How to split and reproject a polygon shapefile into a grid based on area proportion with QGIS?












2















I have a shapefile with polygons (municipal.shp) which contains a variable (float numbers) for each municipality of an area. I want to distribute these values into a vector grid (grid.shp) with different projection. So, the splitting should be based on the area proportion of the value. In the image below you can see how the files look like and how the output should be.



enter image description here
How I could do that in QGIS?






qgis shapefile splitting







share|improve this question























  • I don't get the point about the "area proportion", or more precisely, I don't get how proportions are connected to tilting the grid. Could you explain it in detail, please?

    – Erik
    yesterday


















2















I have a shapefile with polygons (municipal.shp) which contains a variable (float numbers) for each municipality of an area. I want to distribute these values into a vector grid (grid.shp) with different projection. So, the splitting should be based on the area proportion of the value. In the image below you can see how the files look like and how the output should be.



enter image description here
How I could do that in QGIS?






qgis shapefile splitting







share|improve this question























  • I don't get the point about the "area proportion", or more precisely, I don't get how proportions are connected to tilting the grid. Could you explain it in detail, please?

    – Erik
    yesterday
















2












2








2








I have a shapefile with polygons (municipal.shp) which contains a variable (float numbers) for each municipality of an area. I want to distribute these values into a vector grid (grid.shp) with different projection. So, the splitting should be based on the area proportion of the value. In the image below you can see how the files look like and how the output should be.



enter image description here
How I could do that in QGIS?






qgis shapefile splitting







share|improve this question














I have a shapefile with polygons (municipal.shp) which contains a variable (float numbers) for each municipality of an area. I want to distribute these values into a vector grid (grid.shp) with different projection. So, the splitting should be based on the area proportion of the value. In the image below you can see how the files look like and how the output should be.



enter image description here
How I could do that in QGIS?






qgis shapefile splitting




qgis shapefile splitting






share|improve this question













share|improve this question











share|improve this question




share|improve this question










asked yesterday









NatNat

275




275













  • I don't get the point about the "area proportion", or more precisely, I don't get how proportions are connected to tilting the grid. Could you explain it in detail, please?

    – Erik
    yesterday





















  • I don't get the point about the "area proportion", or more precisely, I don't get how proportions are connected to tilting the grid. Could you explain it in detail, please?

    – Erik
    yesterday



















I don't get the point about the "area proportion", or more precisely, I don't get how proportions are connected to tilting the grid. Could you explain it in detail, please?

– Erik
yesterday







I don't get the point about the "area proportion", or more precisely, I don't get how proportions are connected to tilting the grid. Could you explain it in detail, please?

– Erik
yesterday












1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes


















5














If I understand your question correctly you can do the following:



First, both of your layers, the municipalities and the grid, need to be in the same metric projection.



Now you can calculate the value per m² of municipalities using field calculator and store it in a new field, lets say valuem2. Use "value" / $area.



enter image description here



Now perform an intersection of municipalities and grid.



enter image description here



It will look like this (id_2 is the grids id):



enter image description here



When you now calculate the new value using "valuem2" * $area you will get the new proportional value into each new splitted polygon.



enter image description here



Now you can reproject your final layer into whatever you want to have it.



Your final product will look like this. Value per m² is represented in a blue color ramp. Value New is represented in the size of circles at the centroids. Additionally labels with all three values. The only one of interest for you in this final result is valuenew. You can delete the other columns to avoid confusion.



enter image description here





  • value is the original absolute value of your municipalities.


  • valuem2 is the relative value of value of your municipalities.


  • valuenew is the absolute value of your new polygons, the intersection
    of municipalities and grid. This will be your final product. It was calculated by the new polygons area multiplied with valuem2.






share|improve this answer


























  • I tried what you suggested but I have the following problem: If a polygon (municipality) has the value of 100 and overlaps 2 grid cells of the final grid then in the final intersection.shp both grid cells have taken the value of 100. The correct would be that the value of 100 would be distributed based on the area of the polygon covered in the grid cells.

