Formula - relative or absolute ref, keeps changing

Have a simple idea that is giving me fits.

Have a worksheet with numberic data and labels in rows and columns. Below
each column I use a simple SUM() function which works fine, until I disturb
a row of data. By disturb, what I mean is that if I move the top row of
data down to the bottom of the array, highlight the entire data area, move
that area up one row, I lose the correct references in the SUM() function.
I'm just moving the data area, not the row containing my SUM() functions -
that stays put. IOW, the SUM() function is in row 12, the data area extends
from row 1 through row 10, I move row 1 to row 11 and then move everything
from row 2 through row 11, back up one row.

I've tried using relative and absolute addressing but that SUM() formula
somehow keeps adjusting based on what it sees me moving and giving me an
incorrect result. How do I make the formula "static", or to just tell it
"sum the numbers above and don't watch what's moving around, dog-gone it!".

Thanks for any advice here.

To use absolute addressing try =SUM($A$1:$A$10)

"Hoib" wrote:

> Have a simple idea that is giving me fits.
>
> Have a worksheet with numberic data and labels in rows and columns. Below
> each column I use a simple SUM() function which works fine, until I disturb
> a row of data. By disturb, what I mean is that if I move the top row of
> data down to the bottom of the array, highlight the entire data area, move
> that area up one row, I lose the correct references in the SUM() function.
> I'm just moving the data area, not the row containing my SUM() functions -
> that stays put. IOW, the SUM() function is in row 12, the data area extends
> from row 1 through row 10, I move row 1 to row 11 and then move everything
> from row 2 through row 11, back up one row.
>
> I've tried using relative and absolute addressing but that SUM() formula
> somehow keeps adjusting based on what it sees me moving and giving me an
> incorrect result. How do I make the formula "static", or to just tell it
> "sum the numbers above and don't watch what's moving around, dog-gone it!".
>
> Thanks for any advice here.
>
>
>
>

You can use the Indirect function: =SUM(INDIRECT("A1:A10"))

Hoib wrote:
> Have a simple idea that is giving me fits.
>
> Have a worksheet with numberic data and labels in rows and columns. Below
> each column I use a simple SUM() function which works fine, until I disturb
> a row of data. By disturb, what I mean is that if I move the top row of
> data down to the bottom of the array, highlight the entire data area, move
> that area up one row, I lose the correct references in the SUM() function.
> I'm just moving the data area, not the row containing my SUM() functions -
> that stays put. IOW, the SUM() function is in row 12, the data area extends
> from row 1 through row 10, I move row 1 to row 11 and then move everything
> from row 2 through row 11, back up one row.
>
> I've tried using relative and absolute addressing but that SUM() formula
> somehow keeps adjusting based on what it sees me moving and giving me an
> incorrect result. How do I make the formula "static", or to just tell it
> "sum the numbers above and don't watch what's moving around, dog-gone it!".
>
> Thanks for any advice here.
>
>
>


--
Debra Dalgleish
Excel FAQ, Tips & Book List
http://www.contextures.com/tiptech.html

Thank you bigwheel. I actually had tried this method too with the same
result. The expression $A$1:$A$10 also "flexes" or changes as I move the
top row to the bottom yielding an unwanted result - the moved row is
excluded even though I move the entire 10 row array back into position. I
will say, however, the INDIRECT() function spec'd in a subsequent post by
Debra, is apparently one answer to this. I'm also sure there are probably a
hundred different techniques to get this done. So, again, I thank you for
your contribution.


"bigwheel" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> To use absolute addressing try =SUM($A$1:$A$10)
>
> "Hoib" wrote:
>
>> Have a simple idea that is giving me fits.
>>
>> Have a worksheet with numberic data and labels in rows and columns.
>> Below
>> each column I use a simple SUM() function which works fine, until I
>> disturb
>> a row of data. By disturb, what I mean is that if I move the top row of
>> data down to the bottom of the array, highlight the entire data area,
>> move
>> that area up one row, I lose the correct references in the SUM()
>> function.
>> I'm just moving the data area, not the row containing my SUM()
>> functions -
>> that stays put. IOW, the SUM() function is in row 12, the data area
>> extends
>> from row 1 through row 10, I move row 1 to row 11 and then move
>> everything
>> from row 2 through row 11, back up one row.
>>
>> I've tried using relative and absolute addressing but that SUM() formula
>> somehow keeps adjusting based on what it sees me moving and giving me an
>> incorrect result. How do I make the formula "static", or to just tell it
>> "sum the numbers above and don't watch what's moving around, dog-gone
>> it!".
>>
>> Thanks for any advice here.
>>
>>
>>
>>

Perfect! It works as advertised! Thanks a lot!


"Debra Dalgleish" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> You can use the Indirect function: =SUM(INDIRECT("A1:A10"))
>
> Hoib wrote:
>> Have a simple idea that is giving me fits.
>>
>> Have a worksheet with numberic data and labels in rows and columns.
>> Below each column I use a simple SUM() function which works fine, until I
>> disturb a row of data. By disturb, what I mean is that if I move the top
>> row of data down to the bottom of the array, highlight the entire data
>> area, move that area up one row, I lose the correct references in the
>> SUM() function. I'm just moving the data area, not the row containing my
>> SUM() functions - that stays put. IOW, the SUM() function is in row 12,
>> the data area extends from row 1 through row 10, I move row 1 to row 11
>> and then move everything from row 2 through row 11, back up one row.
>>
>> I've tried using relative and absolute addressing but that SUM() formula
>> somehow keeps adjusting based on what it sees me moving and giving me an
>> incorrect result. How do I make the formula "static", or to just tell it
>> "sum the numbers above and don't watch what's moving around, dog-gone
>> it!".
>>
>> Thanks for any advice here.
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Debra Dalgleish
> Excel FAQ, Tips & Book List
> http://www.contextures.com/tiptech.html
>

You're welcome!

Hoib wrote:
> Perfect! It works as advertised! Thanks a lot!
>
>
> "Debra Dalgleish" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>
>>You can use the Indirect function: =SUM(INDIRECT("A1:A10"))
>>
>>Hoib wrote:
>>
>>>Have a simple idea that is giving me fits.
>>>
>>>Have a worksheet with numberic data and labels in rows and columns.
>>>Below each column I use a simple SUM() function which works fine, until I
>>>disturb a row of data. By disturb, what I mean is that if I move the top
>>>row of data down to the bottom of the array, highlight the entire data
>>>area, move that area up one row, I lose the correct references in the
>>>SUM() function. I'm just moving the data area, not the row containing my
>>>SUM() functions - that stays put. IOW, the SUM() function is in row 12,
>>>the data area extends from row 1 through row 10, I move row 1 to row 11
>>>and then move everything from row 2 through row 11, back up one row.
>>>
>>>I've tried using relative and absolute addressing but that SUM() formula
>>>somehow keeps adjusting based on what it sees me moving and giving me an
>>>incorrect result. How do I make the formula "static", or to just tell it
>>>"sum the numbers above and don't watch what's moving around, dog-gone
>>>it!".

--
Debra Dalgleish
Excel FAQ, Tips & Book List
http://www.contextures.com/tiptech.html