Thanks Dale,

Trust Al's version.  It looks like the changes I made also changed the
results of the LOOKUP function.  I'll go thru the steps for the
examples you provided and see if I can figure out where mine is going
wrong.  It won't be right away, maybe in a day or two.

Try widening the column for the '######' answer.  That's usually an
indication the number is too large for the space.

Bob W.

On Mon, 30 Oct 2006 20:06:19 -0700
Dale Rogers <dale.r@cox.net> wrote:

> Bob,
>
>    I'm only using Excel on this machine.  The two versions give different results for several
> cases.  350a @ 1 ft. old=="size 0/4" with "see chart" for "in-bundle" (no weight column); new=="0/3" and
> weight == "######".  For 10A @ 14 ft, I get: 18g /16g in-bundle; new: 20g/18 in-bundle.
>
>    Now I don't know what to trust. ;)
>
> Dale R.
>
> Bob White wrote:Hi Wendell,
>
> Yes, we need to get one of the Excel users to test it (if I didn't make
> them all mad with my smart a** comment :).  I also found a 502 error in
> the weight depending on the data input.  For example, If length is one
> foot, any current from 301A to 379A gives a 502 error.  380A and above
> gives a zero weight.  The zero makes sense because that's where the AWG
> answer becomes 'See Chart'.
>
> How about it Excel users.  Will one of you run the same data in the
> spreadsheet I modified and compare it to Al's original?  Does it
> calculate to the same AWG for reasonable data?  Do you see an error in
> weight for current of 350A and length of 1 foot?  (Spreadsheet attached
> to earlier post.)
>
> Thanks,
> Bob W.
>  
>
> --
>
> Homepage:  http://www.flyrotary.com/
>
> Archive and UnSub:   http://mail.lancaironline.net/lists/flyrotary/


--
N93BD - Rotary Powered BD-4 - http://www.bob-white.com
First engine start 1/7/06 - Special Airworthiness Certificate 10/1/06
Cables for your rotary installation - http://www.roblinphoto.com/shop/