warren (asker) Aug 25, 2009:

Feedback with regard to this question, I offered the answers from Gillian & Bern for the translation of this word, the company chose Gillian’s answer. As I said, in this case this answer is more understandable, the target group are non native speakers.

warren (asker) Aug 15, 2009:

agreeable note It would be nice to end this on a more agreeable note. At the moment I am travelling and have minimum access to the internet. All I can say is I really appreciate the assistance and expertise I receive through this forum, as I am relatively new to the arena of translation it is tremendously helpful. Have a lovely day.

warren (asker) Aug 9, 2009:

@Gillian & Marga, I would like to ask your opinion, do you think using “no rusting under the paint coating on the scratch track” to translate “Kein Anstrichunterrostung an der Ritzspur” is a deviation to certain jargon people are anticipating when reading this test result?

warren (asker) Aug 9, 2009:

Just to make it clear to anyone reading this, on my entry at 01:04 I originally wrote, “no rusting under the coat of paint on the scratch track” instead of “no rusting under the paint coating on the scratch track”.

warren (asker) Aug 9, 2009:

Well in the first place it was paint coating and not coat of paint – sorry – but don’t suppose that will make any difference as to how you see it. I don’t venture to know what people anticipate but would be interested to hear some other opinions.

Bernd Runge Aug 8, 2009:

Well we are not talking about explaining a standard test procedure and the way the results are described: why don't you go ahead and "compare-google" “no rusting under the coat of paint on the scratch track” and “no rust creep from scribe”. People are anticipating a certain jargon when reading the test results. Deviation or non-compliance will immediately indicate the non-expert translator.

warren (asker) Aug 8, 2009:

Hi Bernd, I can give you two comprehensible reasons why I chose Gillian’s answer in this case. In the first place it fits with the existing literature and the second is when I look at the picture which is being explained, Gillian’s answer explains it in a simple manner. So in other words, in my opinion with respect to this picture, “no rusting under the paint coating on the scratch track” is more understandable than, “no rust creep from scribe”. I hope this explanation is helpful, believe me, I do appreciate your expert feedback.

Bernd Runge Aug 8, 2009:

As I'm always striving to improve my translational skills: Would you please give me 2-3 comprehensible reasons why you chose Gillian's answer.

warren (asker) Aug 6, 2009:

OK, so the use of the word penetration is wrong because this is about what is going on under the surface, nothing to do with penetration.! And the 1300 "h" obiously stands for hours, but I really wasn't sure about that to be honest. Thanks Bernd.

Bernd Runge Aug 6, 2009:

penetration Ich würde immer an eine Wirkrichtung senkrecht zur Oberfläche denken - ist hier aber nicht gefragt. Hier geht es um die seitliche Ausbreitung des Rostes von der Ritzspur aus.

Bernd Runge Aug 6, 2009:

Sounds familiar? Well, I do see a significant difference ;-)<br>Ich glaube, dass es hier um eine Prüfung wie in ASTM B117 geht - und da wird eindeutig der Sachverhalt in der Bewertung "No rust creep from scribe following 1300hrs of XY" wiedergegeben.

warren (asker) Aug 6, 2009:

What about my initial... What about my initial "rust penetration beneath coat of paint"!? It sounds fairly similar to these answers. Or is there any technical element which I am missing – as in for example my using penetration compared to under? Also, I do have more content regarding the overall area:

Einsatzgebiet: Besonders geeignet für die Lackierung vn Land- und
Baumaschinen, Kfz-Zulieferbranche, Stahlmöble, Maschinen-
Und Anlagenbau, Gehäuse, Verkleidungen, Metallwaren,
Gartengeräte, Beschilderungen, Automatenbau, u.v.m.

Untergrund: Stahl, Aluminium, Zink (bei NE-Metallen Haftungsprüfung
Durchführen)