0
\$\begingroup\$

I have a question about avoiding to use USB connectors on PCB design. Is there any way to connect a USB device to a board using another kind of connector? I mean, using a cable with USB-C port by one side and other kind of connector by the other side. In this case, it would be 3.0 USB connection.

EDIT: The target of this is saving space on the PCB (or trying to.)

EDIT 2: I was asking for a solution like this:

https://es.aliexpress.com/item/32966866664.html

Using a FPC connected to a mini board where is the USB-C connector, and the other side of the PCB connected to my own board on a FPC receptacle.

\$\endgroup\$
6
  • 5
    \$\begingroup\$ What problem are you trying to solve? \$\endgroup\$
    – Transistor
    Jun 14 '21 at 7:46
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ Sure they are. Some industrial embedded boards have this kind of connectors and flat cable to USB connector, but don't ask for the price. \$\endgroup\$
    – Marko Buršič
    Jun 14 '21 at 7:47
  • \$\begingroup\$ Possible? Certainly. Is it a good idea? Usually not. A cable is much more fragile than your PCB, what happens if the cable fails? Also at the higher USB 3 speeds it might be challenging to respect all the requirements with a cable directly soldered to the PCB. \$\endgroup\$
    – jcaron
    Jun 14 '21 at 7:47
  • \$\begingroup\$ Thanks for your answers. I have editted the post solving some little questions. All this is about saving space on the PCB and the PCB receptacle, and It would be with 3.0 connections. \$\endgroup\$
    – Juanma
    Jun 14 '21 at 7:57
  • \$\begingroup\$ It's not very clear from your question, are you designing a host or device with a Type-C receptacle, and just want the receptacle to not be on board, or are you designing a device with a captive Type-C cable that ends with a plug ? What power will flow through VBUS (i.e. is device bus-powered) ? Do you need support for PD ? \$\endgroup\$
    – Nipo
    Jun 14 '21 at 12:12
4
\$\begingroup\$

The target of this is saving space on the PCB(or trying to do it).

You need to connect 7 conductors there (the two superspeed pairs, and classical USB1/2 signals and at least ground), probably 8. I don't think you'll get that any more compact than with a vertical USB-C connector.

\$\endgroup\$
4
  • \$\begingroup\$ But to use USB C you need to add device-host controllers, right? But, the USB cable connector (A or C) are too hard and huge, is it still the best option? Other doubt, What happens with the usb cable protections when you use other kind of connectors? Is it maybe a problem too? \$\endgroup\$
    – Juanma
    Jun 14 '21 at 8:16
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ seriously, vertical USB-C connectors are tiny for the 8 conductors they connect properly. USB-C itself here is just the shape of the connector and doesn't need any controller you wouldn't need anyway. I can't tell you what the "best" option is, as I can't look into your head and see all the requirements that you don't state in your question. Other question: please don't ask new questions in comments. \$\endgroup\$
    – Marcus Müller
    Jun 14 '21 at 8:19
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ The OP wants USB 3.0 and an C receptible. You require atleast 4 superspeed pairs (2*4=8) 1 classic pair (2), 2 Cabl configuration (CC) lines (2), and power/ground (2), this makes for a minium of 8+2+2+2=14 wires instad of the 7 you mentioned. Note that it is the responsibility of an device with an recetiple to read the CC wires and automatically select the 2 high speed pairs from the list, and send a signal to a mux to route the signals to your consumer \$\endgroup\$
    – Ferrybig
    Jun 16 '21 at 13:09
  • \$\begingroup\$ oh snap, you're right, @Ferrybig \$\endgroup\$
    – Marcus Müller
    Jun 16 '21 at 13:17

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.