Help

Re: Concatenate with limited characters

Solved
Jump to Solution
2101 1
cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
Michael_Leidens
5 - Automation Enthusiast
5 - Automation Enthusiast

Hi,

Who's gonna help to :

- concatenate Row 1+2+3 with a limitation of 3 character per row and a total character of 16 ?

I need to create unique reference (in e-commerce) called Variant SKU looking like

Modele, Size, Color but as we are limited in number of characters (16) it would look like

#MOD-SI-COL

In this view : Variant SKU will be a formula including

#SAM (from marque (brand in french)-modele-vendor

taking only the 3 first characters

Capture d’écran 2022-12-07 à 16.30.12.png

 

thanks guys 🍭

2 Solutions

Accepted Solutions
Andrey_Kovalev
8 - Airtable Astronomer
8 - Airtable Astronomer

@Michael_Leidens Hi, it seems easy at first site. You can use the formula:

UPPER(CONCATENATE("#",LEFT(Brand,3),"-",LEFT(Model,3),"-",LEFT(Vendor,3)))

But here comes a problem of duplicate items if, say, the model names start with the same first characters. So, for model I would suggest using unique codes. However, in this case we are going to have SKU within SKU.

See Solution in Thread

Thank you Andrey.

You are right. Actually we will use model/size/color which is unique.

I didn't mention it and the screenshot I published was taken before. But indeed, otherwise we would might have duplicate. 

See Solution in Thread

2 Replies 2
Andrey_Kovalev
8 - Airtable Astronomer
8 - Airtable Astronomer

@Michael_Leidens Hi, it seems easy at first site. You can use the formula:

UPPER(CONCATENATE("#",LEFT(Brand,3),"-",LEFT(Model,3),"-",LEFT(Vendor,3)))

But here comes a problem of duplicate items if, say, the model names start with the same first characters. So, for model I would suggest using unique codes. However, in this case we are going to have SKU within SKU.

Thank you Andrey.

You are right. Actually we will use model/size/color which is unique.

I didn't mention it and the screenshot I published was taken before. But indeed, otherwise we would might have duplicate.