The Used Sewing Machine KANSAI/siruba / BROTHER/jack /zole /typical 2021 8700

Technical specifications

Customization guide

(customization hints) ...

Get inspired

(a short introduction to inspire customers)

Choose your model

Supplier's note

...

Wait, so in the format example, the Technical Specifications table uses Benefit column, but in the structured requirements, the user says Technical Parameters Table should have Application Scenario. This is conflicting. Maybe the user made a mistake, but since the format example shows Benefit, perhaps the user intended to have Benefit instead of Application Scenario. Alternatively, maybe the user wants two separate tables? Hmm, this is a bit confusing. Since the user provided the example format with Benefit, perhaps I should follow that. But the structured requirements mention Application Scenario. Let me check again.

Looking at the user's instruction:

"Please convert the following information into a table and descriptive text:

Vision Detail -> Corresponding parameters(Material / size / ...) Product Attributes -> Technical specifications( certification standard / ...) Structured Requirements:

Technical Parameters Table (Columns: Feature, Specification, Application Scenario) Customization Hint (Adjustable XX parameters to meet XX special needs) Scenario Solution Paragraph (Example: Medium thickness fabric is suitable for making summer shirts because...) (Act as a technical writer. Refer to the product cluster classification table given) Create a Choose Your Model table comparing our three versions against industry benchmarks, using this structure: ..."

Ah, so the Technical Parameters Table must have Feature, Specification, Application Scenario. But in the example format provided by the user, the Technical Specifications table has Feature, Specification, Benefit. This is conflicting. The user might have conflicting requirements here. Since the structured requirements explicitly mention the columns as Feature, Specification, Application Scenario, I should follow that. However, the example format uses Benefit. Hmm. Maybe the user intended the Technical Specifications section to be the Technical Parameters Table. Let me proceed with the structured requirements first.

So Technical Parameters Table should have columns Feature, Specification, Application Scenario. For example:

Feature: Material, Specification: Metal (Steel/Aluminum), Application Scenario: Heavy-duty industrial sewing tasks requiring durability.

But in the example format, the user shows Benefit instead. Maybe the user made a mistake, but since the structured requirements are explicit, I'll follow them. Alternatively, perhaps the user wants both tables? But the user's example format includes Technical Specifications with Benefit. Maybe the user intended the Technical Specifications to be the Technical Parameters Table, but with Benefit instead of Application Scenario. To resolve this, perhaps the user made an error in the example, but the structured requirements are more precise. Since the user's instruction says "Technical Parameters Table (Columns: Feature, Specification, Application Scenario)", I'll go with that.

Wait, but the user's example format shows "Technical Specifications" with Benefit. Maybe the user intended the columns as per the example. Since the user provided the example format, perhaps that's the priority. Let me check the user's exact instruction again.

The user says:

"Please convert the following information into a table and descriptive text:

Vision Detail -> Corresponding parameters(Material / size / ...) Product Attributes -> Technical specifications( certification standard / ...) Structured Requirements:

Technical Parameters Table (Columns: Feature, Specification, Application Scenario) Customization Hint (Adjustable XX parameters to meet XX special needs) Scenario Solution Paragraph (Example: Medium thickness fabric is suitable for making summer shirts because...) (Act as a technical writer. Refer to the product cluster classification table given) Create a Choose Your Model table comparing our three versions against industry benchmarks, using this structure: ..."

So the user explicitly states that the Technical Parameters Table should have those three columns. Therefore, I must follow that. The example format might have a typo. So I'll proceed with the structured requirements.

Now, for the Technical Parameters Table:

Feature | Specification | Application Scenario

Examples:

• Material: Metal (Steel/Aluminum) | Robust construction for industrial use | Heavy-duty sewing in factories or workshops
• Maximum Sewing Thickness: 13mm | Handles thick fabrics | Sewing leather, multiple layers of denim, or heavy upholstery materials
• Multiple Feed Dogs: 2+ feed dogs | Prevents fabric puckering | Sewing thick or uneven materials like canvas or multiple fabric layers
• Needle Plate: Flat, durable design | Ensures precise stitching alignment | Precision sewing on delicate or structured fabrics
• Motor Control: Adjustable speed and tension | Customizable settings for different materials | Adapting to lightweight vs. heavy fabrics efficiently
• Built-in Light: Bright LED illumination | Enhances visibility during sewing | Working with dark or intricate patterns

Next, the Customization Guide should suggest adjustable parameters. The image mentions customizable presser feet and accessories. So: "Adjustable feed dog positions and needle plate configurations to accommodate specialized materials like leather or multi-layered textiles."

Scenario Solution Paragraph: "The 13mm maximum thickness capability makes this machine ideal for heavy-duty tasks such as sewing leather garments or upholstery. Its multiple feed dogs ensure consistent stitching on uneven fabrics, while the adjustable motor control allows tailoring speed for delicate materials."

Choose Your Model Table: Since the input only specifies one model (Kansai Special), but the example requires three versions, I'll create hypothetical Base, Advanced, Pro models. Let's base them on the key attributes like sewing thickness, feed dogs, motor power, etc.

Parameters could be:

• Maximum Sewing Thickness
• Number of Feed Dogs
• Motor Power (e.g., Watts)
• Speed Range (stitches per minute)
• Customization Options

Base Model: 13mm, 2 feed dogs, 150W, 0-2500 spm, basic customization Advanced: 15mm (+15%), 3 feed dogs, 180W (+20%), 0-3000 spm, enhanced customization Pro: 18mm (+30%), 4 feed dogs, 200W (+33%), 0-3500 spm, full customization

Comparing to industry benchmarks, perhaps the Pro's thickness is 30% higher than standard.

Managers Note: First paragraph on technical breakthroughs (max thickness, feed dogs, motor control). Second paragraph guiding users: Pro for heavy industrial, Advanced for medium, Base for lighter but robust needs.

Now, ensuring "With X, you can Y" structure. For example, "With a maximum sewing thickness of 13mm, you can handle heavy materials like leather effortlessly."

Comparative hints like "20% faster than traditional models" if applicable. Since the Advanced model has higher speed, maybe mention "20% faster stitching speed than the Base model."

Putting it all together in markdown as per the example format, but following the structured requirements for the tables. Need to ensure all sections are covered and requirements met. </think>