array index not starting at 0

[Raiko]

Hello all,

I have a problem with the display of an array (see attached pic).
The red circles are measurment values. I'd like to add a fit function that is defined by boundaries given as "von" and "bis"; a piece wise fitting and interpolation that is.
The fitting functions do not pose a problem, however, the fit function's values are written into an array starting at 0. Since my measuerement values do not start at zero but at an arbitrary point these two graphs do not match.

One way to overcome this is to extend the array by adding zeros but these zeros are displayed as well. The graph then looks really ugly.

Hence my question: does anybody know of a way to display only parts of an array starting at an arbitrary value?

Raiko

[ptc-1368288]

>The graph then looks really ugly.<<br> ___________________________________

Probably lot worst than "ugly",
I guess everything wrong !

You know how to help yourself ... attach the work sheet,
"save as" as low version you figure help is there.
You message flies in the blue.

jmG

[StuartBruff]

On 8/5/2009 8:26:56 AM, raiko01 wrote:
== Hence my question: does anybody know of a way to display only parts of an array starting at an arbitrary value?

Try adding 'von' to i on the x-axis.

Stuart

[LouP]

One way to skip points in an array is to use the fact that the 2-D graph doesn't plot complex values. Make the points you don't want to plot imaginary. They won't plot, and the array indices haven't changed. Making an intermediate value imaginary will put a break in a line plot.

Lou

[TomGutman]

Don't post pictures (who knows how you got them?), post actual work sheets.

Don't create an array for the fit, plot the function. Don't plot against the index value (not usually meaningful), plot against a suitable independent variable.
__________________
� � � � Tom Gutman

[Raiko]

On 8/5/2009 3:30:42 PM, Tom_Gutman wrote:
>Don't post pictures (who knows
>how you got them?), post
>actual work sheets.
>
>Don't create an array for the
>fit, plot the function. Don't
>plot against the index value
>(not usually meaningful), plot
>against a suitable independent
>variable.
>__________________
>� � � � Tom Gutman


Hello guys,

thank you for your input but I found the culprit - I used the index of the measurment value instead of the value itself; silly me.

Raiko