Author Topic: Carbon Fiber vs. Aluminum Center Column  (Read 978 times)

Macro_Cosmos

  • NG Member
  • *
  • Posts: 307
  • The Macro Fanatic
    • Flickr
Carbon Fiber vs. Aluminum Center Column
« on: November 09, 2019, 07:59:29 »
https://thecentercolumn.com/2018/04/03/carbon-fiber-vs-aluminum-center-column/
David at "thecentercolumn" conducted a series of tests on carbon fibre and aluminium centre columns. The conclusion is in favour of aluminium centre columns, while carbon fibre is the better choice for legs.

It's pretty interesting, because most tripods that do offer a centre column has consistent material, that is, the centre column is made of the same material as the tripod legs. Out of my no doubt GAS collection of tripods, I only have 2 that features a centre column. The RRS TVC-33 I use offers a centre column add-on which is made of aluminium. (https://www.reallyrightstuff.com/ta-3-qc)

This is quite interesting. Obviously the weight difference is negligible and the cost difference is minute. I tend to dislike centre columns but sometimes I do get lazy.

PeterN

  • NG Supporter
  • **
  • Posts: 1036
Re: Carbon Fiber vs. Aluminum Center Column
« Reply #1 on: November 09, 2019, 08:35:54 »
Thanks for sharing.
Indeed, intetesting. I do have a far less advanced tripod (manfrotto 190c) but it has carbon fiber legs and aluminium center column. So far it has served me well.
Peter

arthurking83

  • NG Member
  • *
  • Posts: 225
  • Good to be back on NikonGear
Re: Carbon Fiber vs. Aluminum Center Column
« Reply #2 on: November 10, 2019, 05:27:36 »
Obviously, the way the centre column tube is manufactured is the key to why the carbon column is less resistant to torsional rotation compared to aluminium.
For years, one of the primary advances in race car(and subsequently road car) mechanics has been carbon fibre drive shafts.
These tubes of carbon fibre experience far more rotational force than the average tripod centre column does! ... 1000Nm and more.
The stiffness in the carbon tubes were not only more durable in that they accepted more power and broke less often, but also lessened power losses in the transmission.

Interesting read.
Arthur