Вход на сайт
Help me please!
115
NEW 23.01.06 17:44
С немецкого отправили сюда, помогите, пожалуйста, люди добрые проверьте мои тексты на английском. Тогда я их сюда сразу и вставлю.
Текст 1:
Rule 2:The level of utilization of a non-bottleneck is not determined by ist own potential but by some other constraint in the system
There are four main combinations from X as a bottleneck and Y as a non-bottleneck. They demonstrate that the whole system can be determined only by the bottleneck irrespective of the direction of the flow of parts.
In both cases, no matter whether the X feeding parts to Y or in reverse direction √ the Y feeding parts to X, it is imposrtant to produce so much, how can be sold. Besides you must take into consideration the fact, that X is a bottleneck, i.e. it hasn▓t extra capacity and you need all 100% capacity of the X machine to meet demand.
In the case, if the products should be separate worked on ( one product flows through the bottleneck, the other not) but they should be mated at the end the production prozess into one finisched product it means that we must be orientaded of demand and the bottlenecks capacity.
If Y produced more than can be sold, that means you put up inventory.
And the next case √ if products are produced separate and likewise separate are sold at first glance it looks at we can use the both machines to 100% but by Y we should take into concideration the market demand. So the level of utilization of a non-bottleneck bottleneck is not determined by ist own potential but by some other constraint in the system.
Текст 2:
Rule 3. Activation and utilization of a resource are not synonymous.
It tourned out that another bottlenecks exist in the plant. Alex decided to call Jonah again and after thaht Jonah comes into Alex▓s plant. They look over the plant and the new bottlenekc together.
Jonah explains that it is very inefficient plant, if you keep the worke working all the time. You must try to use your capacity respectively resource so it let you reach the goal as better as posiible. And the goal is √ making money. There is not a prescribed ( vorgeschriebene) number of working hours or a percentage of working time. In Jonah▓s opinion with enough raw materials you could keep one worker busy until its rentirement. But you should ask a gustion allways :■Should I do it?■ And then you get the answer ⌠Now if you want to make money■
Jonah determines ⌠activation■ as pressing the ON switsch of a machine. The fact the running the machine doesn▓t mean that it is useful with regard to your goal.
⌠Utilization■ means you can use the resource and namely in a way which moves the system toward the goal.
If you try to make the work in all the firm▓s field efficient, it can have consequence that each of they may be in order but the total system respectively a plant is very inefficient.
Therefor you must try to turmn the activities of each field to the goal and accordingly to manage they.
Thus the efficient of the total system can be achieved.
It should be took as much as possible advantage of. Because of the fact that in the plant were tryed to use both bottlenecks and non-bottlenecks to the full capacity the additional bottlenecks came into being. They are not the true (real?) bottlenecks but they are created artifically because of wrong decisions.
Neverthelles the flow of parts flows into the bottlenecks the excess inventory come into being what are took for new bottlenecks mistakenly
Текст 1:
Rule 2:The level of utilization of a non-bottleneck is not determined by ist own potential but by some other constraint in the system
There are four main combinations from X as a bottleneck and Y as a non-bottleneck. They demonstrate that the whole system can be determined only by the bottleneck irrespective of the direction of the flow of parts.
In both cases, no matter whether the X feeding parts to Y or in reverse direction √ the Y feeding parts to X, it is imposrtant to produce so much, how can be sold. Besides you must take into consideration the fact, that X is a bottleneck, i.e. it hasn▓t extra capacity and you need all 100% capacity of the X machine to meet demand.
In the case, if the products should be separate worked on ( one product flows through the bottleneck, the other not) but they should be mated at the end the production prozess into one finisched product it means that we must be orientaded of demand and the bottlenecks capacity.
If Y produced more than can be sold, that means you put up inventory.
And the next case √ if products are produced separate and likewise separate are sold at first glance it looks at we can use the both machines to 100% but by Y we should take into concideration the market demand. So the level of utilization of a non-bottleneck bottleneck is not determined by ist own potential but by some other constraint in the system.
Текст 2:
Rule 3. Activation and utilization of a resource are not synonymous.
