Hi all, I've seen a lot of camera sliders on Amazon, but not willing to pay 500$ just for a left right slider. So I check on YouTube there were a lot of examples for a DIY slider. My only concern was is it really stable enough to handle my A7III with huge lenses on it (Total weight: ±1.8Kg). So I've started to work on my own model using openbuild parts: It's a 1000mm C Beam profile to have a solid movement. The Slider Cat together with the Motor for the tilt movement: The red parts are thrust ball bearings. Something like that: 10 Stk. Axiallager F5-12M - 5 x 12 x 4 mm | eBay This should ensure that the Pulley is moving fully free between the two plates. The screw for the camera ball head is a M5 with 45mm Length Now my questions: What do you think overall about this setup? Will it be able to hold and turn 1.8Kg in horizontal movements? Will it be able to hold and turn 1.8Kg in vertical also? (Must not be 100% vertical.) Is there a better solution for the Pulley integration between the two plates? Is the Nema17 the good and powerfull motor for this setup?
you will need to balance the camera, just like on all other sliders and tilters. so you will need a sliding plate on top of the ball that allows you to balance the camera/lens assembly so the motor power needed to move it is minimized.
Okay I think I got what you mean, so the camera + lense middlepoint should be over the rotating axis. If this is fine, do you think there is no issue with using "just" a M5 screw? For vertical movement I could also add an additional weight at the end of the base that is sliding arround the edge, just saw a video about that.
M5 is ok so long as it is not the cheapest thing in the hardware store (-: ie use a hardened bolt. The standard for tripods is a 1/4-20 which is bigger and courser than M6, so M6 would be better really. yep, balance is key to reducing motor power needed, which then reduces battery power needed in the field.
I see a few issues. I wouldn't go with anything less than the 1/4-20 threaded screw into the base of the pan head and if the base has the larger size option I would go with that. Second, the belt and pulley system pulls laterally on the base and the axial thrust bearings will not work for this. You need regular rotary bearings to handle this lateral force. Finally, I wouldn't trust the 3mm plates you have shown, certainly not as the main gantry plate. Too much riding on it, both in weight and dollar value.
Okay I got this remark twice. The ball head I'm planning to use is a 3/8 Inch (~9,52mm). So I will try to switch this part. Anyway I was thinking already about how to adapt on the top end from M5 to the 3/8 so I can get rid of an adapter here. I will use the full length with a 3/8 Inch Screw. Here I would have one more question, The setup with 4 bearings is good, one on each side of the plates? So that each component has a free translatin. I found this bearing online with 3/8 Inch: Edelstahl Kugellager SS-R6-2RS 9.525x22.225x7.14, 4,39 € Is that matching what you had in mind? This also meanst that the hole I need in my plate must be larger than the inner metal ring of the bearing right? I just choose the Gantry Plate as it was easy to order and had already a lot of ready to use holes. Do you have another plate that would be better? From which material the plate should be? What would be a good thickness What do you think about selfprinting a plate with a 3D printer? A lot of questions in this message, thx already for the answers so far!
I would probably base it all on the XLarge C-Beam Gantry Plate in a 6 wheel configuration. As for the bearings I would use a stacked configuration based on the axial thrust bearing resting on a flanged bearing set in a hole in the plate with a matching set of bearings inserted upward into a similar hole in the bottom plate and a bolt up from the bottom holding them all together. For drilling the bearing hole in the plates use a stepped bit. They cut aluminum like butter. As for the motor mount I would probably rotate the mount 90 degrees on the gantry plate and invert it, hanging it down off the side of the beam to where it is not in the way of the camera motion. With what you paid for the camera it is truly not worth the risk of going cheap on a plate. Do this right the first time and there will never be any regrets.
