I recently wanted to create an excel table to note all my electric components that I have so I can easily find the right component without searching every time for it.
The problem is, especially with capacitors, they come with a wide range of values generally for me between 220uF and 10pF, and I want to create a custom format to display the values properly in excel, for example if I put in a cell 0.00022 it shows 220uF or maybe 0.22mF (but 220uF is better) and not 2.2E-04 or any other format.
I tried the custom tool but I don't know how to add the micros, nanos and picos.
You can add conditions to the formatting, like:
[<0.00001] 0.00%%% "pF";[<0.001] 0.00% "uF";#
This will show 2.20%% uF in the cell (so you can multiply by using the percent sign, more details here).
Drawback: the percent signs are shown, and the Ctrl+J trick described on the link does not really work for me (and I personally find it as an ugly solution).
If I were you I'd add a new column called "Formatted" where I multiply the values with formulas. Like
=IF(A1<0.00001,A1*1000000 & "pF",IF(A1<0.001,A1*10000 & "uF"))
It's easier then to search in both columns (one is by formatted, like all "uF", other is by real Farad value. Also you could use the original column for sorting.
I am writing an equation sheet that helps me convert units and then uses those numbers in other more complex equations. I would like to input a value in inches then have it output in feet in the same table. That part is easy. The part I am struggling with is in the same table I would like the option to input feet and have it return inches where I would normally type it. I know I will need another table with all my if statements. more just wondering if excel even has this ability within the IF function please let me know if you need more info.
Excel has a Convert() worksheet function especially for this need. In order to convert a number from inch to feet, you can do the following:
=CONVERT(A1,"in","ft")
In order to find out how it works, just type =CONVERT( and a helper box (intellisense) will be opened for helping you to fill in the proper parameters.
Extrapolation in Excel is easy: have a list of numbers (and optionally their paired "X-values"), and it can easily generate further entries in the list with the GROWTH() function.
GROWTH() works for interpolation too: you just need to tell it the intermediate X-values that you want it to calculate for. My problem with it is the appearance of the data in the spreadsheet. Here's an example:
Say I have some inputs, and through some process get some outputs. Only, there were gaps in the experiment so no outputs were generated for some values:
Out of curiosity, I copied the data to the right, and used Excel's "Extend with Growth Trend": I highlighted the first two entries (only), then right-click-dragged-down the little square over the next four cells (overriding the final value there) and chose "Growth Trend" in the context menu. To remind myself that the values were Excel-generated, I gave them a grey background:
Hmm. The generated values (unsurprisingly) aren't a good extrapolation, since they don't factor in the later value. It's out by over 40%! Also note that this Extend feature of Excel is an ease-of-input mechanism, not a calculation tool in its own right - Excel enters the data as raw numbers (to multiple decimal places).
So I formalised the Extend column by using the GROWTH() function - again only factoring in the first two values, but also using their paired X-values and the desired interpolation entry as parameters:
D4: =GROWTH(D$2:D$3,$A$2:$A$3,$A4)
D5: =GROWTH(D$2:D$3,$A$2:$A$3,$A5)
D6: =GROWTH(D$2:D$3,$A$2:$A$3,$A6)
Thankfully, the results mimic those of the previous column (Microsoft use the same mechanism for both features!) I didn't overwrite the last entry, since after all it has the value that I actually want! The fact that the calculated values are the same as before is the problem I'm trying to fix, and that this question is about.
To improve the calculated values, I need to incorporate the last value - but at the same time I want the "natural" sequence of input values to be maintained. In other words, I want the interpolated values to be placed in situ. That implies that the arguments to the GROWTH() function need to be discontiguous ranges, which Excel does by using the (Range,Range,...) syntax. I tried it, and got #REF! errors. I then tried using a named discontiguous range: same result.
After a bit of Googling (and StackOverflowing!) I found references to using INDIRECT() - a particularly problematic 'solution', since it evaluates strings that would need to be manually maintained. Nevertheless:
E4: =GROWTH(INDIRECT({"E2:E3","E7"}),INDIRECT({"A2:A3","A7"}),A4)
E5: =GROWTH(INDIRECT({"E2:E3","E7"}),INDIRECT({"A2:A3","A7"}),A5)
E6: =GROWTH(INDIRECT({"E2:E3","E7"}),INDIRECT({"A2:A3","A7"}),A6)
…and after all that it didn't work anyway! The values remained the same as the previous version, that didn't incorporate the last value. Maybe the last value doesn't make for better interpolation results? So, as an experiment, I ignored the "in situ" requirement and generated an "ex situ" version, with the known values followed by the desired values, allowing me to use simple ranges. Success! But to highlight that the data is in the wrong order, I asked Excel to create an X-Y plot of the data too:
B13: =GROWTH(B$10:B$12,$A$10:$A$12,$A13)
B14: =GROWTH(B$10:B$12,$A$10:$A$12,$A14)
B15: =GROWTH(B$10:B$12,$A$10:$A$12,$A15)
Of course, the results are exponential not linear, so setting the Y-axis to logarithmic generates a very readable result - and it effectively masks the back-and-forth of the data. But deep down, we both know that the data is wrong - just look at the table!
Maybe, just maybe, if I used Excel's "Sort Data" feature it would break up the range for me, and show me how I should have written the formulae? Sadly, although it looks like it worked, I get a "Circular reference" error for B12 - the range wasn't modified to make it discontiguous, and now B12's result is dependent on the original range which includes itself! I coloured it below to indicate that this isn't a viable solution:
So, my "final" solution is to maintain the previous "ex situ" version, and simply have an "in situ" column as well that does a VLOOKUP() on the ExSitu (named) table - and I needed to tell it to do an exact match with the FALSE parameter, since the list isn't sorted:
F4: =VLOOKUP($A4,ExSitu,2,FALSE)
F5: =VLOOKUP($A5,ExSitu,2,FALSE)
F6: =VLOOKUP($A6,ExSitu,2,FALSE)
Note that I labelled the column with an asterisk since it's a cheat: the values are only in situ by copying from another table.
