Futon. Monday , April 16th , 2018 - 17:45:18 PM
In 1990 Gary Shaffield & Robert Fireman filed a futon design patent utilizing a tension spring to facilitate movement from position to position. (Patent Number 4996730). This design was very similar in look to the 1985 patent involving Robert Fireman and many of the structural components and aesthetics of these two designs featured in both patents when compared were similar. The design of this frame however focused on the legs built into the seat section that when pulled out would engage and then when the frame was retracted featured a stop that helped prevent the legs from becoming entangled with the base. Incorporated into this design was a tension spring that helped with the operation of the frame. Many early futons would go through refinements in design and function and this is often how improvements in frames would be created and how they found their way into the products we would purchase. It should be noted that in my studies of futon patents many other patents in futon designs are held by Robert Fireman in both tri-fold and bi-fold designs. He is considered one of the early pioneers in futon design throughout the industry.
For example, there are some truly lovely, subtly curved frames and armrests that add just enough of a style improvement to make them a truly gorgeous addition to your home. In fact, where the older futon designs used to be so bland and ordinary that they were once only considered as an addition to the home simply for a budget friendly, base sleeping option, they selection of futons that is now available today features enough style that they are often added to homes for their ability to actually contribute to the interior design scheme of someone's home as opposed to simply providing a cheap sleeping option for college students or a simple bedding option for any house guests you might have.
The problem came from the fact that the seat and back section contained round metal bars spot welded in a couple of places. Since these were hollow, if enough force or weight was applied to a section of these bars they would bend or break out. People were finding that the fail rate on these frames to be quite high and when they would try to return them to the stores they would discover these frames only carried a 90 day warranty. Hardly the type of warranty that would suggest this piece of furniture could provide at least a couple years of use. Instead the manufacturers seemed to be satisfied that 90 days was an adequate time of warranty for their products. I would compare this to an automobile manufacturer who warranties a car for the first 3,000 miles. They're basically telling you that after a few months of driving your vehicle is now out of warranty and if anything happens to your vehicle you'll need to buy another one or pay for parts and servicing as you've met the expected life of your vehicle. Quite unbelievable, really.
Any content, trademark’s, or other material that might be found on the Streatchforming website that is not Streatchforming’s property remains the copyright of its respective owner/s. In no way does Streatchforming claim ownership or responsibility for such items, and you should seek legal consent for any use of such materials from its owner.