Skip to main content

geodesy - How to calculate the distance between UTM-projected coordinates?


My coordinates are projected using the following projection:


proj= {"UTMZone32", {"GridOrigin" -> {500000, 0}, "CentralScaleFactor" -> 0.9996}};

Now I wish to calculate the distance between two points (ignoring elevation), e.g.



p1= GeoGridPosition[{359577, 5.51291*10^6,0}, proj]
p2= GeoGridPosition[{509108, 5.972*10^6,0}, proj]

When I try GeoDistance


GeoDistance[p1,p2]

it fails with the error message



GeoDistance::invparam: "Invalid parameters \!\(\"GeoGridPosition[{359577, 5.51291*^6, 0},
{\\\"UTMZone32\\\", {\\\"GridOrigin\\\" -> {500000, 0}, 

 \\\"CentralScaleFactor\\\" -> 0.9996}}]\"\). "

Also, the GeoPositionXYZ function, as in


GeoPositionXYZ[p1]

fails with the error messages



ToString::nonopt: Options expected (instead of InputForm) beyond position 2 in 
ToString[None,{GridOrigin->{500000,0},CentralScaleFactor->0.9996},InputForm]. 
An option must be a rule or a list of rules. >>


GeoGridPosition::invparam: "Invalid parameters ToString[\!\(None, {
 \"GridOrigin\" -> {500000, 0}, \"CentralScaleFactor\" -> 0.9996`}, InputForm\)]."

GeoPositionXYZ::invcoord: "\!\(\"GeoPosition[GeoGridPosition[{359577, 5.51291*^6, 0}, 
{\\\"UTMZone32\\\", {\\\"GridOrigin\\\" -> {500000, 0}, \\\"CentralScaleFactor\\\" -> 
0.9996}}]]\"\) is not a valid coordinate specification."

Both functions work, however, when I switch proj to the string UTMZone32.


Do I need to get the full projection specification to work?



EDIT: After some further googling, I realized that in UTM coordinates the distance between two points is simply


Norm[{p1[[1,1;;2]]-p2[[1,1;;2]]}]

so I would answer my own question with no.



Answer



As @Sjoerd states in the comments, your projection system (UTMZone32) has a defined set of parameters. You can check these using GeoProjectionData:


GeoProjectionData["UTMZone32"]


{"TransverseMercator", {"Centering" -> {0, 9}, "CentralScaleFactor" -> 0.9996, "GridOrigin" -> {500000, 0}, "ReferenceModel" -> "WGS84"}}




These coincide with the ones you are trying to set.


To define your own projection system similar to UTM (based on Transverse Mercator), you can simply specify those in GeoGridPosition:


GeoGridPosition[{1000000, 1000000}, 
 {"TransverseMercator", {"Centering" -> {0, 0}, "CentralScaleFactor" -> 0.95,
 "GridOrigin" -> {500000, 0}, "ReferenceModel" -> "WGS84"}}]

This now can be easily converted to LatitudeLongitude.


So, since this is a projected coordinate system, and as you state at the end of the question, can be easily calculated using Norm or EuclideanDistance or whatever:


Norm[{359577, 5.51291*10^6, 0} - {509108, 5.972*10^6, 0}]

EuclideanDistance[{359577, 5.51291*10^6, 0}, {509108, 5.972*10^6, 0}]


482828.


482828.



But we can also use the built-in GeoDistance which in v10 returns a Quantity:


pos1 = GeoGridPosition[{359577, 5.51291*10^6, 0}, "UTMZone32"];
pos2 = GeoGridPosition[{509108, 5.972*10^6, 0}, "UTMZone32"];
GeoDistance[pos1, pos2]~UnitConvert~"Meters"



482985. m



Sadly, they're 157 meters apart.


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

functions - Get leading series expansion term?

Given a function f[x] , I would like to have a function leadingSeries that returns just the leading term in the series around x=0 . For example: leadingSeries[(1/x + 2)/(4 + 1/x^2 + x)] x and leadingSeries[(1/x + 2 + (1 - 1/x^3)/4)/(4 + x)] -(1/(16 x^3)) Is there such a function in Mathematica? Or maybe one can implement it efficiently? EDIT I finally went with the following implementation, based on Carl Woll 's answer: lds[ex_,x_]:=( (ex/.x->(x+O[x]^2))/.SeriesData[U_,Z_,L_List,Mi_,Ma_,De_]:>SeriesData[U,Z,{L[[1]]},Mi,Mi+1,De]//Quiet//Normal) The advantage is, that this one also properly works with functions whose leading term is a constant: lds[Exp[x],x] 1 Answer Update 1 Updated to eliminate SeriesData and to not return additional terms Perhaps you could use: leadingSeries[expr_, x_] := Normal[expr /. x->(x+O[x]^2) /. a_List :> Take[a, 1]] Then for your examples: leadingSeries[(1/x + 2)/(4 + 1/x^2 + x), x] leadingSeries[Exp[x], x] leadingSeries[(1/x + 2 + (1 - 1/x...
Post a Comment
Read more

mathematical optimization - Minimizing using indices, error: Part::pkspec1: The expression cannot be used as a part specification

I want to use Minimize where the variables to minimize are indices pointing into an array. Here a MWE that hopefully shows what my problem is. vars = u@# & /@ Range[3]; cons = Flatten@ { Table[(u[j] != #) & /@ vars[[j + 1 ;; -1]], {j, 1, 3 - 1}], 1 vec1 = {1, 2, 3}; vec2 = {1, 2, 3}; Minimize[{Total@((vec1[[#]] - vec2[[u[#]]])^2 & /@ Range[1, 3]), cons}, vars, Integers] The error I get: Part::pkspec1: The expression u[1] cannot be used as a part specification. >> Answer Ok, it seems that one can get around Mathematica trying to evaluate vec2[[u[1]]] too early by using the function Indexed[vec2,u[1]] . The working MWE would then look like the following: vars = u@# & /@ Range[3]; cons = Flatten@{ Table[(u[j] != #) & /@ vars[[j + 1 ;; -1]], {j, 1, 3 - 1}], 1 vec1 = {1, 2, 3}; vec2 = {1, 2, 3}; NMinimize[ {Total@((vec1[[#]] - Indexed[vec2, u[#]])^2 & /@ R...
Post a Comment
Read more

plotting - Plot 4D data with color as 4th dimension

I have a list of 4D data (x position, y position, amplitude, wavelength). I want to plot x, y, and amplitude on a 3D plot and have the color of the points correspond to the wavelength. I have seen many examples using functions to define color but my wavelength cannot be expressed by an analytic function. Is there a simple way to do this? Answer Here a another possible way to visualize 4D data: data = Flatten[Table[{x, y, x^2 + y^2, Sin[x - y]}, {x, -Pi, Pi,Pi/10}, {y,-Pi,Pi, Pi/10}], 1]; You can use the function Point along with VertexColors . Now the points are places using the first three elements and the color is determined by the fourth. In this case I used Hue, but you can use whatever you prefer. Graphics3D[ Point[data[[All, 1 ;; 3]], VertexColors -> Hue /@ data[[All, 4]]], Axes -> True, BoxRatios -> {1, 1, 1/GoldenRatio}]
Post a Comment
Read more