In case you downloaded it here: https://github.com/dbekaert/StaMPS
There is a mt_prep_snap command which is designed for outputs preprocessed in SNAP. I suggest using this instead. Additionally, you have to define setparm(‘processor’, ‘snap’) afterwards.
1 Like
Thank you ABraun. From where can i download? is it that latest one? mt_prep_gamma_snap(changed) (6.4 KB)
no, the manually changed one is no longer needed.
You can directly download the full package here: https://github.com/dbekaert/StaMPS
1 Like
after Co-registration I subsetted my area. is it not making this issue right?
I’m not sure to be honest. If you want to do it manually, I suggest to follow the workflows from the snap2stamps manual: https://github.com/mdelgadoblasco/snap2stamps/blob/1.0.1/Manual/SNAP2StaMPS_User_Manual.pdf
Subsetting is involved at some step but I am not sure, when exactly. Maybe @mdelgado can tell us.
Well, the subsetting (as literally done using a WKT POLYGON ) as the latest step after all is done (coreg, ifg)
For what I have seen on the unwrapping error it could be linked somehow to the coordinates, in the sense that you should check that lonlat matrix does not contains NaN’s or similar.
If you found that, please remove them. This normally is done in the ps_load_gamma_initial of the StaMPS latest version, but please check anyway.
I hope this helps
1 Like
This mean before STaMP starting i have to check this values on SNAP ? I mean before STaMP EXPORT?
Well… normally I do not check them, but I do not get your errors. In case I would, I would check everything out until find where I got the issue.
Do it whenever you can, before stamps export or after… but surely before stamps
Thank you dear @ABraun, @mdelgado. I checked Lat Lon file. But still this error coming. I am thinking may my parameters dimensions are not correlating. Which parameters do you give for unwrapping? in my case:
how many persistant scatterers are in your image?
You could try slighlty different settings in the weeding (step 4) and repeat the unwrapping
Greetings Dear contributors,
While processing PSI (2nd time) i encountered with some error at very beginning, in first attempt all the steps ran very smoothly but this time it failed.
here is the screenshot
Could you show the content of the INSAR_20180707 folder?
Dear @mdelgado, after StaMPS export in SNAP i got 4 directories. 
The rslc folder has these contents
I dont know why this is happening, i also checked all the interferograms they seems good.
Greeting,
In my PATCH_1 folder “pscands.1.ij0” is empty. Can anyone tells me the possible reason behind this.
Here is the screenshot
Dear @mdelgado i solved this error, it was due to some typo error.
Regards
1 Like
Hello @ABraun
Why the polarization of HH?
Is the VV polarization not better for detecting the deformation of the surface?
I can’t exactly tell which one is more promising for InSAR applications of surface deformation, but there are studies which argue in favor of certain polarizations.
My main point was that if Sentinel-1 data is being used, the co-polarization channel (mostly VV, but HH in some specific regions, see the last figure on this page) is better than the cross-pol channel, mainly because of two reasons:
- better fringes and higher coherence, see here: Effect of polarization on interferometric products
- using both channels requires more processing time and disk space and can cause errors in SNAP related to file naming during the the unwrapping steps.
This was why I advised to reduce the data to the VV or HH information (whatever is available, mostly not both at a time) already at the interferogram generation step.
Hi all.
I want to share my results over Mexico City where important subsidences have been identified. According to the analysis I made with 13 images, I identify displacements between -262 to 110 mm/y in LOS and relative magnitudes. I have measurements with GNSS equipment and leveling, I want to validate the results with these measurements but when I export to ascii format, I get columns that I do not understand what represent.
2 Likes
Despite the values should be ok, as the subsidence is such high than other error sources surely are negligible, I would suggest you to consider a wider time span.
Good job!
Thanks @mdelgado
I am downloading more images, I will process data of the full year (more than 20 images) and I will tell you the result.