That would also go for the Expansion port on the 16" and given the amount of times it seems users fiddle inside then the Input Cover with it’s keyboard and touchpad connectors are also vulnerable.
Nope, I can absolutely say you are 100% wrong. There are FOUR spring loaded clips.
The two on the outside of the shield inside the socket that press against the smooth outer steel shielding of the plug, and two INSIDE THE PLUG that grab onto the “ears” on the sides of the flat tab inside the socket.
Take a look at the PNG I created. I have added red arrows pointing to the ears that wear off the socket in the 2016 Macbook Pros. How do I know this? I took a needle and superglue and re-created the ears (I used to assemble plastic models, so this is pretty easy for me). Once the ears were re-created, the plug snapped snugly over the flat tab inside the socket, and the sockets were usable again. However, the super-glue wears off too, and the solution is only temporary, lasting a few months.
The green lines represent the steel shield of the USB C plug.
The blue lines are the spring clips INSIDE THE PLUG that I am referring to.
The purple arcs are the spring clips inside the socket that grab onto the steel shield of the plug–those are what you are referring to.
In total there are FOUR spring clips (two on the socket, two on the plug) involved.
If you don’t believe me, grab a good magnifier and look inside a USB C plug. You can see the metal clips on each side of the inside.
Also, it should be possible to verify the existence of the clips inside the plug by referring to the official USB C industry standard specification (but that document is huge, so finding the exact page could take a while).
UPDATE: I found a mechanical drawing of a male USB C plug here that clearly shows the spring clip inside the plug.
I have attached zoomed-in shots of the diagram and highlighted the inner spring clips in light blue.
Zoomed in, this is what I am referring to (blue lines in my drawing).
1 Like
You are correct–the expansion cards would almost certainly never be removed and re-inserted to the same number of cycles as the USB C port on a smartphone. On my Macbook Pro, we’re probably talking 365 days * 3 times a day * 2 years = 2190 plug/unplug cycles before the little ears wore off (they are really soft, probably FR4 fiberglass). Other 2016 and 2017 MBP owners complained that their USB C ports wore out in 2 years too.
I think the real threat to the Framework’s soldered-to-the-motherboard USB C ports is torque–if someone were to insert an expansion card incorrectly (perhaps it’s a poorly-designed expansion card without the alignment slots, or maybe the USB C plug is slightly-off-center), it could break the motherboard’s USB C port. Not likely, but it’s possible for someone designing/developing an expansion card with a 3D-printed housing.
Another possibility is if someone foolishly inserts a USB C cable directly into the USB C socket soldered to the motherboard. Trip over that cable, and voila, gotta replace the whole motherboard.
You are absolutely right that Framework’s idea of using expansion cards is a good thing–they effectively make it so that the high wear is on the outer USB C socket of a USB C expansion card, reducing the wear on the USB socket soldered to the motherboard. It is one of the more attractive features of the Framework laptop compared to, say, my beloved Macbook Pro that I had to dump only because the USB C sockets wore out.
1 Like
image
Those purple colored parts are receptacle EMC (Electro Magnetic Compatibility) springs. You’ll see in USB-IF documents that they are optional depending on the speed of the port, and they aren’t meant as a retention mechanism. You’ll find a number of other spring shield contact points in different locations depending on manufacturer, and on the particular model. They can use whatever they wish, as long as it passes EMC. Not found at all on a great deal of lower speed female ports I’ve seen.
On some male plugs, inside at the very front, you’ll also see a number of tiny spring points. EMI gnd springs.
No, I’m not. The clips colored blue in your drawings and the matching ears inside the female ports are the only parts I’m referring to. These are the only componets that make up the retention mechanism according to the USB-IF (you’ll find them marked “retention springs”). And they’re guaranteed to be on plugs and ports from any manufacturer. Unlike receptacle EMC springs and plug EMI gnd springs.
The ears are metal in any port I’ve seen. Hell, even on the cheapest direct-from-china no-brand ports I’ve seen. Hardened metal on quality ports. If they are weak in the 2016 Macbook Pro, then Apple made some truly terrible ports, which were destined to fail early. I would expect such ports don’t follow the USB-IF specs.
And if the ears found in the Macbook somehow aren’t even metal at all, I don’t even know what to say. Just not fit for purpose.
