Q:

Access Expression problem: it's too complex, so how do I turn it in to a function?

Access 2007 is telling me that my new expression is to complex. It used to work when we had 10 service levels, but now we have 19! Great! I've asked this question in SuperUser and someone suggested I try it over here. Suggestions are I turn it in to a function - but I'm not sure where to begin and what the function would look like.
My expression is checking the COST of our services in the [PriceCharged] field and then assigning the appropriate HOURS [Servicelevel] when I perform a calculation to work out how much REVENUE each colleague has made when working for a client. The [EstimatedTime] field stores the actual hours each colleague has worked.
[EstimatedTime]/[ServiceLevel]*[PriceCharged]

Below is the breakdown of my COST to HOURS expression. I've put them on different lines to make it easier to read - please do not be put off by the length of this post, it's all the same info in the end.
Many thanks,Mike
ServiceLevel: IIf([pricecharged]=100(COST),6(HOURS),
IIf([pricecharged]=200 Or [pricecharged]=210,12.5,
IIf([pricecharged]=300,19,
IIf([pricecharged]=400 Or [pricecharged]=410,25,    
IIf([pricecharged]=500,31,
IIf([pricecharged]=600,37.5,
IIf([pricecharged]=700,43,
IIf([pricecharged]=800 Or [pricecharged]=810,50,
IIf([pricecharged]=900,56,
IIf([pricecharged]=1000,62.5,
IIf([pricecharged]=1100,69,
IIf([pricecharged]=1200 Or [pricecharged]=1210,75,
IIf([pricecharged]=1300 Or [pricecharged]=1310,100,
IIf([pricecharged]=1400,125,
IIf([pricecharged]=1500,150,
IIf([pricecharged]=1600,175,
IIf([pricecharged]=1700,200,
IIf([pricecharged]=1800,225,
IIf([pricecharged]=1900,250,0)))))))))))))))))))

UPDATE (16/04/10 14:46 GMT)
I've built a new table as recommended below. Now it's matter of removing my expression and making my original SELECT query use the new table. However, I'm not at all clear on how this is done.
Using the DLookUP example I imagine I keep the original query where I have my PRICECHARGED field, include a new DLookUp field that uses the example below to refer to the PRICECHARGED and populate the rows with the appropriate SERVICELEVEL (hours). 
I become confused at this point because in my original SELECT query all the calculation happened in that query (expressions, after expression), which meant that the final result of my query was a list of colleagues with HOURS, and REVENUE (Cost) against their name. I have a feeling that I'm in need of another query in the middle to manage the DlookUp process.

`Any directions or road map very much appreciated.  

Final update. Added another table as mentioned above, created the appropriate links from the new table to the field in the 'fixed'table. Voila. It worked a charm, and without me doing anything that caused it to crash or give me an error warning. It was easier than I thought. I don't understand why I didn't manage it this way before.

Thanks again, Mike 

A:

You're making life really, really, really hard for yourself.
Create a table PriceToHours with columns PriceCharged and Hours.  Put the appropriate rows into it so it matches the tabular data in your expression.  Now JOIN that table to your main data table to get the Hours from the PriceCharged.  When this information changes in the future, simply update the data in the table.  This is much more transparent (no data hidden in a query expression) and requires no additional programmer time when the values change in the future.

A:

I would suggest changing the way this works and keeping the service level to price charged logic in a separate table. This would allow you to change it quickly if the business need changed.
The table would just be as simple as two columns and “ServiceLevel” and “PriceCharged”. Then in your query link that to your table.
For a quick check however what would happen in the price charged was say 1105 i.e. not in the list? The function would possibly return a null which would then cause the expression to fail maybe that is causing it?
EDIT::
After a bit of searching around it looks like the maximum number of nested IIF statements in access is 10 hence why it worked fine before but now does not. Looks like your only option is to redesign it to how it should have been in the first place!

