this post was submitted on 23 Jan 2024
1576 points (99.2% liked)
3DPrinting
15525 readers
138 users here now
3DPrinting is a place where makers of all skill levels and walks of life can learn about and discuss 3D printing and development of 3D printed parts and devices.
The r/functionalprint community is now located at: !functionalprint@kbin.social or !functionalprint@fedia.io
There are CAD communities available at: !cad@lemmy.world or !freecad@lemmy.ml
Rules
-
No bigotry - including racism, sexism, ableism, homophobia, transphobia, or xenophobia. Code of Conduct.
-
Be respectful, especially when disagreeing. Everyone should feel welcome here.
-
No porn (NSFW prints are acceptable but must be marked NSFW)
-
No Ads / Spamming / Guerrilla Marketing
-
Do not create links to reddit
-
If you see an issue please flag it
-
No guns
-
No injury gore posts
If you need an easy way to host pictures, https://catbox.moe may be an option. Be ethical about what you post and donate if you are able or use this a lot. It is just an individual hosting content, not a company. The image embedding syntax for Lemmy is 
Moderation policy: Light, mostly invisible
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I would want an RJ45 charger.
USB-C has official specifications for a screw lock connector
Nice
Why are technical drawings so much cooler?
Because engieneering is so much cooler.
Fun fact: if you design in fusion 360, you can make technical drawings quite easily with only a couple clicks.
Fun fact: FreeCAD is better
I wish
[Fact Check!] A YouTube video series says it takes 30 days to completely master. Did skillshare send you?
To completely master yeah maybe, but if you just want the cool drawings, it'll automatically make them from your model (I meant that assuming you already use fusion).
Why two different and incompatible options?
Or, more generally, why can't I ever read some USB spec and get out with less questions than I had in the beginning?
Probably for the same reason why they decided to rename USB 3.0.
I guess they had a liquor cabinet in the room where they held their meeting
Because for some reason, the USBIF has been hit over and over again with the stupid stick ever since USB2 came out.
These are for niche needs. For most applications neither is necessary. If needed and space is constrained the single pin variant allows additional connectors to be packed together on a single PCB. The dual pin option doesn't, it takes up space that could be used for additional connectors.
I se no advantage at all for the dual pin design.
It looks exactly like what I imagined by screw-lock USB connector, but the single pin seems to be a really inspired design somebody had and made the entire committee angry for some reason.
The single pin only resists force. Two pins resist torques being applied to the usb connector. The single pin does resist torque but it uses the connector potentially damaging the PCB.
Short version: looks good, functions bad
But why not make a dual screw design by adding one more screw to the bottom of the current single screw one? Would be more compact and allow them to be more cross compatible.
PCB are designed with things on top of them. Typically they are mounted with the bottom of the PCB at the bottom of a case. So following normal conventions there wouldn't be a place for the bottom screw to go into something. Unless you used a bespoke case. It's much easier to have the two screw design place the screws above the PCB.
It may seem like a minor change, but it costs substantial more in design time and effort. New folded steel cases and injection moulded cases would have to be developed. Designers would use a different port, or worse deploy their own two horizontal screw design. There would then be several two screw designs (metric/imperial/very close/very far etc).
Anyone with the niche need of the two screw vertical design would likely rotate the whole connector or use a flex cable to join the connector to the main board.
Because USB is pretty much neither universal or standardized, just the same shape and somewhat compatible
The single screw version looks wrong somehow.
I wish things actually used this, it looks really stable.
Well, you can buy them: https://www.coolgear.com/product/usb31-type-c-to-c-dual-screw-lock-cable
That's cool, but I wouldn't have anything to attach it to. It would be great if my laptop had those ports though.
You usually do not want connectors to be too stable.
The fact that it unplugs before any part breaking or pushing your devices away is almost always a feature, not a bug.
Coaxial for me
25pin serial cable and ain't nobody at work gonna steal my phone charger no more.
Cant do it, the BNC connector is not large enough to house a USBc end, even the Apple one which is the smallest I have. I would have to enlarge the BNC to a near comical size. Now if we removed the moulded housing it could be done, but it would have to be made on a bare PCB/Cable/Connector to be the right size.
An N connector should be just big enough, if not, use a 7/16 DIN connector then.
N connector to SMA, and hardline to USB-C.
Jack or Plug? if plug, would you want it to look like its plugged in, so just the retention tab and back half are sticking out?
It would be epic if it is both.
https://www.thingiverse.com/thing:6449087
not tested yet
https://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3251.txt
https://www.thingiverse.com/thing:6449087
I have not done a test print yet, but this might work. Requires a Apple USB-C cable because anything else is too big.