This the problem

I desigh a mini database for me.

I want to calculate the cost per print in my plotter

I found that

with 400% ink (CMYK) Field A

Print on 0.10 Squear meter Field B

my printer inkjet "3 ml" of my colours Field C

I want to put values in Fields A and B

to calculate the ml of printed colours (field C)

Is that possible???

George

It may be possible, but you haven't provided much information to go on. What kind of relationship is there between the %, area, and volume used? From one data point, isn't clear if this is a linear relationship or how the volume used varies when the % or area are changed.

It's linear. That's what the 400% implies.

Your variables are:

% ink = A (CMYK)

If you use a bulk number for all four colors for the % you need to divide it by 4 before calculating.

We'll switch to a full square meter for simplicty, trust me.

B = Area(sq.m)

At 100% coverage of .1 meter you use 3 ml ink.

At 100% coverage of a full meter you use 30 ml of ink.

So your calculaion should be something like:

((A/4)/100)) * 30) * B

Sample:

If your coverage is 280% and your area is .5 sq meter:

.7 * 30 *.5 = 10.5

or per your example:

((400/4)/100)*30*.1 = 3ml

Got it?

PS -Glad you didn't ask for this in imperial measure ! (ft, in. etc.)

IF it is linear (and I don't know how the 400% would imply that), then the formula can be simply:

Coverage * Area * constant

In the given example, if Coverage is entered as percentage (i.e. 400 means 400%), and Area is measured in square meters, constant will be 0.075:

400 * 0.1 * 0.075 = 3

In my reply you'll see the 'A (CMYK)' representing the 4 colors of ink.

400% represents 100% of each color. Color on a piece of paper is not mutable.

We know that this is a calcualtion which is not measured over time or distance so there are no other mutable variables. I don't see how this could be anything but linear GIVEN the variables: A percent. An area. And a constant.

Your formula is correct, as is mine.

I don't know what 'mutable variable' means. The assumption that 200% coverage consumes twice as much ink as 100%, and 400% twice as much again, sounds reasonable - but it is an assumption nevertheless.

We have been given a single point. You need at least three to indicate linearity. Even then it might be a coincidental knee of an exponential curve.