Hello,
at the moment I face a problem where I need to run USB cable through cable gland similar to picture below. First of all I need the cable to be be according to USB 3.2 Gen1 specification (formerly known as USB 3.0, speed 5 Gbit/sec). I would like to avoid cutting connector off, then passing cable through cable hole and then reattaching connector - as I understand this is not something you can do without professional machines for USB 3.2 Gen1 cable.
USB cable has USB-A male connector from both sides. I have trouble guiding USB-A connector through inner gasket of cable glands - gasket is too small for connector. If I use bigger cable gland with bigger gasket diameter, then the gasket is too big for cable diameter.
I cannot use cable gland with split gasket as well. By split gasket I mean gasket which is split in one section, see image below.
The reason is because I need cable gland to have one particular certification. And cable gland with split gasket which has such a certification does not exist. Cable glands without inner gasket which use filling compound instead all seems to have a similar issue - you cannot get the connector part through the cable gland and at the same part end up with cable diameter bigger than minimum allowed cable diameter.
I also tried finding USB extender via CAT 5E or CAT 6 cable such as this one
https://www.amazon.com/Monoprice-Extender-CAT5E-Connection-150ft/dp/B003L14ZTC main issue with this is that there is simply no USB 3.2 Gen1 version that would not be big, high power consumption and expensive. If I found one it would be very simple because crimping CAT5 / 6 cable is something anyone can do with simple tools.
So it appears all roads lead to cutting off USB wire, passing it through cable gland and then resoldering cable ends back together.
Now I would like to ask:
Do you have any tips on how to solve this other than soldering USB cables?
Do you have any experience with soldering USB 3.2 Gen1 cables? I am interested mainly in how to reconnect all the shields so the cable is as robust as it can be to EMC.
Cheers,
Dan