[dumindarw]

Dear Professor Periz

I have been working with 33 Sentinel 1(mid 2019-2021) images on a Mater area of Radius 10Km in a mountainous region under small scale earthquake deformation study. In the APS estimation for the estimated parameters especially the Integrated Velocity shows spatial ramps in the inverted residuals estimation. I have gone through almost all the discussions regarding the spatial ramps , the quality of the images downloaded was also considered other than the graph connections ,Interferograms, coherence, NL weighting, and the processing parameters. Also I have reduced the size of the master area and tested as I am working on an evaluation version of Sarproz. I got through these ramps in few cases (not convinced) 1. when I remove the 3 Sentinel images for the month of late February and March 2021 keeping the stack of 32 from 35 2. when I reduce the study area to around 12Km to 8Km specifically targeting the Urban areas 3. when I use Inverted parameters (flatten). 4. For co-registration using orbits and external DEM

I have tried many ways to reduce these patterns for last few months but bit confused and need some advice on where to conduct more detailed investigation to reduce these.

Attachments:

You must be logged in to view attached files.

[dumindarw]

Spatial Trends and parameters

Attachments:

You must be logged in to view attached files.

[periz]

Hi Duminda,
to give you a proper advice we need to see your data. Please be patient a few days, it’s a busy time. Please write an email to support, we’ll get back to you soon.
Best

[dumindarw]

Dear Professor Periz

Thank you for your respond, I do really appreciate your attention on the matter and I am really sorry for being in the middle during a very busy time. I will write to support!

Thanks a lot!

[Author]

Posts