How Camera Jibs Remain at Any Angle Without Moving Counterbalances

  • Thread starter Thread starter loozh
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Balance Weight
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the mechanics of camera jibs, specifically how they can maintain any angle without moving counterbalances. Participants explore the principles of balance, torque, and the role of rigid structures in the operation of jibs, while questioning the conditions necessary for a jib to remain level or to hold an angle.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions how a jib can remain at any angle if it is perfectly balanced, suggesting that perfect balance should lead to a level condition.
  • Another participant explains that perfect balance is a neutral condition and that returning to level is an imbalanced condition, raising further questions about where the imbalance occurs.
  • Some participants discuss the analogy of a window balanced by a counterweight and how it relates to the concept of "level" in the context of jibs.
  • There is mention of the rigidity of the boom and how torque from the camera weight is counterbalanced by the weights, maintaining balance across different angles.
  • A participant introduces the concept of moment arms being static and questions the absence of a spring mechanism to adjust torque at different angles.
  • Another participant compares the jib's mechanics to a child's teeter-toter, suggesting that balance can be maintained at various angles as long as the conditions are met.
  • One participant proposes that for a jib to remain at any angle, the vertical location of its center of mass must coincide with the pivot axis, while also noting the importance of balance.
  • A later reply mentions the role of a friction disk in stabilizing the jib against small movements.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the conditions necessary for a jib to remain level or hold an angle. There is no consensus on whether perfect balance should lead to a level condition, and the discussion remains unresolved regarding the mechanics involved.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight limitations in their understanding of the mechanisms involved, including the absence of spring mechanisms and the implications of static moment arms. The discussion also touches on the stability of equilibrium in relation to the geometry of the jib.

loozh
Messages
7
Reaction score
0
TL;DR
Given that both ends of a camera jib are balanced, shouldn't a jib remain level / parallel to the ground instead of staying in any position?
Hi, I am trying to understand how camera jibs work.

They seem to be able to remain at whatever angle despite being balanced. The counter weight is static and does not move, yet the jib does not remain level nor does lift or drops. I have spoken to the operators and they mention they don't use resistance to hold it in place.

Jib length to the fulcrum on either side remains the same. no mechanism to length / shorten to compensate.

Should'nt a perfect balance lead to it being level?
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
Welcome to PF. :smile:

Could you post some links to some more information about these mechanisms, so we don't all have to go looking for ourselves? Thank you.
 
Thank you for replying.

I dont have much info but a few video for reference on the setup and usage:




Hope this helps.
 
This works because the boom is rigid (from the cables) and the torque from the camera weight is exactly to counterbalanced by the the torque from the weights by adjustment at zero angle. Any change in angle shortens the moment arm of each in the exact same proportion, so the balance remains perfect.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: loozh
loozh said:
Should'nt a perfect balance lead to it being level?
No, perfect balance is a neutral condition. Returning to level is an imbalanced condition. But there's a catch; where's the imbalance when it returns to level?
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: loozh
If you look at a window balanced by a counterweight through a pulley, what would be the "level" condition?

 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: hutchphd
hutchphd said:
This works because the boom is rigid (from the cables) and the torque from the camera weight is exactly to counterbalanced by the the torque from the weights by adjustment at zero angle. Any change in angle shortens the moment arm of each in the exact same proportion, so the balance remains perfect.
Thanks Hutchphd,
moment arms are static. they do not lengthen or shorten while going up or down.
There is no spring mechanism from the camera head side to vary torque at different angles too.

The cables are meant to act as a tension cable to level the camera head. Its based on fig 1: the sum of angles for the purple is 180 degrees.

thus allowing fig 2 movements

Fig1:
Angles.png

Fig 2:
Tension.png
 
russ_watters said:
No, perfect balance is a neutral condition. Returning to level is an imbalanced condition. But there's a catch; where's the imbalance when it returns to level?
Given the case does it mean i would be able to balance this level scale so that it can stay in any position without changing the weight or distance? if so how?

20230527_063626.jpg
 
jack action said:
If you look at a window balanced by a counterweight through a pulley, what would be the "level" condition?



It seems the pulley has springs to have increased torque depending on the length. A jib does not have spring mechanism, both heads are free. Given a scale lever, would it be possible to change the "level condition" to be flexible?
 
  • #10
jib.png

Hi,
i tried drawing a jib from memory. concepts are roughly similar across.
starting from left,
the yellow is a control plate attached to swivel plate (Green)
Its is connected via a tension cable / rod (Pastel blue) to the front to mantain level. ( see above response to hutchphd)
gaerrewa.png
Red is the bar. Weights are attached to the blue circle via a rod where weights can be mounted on.
The bar has a T pin to prevent it from escaping.

Black is the fulcrum.

There is no spring mechanism in the jib. Perhaps i am missing some key concepts. appriate your love and patience. Thank you.
 
  • #11
I fear you are. A child's teeter-toter, if balanced at horizontal, will also be balanced at any other angle so long as the children remain rigidly upright. there are no further requirements.
By the same token, any imbalance will likewise persist at all angles unless the geometry changes (e.g. one child leans back).
That's it. Not complicated.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: loozh
  • #12
Thank you hutchphd. That makes sense, perhaps i should try some hands on to fully understand the effect. Many thanks!
 
  • #13
loozh said:
Given the case does it mean i would be able to balance this level scale so that it can stay in any position without changing the weight or distance? if so how?

View attachment 327113
In that example the weights are hanging below the bar. That's the answer to my question: it is imbalanced in the vertical axis (more weight below than above). Though if they are hanging they might be able to swing back and forth somewhat.
 
  • #14
hutchphd said:
I fear you are. A child's teeter-toter, if balanced at horizontal, will also be balanced at any other angle so long as the children remain rigidly upright.
When you say "rigidly upright" do you mean they have to change their lean with respect to the teeter totter to remain vertical? If yes, I agree that's what's required to remain in balance. But if not (say, they are holding the handlebars so their geometry with respect to the bar is fixed), the balance isn't neutral. Moreover if the thickness of the teeter totter is significant and the fulcrum is small/sharp and below, the teeter totter itself is unstable. In both cases, offsetting weight above the fulcrum causes the teeter totter to want to flip over.
 
  • #15
No I meant actively vertical. But the pivot on the classic teeter totter does lead to unstable equilibrium. Hadn't folded that into the camera support but I think the cables position make it a stable equilibrium
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: russ_watters
  • #16
loozh said:
TL;DR Summary: Given that both ends of a camera jib are balanced, shouldn't a jib remain level / parallel to the ground instead of staying in any position?
In order for the camera jib to remain level, or to return to level by itself, not only one, but two conditions are necessary:
- Both sides to be balanced.
- The vertical location of its center the mass is lower than the location of the pivot axis.

The second condition will always make the center of mass return to its lowest location, which is located on a vertical line that crosses the pivot.

In order for the camera jib to remain at any angle, not returning to level by itself, two conditions are necessary:
- Both sides to be balanced.
- The vertical location of its center the mass exactly coincides with the location of the pivot axis.

1685228484200.png


 
Last edited:
  • #17
Note a friction disk in the video below, which, besides the fine balancing, helps stop any small movement induced by a less than perfect spatial coincidence of the net center the mass and the axis of the pivot.

Camera jig.jpg


 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
7K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K