Drummers Guide: Understanding the Impact of Fulcrum on Cymbal Mounting

  • Thread starter Thread starter karate718
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Fulcrum General
AI Thread Summary
Extending the length of a cymbal boom arm increases the torque at the joint of the stand, which can affect its stability. While it may seem like the joint is "working harder," technically no movement occurs, so no work is done. Keeping the boom arm short can reduce wear and tear on the joint. However, quality stands are designed to handle the torque at full extension and frequent adjustments. Overall, there is little need for concern if using a decent stand.
karate718
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Hi,

I am a drummer and have a question in regards to mounting my cymbals. If you have a look at this picture to give a frame of reference: https://www.americandrumschool.com/store/images/boom%20stand%20BS-70D.jpg .

Thy cymbal mounts on the top where the black felts are. My question is, if I extend the length of the boom arm, does that make the joint/fulcrum at the top of the vertical part of the stand work harder?

Thank you.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
The joint (pivot) would certainly have a harder time of keeping the boom in place.

Strictly speaking, we wouldn't say it's "working harder"; no movement is taking place so no "work" is being done. More correctly, a bigger "turning moment" (or torque) is being encountered at the joint.
 
Got it. Thank you. So by keeping the boom as short as possible I am decreasing the wear and tear on the the joint.
 
karate718 said:
Got it. Thank you. So by keeping the boom as short as possible I am decreasing the wear and tear on the the joint.

Theoretically, yes. However, if you've bought reasonably decent stands, then they'll have been designed to withstand the torque encountered at full extension, and to withstand the repeated adjustments and disassembly/reassembly caused by heavy gigging.

I really wouldn't worry about it.
 
comparing a flat solar panel of area 2π r² and a hemisphere of the same area, the hemispherical solar panel would only occupy the area π r² of while the flat panel would occupy an entire 2π r² of land. wouldn't the hemispherical version have the same area of panel exposed to the sun, occupy less land space and can therefore increase the number of panels one land can have fitted? this would increase the power output proportionally as well. when I searched it up I wasn't satisfied with...
Back
Top