Well, of course not.
The difference between 10:25pm and 10:55pm is exactly 30 minutes, or
1800 seconds. But you have 2026 samples, which, at a second each, comes
to 33 minutes and 46 seconds, which is equivilent to a stop time of
10:58:46pm. The extra second is (I think) due to the first sample
At 06:33 11/09/2014 -0700, Nobody Noname wrote:
Thanks again for the replies, this is what I've tried so far:
Why not try one of the two techniques already suggested (both of which work)?
The start time was 10:25pm and the stop time was 10:55pm, with 2026
samples. I first highlight column
At 09:24 11/09/2014 -0700, Nobody Noname wrote:
... that last reply got it working.
Good-oh!
I can see some time values repeated twice but that's what you'd
expect with a non one sample per second sampling rate.
Exactly. I meant to mention this but forgot. Remember that the
repetition is
It might be helpful if you post the actual start/stop times
for the 2026 samples. There's more than one way to skin this
cat and I'd only look for solutions outside of Calc as a
very last resort.
-Bill
On 9/9/2014 8:22 PM, office76#xt wrote:
Thanks for the replies.
Hi :)
If you are not happy with Calc and looking for a reason to use something
else then maybe try Gnumeric.
It is a specialist tool that focusses more on spreadsheeting functionality
without having to worry about any other apps as it's a stand-alone tool.
It co-operates well with
It might also be helpful if you mentioned your data acquisition hardware.
It might be that using a standard interval reading is possible and you
don't have to guess about the readings at all.
Start 00:00:00, first interval 00:01:00, second interval 00:02:00 etc...
On 9/10/2014 7:45 AM,
Also the data acquisition software. I have written a few data
acquisition programs and in some cases the sample rate was extremely
high over an extended period of time. To keep the file sizes down to
something reasonable I stored the captured data with a compression
algorithm which, amongst other
This is what Brian is trying to explain...
You've got 6 samples. The first one taken at 12:04PM, the
last one at 12:36PM.
The total elapsed time is 12:36PM - 12:04PM = 22 minutes.
22 divided by 5 (always the total number of readings minus
1) = 6.4 minutes or 6m and 24s per interval.
At 05:45 09/09/2014 -0400, William Drago wrote:
This is what Brian is trying to explain...
I was doing more than try! And no: what you
suggest here is not what I was saying.
You've got 6 samples. The first one taken at
12:04PM, the last one at 12:36PM. The total
elapsed time is 12:36PM -
On 9/9/2014 6:18 AM, Brian Barker wrote:
At 05:45 09/09/2014 -0400, William Drago wrote:
This is what Brian is trying to explain...
I was doing more than try! And no: what you suggest here
is not what I was saying.
You've got 6 samples. The first one taken at 12:04PM, the
last one at
At 07:22 09/09/2014 -0400, William Drago wrote:
Since the OP was confused by your instructions
(indicating his level of inexperience with
spreadsheets) and you did not explain how to
fill the column or the purpose of $, I offered
what I thought would be easier for someone at his level to
Hi :)
I thought it was really kind to de-geekify Brain's answer. The tpyo was
unfortunate but these things happen [shrugs]. The main thing, for me, was
that i could then go back to Brian's answer and understand it more easily.
Thanks and regards from
Tom :)
On 9 September 2014 12:22, William
At 17:22 09/09/2014 -0700, Nobody Noname wrote:
My earlier example was a simplified version of the data I'm working
with. When Brian Wdragos technique ...
They were not one technique but two different ones, in fact.
... is applied to the 2026 samples I really have, it sort of works
so I can
Hi.
I think the trick is to not calculate the difference/no. samples and
keep adding but to calculate the difference and multiply by position
over number of samples added to start time. For a quick test this seems
to give times to 0.00 of a second and the finish time is always the
finish time
At 16:58 10/09/2014 +1200, Steve Edmonds wrote:
I think the trick is to not calculate the difference/no. samples and
keep adding but to calculate the difference and multiply by position
over number of samples added to start time.
For the avoidance of doubt, you will see that this is what my
15 matches
Mail list logo
