This is the folder which must be used in matlab. Type getparm to see if all data is loaded correctly.
I also suggest not to run steps 1-8 with one command. Execute them one after another to be able to read the output and change the parameters accordingly.
stamps(1,1)
stamps(2,2)
ect.
You may try with this function I have modified time ago. I hope it works for you. ps_load_initial_gamma.m (7.2 KB)
It should be used on the stamps step 1. So before you override the current one on the stamps_v4.1b/matlab/ please make a backup.
Then please run again the command stamps(1,1) so you re-run step1 to use this function
Thanks a lot, I followed your instructions, and so far ‘stamps (2,2)’ works fine, I removed all the results and rerun ‘mt_prep_snap’ again, then I run ‘stamps (1,1)’ later on ‘stamps (2,2)’ .
Your modified function worked and solved the issue,
This is the first results wrapped phase, I used (StaMPS 4.1b) I didn’t change any of parameters, the goal is to overcome all the technical issues, thanks go to @mdelgado and @ABraun for their efforts and opinions.
good job! Congratulations on sticking to the issue and thanks to @mdelgado for his contribution here. Can you shortly describe what you changed in the matlab script - was it a bug or just covering an exception?
I have duplicated David Bekaert’s strategy identify NaNs (so I include the case where pixels have 0’s) to not include them in the analisis on next steps. As index with 0’s and NaNs gives problems while indexing ij or latlon into matrixes.
No bug! This is not somthing introduced by StaMPS, but SNAP, which saves pixel valuess with 0 or NaNs (to be investigated why exactly this happens). Before SNAP saving 0s and NaNs values on matrix or geological coordinates, non DInSAR processor compatible with StaMPS was doing that before, so StaMPS scripts had not included such verification commands.
But now StaMPS does solve this problem.
Another alternative to handle this could be not to save those values directly from SNAP, but also SNAP currently does not do anything special for these cases.
I can see trends in many of the interferograms. If I were you I would try to remove them before publishing results in other sites.
In my opinion, these trends could be either orbit related error or troposphere related artefacts (but still other people believe that S1 does not introduce orbit errors while using Precise Orbits, so it could be a point for discussion)
According to the StaMPS V4,1b manual, as below, I’d like to drop many of intgms, the same parameter doesn’t work as I posted it previously, I applied your instructions to drop those infgms with high trends, but it dosen’t remove any of them.