Forum Discussion
Print for a date range
If you've gotten rid of that top row that had only a few formulas in it, as well as both rows at the bottom that were not true data rows, then the formula below should work, and keep up with new rows at the top. However, I think you'll find that it works best to insert the new row just above row 3, not at the very top. At the very top, it will format itself based on the header row above, which you don't want to have happen.
This formula goes in cell A5 of the "Prt Date Rng" tab
=FILTER(tblQ1,(tblQ1[Date]>=Start)*(tblQ1[Date]<=Finish),"No Rows")
What you'll see there is that it no longer refers to the cell addresses, but rather to the table by name and the Date column by name.
Note: I've attached a slightly updated version of the older workbook, with the table modified (and an empty row waiting for you) and the new formula.
Regarding the $ symbol in a cell reference ( $A$3, $A3, A$3 😞 What these do, and it's significant, is to render the letter or the number (the column or the row reference, respectively) absolute rather than relative. Which means, as you copy a formula elsewhere, the parts of a cell reference that are absolute don't change, where the relative ones do, relative to the new cell. Here's a more complete description of how that works.
This basically does what I need. However, there are some issues. I need the sort order to be z to a based on date only.
Not sure what "z to a based on date only" means. Or was it a typo? In any event, all you need to do is remove the SORT from the formula (along with the first and last parentheses) to have the sort be in the order of your basic raw data. I've done if for you in the attached revised file.
You apparently put the formula into the comments column. When I enter data there it destroys the formula.
No, I put the formula ONLY in cell A5. FILTER is what's called a dynamic array function--so one instance of the formula pulls in the whole array that meets the criteria, and "spills" that array to the rows and columns needed, so long as there's nothing in one (or more) of those target cells. When you enter something (or something is pre-existing) in one of those cells, it generates a SPILL error. Don't enter data into that area. Enter data into your "raw data," not the output of the formula.
When I insert rows, for convenience, I may insert a row in a day that may come after intervening rows which I have not yet entered, but that I will insert and fill in later.
Because I insert, I need the row next to the header to preserve the formatting and to be hidden. Without that, when I insert a row immediately below the header it takes the formatting from the header. I manually insure the chronological order within a day by how I insert rows.
So you're doing manually what Excel could do for you. l get why you don't enter things in the top row; I wouldn't either. But I recommend you familiarize yourself with the SORT function that I just removed from the formula on the "output" page, so at least you become familiar with how Excel could do the sorting for you. You're not obligated to use it, of course. Here's a link to an excellent YouTube video that explains SORT, UNIQUE and FILTER. It's where I first heard of the functions a little over a year ago.
Yesterday, I discovered an feature called "Get Data from Table/Range" when I right click on a cell. Does this do something similar?
I don't know, and don't see that happen when I right click on a cell. I'm on a Mac, so perhaps that's why I'm not seeing it. There are so many ways (all of the LOOKUP functions, for example; and INDEX and MATCH) to get data from a table or range...... FILTER is perhaps the newest, and (IMHO) one of the most flexible and powerful, but the others are useful in other situations as well.
The time field is left out of the sort, because I may not always put a time in the time field as I enter partial new data to save time, and fill it in later. If I have Excel sort for me, it would change the physical order I placed them in, if all times are not filled in. If I were to use the sort feature and include time, when adding the normal way, I would still need to go to the bottom of the table to enter the latest row, would I not? That would be awkward. With that understanding, I chose to insert at the top instead.
I hadn't noticed the range was on a different sheet. I thought I was still on Q1. Oh well. Thank you. This is great. I just have four questions related to the "Print Date Range". Why is the time formatted as a decimal number? Can it not retain its normal format? Is there a way to keep the empty fields blank instead of inserting 0s in them? Where is the formula. I presume it is hiding somewhere. I can only see it in grey in the function field when I click on an empty comment field. I guess I do not know where to look. It is not under view code for the new sheet. Sorry I am so dense. I find Access much easier to understand.