1) Definitely pay attention to the bearings, the above ideas are good. 2) I'd go 6mm/1/4" on the plate if possible; though 3mm will technically hold the camera because it did with my slider from 2014 or whenever, it's not optimal especially when you're trying to hold bearings. The XL plate is good. 3) Remember if you're tilting the camera at the base and not on a gimbal centered at the optical center (not just front to back, but also top to bottom), a) you're gonna get some weird effects in use, and b) it's going to drastically alter the center of mass as it tilts, and it'll want to flop around. Base tilt is fine for a locked tilt like a ball head in the pics, but will need care in any simultaneous motion (video, multi-axis timelapse, etc) 4) If you're trying to do video, I generally wouldn't recommend a stepper mounted to the camera carriage; a) they're super noisy if you're recording audio, b) they generate a lot of vibration which could impact image sharpness and video stability- probably(?) not by more than software could fix it, but better just to build it right in the first place. Either move the stepper onto one of the end brackets, or switch to some kind of brushless motor setup. If you're doing low-speed time lapses where the camera will never be capturing while the motor is moving, it should be fine.
Funny that you showed me that plate, since your first comment I was searching for alternatives and reworked on my slider cat with this plate. For the bearing I'm not 100% sure I got your remark right. I will place the pulley in the middle of the plate and still I wil lfix the two plates at the edges. I've build the follwing options based on my understanding: Red = Axial Bearing Green = Flanged Bearing Blue = Spacer / Precision Shim On both solutions there will be a insert lock at the top. Option 1: (Benefit I need less space below the bottom plate --> I would need to extend the weels to not get in conflict with the Acme lead screw) Option 2: (Benefit the two plates are closer together) I've found all the bearings in 7/8 Inch or M6. What would you prefer? I'm hesitating to take the 7/8 Inch as I don't need any other adapter to mount the ball head. Could you draw a small semantic for that? I'm not sure to get it right. Would it be also an option to use a long belt and attach the second motor also on one of the C Beam Base Sides? You are fully right on that point. One more question came up during the playing arround with the C Beam Base & Acme lead screw. On the following picture you can see that the allignment between the screw and the nut block is not there. I've tried it with multiple spacers but it's never exactly matching:
Thx for this remark, I posted in my answer before two options. Switched to the 6mm XL plate. So I would say here I could make use of my panorama adapter, to bring the "optical" center on the center of the ball head. Are my thought right one that? I've noted the issue with the center of mass and the it could flop around, but this would / could just happen in vertical or not 100% horizontal mode. The main reason for the slider is Timelapse with Movement + Tilt, but I don't want to exclude video. Like I've already said, most of the time it will be used for multi axis TimeLapse. I've proposed in the message above to add the motor to one of the ends of the C Beam. In the meanwhile I see two issues: Long belt just for the Tilt movement It would also be hard to synchronize the two motors, as a movement of the base would mean that also the tilt is moving. Not sure there is even any good solution for that. Do you have any other idea where i could place the motor?
What I was suggesting on the motor. Drawing is schematic only. I'm away from home and don't have my full parts database on my laptop. This is the best I could scavenge online from 3DWarehouse. As for option 1 or 2 on the bearing stack, I would go with a derivate of option 1. Take the lower axial bearing stack you have shown and move it to the top of the upper plate. This will allow you to thread the pan head down fully on the stack so it compresses properly and will require less space between the plates. If the axial washers are not larger than the hole in the plate you may want to add a thin plate or washer on top of the upper bearing plate to support them properly. You should have a 3mm spacer + a 1mm spacer on each of the screws between the nut block and the plate.
Thx I got it, I will redesign this part, when I'm clear on the bearings & size of the bearings. I'm not sure to get your remark here. When I move the bottom stack from option 1 to the top, it's like option 2 or? I've build one more solution with less space between the plates & less space below the bottom plate. Is that what you had in mind? Here you speak about the place of the orange line in the next image right? If that is not 100% fitting I should use a washer to have more contact surface. I will try to get a ready model of the C Beam Base and compare to my building to find the mistake. I have one more question regarding the size of the Screw & Bearings: I've managed to find a 3/8 inch flanged bearing online. It would take a while to arrive in Germany but that's okay: 3/8" ID x 7/8" OD Flanged Ball Bearing (2 pack) I see more an issue with the outer size of the bearing which is for a 3/8 --> 7/8. The hole in the C Beam XL Plate would be really huge and close the the other holes arround: Do you think that could be and issue? Maybe I should better search for a solution with M8 where I would save 3,225mm on the diameter of the bearing hole.
