0

I'm trying to find the correct CRS in QGIS 3.34 for the GNSS points from our trimble device. The Trimble is set to World Wide/UTM Zone 32N projection ITRF2020 (EPSG:9989). Other settings please see first picture.

In the Trimble the points show NE of "Bahnstraße". Please see second picture. This is correct.

But when I load the CSV into the QGIS project (CRS ist set to ESPG:25832) and try to set the CRS to 9989, the transformation options will show only Norway, Denmark and the complete 32N area. We are in Belgium. But whichever conversion I try the point don't show and QGIS gives me a transformation error.

All other UTM based CRS I tried, put the points 120 to 1000 m NNW to NW or in one case 180 m W of the intended location.

Next thing I tried was starting a new project with ITRF2020 as project CRS and add in CSV and the WMS for Belgium. Didn't work either. Here I start with 621 million km diffrence between Map and points.

I suspect the settings through the correctional data from WALCORS created a customized dataset which will not automatically be projected right in QGIS.

How can I solve this?

Settings Correct Locationenter image description here Location

Improve this question
7
  • 1
    Please post your CSV. (As Text)
    – Pointdump
    Commented Sep 27 at 8:57
  • Following the first points of our csv 101,295300.280,5574083.175,468.316,FP,, 102,295295.024,5574085.715,468.847,FP,, 103,295305.999,5574093.169,467.956,FP,, 1000,295303.034,5574075.410,468.654,Zn-Pr,4,A 1001,295301.720,5574074.795,468.649,Zn-Pr,4,B 1002,295301.458,5574074.089,468.364,UR-Pl,4, 1003,295301.584,5574074.230,468.433,UR-Pl,4, 1004,295301.745,5574074.286,468.670,UR-Pl,4, 1005,295301.854,5574074.307,468.853,UR-Pl,4, 1006,295301.961,5574074.295,469.137,UR-Pl,4, 1007,295302.141,5574074.369,469.257,UR-Pl,4,
    – SaSiGS
    Commented Sep 30 at 8:07
  • EPSG:9989 is a Geographic Coordinate System, which uses Lats and Longs. Your CSV looks like Eastings and Northings, so if your points are in Belgium, they probably belong in EPSG:25832.
    – Pointdump
    Commented Sep 30 at 8:42
  • They were supposed to work with 25832, so this was the first i tried, but using this CRS the points are projected 200 m north of actual site location. I think it has something to do with WALCORS correctional data (main source in the wallonian part of Belgium). The global reference date was set to WALCORS 22 (7P) the global reference epoch is 2005, while the displacement model is ITRF2020.
    – SaSiGS
    Commented Oct 1 at 5:45
  • What are you comparing against to determine your data is 200 Meters to the North? A 200 Meter shift most likely indicates a Datum selection problem.
    – Pointdump
    Commented Oct 1 at 8:25

1 Answer 1

Reset to default
0

Looks like a shift because of Datum.

Create a custom coordinate system in QGIS by editing EPSG:25832, replacing GEOGCS ETRS89 with GEOGCS BD72:

PROJCS["BD72 / UTM zone 32N", GEOGCS["BD72", DATUM["Reseau_National_Belge_1972", SPHEROID["International 1924",6378388,297], TOWGS84[-106.8686,52.2978,-103.7239,0.3366,-0.457,1.8422,-1.2747]], PRIMEM["Greenwich",0, AUTHORITY["EPSG","8901"]], UNIT["degree",0.0174532925199433, AUTHORITY["EPSG","9122"]], AUTHORITY["EPSG","4258"]], PROJECTION["Transverse_Mercator"], PARAMETER["latitude_of_origin",0], PARAMETER["central_meridian",9], PARAMETER["scale_factor",0.9996], PARAMETER["false_easting",500000], PARAMETER["false_northing",0], UNIT["metre",1, AUTHORITY["EPSG","9001"]], AXIS["Easting",EAST], AXIS["Northing",NORTH]]

enter image description here

enter image description here

Improve this answer
4
  • 1
    Thank you so much. That worked perfectly. I just had to insert one missing bracket :)
    – SaSiGS
    Commented Oct 4 at 8:23
  • Oops! Let me know where I missed a bracket so I can correct it.
    – Pointdump
    Commented Oct 4 at 9:33
  • OK, thanks for letting me know. I edited my answer and fixed it.
    – Pointdump
    Commented Oct 4 at 9:41
  • 1
    I had the bracket here: PARAMETER["false_northing",0], UNIT["metre",1], AUTHORITY["EPSG","9001"] It worked just the same.
    – SaSiGS
    Commented Oct 4 at 11:56

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.