Here is the screenshot
why is there only one band phase?
Ususally, there are Phase_xxx and coherehce. I think the naming and composition of the bands shouldn’t be changed.
Yes, you are right. When I used “S1A_IW_SLC__1SDV_20150414T030925_20150414T030952_005474_006FD6_7F63_Orb_Stack_ifg_deb_dinsar_flt” the exporting is worked.
I will check why I got only Phase_XX, without coherence in the multilook file.
Thank you for your tip.
Regards
hi Arsalan, do you know why after multilooking, we just have i and q, without coherence and phase?
Thank You
according to your screenshot, the script is currently executed in C:\Windows\system32
you have to navigate to the folder where your files were exported. Install SNAPHU using Cygwin
thanks a lot.
You can navigate using the cd command: https://www.digitalcitizen.life/command-prompt-how-use-basic-commands
Hello guys, I need an explanation about theory of displacement result
In forming displacement map, we use Sentinel-1A with resolution 5X20m, SRTM 1arc 30m, whereas to produce the displacement map, we need displacement in scale “cm” or “mm” even. Can you guys explain this theory or is there a paper that explain this processing theory?
Thank You
This is a good starting-point:
Good afternoon, I have a doubt when interpreting my results in this analysis of Independence-Bolivia. Use upward images. Correct me if I am wrong please, negative values mean sinking and positive rises. Please someone could help me, thanks in advance
I think the problem in your case is the large proportion of decorrelated areas. Any isolated patch of pixels can basically not be trusted, because the unwrapping propagated random values in the low coherence areas (noisy interferogram). So comparing the values of the northwest with the small area in the southwest is basically impossible. Also the extreme range of values indicates that some unwanted patterns were introduced.
What kind of deformation do you expect in the area?
Is that for the results that are in the capture discretize the coherence to 0.7, the area I want to analyze is the one of the capture that I attach. I expected to have subsidences in the southern part and elevations in the northern part to compare with the results I have for the area and validate the application of this method in that area. But I had a doubt about the interpretation of the results.
if this is your only area of interest, it might be good to create a subset after debursting the interferogram, so before the snaphu export. Does the interefrogram look alright in this area?
If you have a very small area, you can change the number of rows and colums to 1 in the snaphu configuration file to reduce the chance of tiling errors.
ese es el interferograma de todo y de mi zona de interés es
Este es el interferograma de mi zona de interés
you could consider multi-loking the interferogram, followed by the Goldstein filter. Yet, the urban area (second screenshot) is entirely surrounded by noise.
The only thing you can extract here are variations within the urban area, but not the urban area in total, because there is no reference point outside this urban area which could be used.
Please have a look at how the interferograms look in some DInSAR studies and how these are used to identify subsidence. I’m afraid, looking at small patches of isolated pixels will barely bring insights.
You’re right, apply a filter and this is what my analysis area looks like, I’ll see how the results are. Thanks a lot. Although I still have the doubt of the range of the results that I will obtain.
Hello meli, I am facing problem to get results like you, in my picture displacement is happening all over the region. it should be not like this, it should show movement only some parts not all over the region. can you please guide where is the problem. Thanks
maybe the quality of your inteferogram was bad and unwrapping produced a random result?
1 Like
Sir I have tried many times but no difference in reult.