Conducting Surveys with RS2+ Rover in ETRS89 / UTM Zone 32N Using ETRF2000 NTRIP SmartNet

Hi! I am using the RS2+ rover with an NTRIP SmartNet connection by Hexagon/Leica, which is set to the ETRF2000 reference system.

I need to conduct a survey in the ETRS89 / UTM zone 32N reference system (EGM 2008 Geoid). How can I do this? Thank you for your advice.

Hi Gilberto,

Welcome to our community!

In this case, you have three different options:

  1. If you have experience with third-party software such as QGIS, you can perform the survey in an ETRF2000-based coordinate system and transform the coordinate system in the office into ETRS89 / UTM zone 32N.

  2. If you have known points in your site in ETRS89 / UTM zone 32N, you can measure them in an ETRF2000-based coordinate system and apply localization to transform your coordinates.

  3. The third method may require some research, but you can set up a custom coordinate system where you can enter the transformation parameters between the two datums and then define the projection.

Hi Zoltan,
thank you so much for your answer. I have anoter question: Can i collect points in Global CS and then create a new project with the required coordinate system and import the CSV file into it?

Beacuse i see this answer: Converting Global CS to GDA2020

Thank you so much

I had a short discussion with the team about your case. ETRF2000 is a realization of ETRS89, you don’t need the workaround that I listed previously. You can use your NTRIP service and measure in ETRS89 / UTM zone 32N right away. You should get centimeter-level precision.

Sorry if I confused you. However, I left my previous message as it is because it can be helpful for others whose datums are totally different.

Can i collect points in Global CS and then create a new project with the required coordinate system and import the CSV file into it?
Beacuse i see this answer: Converting Global CS to GDA2020

It could also work in your case, but this approach just adds an excessive step of manual conversion. So I’d stick with the simplest method.

3 Likes

I was about to say this, so I am just here to support @zoltan.biber answer.

1 Like