What I was referencing in the way of a stack: Drawing not entirely complete as I didn't show the washers above and below the pulley but should be sufficient to get the idea. The object just below the upper axial bearing stack is an oversized washer. Not an issue. It won't be pretty but it won't likely be visible.
Thanks a lot, I now have a clear view on that part. I will redesign the slider cat now with a 3/8 inch screw from the button to the top and I will end up with this Camera Base plate on top: https://www.amazon.de/MENGS®-DDM-60-Dual-Schnellwechselplatte-kompatibel-Arca-Swiss/dp/B007ZBJ2G0 I will be much more flexibel with this base and it's having a 3/8 inch in the middle so I could directly screw it on the end of the screw together with some screw clue and one washer below. I got the idea from this slider: PT Pan Tilt Head – PocketSlider Some more points I have to clarify before I can redesign the slider cat: For the base I'll use a Nema23 Motor, would you also recommend to use the same one on the slider cat for the tilt movement? I was looking on some shops in Europe for a pulley with 3/8 inch inner diameter, no luck so far. Can I buy a pulley with 8mm and then I will cut it myself to 3/8? How "acurate" this step must be? Should the pulley belt be from GT2 or 3GT? What is the best width for the belt? Do I need a third wheel for the belt or can I just use it between the motor and the pulley for the camera base?
I would suggest a NEMA 23 with a 0.9 degree step for the pan motor. Just make sure it will still have enough thickness for the set screw. I'd probably go 3GT and a 9mm belt. You shouldn't need one.
Hi Rick, I've redesigned the bearing part. and based now everything on a M8 screw. It was easier with the bearings to order everything in Germany. Could you have an eye on these parts, I will try to find some with a higher quality, but I mean more on the dimensions? I've chosen the 8x16x5 instead of the 8x22x7 as they were fitting better into the plate, are they "big" enough? Flange Bearing 8x16x5: https://www.amazon.de/Radialkugella...bgeschirmtes-Flansch-Kugellager/dp/B078RFZVWQ Radial Bearing 8x16x5: https://www.amazon.de/688-2RS-Kugel...gellager-Doppeltes-Versiegeltes/dp/B07D3KB99Q Pulley 40 Tooth: Zahnriemenrad HTD-3M 9mm breit - 40 Zähne, Bohrung 8mm H7 mit Klemmsc, 10,00 € I've aligned the items like you described: One question here, could I move the flange bearing at the bottom arround to have the flange side on the bottom side of the bottom plate? With this I can also lock the two plates with the screw, with your drawing at the moment to bottom plate would not be fixed. For sure I have in the 4 edges the spacers to hold the plates together, but it would be better to also lock it with the center screw or? For the final plate on the top I found a shop in Germany, that can produce a round plate (60mm) with a thickness of 6mm or 8mm. In the center the would add an M8 thread. So I would use this plate as the nut screw to fix and hold the center screw. Then on top of the plate I would screw the camera base I've shared in the last post. Would you go with 6mm or 8mm in the thickness of this final plate?
I wouldn't. That will require far too much precision on your post lengths to get your bearing stack properly tightened. As shown it will pull up slightly away from bearing on the bottom plate but that doesn't matter as the forces on it are only sideways. But you will be able to tighten the bearing stack properly in the process. Is this plate aluminum or steel. I'm not a big fan of threaded aluminum when it comes to securing high priced cameras. If you're determined to use aluminum I would either go 16mm thick so you have at least 2 thread diameters of grip length or 12mm so you can mill out a pocket to recess a steel nut into.
Okay I got it, so that means the plates are just connected over the 4 spacers around. I've just checked it's also possible to order these plates from steel. With steel 8mm is enough or should I still go with more? In the shop where I wanted to place my order, they don't have anymore the C Beam End Mount plate, they replaced it by this new C Beam Motor plate: C-Beam Motor Mount Plate - Plates - OpenBuilds Hardware - Hardware I'm a bit confused by the countersunk holes, are these really countersunk or counterbore holes? I can use the same flanged bearings for these, but they will better for a counterbore hole.
