I am working on a spreadsheet for planning road improvements, there are two aspects. Resurfacing and Surface Dressing these are interdependent values as you can see in the example below. However there is no scenario where both numbers can exceed 100 and I was hoping of finding a way of displaying total percentages of resurfacing and surface dressing in one cell. Ideally with resurfacing on the left of the cell and surface dressing on the right.
Currently I am using conditional formatting on each cell, I know I can store two values in one cell but it doesn't seem possible to use conditional formatting on these cells.
Any Ideas how this can be achieved? Would be much appreciated
I'm not sure which values are which, but combining two results into one cell can be done like this:
="A438 "&A4&" "&A5
and you could replace the A438 with a cell reference :
=A2&" "&A4&" "&A5
Related
I've read this forum for many Excel-related issues over the past 3-4 years, always finding answers when needed... but this time, I'm stumped.
I'm trying to use Conditional Formatting based on a formula to highlight values that are out out of range based on a cell that is a defined distance away. Specifically, the cell I will be attempting to format will be 8 cells to the right of the reference cell. (e.g., comparing R13 to J13, where J13 is the reference value). So the "Lower Spec Limit" is automatically generated from column J to Q, and the user inputs results in columns R to Y.
I would like to accomplish this without having 8 formulas, but so far I have been unable to figure out the right combination of AND/OR statements that will allow me to apply a single formula from row R to Y, where R>J, S>K, T>L, etc. are the conditions to be met.
In a nutshell, the formula I was using was basically:
=OR($R13>$J13,$S13>$K13,$T13>$L13)
Within the Conditional Formatting line. Of course, I then realized that this would format the entire affected range when any condition was met. I also tried to consider whether there was even data in the cell yet, but that got to be a messy way to highlight the entire range again anyway.
From other entries on this site, I've found that I need to:
Avoid INDIRECT references (can be unstable)
Potentially use OFFSET (although I'm unfamiliar within Excel formulas, only used in VBA in the past)
There will be other users for this spreadsheet, so that will have to be a condition.
Is this a feasible task, or would I be better off to have the 8 formulas (which will be 16 if I highlight based on "pass" and "fail" criteria)?
Thank you for your help!
Microsoft is about to release a new "Spill" feature for Excel. At time of post, this not available in the current version, but insiders can use it.
Is there an "easy" (non-vba or conditional formatting) method to dynamically format the spilled range? Example (as shown in this file) is if a user changed a cell, which drives a spill range, is it possible that spilled range could hold certain formatting? Additionally, if the list shortened, I would want the formatting to resort to blank cell formatting.
In the example, I'm trying to use a certain gray format (the Style of output cell ) for the list. If you tinker around you can see the good/bad results.
I realize that Pivot Tables may be the better approach, I'm just more curious from a learning perspective if there's something I'm overlooking.
I use conditional formatting to do this. I just have a rule of "does not contain a blank" that applies to the whole column or my desired range. I also like to have banded rows, so I use a rule above that rule that just has the background the chosen banded color when this formula is satisfied:
=IF(MOD(ROW(),2)=1,TRUE)
Joe
Consider the following data:
I would like to compare each cell in row 1 to the adjacent cell below in row 2, using red for inequality and green for equality. A similar principle applies for rows 3 and 4. I.e., the output should be
The data I have in reality have more rows and columns than in this toy example, so the less manual work that has to be done, the better. The data I have are small enough that I would be fine pointing and clicking for results. I've tried using Conditional Formatting for this, but haven't been able to figure out its formulas.
I would prefer a non-VBA solution if possible.
I don't necessarily need the provided solution to be general, as long as it's clear to me how it can be generalized. I.e., it needs to be obvious how to adjust the solution when the data start at a different row or column, other than cell A1.
The following formula will format all pairs of nonequal cells:
=OFFSET(A1,1-2*MOD(ROW()+1,2),0)<>A1
Create a second rule with <> replaced with = to format the equal cells.
Fill all the cells red then use this rule to turn them Green
=AND(A1<>"",OR(AND(MOD(ROW(A1)-1,2)=0,A1=A2),AND(MOD(ROW(A1)-1,2)=1,A1=INDEX(A:A,ROW(A1)-1))))
I'm trying to make a formula that will color code three cells that are directly above/below each other. The color coding depends on the sum of three other cells that are directly above/below each other, and directly across from the cells to be colored.
This part is easy. The rule is:
Forumula: =SUM(H5:H7)>30
And it applies to:
$E$5:$E$7
However, the issue is that when I copy the cells that are being colored (E's) to three more cells below them for the next batch, the relative formula does not work as expected. It applies the formula on H6:H8 (+1) instead of H8:H10 (+3).
Is there a way to get the relativeformula to work as expected? I hope this was clear enough. I know it's hard to visual a spreadsheet, but ultimately I need the relative forumla to add +3 instead of +1 when it is copied.
Problem:
If I correctly understand, what you are trying to achieve is to have the range E5:E7 formatted strictly based upon H5:H7, then the next three-cell range - E8:E10 - based upon H8:H10 and so on. You can do this by implementing the below solution:
Solution:
Step 1: Setup Columns as Below
Step 2: Implement Conditional Formatting as Below
Explanation:
I have recreated your issue and I see your problem; it was not that obvious until I played around with changing values of different cells in Column H.
