Original Text / Japanese
Copy
9/14（水）１１：００amより、工作技術課とディンプル加工の為の金型仕様の打ち合わせを予定しています。つきましては、以下確認させてください。
※不明確な場合は金型細部の仕様が決められないと想定しております。
よろしくお願い致します。
（回答が得られない場合は、ひとまず、サンプルの測定結果を基準に進めます）
回答納期：9/14 11:00am
【確認事項】 Dimpleについて
１ 高さMIN値？ （高さMAXは1.5）
Rating
57
Translation / English
- Posted at 02 Sep 2011 at 17:50
From 11:00am on 14/Sep(Wed), we are planning to conduct a meeting with technical department regarding dimple processing.Please let me consider below.
*We assume that detailed specification of the mould can not be confirmed if this point remains unclear.
(If we can not receive reply, we will tentatively refer to sample measurement result)
Due date: 14/Sep 11:00am
(Check item) About Dimple
1 Height min value? (Maximum height is 1.5)
*We assume that detailed specification of the mould can not be confirmed if this point remains unclear.
(If we can not receive reply, we will tentatively refer to sample measurement result)
Due date: 14/Sep 11:00am
(Check item) About Dimple
1 Height min value? (Maximum height is 1.5)
Rating
50
Translation / English
- Posted at 02 Sep 2011 at 17:52
We are going to have a meeting with the engineering section concerning the specification of the metal mold for dimple processing at 11:00 am on Sep. 11 (Wed.).
I would like to make clear the following points. Thank you.
(If we don't get any answers, we will start the meeting based on the result of the analyses of the samples for convenience.)
Deadline for answers: 11:00, Sep. 14.
“Points to be checked” About Dimple.
1. Height in MIN unit? (Maximum height: 1.5 MIN)
I would like to make clear the following points. Thank you.
(If we don't get any answers, we will start the meeting based on the result of the analyses of the samples for convenience.)
Deadline for answers: 11:00, Sep. 14.
“Points to be checked” About Dimple.
1. Height in MIN unit? (Maximum height: 1.5 MIN)
Rating
Translation / English
- Posted at 02 Sep 2011 at 18:16
I plan arrangement about the making technology section and the dimple processing mold specification from 9/14 (Wednesday) 11:00am.
I would therefore like to be requested confirmation.
※ When indefinite, I assume that the specification of the mold detail isn't decided.
Yours very truly.
( When an answer isn't gotten, for the time being, I advance the measurement result of the sample to the standard.)
The answer appointed date of delivery: 9/14 11:00am
【 Confirmation item 】About Dimple
1The height MIN value?
( Height MAX is 1.5 ).
I would therefore like to be requested confirmation.
※ When indefinite, I assume that the specification of the mold detail isn't decided.
Yours very truly.
( When an answer isn't gotten, for the time being, I advance the measurement result of the sample to the standard.)
The answer appointed date of delivery: 9/14 11:00am
【 Confirmation item 】About Dimple
1The height MIN value?
( Height MAX is 1.5 ).
Original Text / Japanese
Copy
２ ディンプルのボトムの直径サイズ。 MIN値とMAX値は不問でしょうか？
（用途を考えるとあまり関係なさそうですが、どうでしょうか）
３ 受け基板側のパッド形状、サイズ。
また、受け側の5か所のセンター座標値は同一ですか？
４ 「基板をMAX45度曲げても問題ないこと」の要求意図は何でしょうか？
また、曲げる場所など決まっておりますでしょうか？
私は単なるロバスト性配慮だと勝手に思っておりますが確認致します。
Rating
57
Translation / English
- Posted at 02 Sep 2011 at 18:01
2, Diametre of bottom part of the dimple. Any limit for Min/Max?
(Due to usage, we assume no affect.How is your view?)
3, Pad shape, size of the recieving board side
Is centre coordinates figure same for 5 points on recieving side?
4, What is your intention of your request of "No problem when board bends max 45 degrees"? Is there any specified area where it will be bent?
In my understanding, it is due to robustness but please let me check with it.
(Due to usage, we assume no affect.How is your view?)
3, Pad shape, size of the recieving board side
Is centre coordinates figure same for 5 points on recieving side?
4, What is your intention of your request of "No problem when board bends max 45 degrees"? Is there any specified area where it will be bent?
In my understanding, it is due to robustness but please let me check with it.
Rating
50
Translation / English
- Posted at 02 Sep 2011 at 18:54
2. Isn't it necessary for us to be sensitive for dimple bottom diameter and MIN/MAX values?
(Considering its application, it seems not so important. How do you think about it?)
3. Figures and sizes of the pad on the receiving plate.
Are the five center coordinate figures the same ?
4. How do you think about the indication,“No problem on distorting the bed to a maximum of 45 degree”? Do you think you can decide the point of distorting? I myself think that this note is only for consideration for robustness.
But I will confirm.
(Considering its application, it seems not so important. How do you think about it?)
3. Figures and sizes of the pad on the receiving plate.
Are the five center coordinate figures the same ?
4. How do you think about the indication,“No problem on distorting the bed to a maximum of 45 degree”? Do you think you can decide the point of distorting? I myself think that this note is only for consideration for robustness.
But I will confirm.
Rating
Translation / English
- Posted at 02 Sep 2011 at 18:34
2 About the diameter size of the dimple bottom.
The MIN value and the MAX value a non - question?( I think that there is not relation when I consider an use. What do you think?)
3 About the pad shape and the size of recipient substrate.
Also, is the center coordinates value of five pieces of recipient identical?
4 " When bending a substrate by a maximum of 45 degrees, the problem doesn't occur ".
What is the intention to require?
Also, are the place which can be distorted and so on decided?
I conceive private conviction that in the Robust-type consideration, is this a right answer?
The MIN value and the MAX value a non - question?( I think that there is not relation when I consider an use. What do you think?)
3 About the pad shape and the size of recipient substrate.
Also, is the center coordinates value of five pieces of recipient identical?
4 " When bending a substrate by a maximum of 45 degrees, the problem doesn't occur ".
What is the intention to require?
Also, are the place which can be distorted and so on decided?
I conceive private conviction that in the Robust-type consideration, is this a right answer?