It tourned out that another bottlenecks exist in the plant. Alex decided to call Jonah again and after thaht Jonah comes into Alex▓s plant. They look over the plant and the new bottlenekc together.
Jonah explains that it is very inefficient plant, if you keep the worke working all the time. You must try to use your capacity respectively resource so it let you reach the goal as better as posiible. And the goal is √ making money. There is not a prescribed ( vorgeschriebene) number of working hours or a percentage of working time. In Jonah▓s opinion with enough raw materials you could keep one worker busy until its rentirement. But you should ask a gustion allways :■Should I do it?■ And then you get the answer ⌠Now if you want to make money■
Jonah determines ⌠activation■ as pressing the ON switsch of a machine. The fact the running the machine doesn▓t mean that it is useful with regard to your goal.
⌠Utilization■ means you can use the resource and namely in a way which moves the system toward the goal.
If you try to make the work in all the firm▓s field efficient, it can have consequence that each of they may be in order but the total system respectively a plant is very inefficient.
Therefor you must try to turmn the activities of each field to the goal and accordingly to manage they.
Thus the efficient of the total system can be achieved.
It should be took as much as possible advantage of. Because of the fact that in the plant were tryed to use both bottlenecks and non-bottlenecks to the full capacity the additional bottlenecks came into being. They are not the true (real?) bottlenecks but they are created artifically because of wrong decisions.
Neverthelles the flow of parts flows into the bottlenecks the excess inventory come into being what are took for new bottlenecks mistakenly
NEW 23.01.06 20:00
в ответ vafr 23.01.06 17:44
Про технические термины не знаю, но с грамматической точки зрения кое-что бросилось в глаза. Кстати, там, где выделено красным, не совсем понятно, что имеется в виду. Как в оригинале было?
Rule 2:The level of utilization of a non-bottleneck is determined not by its own potential but by some other constraint in the system
There are four main combinations of X as a bottleneck and Y as a non-bottleneck. They demonstrate that the whole system can only be determined by the bottleneck irrespective of the direction of the parts flow [???].
In both cases, no matter whether the X feeding parts to Y or in reverse direction √ the Y feeding parts to X, it is important to produce as much [of what?] as can be sold. Besides you must take into consideration the fact that X is a bottleneck, i.e. it doesn't have extra capacity and you need all 100% capacity of the X machine to meet the demand.
In case the products should be worked on separately (one product flows through the bottleneck, the other does not) but mated [???] at the end of the production proсess into a single product, we must be oriented on demand and the bottleneck capacity.
If Y produced more than can be sold, that means you put up inventory.
In the other case √ the products are produced separately and are sold separately as well √ it seems at first glance that we can use both machines to 100% but in case of Y we should take into consideration the market demand. So the level of utilization of a non-bottleneck bottleneck [???] is determined not by its own potential but by some other constraint in the system.
Rule 2:The level of utilization of a non-bottleneck is determined not by its own potential but by some other constraint in the system
There are four main combinations of X as a bottleneck and Y as a non-bottleneck. They demonstrate that the whole system can only be determined by the bottleneck irrespective of the direction of the parts flow [???].
In both cases, no matter whether the X feeding parts to Y or in reverse direction √ the Y feeding parts to X, it is important to produce as much [of what?] as can be sold. Besides you must take into consideration the fact that X is a bottleneck, i.e. it doesn't have extra capacity and you need all 100% capacity of the X machine to meet the demand.
In case the products should be worked on separately (one product flows through the bottleneck, the other does not) but mated [???] at the end of the production proсess into a single product, we must be oriented on demand and the bottleneck capacity.
If Y produced more than can be sold, that means you put up inventory.
In the other case √ the products are produced separately and are sold separately as well √ it seems at first glance that we can use both machines to 100% but in case of Y we should take into consideration the market demand. So the level of utilization of a non-bottleneck bottleneck [???] is determined not by its own potential but by some other constraint in the system.
NEW 23.01.06 20:29
в ответ airet 23.01.06 20:00
no matter whether the X feeding parts to Y or in reverse direction √ the Y feeding parts to X
es spielt keine Rolle, ob Teile von X zu Y fließen oder in umgekehrter Richtung von Y zu X.
