What wood for a tripod?

[Greg_E]

If you were making a tripod, what type of wood do you think you would use? Ash, Cherry, Red Oak, or possibly Hickory (though Hickory is the last choice because it dulls the tools too quickly). I'm getting quotes of around $80 for the Cherry, and less for the other wood.

I'm not as concerned about which will look better, but which will perform better.

 

[Colin Graham]

Ash is very strong and relatively light, holds profiles well, and very cheap. I got a chunk of 12/4 x 8' that I made mine out of for about $30. That's a dollar and change per board foot. I like it also because it's subtle, with no outrageous grain, but you may like something more exotic.

 

[galyons]

If it helps any, both my Berlebach and Miller tripods are ash. Both are great. The Miller is in it's second career after a total rebuild & refinish.
Cheers,
Geary

 

[Jim Jones]

I'm partial to walnut, perhaps because of certain traditional uses and its availability here. Some other woods might be better for parts of a tripod. Well seasoned oak is hard. Osage orange is tough, rather like hickory.

 

[John Koehrer]

Ash, Maple, etc. You're going to want a tight grain wood that's going to work well with machining. The Oak varieties are going to be too coarse to be finely machined. I've got a surveyor's tripod that is I think is ash.
Another concern would be weight of the respective varieties.

 

[Lee L]

You could apply some of this info to your choice of tripod wood:
http://www.baseball-bats.net/baseball-bats/baseball-bat-materials/index.html

Lee

 

[Robert Hall]

Hard Maple or Bamboo (kind of hard to find, try a flooring place)

 

[Loose Gravel]

Laminated bamboo would be great. I don't know where to get it, but I just heard tonight someone talking about how they are making fancy bicycles out of it now. I've made two wooden tripods. I made the top where the legs connect out of cherry and the legs from sitka spruce (aircraft grade, like the Spruce Goose). Spruce has very high stiffness to weight. Also used for masts on sail boats. Really easy to work and the grain is lined up perfectly.

 

[resummerfield]

Another vote for Ash. It's a heavy wood, but I think it would perform the best.

 

[Mark Fisher]

If I built one right now, I'd go with spruce. I am not a close-to-the-car kind of guy so I'd want something lighter weight. The down side to spruce is that it is softer and will show dings. I would not worry about stiffness too much though. You can always make the sections a little thicker to get the absolute stiffness up. Increasing the section increases stiffness more efficiently. That is why aluminum bicycles have larger diameter tubes than steel bikes yet can weigh less and be stiffer (even though the stiffness to weight ratio of aluminum and steel are nearly identical).

 

[juan]

I don't really know anything about woods, but I know one of the advantages of a wooden tripod is that it helps dampen vibrations. I wonder if one of the stiff woods mentioned would be more prone to vibration? I believe my old Zone VI tripod is ash.
juan

 

[noseoil]

Regardless of the wood type, make sure you find a piece with nice, straight, tight grain and no knots. With small members, a grain run-out will allow the wood to fracture or split when stress is applied. Quarter sawn would be best for dimensional stability. A danish oil finish would look good, seal the wood and be easy to touch-up when dings appear. tim

 

[MikeSeb]

I vote for wood pulp. It's what the B&H box is made of!

Sorry all!

 

[Greg_E]

I'm kind of leaning towards Ash for some of the reasons mentioned. That and Ash is cheap, I can get everything I need in Ash for about $40.00, and that includes running it through the planer (s4s) to smooth it down. Those prices are for lumber that is cut to my dimensions, not raw boards. The Red Oak is from some special price clearance and would be even cheaper for what I need. Since I'm not really a woodworker, this is all a bit hit or miss. That's why I'm geting the lumber cut to the size that I think I need, and why I'm going for left over pieces that may be laying around the warehouse. No sense wasting good lumber to poor craftsmanship

Wood pulp works, but it is heavy. All the glue adds up. Though if you were really good, you could probably make a honey comb laminated paper tripod that would work very well, and not be too heavy. I know you were joking, but it could be done.

 

[lee]

I vote Ash or Maple.

lee\c

 

[DannL]

Pine. On the first time through make it from inexpensive pine. Once you've worked the bugs out (quirks) then repeat the process with "experience and a choice wood". When all is said and done, you'll have two pods, one badweather tripod and the other for show.

