Just playing w/ the problem and first issue is that two of your peaks have two identical values in a row (EX: rows 77 & 78).
So far WHER's approach seems best. I tried similar w/ two added columns to smooth the data... I simply used the max of the value and the two following (first to column A, then to column B), then I compared the value in column A to a max of the 30 cells before and after (starting at row 31). I used 30 because that seems to adequately encompass your double-hump peaks. You could then do the same using min functions to find the local bottoms.
I manage to make peak's areas.
You only need to define Y value that intercept all curves:
2.JPG
See lines:
Blue would have 9 max
Red, what you need, 10
Green also 9.
This you can't avoid: either in this approach or my previous with ATAN() function where you had to define min difference between min and max.
Excel can't know what you consider as max or min unless you tell him.
This is perhapes easiest because you need to put that number approximately in yellow box at top.
So I put here 4,5
5 would also be good
4 is doubtfull because it's not clear would it consider small peak after first big peak as a actuall peak or nor. If it go over that line it will be new peak (wich you want to avoid so take those safe numbers). In this example 4 is also OK, but 3,9 not. You can put some number and if not satisified change it so you get matching peak's max with your desired number that you can see from graph.
Now when we have tose interception points I've create ranges for MIN and MAX.
You will see blocks of data: first block 11111111...11, second 222222222...222, third 33333333333333...3333 etc
This is automatic and in different cases you'll get different number of blocks. If you have more data you'll need to extend range in formula (I put 10000). Also you can move more to the right (I put up to X column).
I calculate average for each block.
This average will change as you choose your number in B1 but not much.
MIN and MAX won't change - only I don't know how to get them
max_min(1).xls
Also notice that you have one min more than max. This is because you didn't consider start of curve (start from 0) as a first min.
I think this should be considered too so actually you have 10 MAX's and 11 MIN's, I put in formula 10 max, but can be changed according to this.
Last edited by zbor; 09-03-2009 at 01:29 AM.
"Relax. What is mind? No matter. What is matter? Never mind!"
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Bookmarks