If Y produced more than can be sold, that means you put up inventory
Wenn Y produziert mehr als es abgesetzt werden kann, bedeutet dies, dass Bestände aufgebaut werden.
Огромное спасибо. А Вы бы эти предложения,которые вы красным выделили по-другому бы перевели? Если да, то как?
es spielt keine Rolle, ob Teile von X zu Y fließen oder in umgekehrter Richtung von Y zu X.
If Y produced more than can be sold, that means you put up inventory
Wenn Y produziert mehr als es abgesetzt werden kann, bedeutet dies, dass Bestände aufgebaut werden.
Огромное спасибо. А Вы бы эти предложения,которые вы красным выделили по-другому бы перевели? Если да, то как?
NEW 23.01.06 21:09
в ответ vafr 23.01.06 20:29
Тогда я бы так написала
There are four main combinations of X as a bottleneck and Y as a non-bottleneck. They demonstrate that the whole system can only be determined by the bottleneck irrespective of the direction, in which the parts flow.
It doesn't matter whether the parts flow from X to Y or vice versa, in both cases it is important to produce not more than can be sold. Besides you must take into consideration the fact that X is a bottleneck, i.e. it doesn't have extra capacity and you need all 100% capacity of the X machine to meet the demand.
In case the products are worked on separately (one product flows through the bottleneck, the other does not) but at the end of the production proсess combine into a single product, we must be oriented on demand and the bottleneck capacity.
If Y produces more than can be sold it means that the stock is being built up
In the other case √ the products are produced separately and are sold separately as well √ it seems at first glance that we can use both machines to 100% but in case of Y we should take into consideration the market demand. So the level of utilization of a non-bottleneck is determined not by its own potential but by some other constraint in the system.
P.S. Но фраза "produces more than can be sold" остается неправильной, т.к. нет дополнения-подлежащего, которое "can be sold". О каком производстве речь?
There are four main combinations of X as a bottleneck and Y as a non-bottleneck. They demonstrate that the whole system can only be determined by the bottleneck irrespective of the direction, in which the parts flow.
It doesn't matter whether the parts flow from X to Y or vice versa, in both cases it is important to produce not more than can be sold. Besides you must take into consideration the fact that X is a bottleneck, i.e. it doesn't have extra capacity and you need all 100% capacity of the X machine to meet the demand.
In case the products are worked on separately (one product flows through the bottleneck, the other does not) but at the end of the production proсess combine into a single product, we must be oriented on demand and the bottleneck capacity.
If Y produces more than can be sold it means that the stock is being built up
In the other case √ the products are produced separately and are sold separately as well √ it seems at first glance that we can use both machines to 100% but in case of Y we should take into consideration the market demand. So the level of utilization of a non-bottleneck is determined not by its own potential but by some other constraint in the system.
P.S. Но фраза "produces more than can be sold" остается неправильной, т.к. нет дополнения-подлежащего, которое "can be sold". О каком производстве речь?
NEW 23.01.06 21:44
в ответ vafr 23.01.06 20:33
во втором тексте не соблюдено согласование времен, должно быть либо повествование в настоящем, либо в прошедшем времени.
It turns out that other bottlenecks exist in the plant. Alex decides to call Jonah again and Jonah comes to Alex▓s plant. They look over [что делают? осматривают завод ищут bottlenecks?] the plant and the new bottleneck [один или много?] together.
Jonah explains that it is very inefficient to keep the plant working all the time. You must try to use your capacity respectively resource [???] to achieve the goal most effectively. And the goal is to make money. There is no specific number of working hours or a percentage of working time. In Jonah▓s opinion, with enough raw materials you could keep workers busy till their retirement. But you should always ask a question: ■Should I do it?■ And then you get the answer ⌠Now [смысл?]if you want to make money■
Jonah defines ⌠activation■ as pressing the ON switch of a machine. The fact the machine is running doesn▓t mean that it is useful with regard to your goal.
⌠Utilization■ means you can use the resource in a way that moves the system towards the goal.
