This invention relates to the need for property owners to address the periotic build up of leaves and yard debris. It represents a very cost effective and easy to use tool to collect and move debris to a wooded area, composting area, or collection area.
Any discussion of the prior art throughout the specification should in no way be considered as an admission that such prior art is widely known or forms part of common general knowledge in the field.
Through time tools have been developed to move leaves and plant debris, most common are the various types of rakes. Devices to blow leaves where desired are now more prevalent weather they are electric or gas powered. Some people have combined a rake and a large sheet such as an old bedspread to speed up the process. The leaves could be raked onto the bedspread and be dragged away, or bundled up and lifted over one's shoulder and carried off. A number of patents have been granted for devices for collecting and moving leaves and or yard litter. Most of these involve a sledge like apparatus with runners or some sort of wheeled vehicles, while some others focus on lifting and funneling the leaves into yard waste bags. The problem with prior art is they are either relatively expensive, time consuming in use, difficult to store, have a lot of components to wear out or fail, or are too narrowly focused in their application. My research has identified five US patents that are skid-based apparatus's and are operable by one person. The earliest is #3,355,187 that incorporates a pivoting flat rear mandrel that is hoisted upright when full to form a half boat like structure before moving. The second is a device by Reiner #5,104,133 that has short stiff sections at the rear sides that hold up the rear end of the sheet when being pulled. Third is Jones #6,565,101 a similar design that has a ridged mandrel at the rear with short extensions along the sides that fold up when the rope is pulled as it passes thru grommets along the sides. Forth Shumate #8,955,892 is a skid with some stakes and two rods that form a rear wall. Fifth is Clevenger #9,669,994 that includes several yard working tools one of which is a skid that is sized to slip into a pick-up truck bed.
The common theme with the skid type devices is a perceived need to close in the rear and or sides when in motion. Through extensive use of prototypes that I have developed I am convinced that the amount of leaves that fall off a flat tarpaulin type skid when pulled over uneven ground and sidewalks or driveways is insignificant if any. This knowledge is gained over hundreds of pulls many of which exceeded a hundred feet in length. The most needed attribute that I have identified is the need for the tarp to be able to lie flat on the ground during loading. It is important that it be able to resist a gust of wind that would blow the corners up, and to not catch on the tines of a rake easily; while being reasonably useful when used with a leaf blower. The prior art that depicts rigid or semi-rigid rear mandrels will not allow the tarp to conform to hills, swells, and low spots in a yard, like a thick clump of grass, or in a driveway. This assures that they will prove tedious and time consuming in use. The other concerns I have with the prior art is the time and effort required to and make it ready for use. The more complicated it is the more tedious and time consuming it will be to set it up for use. Likewise, the more steps it takes before it can be moved, as in pulling up props or extensions of some kind, the more time will be consumed, and the more bending over and physical effort will be expended in use. The designs that include a short section that is pulled up vertical once underway would endure a real risk of getting caught on or snagging part of the ground, making them a challenge to drag. As to the designs that make a ‘half boat’ like object when pulled, it would appear to me the risk of capsizing is real. Since leaves and tree litter are typically collected once in late Spring and numerous time in the Fall, these devices will spend most of their time in storage, placing a premium on space utilization; and the more complex and greater the number of parts the more difficult storage becomes.
As to the non-skid type apparatus's that have been disclosed over the years, these all fail the storage criteria, are more expensive to manufacture and purchase, are more difficult to load and off load, and as such I am not aware of any that are in use.
The present invention overcomes the problems with prior art. The present invention does this by fulfilling these four design objectives: affordability, ease of use, efficient in storage, effective at saving time and energy. Affordability is accomplished by being inexpensive to manufacture using well established production methods and practices, thus allowing it to be sold to an end user at an affordable price. It is efficient in storage as it is shipped to a warehouse or sells location by placing it in its own storage container that can have point of purchase advertisements included on it along with identifying information. In use the product is very close to intuitive as it is simple to understand and operate. This invention will save the operator a considerable amount of time and effort, in that they will not have to keep moving the same material over and over to get it where desired. The product consists of a tarpaulin like device that has two of the ends hemmed to create pockets to hold a solid draw bar at one end and a ground conforming weight (my acronym GCW) at the other. Grommeted openings are placed strategically to retain the draw bar, GCW, pull rope, and any ground stakes that may be desired. A rope is attached thru the tarp and draw bar to pull the device. In use the operator need but retrieve it from its place of storage, remove it from the storage container and cart it to the start place of choice. Once there it is rolled out and is immediately ready to accept leaves or debris. Once the leaves in the immediate area are all loaded the skid can be pulled forward and have more material added until determined full, after which it would be dragged to a desired location to be dumped.
Overview: In
The size of the apparatus is highly scalable and the application of the draw bar 50 can be internal as shown or external with multiple connection points. The GCW 60 (GCW), likewise could easily be adapted to function outside either attached to tarpaulin 20, or laid on top with or without the use of ground stakes.
Tarpaulin: In
The tarpaulin could be constructed of any suitable sheet good material, a plastic mat or sheet, or a woven organic or synthetic fiber material. Desired attributes are abrasion resistance on the bottom surface and adequate tear strength where it contacts the draw bar. Holes for ground stakes are optional as they would most likely only be used with a blower. Both
Drawbar:
Ground conforming weight:
The design purpose of the GCW is to hold the rear edge of the tarp as tight or close to the ground as is practical. Yards and lawns are rarely truly flat as they have high and low spots, and swells are often created to control heavy rains. Even clumps or clusters of grass and or weeds are enough to raise portions of the tarp, while driveways frequently have uneven areas created by broken concrete, or tire ruts in asphalt. Without the GCW the tarp would be much more likely to lift in the wind, and the low spots that it was spread over would encourage leaves and debris being raked or swept onto it to go under the tarp instead. Without the GCW the likelihood of the tarp flipping up when it is caught by a rake tine would be greatly amplified. The drawings in
Alternative GCW's:
The above alternatives are in no way meant to be inclusive of all possible ways to weight the tarpaulin to enhance its functionality. An inexpensive metal pipe could be used for cost purposes but would only work well on a relatively flat surface. Any of these three alternatives may prove the most desirable after cost/benefit study. The device in
Additional GCW:
The purpose of the above additional embodiments is to enhance the operation of the leaf skid and improve the ownership experience, by making it an all-inclusive purchase.
3,355,187Aug. 28, 1967Brindle5,104,133Apr. 14, 1992Reiner6,565,101May 20, 2003Jones8,955,892Feb. 17, 2015Schumate9,669,994Jun. 6, 2017Clevenger Cross reference to provisional application by Inventor #62/624,836 on Feb. 1, 2018