If you’re going to spend time looking through drawings, look at the USB-IF spec files. Document Library | USB-IF. That’s the only true authoritative source, and it’s where you will find the purpose of the features you are referring to.
3 Likes
Wow, I just saw this.
I don’t know what to say.
That’s just horrendous. That they didn’t use a metal mid-plate.
~edit~
I just had to grab the specs Apple violated in their, not at all inexpensive, Macbook Pro.
There has to be a mid-plate (picture in screenshots), and it’s required to be grounded. Hard to do if it doesn’t exist / isn’t metal, as on that Macbook, apparently. The mid-plate, of course, provides the structure for the “ears” / the retaining hooks that the male plug’s retention springs engage with.
3.8.1 Mechanical Requirements
“extraction force shall be within the range of 6 N to 20 N after 10,000 insertion/ extraction cycles”
“durability rating shall be 10,000 cycles minimum for the USB Type-C connector family. The durability test shall be done at a rate of 500 ± 50 cycles per hour and no physical damage to any part of the connector and cable assembly shall occur.”
I’d like to note that Nrp did confirm, in a tablet project thread I believe, that the USB-C ports on the Framework Mainboard are rated to 10,000 cycles. As they should be. This apparently can’t be said for a Macbook.
2 Likes
Ah, I see. I followed your link and read the official docs.
You are correct in strict nomenclature or the officially-intended/designed function of the clips in question (blue vs. purple). Your point is taken.
However, I was referring to the actual, real-world function of the clips in question, which is that the purple clips do luckily serve to retain the plug in the socket (even if that is not their intended purpose) such that for the most part, even with the ears (indicated by red arrows) are worn completely off, the plug is retained well enough in the socket that it maintains full electrical connection on all lines (I observed this while attaching an external hard drive, which involves the data pins, not just power). It is not enough retention to handle slight disturbances to the cable.
I hearted your post–thanks for the explanation.
1 Like
You’re absolutely correct that the official spec sets the mechanical requirements high enough that we consumers should be very pleased, but I strongly suspect that many manufacturers of USB C sockets are cutting corners to save costs.
Think about it: the reason Apple took that shortcut is that it’s just so easy to simply use the substrate that the data+power pins are etched on and not figure out how to get metal to go alongside the sides of the tab to form the ears. They’d probably have to use some kind of glue to glue the metal onto the non-conductive PCB tab. Either that or use a metal so rigid it would not bend over time or with accidents.
Also, even if they did go to this trouble, there is the question of the quality of the metal. The (indicated in blue) clips inside the plug are probably spring steel; spring steel is probably going to be harder than whatever metal they use for the ears, especially if they choose a cheap, soft metal that they can easily injection-mold rather that a rigid, harder metal that won’t deform or wear prematurely.
My strong suspicion is that in the real world, we consumers are running into many sub-standard USB C plugs and sockets around the world. Certainly my end-users are.
Thus, the real question of this entire thread becomes, though the Framework mainboard’s USB C ports may be rated to 10,000 cycles, are they really capable of achieving 10,000 cycles?
We know it’s not true for the Macbook, but what if Framework the company is buying connectors from a manufacturer that is selling them sub-standard connectors? Framework might not even know they are being lied to, if they are being lied to. (I am not claiming that they are, only that they might be.)
This may be where Apple benefits. Because they are just one company and they have very strong power to accept or reject Lightning ports from their OEMs, it is possible that the Lightning connector could be rated to lower mechanical specs than the USB C connector, but in the real world, we experience the Lightning connector as being superior because Apple is in a position to police its OEMs for quality.
Put another way, this could be where the “Universal” in Universal Serial Bus" is a weakness–the many different makers of connectors, all with an economic incentive to cut corners and no strong enforcer of the official standard, results in a real-world situation where consumers experience high failure rates.
Anyway, to the OP, I personally I do not think we have to be concerned even if the USB C sockets on the mainboard are sub-standard. We are insulated quite a bit by the expansion cards. It would be a very unusual end user to get so many cycles unplugging/plugging expansion cards on their soldered-to-the-motherboard USB C ports that they would wear out.
I preferred the Apple Lightning cable. I am probably the only one in existence. Faster charge, always connected. I am using magnetic 24 pin on the framework and as long as you let the magnet pull the connector on it works all the time. if you put it on you have to fiddle with it.