If you try to make the work in every field of the firm efficient, it may have the consequence that each separate field is in order but the total system of the plant is very inefficient.
Therefore you must try to direct the activities of each field towards the goal and manage them accordingly.
In this way the efficiency of the total system can be achieved.
You should take full advantage of it. Because both bottlenecks and non-bottlenecks were used to their full capacity, additional bottlenecks came into being. They are not the true (real?) [original?] bottlenecks but they were created artificially because of wrong decisions.
Nevertheless the flow of parts flows into the bottlenecks the excess inventory come into being what are took for new bottlenecks mistakenly [???]
It turns out that other bottlenecks exist in the plant. Alex decides to call Jonah again and Jonah comes to Alex▓s plant. They look over [что делают? осматривают завод ищут bottlenecks?] the plant and the new bottleneck [один или много?] together.
Jonah explains that it is very inefficient to keep the plant working all the time. You must try to use your capacity respectively resource [???] to achieve the goal most effectively. And the goal is to make money. There is no specific number of working hours or a percentage of working time. In Jonah▓s opinion, with enough raw materials you could keep workers busy till their retirement. But you should always ask a question: ■Should I do it?■ And then you get the answer ⌠Now [смысл?]if you want to make money■
Jonah defines ⌠activation■ as pressing the ON switch of a machine. The fact the machine is running doesn▓t mean that it is useful with regard to your goal.
⌠Utilization■ means you can use the resource in a way that moves the system towards the goal.
If you try to make the work in every field of the firm efficient, it may have the consequence that each separate field is in order but the total system of the plant is very inefficient.
Therefore you must try to direct the activities of each field towards the goal and manage them accordingly.
In this way the efficiency of the total system can be achieved.
You should take full advantage of it. Because both bottlenecks and non-bottlenecks were used to their full capacity, additional bottlenecks came into being. They are not the true (real?) [original?] bottlenecks but they were created artificially because of wrong decisions.
Nevertheless the flow of parts flows into the bottlenecks the excess inventory come into being what are took for new bottlenecks mistakenly [???]
NEW 23.01.06 22:08
в ответ airet 23.01.06 21:44
They look over [что делают? осматривают завод ищут bottlenecks?] the plant and the new bottleneck [один или много?] together
Sie besichtigen zusammeen die Fabrik und schauen sich die neuen Engpässe an.
to use your capacity respectively resource [???]
Kapazitäten bzw. Ressourcen benutzen
Now [смысл?]
Not if you want to make money. Sorry, das war ein Tippfehler von mir.
the true (real?) [original?] bottlenecks
der wahre Engpass, der richtige im Sinne, dass es ihn gar nicht gibt. Es ist nämlich kein Engpass.
Nevertheless the flow of parts flows into the bottlenecks the excess inventory come into being what are took for new bottlenecks mistakenly [???]
weil der materialfluss dennoch durch den Engpass fließt, enstehen überflüssige Bestände vor den Nicht-Engpässen. Und diese Maschinen würden irrtümlicherweise für Engpässe gehalten.
Sie besichtigen zusammeen die Fabrik und schauen sich die neuen Engpässe an.
to use your capacity respectively resource [???]
Kapazitäten bzw. Ressourcen benutzen
Now [смысл?]
Not if you want to make money. Sorry, das war ein Tippfehler von mir.
the true (real?) [original?] bottlenecks
der wahre Engpass, der richtige im Sinne, dass es ihn gar nicht gibt. Es ist nämlich kein Engpass.
Nevertheless the flow of parts flows into the bottlenecks the excess inventory come into being what are took for new bottlenecks mistakenly [???]
weil der materialfluss dennoch durch den Engpass fließt, enstehen überflüssige Bestände vor den Nicht-Engpässen. Und diese Maschinen würden irrtümlicherweise für Engpässe gehalten.
NEW 24.01.06 10:09
в ответ airet 23.01.06 23:37
Огромное Вам спасибо! Так дотошно разобрали каждое предложение, еще раз спасибо
.
Боюсь показаться наглой, но у меня есть еще один важный текст.
