I have a matrix between Products and Enablers, where the intersection between the two represents a point in time.
Product list
Enabler 1
Enabler 2
Enabler 3
Product 1
10-Oct
11-Oct
20-Oct
Product 2
20-Nov
25-Nov
01-Dec
Product 3
10-Oct
21-Oct
25-Oct
I need to turn this into a 'timeline' view so visually there are two ways to see the data, where the dates are across the top and based on the timing in the first table, it returns the corresponding 'Enabler' at the correct date...something like
Product list
10-Oct
11-Oct
12-Oct
Product 1
Enabler 1
Enabler 2
Product 2
Product 3
Enabler 1
Does anyone have any ideas how I'd do this? I think it requires an INDEX MATCH array formula as it needs to look across the matrix to find the date in that row, then return what is in the header column...but this isn't my area of expertise and I just can't seem to figure out how to make it work.
One approach might be to return this as an array. You could do:
=IF( ( Table1[[Enabler 1]:[Enabler 3]] = B7:D7 ) * ( Table1[Product list] = A8:A10),
Table1[[#Headers],[Enabler 1]:[Enabler 3]],
"" )
where Table1 is an Excel Table that holds your Product List and Enablers as columns (as shown in your first table); A8:A10 is the list of products in your second table; and B7:D7 is the list of dates in your second table shown as column headers. The formula would be placed in the upper left cell of your second table - in my example, B8 as shown here:
The result will spill into the second table.
If you wanted your second table to be an Excel Table, the approach
would be different as arrays cannot spill into Excel Tables.
Related
I have a range of cells in excel. How to increment numbers when meeting data validation from three different columns?
I tried using formula COUNTIF($A$2:A2,A2) which creates a number sequence. But I have other data to validate from another column for it to return the correct number sequence.
First validation: count the emp no in column range A1:A5 which return a result under Hierarchy column.
Second validation: check the % value under column L as per below level of hierarchy in which the problem comes from.
1 - 0.25
2 - 0.25
3 - 0.5
4 - 0.5
5 - 1
Third validation: check the type of Relation (see Relation column) that needs to check when returning number of sequence too. Below is the Relation Level table.
I don't know on how to join these three conditions for the result to be as below.
My really problem here is on how will i get a sequence number if a person does have 3 children and should be tagged as 2,3,4 (next to spouse which is 1) then the next relation which is parent will be tagged then as next number sequence from the last count of child wherein will be 5 given that as per relation table, Parent level is 3 but it will be adjusted as per count of relations a person has. And for this specific instance, if Parent count will be 5, it still should have 0.5 EE % (see relation table level vs % hierarchy level) even though the count of number is 5. I hope this will make sense. But let me know if you have any questions.
Hope someone could help me on this coz I am not that expert when it comes to excel formula. Thank you!
Suppose I have a couple of tables:
fTransactions
Index ProdID RepID Revenue
1 1 1 10
2 1 1 20
3 2 2 30
4 2 2 10
dSalesReps
RepID RepName CC1 CCC2
1 joe 40 70
2 sue 30 70
3 bob 70
CC1 contains a calculated column with:
CALCULATE(SUM(fTransactions[Revenue]))
It's my understanding that it's taking the row context and changing to filter context to filter the fTransaction table down to the RepID and summing. Makes sense per an sqlbi article on the subject:
"because the filter context containing the current product is automatically propagated to sales due to the relationship between the two tables"
CC2 contains a calculated column with:
SUMX(fTransactions, CALCULATE(SUM(fTransactions[Revenue]))
However, this one puts the same value in all the columns and doesn't seem to propagate the RepID like the other example. The same sqlbi article mentions that a filter is made on the entire fTransactions row. My question is why does it do that here and not the other example, and what happened to the propagation of RepID?
"CALCULATE places a filter on all the columns of the table to identify a single row, not on its row number"
A calculated column is created in a loop: power pivot goes row by row and calculates the results. CALCULATE converts each row into a filter context (context transition).
In the second formula, however, you have 2 loops, not one:
First, it loops dSalesReps table (because that's where you are creating the column);
Second, it loops fTransactions table, because you are using SUMX function, which is an iterator.
CALCULATE function is used only in the second loop, forcing context transition for each row in fTransactions table. But there is no CALCULATE that can force context transition for the rows in the dSalesReps. Hence, there is no filtering by Sale Reps.
Fixing the problem is easy: just wrap the second formula in CALCULATE. Better yet, drop the second CALCULATE - it's not necessary and makes the formula slow:
CCC2 =
CALCULATE(
SUMX(fTransactions, SUM(fTransactions[Revenue]))
)
This formula is essentially identical to the first one (the first formula in the background translates to the second one, SUM function is just a syntax sugar for SUMX).
You could also write the formula as:
CC2 = SUMX( RELATEDTABLE( fTransactions ), fTransactions[Revenue] )
or
CC2 = SUMX( CALCULATETABLE( fTransactions ), fTransactions[Revenue] )
The key is that fTransactions as the first argument of SUMX needs to be filtered for each SalesRep (i.e. on the current row). Without the filter then you are just iterating the entire fTransactions table for each SalesRep. Somehow SUMX needs to know you just want the fTransactions for the SalesRep whose revenue you are trying to compute.
