Supplier's note
...
So the user's format specifies that the Technical Specifications table has Feature, Specification, and Benefit. However, in the structured requirements, they mention a Technical Parameters Table with Feature, Specification, Application Scenario. This is conflicting. Since the user provided the format example, I should follow that. The Technical Specifications table in the format has Benefit instead of Application Scenario. Maybe the Application Scenario is part of the Scenario Solution Paragraph instead?
Alternatively, perhaps the user intended that the Technical Parameters Table is the same as the Technical Specifications table. Maybe there was a mix-up in terminology. To resolve this, I'll proceed with the format example given, which includes the Technical Specifications table with Feature, Specification, Benefit. The Scenario Solution Paragraph will handle the application scenarios.
Now, moving on. The Technical Specifications table needs to include features from the product attributes and vision details. Let's list them:
- Material: Plastic (maybe specify HDPE as a common type)
- Certification: CE, EPR Germany, EPR France
- Type: Push-in Design
- Durability: High (from vision details)
- Ease of Use: Quick-installation mechanism (from vision details)
- Customization: Multiple styles/sizes (flat, domed heads)
Each of these can be a row. For specifications, the certifications are straightforward. The material's specification could be HDPE, and the benefit is corrosion/weather resistance. The push-in design's specification is the mechanism, benefit is tool-free installation. Durability's specification might be "High-impact resistance" with benefit of long-term use. Customization's specification is "Variety of styles (flat, domed heads) and sizes" with benefit of versatility for different applications.
Next, the Customization Guide. The user wants a hint like "Adjustable XX parameters to meet XX special needs". The vision details mention customization through styles and sizes. So maybe: "Adjustable head styles (flat/domed) and size options to meet specific panel thickness or aesthetic requirements."
Scenario Solution Paragraph needs an example like "Medium thickness fabric..." but here it's automotive. Maybe: "The flat-headed design is ideal for flush mounting on vehicle exteriors, ensuring a seamless appearance, while domed heads provide elevation for trim pieces requiring a raised profile."
Now, the Choose Your Model table. The user wants three versions (Base, Advanced, Pro) compared against industry benchmarks. The example uses parameters like Key Attribute 1 with baseline, +15%, +30%. Since the product is automotive clips, possible parameters could be load capacity, temperature resistance, corrosion resistance, ease of installation, etc.
Assuming the Base Model is standard, Advanced adds some features, Pro is premium. Let's think of parameters:
- Load Capacity: Base might be 100N, Advanced 115N (+15%), Pro 130N (+30%)
- Temperature Resistance: Base -20°C to 60°C, Advanced -30°C to 70°C, Pro -40°C to 80°C
- Corrosion Resistance: Base standard, Advanced enhanced, Pro tripled (as in the example)
- Installation Speed: Maybe Base is standard, Advanced 20% faster, Pro 30% faster
But need to align with the product's attributes. Since material is plastic, maybe temperature resistance is a key factor. Also, certifications might affect the standards they meet.
For the Manager's Note, part 1 requires three technical breakthroughs using features. For example:
- Enhanced corrosion resistance in Pro model (triple industry standard)
- Wider temperature range in Advanced model
- Faster installation mechanism in Base/Advanced/Pro
Part 2 guides users to choose based on applicable crowd. For example:
- Base for standard automotive assembly
- Advanced for harsh environments (cold or heat)
- Pro for high-stress applications needing durability
Also, using the "With X, you can Y" structure. For instance, "With the Pro model's tripled corrosion resistance, you can ensure long-term durability in coastal environments."
Need to ensure comparative hints where applicable, like "20% faster installation than traditional models" if that's a feature.
Putting it all together now, making sure each section follows the format. Let me draft each part step by step.
</think>