UPDATE:
Since your copy was a couple of days behind, I copied the new sheet to my current WB. I then tried out the filter for Aug, Sep and Nov. It seemed to work fine on each until I got about half way through the list on each of the filters, then the dates formatted to 5 digit numbers. See attached. Now, when I open the document it complains of an external source which it cannot update. I suppose that is because I moved the new sheet from your file to my file. I see the formula is referencing your version of the file. I am unable to change the formula as I don't know where it is. Does the formula need to use the full path? Can't it work in context?
The time field is left out of the sort, because I may not always put a time in the time field as I enter partial new data to save time, and fill it in later. If I have Excel sort for me, it would change the physical order I placed them in, if all times are not filled in. If I were to use the sort feature and include time, when adding the normal way, I would still need to go to the bottom of the table to enter the latest row, would I not? That would be awkward. With that understanding, I chose to insert at the top instead.
You are perfectly free to go ahead and do it that way if it works for you.
I hadn't noticed the range was on a different sheet. I thought I was still on Q1. Oh well. Thank you. This is great. You're welcome.
I just have four questions related to the "Print Date Range".
1. Why is the time formatted as a decimal number? Can it not retain its normal format?
A. You're aware that underneath the date and time formats are decimal numbers, I presume. FILTER is returning the "raw data" that is underneath the surface. All you need to do is format the field as date or time, as desired. In this case, you might find it most convenient to just format the columns A as date and B as time and do so all the way down to whatever row would be needed to accommodate the largest output you're going be doing.
2. Is there a way to keep the empty fields blank instead of inserting 0s in them?
A. To my knowledge, that's endemic to empty comment fields coming through the FILTER function; I almost left the comments column out of the FILTERed report for that reason. If the 0s bother you, you can put a space into each of the comment fields where there is no comment (make that the "default" entry. That way it will be read as "blank" instead of zero. I did it in a few of the cells for 9/30 to show the result. (Personally, I'd just tolerate the 0s, but if this report is for the use of other people, I can see why that may not be a valid route to take.)
3. Where is the formula. I presume it is hiding somewhere. I can only see it in grey in the function field when I click on an empty comment field. I guess I do not know where to look.
A. Well, it's kind of hiding in plain sight. As l mentioned in my last reply that it's entered only one place, and that's in cell A5. The results "spill" to all needed rows and columns; and the formula appears greyed in all of them except for the one at the top left of the array.
It is not under view code for the new sheet. Sorry I am so dense. I find Access much easier to understand.
A. If you find Access easier to understand, if you understand and write SQL code in that app, then you will definitely be able to come to grips with these dynamic array functions. I do recommend--quite seriously--watching the YouTube video I linked to in my last post.
UPDATE:
Since your copy was a couple of days behind, I copied the new sheet to my current WB. I then tried out the filter for Aug, Sep and Nov. It seemed to work fine on each until I got about half way through the list on each of the filters, then the dates formatted to 5 digit numbers. See attached.
As noted above, you will need to format the date column as date, time column as time, so as to convert those five digit and decimal numbers to the dates and times they represent. I'm assuming you know how that formatting works, in the "Home" toolbar.
Now, when I open the document it complains of an external source which it cannot update. I suppose that is because I moved the new sheet from your file to my file. I guess I shouldn't have done that.
I don't know how you did the copy/move, but yes...the FILTER function in the new spreadsheet was referring back to the other file, the original, on your OneDrive. I've edited it so that it now refers to the Q1 sheet. Again, watch the YouTube video to demystify how FILTER works. You might actually end up liking it more than Access. (Smiley face)
- Thank you for your help. It is greatly appreciated and does what I need it to do. I am trying to understand the formula. It starts at A24 and ends at T2401. It appears that the beginning parameter moves down as new rows are inserted and the ending parameter remains the same (causing it to effectively move up). I guess I will need to keep updating the formula before each time I use it to account for new rows added. I don't suppose there is a way to generalize it to have it always remain on A5 and the last row, to avoid the need to update the parameters? I will look at the video. Thanks again.
- I’m sorry. I’m on an overseas trip, have been since Feb 16, and won’t return till next week. I’ll try to answer then more fully.