    – Nat
    yesterday






  • 1





    @Nat Yes thats true, you can delete the value field in the intersection layer to avoid confusion. You will recalculate the value via valuem2 * $area as shown in the last step: The value of interest in your final layer will be valuenew. Will add a screenshot to my answer.

    – MrXsquared
    yesterday








  • 1





    @Nat added screenshot and short explanation. Hope it helps understanding it. If not let me know.

    – MrXsquared
    yesterday











Your Answer








StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "79"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});

function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});


}
});














draft saved

draft discarded


















StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fgis.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f311019%2fhow-to-split-and-reproject-a-polygon-shapefile-into-a-grid-based-on-area-proport%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown

























1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes








1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes









5














If I understand your question correctly you can do the following:



First, both of your layers, the municipalities and the grid, need to be in the same metric projection.



Now you can calculate the value per m² of municipalities using field calculator and store it in a new field, lets say valuem2. Use "value" / $area.



enter image description here



Now perform an intersection of municipalities and grid.



enter image description here



It will look like this (id_2 is the grids id):



enter image description here



When you now calculate the new value using "valuem2" * $area you will get the new proportional value into each new splitted polygon.



enter image description here



Now you can reproject your final layer into whatever you want to have it.



Your final product will look like this. Value per m² is represented in a blue color ramp. Value New is represented in the size of circles at the centroids. Additionally labels with all three values. The only one of interest for you in this final result is valuenew. You can delete the other columns to avoid confusion.



enter image description here





  • value is the original absolute value of your municipalities.


  • valuem2 is the relative value of value of your municipalities.


  • valuenew is the absolute value of your new polygons, the intersection
    of municipalities and grid. This will be your final product. It was calculated by the new polygons area multiplied with valuem2.






share|improve this answer


























  • I tried what you suggested but I have the following problem: If a polygon (municipality) has the value of 100 and overlaps 2 grid cells of the final grid then in the final intersection.shp both grid cells have taken the value of 100. The correct would be that the value of 100 would be distributed based on the area of the polygon covered in the grid cells.

    – Nat
    yesterday






  • 1





    @Nat Yes thats true, you can delete the value field in the intersection layer to avoid confusion. You will recalculate the value via valuem2 * $area as shown in the last step: The value of interest in your final layer will be valuenew. Will add a screenshot to my answer.

    – MrXsquared
    yesterday








  • 1





    @Nat added screenshot and short explanation. Hope it helps understanding it. If not let me know.

    – MrXsquared
    yesterday
















5














If I understand your question correctly you can do the following:



First, both of your layers, the municipalities and the grid, need to be in the same metric projection.



Now you can calculate the value per m² of municipalities using field calculator and store it in a new field, lets say valuem2. Use "value" / $area.



enter image description here



Now perform an intersection of municipalities and grid.



enter image description here



It will look like this (id_2 is the grids id):



enter image description here



When you now calculate the new value using "valuem2" * $area you will get the new proportional value into each new splitted polygon.



enter image description here



Now you can reproject your final layer into whatever you want to have it.



Your final product will look like this. Value per m² is represented in a blue color ramp. Value New is represented in the size of circles at the centroids. Additionally labels with all three values. The only one of interest for you in this final result is valuenew. You can delete the other columns to avoid confusion.



enter image description here





  • value is the original absolute value of your municipalities.


  • valuem2 is the relative value of value of your municipalities.


  • valuenew is the absolute value of your new polygons, the intersection
    of municipalities and grid. This will be your final product. It was calculated by the new polygons area multiplied with valuem2.






share|improve this answer


























  • I tried what you suggested but I have the following problem: If a polygon (municipality) has the value of 100 and overlaps 2 grid cells of the final grid then in the final intersection.shp both grid cells have taken the value of 100. The correct would be that the value of 100 would be distributed based on the area of the polygon covered in the grid cells.

