Furniture Repairability Score: Kavela KRS v1.0 Methodology

In furniture, “durable” often describes strength on day one. A long service life also depends on whether the item can recover from a fault. The European Commission’s JRC furniture work identifies two central repairability factors: ease of disassembly and availability of spare parts. Furniture and horizontal repairability scoring are also among the priorities in the EU’s 2025–2030 sustainable-products work plan.

The Kavela Repairability Score v1.0 (KRS) translates that need into procurement language. KRS is not an EU regulation, an accredited test standard or a third-party certificate. It is an open editorial method intended to help a manufacturer, designer and buyer collect repeatable evidence about the same product.

Allocation of the 100 points

1. Disassembly — 0 to 20 points

The assessor first lists parts expected to wear or fail in normal service: hinges, slides, legs, mechanisms, power modules, tops, doors and upholstery. Each is tested for removal and reinstallation with common tools and without damage to neighbouring parts.

• 20: Every critical and high-wear part can be removed and reinstalled without damage.
• 15: At least three quarters of those parts are replaceable without damage.
• 10: The main body is separable, but at least one critical surface or module is irreversibly fixed.
• 5: Disassembly damages an edge, finish or body and requires a secondary repair.
• 0: A critical part is accessible only by destroying the product.

2. Spare-parts commitment — 0 to 20 points

“We will try to help” is not evidence. The file must identify part codes, ordering channel, pricing method and availability after the product leaves sale. A documented period of ten years or more earns 20 points; six to nine years earns 15; three to five years earns 10; one to two years earns 5; no commitment earns zero. A proven standard substitute is assessed separately in the hardware category.

3. Standard hardware — 0 to 15 points

Screws, nuts, hinges, slides, gas lifts and electronic modules are identified by dimension or performance class. A fully specified, multi-source substitutable system earns 15 points; a mixture of standard and custom components earns 10; maker-specific but coded hardware earns 5; unidentified and non-substitutable hardware earns zero. “Standard” means that dimensions and function are documented, not merely that the item looks common.

4–7. Repair, wear layers, documents and separation

Surface and body repair assesses whether a local scratch, damaged edge or stripped fixing point can be addressed without replacing the entire panel. Wear layers cover removable covers, separable foam, replaceable worktops and modular edging. Award the proportional score according to the share of pre-listed wear parts that can be renewed without collateral damage.

Documentation requires a parts list, fitting identification, exploded view, maintenance procedure and safe disassembly sequence. A complete, versioned file earns 10 points; a care sheet alone does not. End-of-life separation tests whether the main material groups can be separated without adhesive contamination. In powered furniture, cable and power modules should leave the furniture body independently.

Score classes

• A — 80–100: High repairability with a strong evidence file and long-term parts route.
• B — 65–79: Good, with some proprietary parts or limited renewal areas.
• C — 50–64: Moderate; basic repairs are possible but material dependencies remain.
• D — 30–49: Low; repair generally needs specialist work and carries damage risk.
• E — 0–29: Very low; a fault is likely to trigger whole-product replacement.

The class is not a stand-alone quality grade. A weak joint does not become safe because it is easy to remove. Apply KRS after strength, ergonomics, emissions and fire requirements. Verified upholstery performance and the ability to replace that upholstery are two different pieces of evidence.

Verifying and publishing a result

Store a photograph, document name, part identifier and test date beside every score. Recalculate when the assessed configuration changes. Label a maker’s own result as “self-assessed” and an independent result as “verified assessment.” Do not call the score “certified” without an applicable certification scheme and competent independent body.

Conclusion

KRS v1.0 is designed to turn repair into a visible procurement criterion, not to decorate furniture with another marketing adjective. The most useful finding may come before the total: an unwritten parts period, a power module that cannot leave without breaking the body, or glued upholstery that cannot be renewed. Each can be corrected during design. Open scoring turns “repairable” from an unsupported claim into an auditable file.

Sources

• European Commission JRC — furniture life and repairability factors
• European Commission — ESPR and Energy Labelling Working Plan 2025–2030