Phew! After all that, my question:
Is there a way to directly interpolate the "in situ" values, without having to have an "ex situ" lookup table to generate the results? The above example was deliberately straightforward: you can easily imagine a longer list with more gaps to be filled in.
Since you had a good data sense, I'll share my discovery path on this case. I'm more like a visual person. I don't see things 'that' clear via tables. Here is what I do to you data points. :
Input Raw
360 7.16
370 28.9
380
390
400
410 5,380.00
Highlight all and press my favorite button > F11. I choose line chart type. Then with the plus button on the top left of the chart, I add trendline > more options.. From there I choose 'polynomial' and 'exponential' . Plus, a tick on 'display equation on chart' As you can see in the links, both fit seem ok. just take the equation and fit in for other values as needed.
Three things I've noticed :
The polynomial and exponential fit is close enough to what I need. But it doesn't exactly 'map' on the ( 410, 5380.00 ) point.
By having the formula I find it easier to make sense of whether or not the trendline 'proposed' by excel is a close fit to my need. As you play around you can see how far-off the linear & logarithmic trendline can be.
The trendline equation doesn't really map to 360,370,410... point as the x value, it assumes x is 0,1,2,3... (try to test it with the 'equation' of the excel proposed trendline)
IMHO, use excel trend with care. My next best fitting tool -> wolframalpha logarithmic fit.
For the original question :
Is there a way to directly interpolate the "in situ" values, without having to have an "ex situ" lookup table to generate the results?
I think my simple answer will be : Indirectly, Yes. Directly? not sure.
Hope this heals/helps in some ways.. ( :
Hi there I am looking to combine two data ranges/arrays into one in order to feed them into excel FREQUENCY function.
Example:
First data range - B5:F50
Second data range - J5:N50
Bins data range - I5:I16
Function definition - FREQUENCY(data_array; bins_array)
Basically I am lazy and I don't want to reshuffle my excel script to spit out both datasets side by side so that I can reference them using something like B5:K50 range. Is there any way I can combine both datasets into data_array using some kind of formula? Maybe to end up with something along the line of =FREQUENCY((B5:F50,J5:N50); I5:I16) ?
BTW: Either of
=FREQUENCY(B5:F50; I5:I16)
=FREQUENCY(J5:N50; I5:I16)
work just file on their own for me.
Update
Actual formula definition FREQUENCY(data, classes)
2013 MS Excel (unrelated)
In MS Excel FREQUENCY function accepts a "union" as the first argument, i.e. a list of references separated by commas and enclosed in parentheses e.g.
=FREQUENCY((B5:F50,J5:N50),I5:I16)
Note: the "bins array" can also be a union if required
In "Google sheets" I don't think the same thing is possible - there may be a clever workaround, but I'm not aware of it
The Using Arrays page has some details that worked for me:
https://support.google.com/docs/answer/6208276?hl=en
It says:
"You can join multiple ranges into one continuous range using this same punctuation, which works the same way as VMERGE. For example, to combine values from A1-A10 with the values from D1-D10, you can use the following formula to create a range in a continuous column: ={A1:A10; D1:D10}"
I have two named ranges, so I was able to use {namedRange1;namedRange2} and it gave me one continuous range.
I'd like to sort a time series of exam performance by one of three categories:
Ideally, a function would sort the scores by "difficulty" while still preserving chronological order. I'd like to do this without filters etc. Something like this is very close, but not quite there. Do I need to use dynamic ranges? Or can I just define data ranges in the table dialog with VLOOKUP or INDEX/MATCH?
I'm thinking a bar graph would be the easiest way to illustrate the data, but I'm open to suggestions. New scores are added every day, with varying difficulties.
Here is the spreadsheet if anyone would like to look it over.
EDIT:
The output visualization could be, for example, a clustered bar graph, but with only one label per category. The idea is that I'd like to preserve chronological order without necessarily having to mark it on the graph.
Would there, for instance, be a quick-and easy and formula-driven way to put these 14 and 17 values for "score" all together under one label? I feel like 17 bar graphs clustered too closely would be hard to read.
I realize this is more of a formatting than a formula issue, but I appreciate input with regards to both.
I would recommend you add a Table over the data in the workbook. One for verbal and one for math. The upside is that it will automatically grow with your data as you add new rows. This is very helpful because charts and other things will automatically refer to the new data. Add one with CTRL+T or Insert->Table on the Ribbon.
Once you have the Table, you can easily do the sorting bit by adding a two column sort onto the Table. This menu is accessible by right clicking in the Table and doing Sort->Custom Sort. Again, the Table is nice here because it will only sort the data within it (not the whole sheet) and will remember your settings. This lets you add new data and simply do Data->Reapply to get it to sort again. Your sort on Difficulty is going to be alphabetic unless you add a number at the front. Here is the sorting step:
With this done, you can create a quick chart based on that data. For the "implicit chronology" you can simply plot score vs. difficulty for all of them since they are sorted.
To get closer to that matrix style display, you can easily create a PivotTable based on this Table and let it do the organizing by date/difficulty. Here is the result of that. I am using Average as the aggregation function since it appears that no dates have more than 1 score. If they did, it would be a better choice than Sum.