I'm a Boy Scout Assistant Scout Master and was asked to help with a fundraiser so I'm trying to put together a Excel sheet. I would like to use sumproduct to pull together the totals I need from two tables. My result would be in B3 in referenced pic.
Math:
(C7 * B18) + (C14 * B19)
or
(.19672 * 300)+(1 * 200)
Result of 259.02
Need
Table 2 Dist Hours
Table 3 Total
From
Table 1 Name = $A$3
Table 1 Name = Table 2 Name
Table 2 ID = Table 3 ID
I hope someone can help our Boy Scout Troop (me)
Try the following formula, which needs to be confirmed with CONTROL+SHIFT+ENTER, not just ENTER...
=SUM(IF(B7:B14=A3,SUMIF(A18:A19,A7:A14,B18:B19)*(C7:C14)))
Adjust the ranges accordingly.
For a finite (and static) number of entries in table 3 this method of stacking error controlled lookups should produce the correct result for any name put into table 1.
=IFERROR(INDEX(C7:C14, AGGREGATE(15, 7, ROW($1:$8)/((A7:A14=A18)*(B7:B14=A3)), 1))*B18, 0)+
IFERROR(INDEX(C7:C14, AGGREGATE(15, 7, ROW($1:$8)/((A7:A14=A19)*(B7:B14=A3)), 1))*B19, 0)
I have a requirement to form a permutation data from the given set of values in excel sheet. Below are the details.
Let us say there are 5 columns and each column has some rows of data as below in input excel sheet.
Column 1 - 2 values(ind,us)
column 2 -1 value (a1)
Column 3= 3 value(cat,dog,cow)
column 4= 4 value(1,2,3,4)
Column 5= 1 value(d)
The output excel has to be on below format.
ind,a1,cat,1,d
ind,a1,cat,2,d
ind,a1,cat,3,d
ind,a1,cat,4,d
ind,a1,dog,1,d
ind,a1,dog,2,d
ind,a1,dog,3,d
ind,a1,dog,4,d
ind,a1,cow,1,d
ind,a1,cow,2,d
ind,a1,cow,3,d
ind,a1,cow,4,d
us,a1,cat,1,d
us,a1,cat,2,d
us,a1,cat,3,d
us,a1,cat,4,d
us,a1,dog,1,d
us,a1,dog,2,d
us,a1,dog,3,d
us,a1,dog,4,d
us,a1,cow,1,d
us,a1,cow,2,d
us,a1,cow,3,d
us,a1,cow,4,d
please note the rows and column count are not constant.
Request all to give some thoughts to implement.
Thanks,
Rakesh
See this question for ways to get (all) combinations of elements with specified values for each slot. Just feed your data as an array of arrays to the Permute function or the .init method.
I'd like to accomplish the following task. There are three columns of data. Column A represents price, where the sum needs to be kept under $100,000. Column B represents a value. Column C represents a name tied to columns A & B.
Out of >100 rows of data, I need to find the highest 8 values in column B while keeping the sum of the prices in column A under $100,000. And then return the 8 names from column C.
Can this be accomplished?
EDIT:
I attempted the Solver solution w/ no luck. 200 rows looks to be the max w/ Solver, and that is what I'm using now. Here are the steps I've taken:
Create a column called rank RANK(B2,$B$2:$B$200) (used column D -- what is the purpose of this?)
Create a column called flag just put in zeroes (used column E)
Create 3 total cells total_price (=SUM(A2:A200)), total_value (=SUM(B2:B200)) and total_flag (=(E2:E200))
Use solver to minimize total_value (shouldn't this be maximize??)
Add constraints -Total_price<=100000 -Total_flag=8 -Flag cells are binary
Using Simplex LP, it simply changes the flags for the first 8 values. However, the total price for the first 8 values is >$100,000 ($140k). I've tried changing some options in the Solver Parameters as well as using different solving methods to no avail. I'd like to post an image of the parameter settings, but don't have enough "reputation".
EDIT #2:
The first 5 rows looks like this, price goes down to ~$6k at the bottom of the table.
Price Value Name Rank Flag
$22,538 42.81905675 Blow, Joe 1 0
$22,427 37.36240932 Doe, Jane 2 0
$17,158 34.12127693 Hall, Cliff 3 0
$16,625 33.97654031 Povich, John 4 0
$15,631 33.58212402 Cow, Holy 5 0
I'll give you the solver solution as a starting point. It involves the creation of some extra columns and total cells. Note solver is limited in the amount of cells it can handle but will work with 100 anyway.
Create a column called rank RANK(B2,$B$2:$B$100)
Create a column called flag just put in zeroes
Create 3 total cells total_price, total_value and total_flag
Use solver to minimize total_value
Add constraints
-Total_price<=100000
-Total_flag=8
-Flag cells are binary
This will flag the rows you want and you can grab the names however you want.