Lookup Hi / Lo

[chrisabberton]

I'm trying to do what i think is quite a simple function.

I have a data array (B5:B13) with the following values in it:

14
40
45
59
70
79
90
100
280

my reference cell is C16 and is currently set to 63.

I would like cell C18 to display the closest match below 63 (in this
example 59), i have acheived this with the forumula
=LOOKUP(C16,B5:B13,B5:B13).

But i want cell C19 to display the closest value above 63 i.e. 70.

I have tried the offset function but can't appear to get it to work,
and would prefer a lookup function if possible.

Thanks in advance,

Chris

 

[Guest]

an index(match())
combo will probably do whhat you want
=index(range,match(63,range,1))
for value less than 63 and
=index(range,match(63,range,-1))
for vlaue above 63

 

[Richard Buttrey]

You could try

=INDEX(B5:B13,MATCH(C16,B5:B13)+1,1)

HTH

I'm trying to do what i think is quite a simple function.

I have a data array (B5:B13) with the following values in it:

14
40
45
59
70
79
90
100
280

my reference cell is C16 and is currently set to 63.

I would like cell C18 to display the closest match below 63 (in this
example 59), i have acheived this with the forumula
=LOOKUP(C16,B5:B13,B5:B13).

But i want cell C19 to display the closest value above 63 i.e. 70.

I have tried the offset function but can't appear to get it to work,
and would prefer a lookup function if possible.

Thanks in advance,

Chris

__
Richard Buttrey
Grappenhall, Cheshire, UK
__________________________

 

[Domenic]

For the largest value less than or equal to the lookup value...

=LOOKUP(C16,B5:B13)

For the smallest value greater than or equal to the lookup value..

=MIN(IF(B5:B13>=C16,B5:B13))

....confirmed with CONTROL+SHIFT+ENTER,not just ENTER.

Hope this helps!

chrisabberton

 

[Harlan Grove]

Domenic wrote...

For the largest value less than or equal to the lookup value...

=LOOKUP(C16,B5:B13)

Since this would only work when B5:B13 were sorted in ascending order,

For the smallest value greater than or equal to the lookup value..

=MIN(IF(B5:B13>=C16,B5:B13))

....

Richard Buttrey's formula,

=INDEX(B5:B13,MATCH(C16,B5:B13)+1)

would be more efficient, and it wouldn't need array entry.

 

[Domenic]

Richard Buttrey's formula,

=INDEX(B5:B13,MATCH(C16,B5:B13)+1)

would be more efficient, and it wouldn't need array entry.

But the formula would return #N/A if the lookup value was 10. Shouldn't
the correct answer be 14?

 

[Harlan Grove]

Domenic wrote...

But the formula would return #N/A if the lookup value was 10. Shouldn't
the correct answer be 14?

Boundary conditions. I'll grant that when C16 = 10, the smallest value
in the list greater than C16 should be 14 rather than #N/A. However, if
C16 were 300, what should the formula return? 0 (which your formula
does) or #N/A (which provides symmetry with the LOOKUP call when C16 =
10)? If it should return #N/A, then perhaps it should resemble

=IF(C16<B5,B5,INDEX(B5:B13,MATCH(C16,B5:B13)+1))

 

[Harlan Grove]

Harlan Grove wrote...
....

. . . If it should return #N/A, then perhaps it should resemble

=IF(C16<B5,B5,INDEX(B5:B13,MATCH(C16,B5:B13)+1))

So maybe I should have made it return #N/A.

=IF(C16<B5,B5,IF(C16>=B13,#N/A,INDEX(B5:B13,MATCH(C16,B5:B12)+1)))

 

[Domenic]

Yeah, I think the formula should return #N/A. In which case, your
formula would provide the correct result. Thanks Harlan!