36 ms·

Perhaps it is stashed in a location where it can't be used because it is ergonomically terrible? (Appears so to me at least.) And for the same reason you have

Perhaps it is stashed in a location where it can't be used because it is ergonomically terrible? (Appears so to me at least.) And for the same reason you have not been able to come up with a satisfactory variation. * Leg corners extending above the seat are suspect * Narrowing back is the opposite of how most chairs get wider towards the top, where you actually need the support. * Back appears to angle back too much. * Reclining is going to generate shear force on the T joint at the bottom of the back sticks...not optimal. Also you are going to get some crazy forces on the mid-joint of the back sticks. I conclude: it is just for looking at.

ofalkaed 1y ago
Chair backs serve purposes other than reclining against and many are designed with their primary purpose to be something other than reclining. Dining chairs are a good example and historically we see a great many classic designs which are very uncomfortable if you recline into the back; backs on dining chairs were often intended as a handle to make it easier to pull out and push back in from the table and you are supposed to sit on them more as you would a stool. It is actually a fairly comfortable chair, I built a quick copy years ago just so I could see it in person and get a better feel for the design. Even when made out of scrap low grade pine it held up quite well and was my desk chair until the canvas I used for the seat started to sag too much and did not seem worth replacing since that cheap pine was eventually going to fail. The stresses in the chair are well thought out and will be long lasting if made from a suitable wood. Not sure why you think the chair can not be used in that location, looks like a great place to stop for a think.