technology resulting in the ability to produce smaller yet
equally or more powerful versions of these components, the demand has increased for thinner
and sleeker smart devices. If anything can be learned from this analysis, it is that perhaps more
research should be done in developing stronger alloys that are more capable of retaining
structural rigidity at thinner dimensions. For the time being, however, the load necessary for
plastic deformation established in this analysis falls outside of the range of regular and intended
operating conditions and should not be a cause for concern for the average consumer.

10

Improvements and suggestions for future work

Problems were encountered throughout the entire process of the project. These problems
happened before the modeling even began, some of them were easy fixes, but others caused
exacerbated issues. One of the first FEA problems was trying to incorporate all of the internal
wall features of the actual iPhone housing; for simplicity these were incorporated into an average
thickness value applied to the entire housing. Resource capabilities created setbacks in terms of
the softwares ability to mesh intricate features. The complexity of assembly caused several
meshing problems. The idea of the assembly was to get the phone to deform around a stress
concentration point, such as the lock button or volume rocker, as observed in physical bend
testing. Assembling all the external features and glass worked well until meshing; problems were
run into where the mated components came into contact. Despite all of the setbacks a complete
model was successfully obtained. Looking at this from a cost-benefit analysis standpoint this has
the potential to save numerous technician man-hours in experimental design, conduction, and
analysis. Physically testing iPhones as many times as a model can be run to obtain accurate
results is not feasible or cost effective.
There are numerous variables that could be incorporated into future work that would have the
potential to drastically impact the results of the simulation. One variable that would notably
impact the behavior of the phone is temperature. This product is marketed worldwide, and most
of the materials found in the product have a temperature dependence. Where the constraints and
forces are applied would also have a large impact on the results of the simulation. If resources
allowed, multiple and exact forces and constraints could have been placed on the model to
simulate various load scenarios that could occur in day to day usage.

11

Distribution of Work
Devon Cates:

Drafted/reviewed/edited final written report

Created multiple CAD model designs/iterations
Composed relevant images
Spearheaded incompatible mesh troubleshooting
Determined geometric features to include/ignore

Cody Crone:

Researched Material Properties

Created slideshow for final presentation
Aided in CAD model development and troubleshooting
Performed cost-benefit analysis
Suggested improvements for future work

Dan Cho:

Completed and documented FEA testing and results analysis

Performed sensitivity analysis concerning mesh iterations
Made improvements to load and constraint applications
Composed relevant images
Provided CAD modeling consultation

12

References
* Solidworks 2014 was the modeling software used to create and analyze the three dimensional
model.
[1] "BulletTrain BulletBlog by JakeE: Apple IPhone 6 & IPhone 6 Plus Dimensional Drawings
Schematics." BulletTrain BulletBlog by JakeE: Apple IPhone 6 & IPhone 6 Plus Dimensional
Drawings Schematics. N.p., n.d. Web. 02 Dec. 2014.
[2]Redditor Explains Why the Aluminum IPhone 6 Bends and the Plastic Note 3 Doesn't GSMArena Blog." GSMArena Blog Redditor Explains Why the Aluminum IPhone 6 Bends and
the Plastic Note 3 Doesnt Comments. N.p., n.d. Web. 02 Dec. 2014.
[3] Incorporated, Corning. Corning Gorilla Glass (n.d.): n. pag. Web.

13