    – Nat
    yesterday






  • 1





    @Nat Yes thats true, you can delete the value field in the intersection layer to avoid confusion. You will recalculate the value via valuem2 * $area as shown in the last step: The value of interest in your final layer will be valuenew. Will add a screenshot to my answer.

    – MrXsquared
    yesterday








  • 1





    @Nat added screenshot and short explanation. Hope it helps understanding it. If not let me know.

    – MrXsquared
    yesterday














5












5








5







If I understand your question correctly you can do the following:



First, both of your layers, the municipalities and the grid, need to be in the same metric projection.



Now you can calculate the value per m² of municipalities using field calculator and store it in a new field, lets say valuem2. Use "value" / $area.



enter image description here



Now perform an intersection of municipalities and grid.



enter image description here



It will look like this (id_2 is the grids id):



enter image description here



When you now calculate the new value using "valuem2" * $area you will get the new proportional value into each new splitted polygon.



enter image description here



Now you can reproject your final layer into whatever you want to have it.



Your final product will look like this. Value per m² is represented in a blue color ramp. Value New is represented in the size of circles at the centroids. Additionally labels with all three values. The only one of interest for you in this final result is valuenew. You can delete the other columns to avoid confusion.



enter image description here





  • value is the original absolute value of your municipalities.


  • valuem2 is the relative value of value of your municipalities.


  • valuenew is the absolute value of your new polygons, the intersection
    of municipalities and grid. This will be your final product. It was calculated by the new polygons area multiplied with valuem2.






share|improve this answer















If I understand your question correctly you can do the following:



First, both of your layers, the municipalities and the grid, need to be in the same metric projection.



Now you can calculate the value per m² of municipalities using field calculator and store it in a new field, lets say valuem2. Use "value" / $area.



enter image description here



Now perform an intersection of municipalities and grid.



enter image description here



It will look like this (id_2 is the grids id):



enter image description here



When you now calculate the new value using "valuem2" * $area you will get the new proportional value into each new splitted polygon.



enter image description here



Now you can reproject your final layer into whatever you want to have it.



Your final product will look like this. Value per m² is represented in a blue color ramp. Value New is represented in the size of circles at the centroids. Additionally labels with all three values. The only one of interest for you in this final result is valuenew. You can delete the other columns to avoid confusion.



enter image description here





  • value is the original absolute value of your municipalities.


  • valuem2 is the relative value of value of your municipalities.


  • valuenew is the absolute value of your new polygons, the intersection
    of municipalities and grid. This will be your final product. It was calculated by the new polygons area multiplied with valuem2.







share|improve this answer














share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer








edited yesterday

























answered yesterday









MrXsquaredMrXsquared

1,2831316




1,2831316













  • I tried what you suggested but I have the following problem: If a polygon (municipality) has the value of 100 and overlaps 2 grid cells of the final grid then in the final intersection.shp both grid cells have taken the value of 100. The correct would be that the value of 100 would be distributed based on the area of the polygon covered in the grid cells.

    – Nat
    yesterday






  • 1





    @Nat Yes thats true, you can delete the value field in the intersection layer to avoid confusion. You will recalculate the value via valuem2 * $area as shown in the last step: The value of interest in your final layer will be valuenew. Will add a screenshot to my answer.

    – MrXsquared
    yesterday








  • 1





    @Nat added screenshot and short explanation. Hope it helps understanding it. If not let me know.

    – MrXsquared
    yesterday



















  • I tried what you suggested but I have the following problem: If a polygon (municipality) has the value of 100 and overlaps 2 grid cells of the final grid then in the final intersection.shp both grid cells have taken the value of 100. The correct would be that the value of 100 would be distributed based on the area of the polygon covered in the grid cells.

    – Nat
    yesterday






  • 1





    @Nat Yes thats true, you can delete the value field in the intersection layer to avoid confusion. You will recalculate the value via valuem2 * $area as shown in the last step: The value of interest in your final layer will be valuenew. Will add a screenshot to my answer.

