wie gehen wir nun mit dem Thema wei

wie gehen wir nun mit dem Thema weiter um?

Hans, die 4. Aussage von Herrn Fessel irritiert mich etwas:
- „Die Zielschädigung liegt beim D4-Führungslenker bei 2.800 und im Q5 bei 2.900.“  Bedeutet für mich dass Q5NF eine höhere Schädigung hat
- „Die Spitzenkräfte stiegen jedoch leicht von -36kN/+16kN auf -40kN/+14kN.“  Wieso JEDOCH?! Höhere Schädigung UND höhere Spitzenkräfte…
Wie ist die Steigung der Zielschädigung von 2800 auf 2900 zu bewerten? Ist das viel?! Habe ich kein Gefühl für…

Habt Ihr euch einmal den Bericht von Herrn Fessel aus der früheren Email angeschaut? Seht Ihr noch Ansätze, warum 2 Gelenke i.O. und 2 Gelenke n.i.O. sind?

Wir müssen hier nun relativ zügig festlegen wie wir weitermachen, da Audi die B-Freigabe erteilen will/muss und unser Gelenk dafür funktionieren muss.

結果 (英文) 1:

How do we now continue with the topic?Hans, 4. statement by Mr. cuff irritates me somewhat: -"Damage to the target is located at the D4-Guide bar at 2,800 and the Q5 with 2.900."  means for me that Q5NF has a higher injury -"The figures but rose from 36kN / + 16kN on 40kN / + 14kN."  why HOWEVER? Higher injury AND higher figures.How is the slope of the target damage from 2800 to 2900 to evaluate? Is that a lot? I have no feeling for...Do you have you once the report viewed by Mr cuff from the earlier email? See more approaches, why are 2 joints i.O. and 2 joints n.i.O.?We must here now relatively quickly determine how we proceed because Audi wants to give the B share / needs and our joint this must work.

結果 (英文) 2:

as we now go with the subject to continue?

Hans, the 4th to Mr Fessel irritates me a little:
- "The aim of damage lies with the D4-guide link at 2,800 and the Q5 at 2.900."  Means for me that Q5NF a higher injury has
- "However, the top executives rose slightly from -36kN / + 16kN on -40kN / + 14kN."  Why HOWEVER ?! Higher damage AND higher peak powers ...
What is the slope of the target of 2800 damage 2900 to evaluate? Is that much?! I have no sense of ...

Have you even looked at you the report by Mr pastern from the previous email? You see even approaches why 2 joints OK and not OK 2 joints are?

We must now define relatively expeditiously as we go on, because Audi wants to give the B-share / must and has to work our joint it.

結果 (英文) 3:

how do we go with the topic?hans, 4. statement by mr frog irritates me.the zielschädigung lies with the d4 führungslenker at 2800 and 2900 q5 in. " for me means that q5nf higher damage to has"people have increased slightly from - 36kn / + 16kn - 40kn / + 14kn."  why, however? . higher injury and higher achievers...what is the slope of the zielschädigung of 2800 to 2900 to evaluate? is it a lot? ! i have no sense of...did you ever the report by mr frog from the previous email look at it? you see more approaches, why two joints. and two joints n.i.o.?we must now define relatively quickly as we proceed, audi b release to give to our joint work for / to.