Apparently, this has to do with how Excel interprets your instructions (formula) supplied under conditional formatting. To understand this let's first focus on the behavior of cells E5, E6 and E7 as a function of values in Column H.
With the formula =SUM(H5:H7)>30 did you notice that:
E5 format depends upon =SUM(H5:H7),
E6 format depends upon =SUM(H6:H8), and
E7 format depends upon =SUM(H7:H9) and
when you copy the range E5:E7 three cells down into E8:E10, the expected behavior is:
E8 format depends upon =SUM(H8:H10),
E9 format depends upon =SUM(H9:H11), and
E10 format depends upon =SUM(H10:H12)
And this is exactly how the range E8:E10 will behave once the above solution is applied.
A partial answer to your question has to do with your relative formula - =SUM(H5:H7) - under conditional formatting. Using this formula causes $E$5 to use =SUM(H5:H7) to determine its formatting, $E$6 to use =SUM(H6:H8) to determine its formatting, and so on. This ultimately leads to issues with the conditional formatting even before you begin copying the cells down.
EDIT: (piggy-backing off #Bharat Anand's answer)
#Bharat Anand's answer appears to be the best way to accomplish this question.
#Thisisstackoverflow requested clarification (under the accepted answer) and I'm hoping my screenshot below will help.
I set my worksheet up in what I believe is the exact same manner as #Bharat Anand, and it seems that the column letters may have been off. Setting mine up like this made it work correctly.
EDIT: (clarification for future visitors)
I really liked #Bharat Anand's solution, so I wanted to explain how it works (using the images/formulas in the solution as reference):
The calculation in Column I is setup to return a number that will only appear three times, in succession, in Column I; in this way it kind of behaves like a unique identifier, allowing other formulas to reference these values for calculation purposes.
Three times is key for the original poster because they were looking for a range of three cells to be formatted based on a sum of three cells. For example, the formula in Column I can be modified to
=ROUNDDOWN((ROW()-b)/a,0)
where:
a is your desired number of cells to format/sum, and
b is equal to a - 1.
Using the formula in J5 as an example, this SUMIF formula uses I3:I7, which includes two (or b, as setup in my explanation above) rows above and two (b) rows below to decide if I5 equals any of the values found in I3:I7. It's important to include the two rows above and two rows below so that the range overlaps the same three cells to meet the requested requirements.
When I5 finds a match, the formula looks to Column H to sum those rows in H3:H7 where I3:I7 equals I5. In this example, J5, J6, and J7 will each equal 32.
Using the simple conditional formatting formula that was setup, we know that cells in Column E should be highlighted when the corresponding row in Column H is greater than 30. According to the original question, this should be done in ranges that are three (a) rows tall. We already handled for that, so all that was left was to make sure the conditional formatting spanned the data area in Column E.
I'm hoping I don't confuse and/offend anyone with this explanation, but it's how I understand it. I like the proposed solution and explaining it to myself again helps me solidify how it works.
I've got a little helper spreadsheet that I use, and there are some Merged Cells.
Rather than get rid of these, which I know can cause headaches, I was looking for an idea on fixing an issue.
I have a few rows that share a merged cell. When this merged cell is not empty, I want the rows to highlight. Currently, the formula (applied over A1:B4) is =$B1<>"" and then a fill. Works okay for the first row, but not the other three:
I was thinking I could add some more logic, but there's nothing really there for me. It's a pretty simple table. Unfortunately, there's not really a way to say (for rows 2:4), if row 1 is colored, then color this row...(Although I think I've seen clever uses of Named Ranges to do something like that, but I could be mistaken).
So, in A2, what's the conditional format formula "thinking"? Is it going to =$B2<>"", in which case ...what's it looking for as B2? If I select A2, and look at the conditional format rule applied to the current selection, it still shows =$B1<>"".
Thanks for any ideas/tips. It's not a huge deal, so I don't need a VBA solution - just maybe an idea or trick for using CF with merged cells.
Edit: For a more full explanation - the idea is that col. B will have an invoice number and if it's there, make the row a color. I will be repeating this "chart" a bunch, and have some non-grouped companies, who have their own lines. I just don't like the gap of color there in my group and was trying to get it to have a color when the first of the group does.
I usually try to base my CFR's on formulas.
After selecting all of column A and B I created a CF rule with the following.
=AND(LEN($A1), ISNUMBER(MATCH(1E+99, $B$1:$B1)))
The approximate MATCH function simply looks for the last number in the B column. I can see a missing invoice number in a cell like B7 would generate confusion but perhaps you can expand on this for conditions not demonstrated by your examples.
If you want to use "placeholder" instead of blank cells (when there is no invoice), you could try the following formula:
=(LOOKUP(2,1/($B$1:$B1<>""),$B$1:$B1)<>"x")*LEN(A1)
With sample data it looks like this:
When the cell is left blank (no placeholder), column A is highlighted, column B is not.