    – MrXsquared
    yesterday








  • 1





    @Nat added screenshot and short explanation. Hope it helps understanding it. If not let me know.

    – MrXsquared
    yesterday

















I tried what you suggested but I have the following problem: If a polygon (municipality) has the value of 100 and overlaps 2 grid cells of the final grid then in the final intersection.shp both grid cells have taken the value of 100. The correct would be that the value of 100 would be distributed based on the area of the polygon covered in the grid cells.

– Nat
yesterday





I tried what you suggested but I have the following problem: If a polygon (municipality) has the value of 100 and overlaps 2 grid cells of the final grid then in the final intersection.shp both grid cells have taken the value of 100. The correct would be that the value of 100 would be distributed based on the area of the polygon covered in the grid cells.

– Nat
yesterday




1




1





@Nat Yes thats true, you can delete the value field in the intersection layer to avoid confusion. You will recalculate the value via valuem2 * $area as shown in the last step: The value of interest in your final layer will be valuenew. Will add a screenshot to my answer.

– MrXsquared
yesterday







@Nat Yes thats true, you can delete the value field in the intersection layer to avoid confusion. You will recalculate the value via valuem2 * $area as shown in the last step: The value of interest in your final layer will be valuenew. Will add a screenshot to my answer.

– MrXsquared
yesterday






1




1





@Nat added screenshot and short explanation. Hope it helps understanding it. If not let me know.

– MrXsquared
yesterday





@Nat added screenshot and short explanation. Hope it helps understanding it. If not let me know.

– MrXsquared
yesterday


















draft saved

draft discarded




















































Thanks for contributing an answer to Geographic Information Systems Stack Exchange!


  • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

But avoid …



  • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

  • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




draft saved


draft discarded














StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fgis.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f311019%2fhow-to-split-and-reproject-a-polygon-shapefile-into-a-grid-based-on-area-proport%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown





















































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown

































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown







-

Popular posts from this blog

If I really need a card on my start hand, how many mulligans make sense? [duplicate]

Image
5 This question already has an answer here: How do you calculate the likelihood of drawing certain cards in your opening hand? 3 answers There is a funny modern deck where you play Treasure Hunt, but you really need to have it on the starting hand. How many mulligans should I take, if my deck contains 60 cards and contains 4 copies of Treasure Hunt? magic-the-gathering probability share | improve this question asked Nov 23 '18 at 12:12 dan dan 152 4
Read more

Alcedinidae

Image
Alcedinidae Martin-pêcheur à dos bleu ( Alcedo azurea ) Classification (COI) Règne Animalia Embranchement Chordata Sous-embr. Vertebrata Classe Aves Ordre Coraciiformes Famille Alcedinidae Rafinesque, 1815 Les Alcédinidés ou Alcedinidae forment une famille d'oiseaux plus connus sous les noms de martins-pêcheurs et martins-chasseurs. Sommaire 1 Description 2 Répartition et habitat 3 Systématique 3.1 Liste alphabétique des genres 3.2 Liste des espèces 4 Chez les Anciens : l'alcyon 4.1 Étymologie (Littré) 4.2 Oiseau « fabuleux » ? 5 Notes 6 Articles connexes 7 Liens externes 7.1 Bibliographie Description | Ce sont des oiseaux compacts de taille petite à moyenne (10 à 46 cm), au bec droit et long, en forme de poignard. Leurs pattes sont courtes, et ils portent un plumage aux couleurs vives. Répartition et habitat | Cosmopolites, ils fréquentent surtout
Read more

Can an atomic nucleus contain both particles and antiparticles? [duplicate]

Image
9 $begingroup$ This question already has an answer here: What happens if we put together a proton and an antineutron? 2 answers Is it theoretically possible to make a "deuterium" atom containing a proton and an antineutron in its nucleus? Would the strong nuclear force cause attraction between a proton and an antineutron? Would such a nucleus be stable, or would the proton somehow annihilate the antineutron when close enough? nuclear-physics antimatter share | cite | improve this question asked yesterday
Read more