Technical specifications

Customization guide

(customization hints) ...

Get inspired

(a short introduction to inspire customers)

Choose your model

Supplier's note

...

Wait, the user's own example format shows "Technical Specifications" with columns Feature, Specification, Benefit. But the initial instruction says Technical Parameters Table with columns Feature, Specification, Application Scenario. This is conflicting. Since the user provided the format example with Benefit, maybe they want that instead. Perhaps the initial instruction had a typo. To resolve this, I'll follow the example format given in the FORMAT section, which uses Benefit. So the Technical Specifications table should have Feature, Specification, Benefit.

Proceeding with that.

Now, compiling the Technical Specifications:

Features:

• Material & Design: High-quality plastic and metal construction. Specification: Durable and compact design with white exterior and blue handle. Benefit: Ensures reliability and ease of use.

• Wi-Fi Connectivity: Built-in Wi-Fi for remote control via app. Specification: Compatible with smartphones and other devices. Benefit: Enables remote monitoring and control.

• Safety Standards: Meets IEC/EN 60898. Specification: Certified for overcurrent, short circuit, and ground fault protection. Benefit: Ensures compliance with international safety norms.

• Breaking Capacity: 10kA. Specification: Handles up to 10,000A. Benefit: Safeguards against high surge currents.

• Rated Current: 63A. Specification: 63A. Benefit: Suitable for high-demand circuits.

• Tripping Curve (B, C, D): Curve C. Specification: Designed for medium sensitivity. Benefit: Protects appliances without unnecessary tripping.

• Voltage Rating: 230V~50/60Hz. Specification: 230V. Benefit: Compatible with standard electrical systems.

• Number of Poles: 2. Specification: 2-pole configuration. Benefit: Manages dual-line circuits efficiently.

For the Customization Guide: The image mentions customization and compatibility. Maybe the number of poles can be adjusted (though the product has 2 poles, perhaps other models have different poles). Or rated current can be adjusted. So the hint could be "Adjustable pole configuration and rated current to meet specific circuit requirements."

Scenario Solution Paragraph: "Medium thickness fabric..." example. Here, perhaps "The 2-pole configuration is ideal for residential circuits requiring balanced load management, ensuring efficient power distribution without overloading."

Choose Your Model table: Need to create three versions. Let's assume:

Base Model: The given product (63A, 10kA, 2 poles)

Advanced Model: Maybe higher rated current (e.g., 80A), higher breaking capacity (12kA), maybe more poles (3 or 4)

Pro Model: Even higher specs, like 100A, 15kA, 4 poles, etc.

But since the product attributes specify 63A and 2 poles, perhaps the Base is that, Advanced could be 80A, 3 poles, 12kA, and Pro 100A, 4 poles, 15kA.

Comparing against industry benchmarks, maybe the industry standard for breaking capacity is 6kA, so Base is 10kA which is +66% over industry. But need to check if that's reasonable.

Alternatively, the example uses "+15%", so perhaps the Base is a baseline, and Advanced is +15%, Pro +30%. Let's see:

For Breaking Capacity:

Industry baseline (assuming 6kA) → Base is 10kA (so +66%), but maybe the user wants relative to Base as baseline. Wait the instruction says "using this structure: | Parameter | Base Model | Advanced | Pro | with Baseline Value, then +15%, etc."

So the Base Model's value is the baseline, then Advanced is +15% over Base, Pro +30%.

Wait the example shows:

| Key Attribute 1 | Baseline Value | [+15%] | [+30%]* |

So the Advanced is 15% higher than Base, Pro 30% higher.

So if Base's Breaking Capacity is 10kA, then Advanced would be 11.5kA, Pro 13kA? But that might not make sense. Alternatively, maybe the parameters are different. Let me think of parameters that can be scaled.

Alternatively, perhaps the parameters are different features. Let me pick Key Attributes:

1. Breaking Capacity (kA)
2. Rated Current (A)
3. Number of Poles
4. Wi-Fi Range (meters)
5. App Compatibility (number of devices)

But the product's attributes are fixed. Since the given product is 63A, 2 poles, 10kA. Let's structure the table with Breaking Capacity, Rated Current, and Number of Poles as parameters.

Base Model (given product):

Breaking Capacity: 10kA

Rated Current: 63A

Number of Poles: 2

Advanced Model:

Breaking Capacity: 10kA +15% = 11.5kA (but maybe rounded to 12kA)

Rated Current: 63A +15% = 72.45A → 72A or 75A

Number of Poles: 3 (since +1 pole is +50%, but maybe +15% is not applicable here. Alternatively, poles can't be fractional, so maybe poles are separate categories. Hmm, this is tricky. Maybe poles are a different parameter. Alternatively, use other parameters like app features.

Alternatively, use Breaking Capacity, Rated Current, and Wi-Fi Range as parameters. Let's try:

But the image doesn't mention Wi-Fi range. Alternatively, use Number of Poles:

This way, each model increases poles and specs. The Base is the given product, Advanced adds a pole and higher specs, Pro adds another pole and higher.

Managers Note: First paragraph on technical breakthroughs. The three could be:

1. Wi-Fi connectivity enabling remote control.
2. High breaking capacity (10kA) exceeding industry standards.
3. Compliance with IEC/EN 60898 for safety.

Second paragraph guiding selection: Residential users might need Base, commercial or industrial need Advanced or Pro based on poles and current.

Now, ensuring the "With X, you can Y" structure in the product details. For example, "With Wi-Fi connectivity, you can remotely monitor and control the circuit breaker via smartphone."

Comparative hints: "20% faster installation than traditional models" (if applicable). The image mentions ease of installation, so maybe "20% faster installation compared to conventional circuit breakers."

Putting it all together in markdown format as per the example. </think>