 

[AlanC]

Pine, and sitka spruce, which was mentioned earlier, would be among the worst woods to use for a tripod. They vibrate too readily, which is exactly why they are used for the soundboards of almost all acoustic string instruments, including guitars, violins, pianos etc.
To check any piece of wood for how much it will vibrate, hold it at one end between your thumb and one finger, letting it hang down. then rap it sharply with the knuckle of your other hand. You will feel the vibration, especially with pine.
Hickory and ash have little vibration, which is why they are traditionally used for sledge hammer handles. They dampen vibration, and stop it running up your arm, and for this reason would be good choices for a tripod wood.
If you want to build a really light tripod, lime would be a good choice (called bass wood in the US ) Lime is one of the "deadest" of woods, which is why it is used for internal blocks and linings of violins and guitars. It lacks the toughness of hickory and the resilience of ash, but is a very light wood. For a medium weight tripod you could beef up the sections, and it still wouldn't be too heavy.
Alan Clark

 

[Greg_E]

I'm thinking more along the lines of Ash legs and Hickory for the guides that the legs slide on. And some kind of metal to hold it all together. May not be the lightest of tripods, but it also shouldn't blow around in the wind. I'll probably start with a short or table top version. The reason for a really sturdy tripod is for a pinhole camera I recently made. If I could buy something really nice for $100, I probably wouldn't go through the trouble of trying to build a tripod. But the really nice stuff is selling for $200+

So far I have prices from http://www.hardwoodstore.com/lumber.html with an additional $0.80 per board foot to rip it and run it through the planer (s4s or surface 4 sides). Waiting for prices from Dead Link Removed who has some closeout Red Oak furniture squares that would be small enough, and a price on Cherry.

I'll probably do something simple like rope to keep the legs from spreading too far, and just a simple place for the head to mount. Probably a simple knob and bolt to apply the pressure to lock the legs, nothing fancy at this time.

 

[Colin Graham]

Greg, not to be a downer or anything but just because they surface all four sides is no guarantee that your premilled pieces will be straight. If they aren't dead straight chances are your tripod will bind; be hard to slide without a lot of slop in the channels. If you are getting finished dimensions from your supplier you should stress what it is that you're using it for, even so I'd be amazed if they will guarantee perfectly straight stock. Square, yes; straight is another story. If they do, please give me their number! I generally have to waste up to quarter inch per side to true up some types of wood. Just something to think about.

 

[Loose Gravel]

Tripods are made from wood because wood is cheap, light, strong, readily available, and easy to work and has been since the invention of tripods. Vibration in tripods comes from overloading and poor design. Some tripod manufactures have moved from wood to aluminum. Miller is the first that comes to mind. I don't know of any that have gone the other way.

 

[Greg_E]

O'Connor seems to have gone from wood to other materials too. Building a tripod out of aluminum just doesn't sound like much fun to me. Especially since I would have to machine or cast fittings for the ends of the tubes.

Colin, thanks for the warning. I hadn't even thought about the lumber not being true after they cut it. It would be a big difficulty to have to steam and bend everything back to being straight. Either that or I'll have to make shorter pieces and more sections, which will increase weight, and increase waste. Or I'll have to be creative and use the curves to help hold it together. If everything is curved in only one direction I might be able to use that to help make things stay together when locked, and slide easily when unlocked. If it's curved in two directions, then I'm out of luck.

 

[DannL]

Pine, and sitka spruce, which was mentioned earlier, would be among the worst woods to use for a tripod.
Alan Clark

Maybe so, but my "pine tripod" will easily hold 170 lbs with no vibration. Naturally when you build something "incorrectly" the results will suffer. Vibrations? Who's building a violin?

 

[AlanC]

vibration also comes from the material used. I have an aluminium Benbo, and a carbon fibre Manfrotto; both substantial tripods. If I mount them both with a light 35mm camera then lightly rap them, the aluminium tripod vibrates but the carbon fibre tripod doesn't. Some wood tripods don't vibrate either, depending on the wood used.
Alan Clark

 

[AlanC]

DannL
Pine vibrates more than other woods. You can't get round the fact.
Alan Clark

 

[Greg_E]

Here is what I just received from the Hardwood store link in a previuos message:

Gregory,
We will cut them twice. Once to a little larger than you need
and then to the exact size so they should be straight.

Hil

I'll be ordering from them today!