Даже не смею ВАс просить, может быть просто глазами пробежать и просто сказать ( не исправлять) где мои ошибки.
Rule 7.
There are 2 different view points with regard to batch size
The batch size can be infinite or consist of one unit. Thus we have two different batch: the process batch and the transfer batch.
The process batch support the point of view that the batch is invinity. The process batch is the quantity of units on which can be worked until the lenght of time. The setup time is the time part spends waiting for a resource until the resource prepare itself for the working on this part.
The processing run time is the time the part spends being modified into a new, more valuable form. The part will be processed.
From the point of the view of a resource it can be advantageously to produce a small or a large batch.
If the resource is a bottleneck than larger batch sizes are desirable. Because this means that the production process runs continuously and it can be generated more output.
For non-bottleneck the smaller batch size means reducing the time the part spends in the plant. Thereby the total lead time is shorter and this leads to reducing of work-in-inventory.
On the one hand that has a positive effect on the financial situation √ not so much money in inventory and on the other hand that positive influences on the timem the part spends in the plant. Thereby can be get an marketplace advantage. And all this has a positive effect again on th sales. They increase.
The transfer batch is the amount of parts will be moved to the next workstation.
Thereby if you make the transfer batch▓s and the process batch▓s sizes different, you can get an advantage namely in the total lead time.
If the process batch and the transfer batch are equal then the batch can be moved to the next workstation just after the producing the process batch and in this case it requires much time. If, on the contrary, the process batches larger then the transfer batch the smaller number of parts can be moved and this means √ reducing the total lead time.
Rule 8 . If you make your process batch variable so you can get an advantage in the total lead time. Then it is possible to cut the batch size. Thus you can reduce the queue time because we must not often setup. This time is very important for bottleneck▓s parts because they are going to wait fot the resource until it is working on other parts. Besides the wait time can be reduced (time the parts spends waiting for other parts to be assembled together).
All this leads to reducing the total lead time. And this can again improve the firm position on the market.
. Боюсь показаться наглой, но у меня есть еще один важный текст.
Даже не смею ВАс просить, может быть просто глазами пробежать и просто сказать ( не исправлять) где мои ошибки.
Rule 7.
There are 2 different view points with regard to batch size
The batch size can be infinite or consist of one unit. Thus we have two different batch: the process batch and the transfer batch.
The process batch support the point of view that the batch is invinity. The process batch is the quantity of units on which can be worked until the lenght of time. The setup time is the time part spends waiting for a resource until the resource prepare itself for the working on this part.
The processing run time is the time the part spends being modified into a new, more valuable form. The part will be processed.
From the point of the view of a resource it can be advantageously to produce a small or a large batch.
If the resource is a bottleneck than larger batch sizes are desirable. Because this means that the production process runs continuously and it can be generated more output.
For non-bottleneck the smaller batch size means reducing the time the part spends in the plant. Thereby the total lead time is shorter and this leads to reducing of work-in-inventory.
On the one hand that has a positive effect on the financial situation √ not so much money in inventory and on the other hand that positive influences on the timem the part spends in the plant. Thereby can be get an marketplace advantage. And all this has a positive effect again on th sales. They increase.
The transfer batch is the amount of parts will be moved to the next workstation.
Thereby if you make the transfer batch▓s and the process batch▓s sizes different, you can get an advantage namely in the total lead time.
If the process batch and the transfer batch are equal then the batch can be moved to the next workstation just after the producing the process batch and in this case it requires much time. If, on the contrary, the process batches larger then the transfer batch the smaller number of parts can be moved and this means √ reducing the total lead time.
Rule 8 . If you make your process batch variable so you can get an advantage in the total lead time. Then it is possible to cut the batch size. Thus you can reduce the queue time because we must not often setup. This time is very important for bottleneck▓s parts because they are going to wait fot the resource until it is working on other parts. Besides the wait time can be reduced (time the parts spends waiting for other parts to be assembled together).
All this leads to reducing the total lead time. And this can again improve the firm position on the market.
спасибо конечно, но я имела в виду, что ich die Klausur geschrieben habe а результаты еще незнаю. Но надеюсь что сдала. Так вроде все ответила.