View
17
Download
0
Category
Preview:
Citation preview
Towards Routine Monitoring of Tectonic and Volcanic Deformation with Sentinel-1
Wright, Tim J (1); Biggs, Juliet (2); Crippa, Paula (3); Ebmeier, Susanna K. (2); Elliott, John (4); Gonzalez, Pablo (1); Hooper, Andy (1); Larsen, Ynvar (5); Li, Zhenhong (3); Marinkovic, Petar (6); Parsons, Barry (4);
Spaans, Karsten (1); Walters, Richard (1); Ziebart, Marek (7).1: COMET, University of Leeds, United Kingdom; 2: COMET, University of Bristol, United Kingdom; 3:
COMET, University of Newcastle, United Kingdom; 4: COMET, University of Oxford, United Kingdom; 5: Norut, Norway; 6: PPO.Labs, The Netherlands; 7: COMET, University College London, United Kingdom
INSARAP
Outline1. Why do we care about deformation observations
for tectonics and volcanoes?
2. Why is Sentinel-1 a game changer?
3. COMET plans for routine processing
INSARAP
Outline1. Why do we care about deformation observations
for tectonics and volcanoes?
2. Why is Sentinel-1 a game changer?
3. COMET plans for routine processing
INSARAP
Earthquakes with 10,000+ deaths since 1900
Figure courtesy John Elliott
Strain rate correlates with rate of earthquake occurrence
Figure reproduced with permission from Corné Kreemer, University of Reno and the Global Earthquake Model
Deformation at volcanoes is diagnostic of impending eruption/unrest
Photo: USGS
Biggs, Ebmeier et al., Nature Comms 2014
Outline1. Why do we care about deformation observations
for tectonics and volcanoes?
2. Why is Sentinel-1 a game changer?
3. COMET plans for routine processing
INSARAP
Why is Sentinel-1 a game changer?
Sentinel-1 Other SAR mission archives
1. Systematic acquisitions for
tectonics and volcanoes: “InSAR
everywhere all the time”
Haphazard acquisitions (multiple
modes, limited capacity)
2. TOPS: 250 km x 1000+ km:
Continental scale InSAR
Small areas imaged, usually less
than 100 km swaths.
3. Small perpendicular baselines,
acquisitions every 6/12/24 days,
ascending and descending -> high
coherence
Typically large perpendicular
baselines and long gaps between
acquisitions -> poor coherence
4. 20 year operational program,
designed for InSAR
Stand-alone missions not designed
for InSAR
5. Free, full and open data policy,
enables mass processing.
Restricted data access, often
commercial pricing
Why is Sentinel-1 a game changer?
Sentinel-1 Other SAR mission archives
1. Systematic acquisitions for
tectonics and volcanoes: “InSAR
everywhere all the time”
Haphazard acquisitions (multiple
modes, limited capacity)
2. TOPS: 250 km x 1000+ km:
Continental scale InSAR
Small areas imaged, usually less
than 100 km swaths.
3. Small perpendicular baselines,
acquisitions every 6/12/24 days,
ascending and descending -> high
coherence
Typically large perpendicular
baselines and long gaps between
acquisitions -> poor coherence
4. 20 year operational program,
designed for InSAR
Stand-alone missions not designed
for InSAR
5. Free, full and open data policy,
enables mass processing.
Restricted data access, often
commercial pricing
1. “InSAR everywhere, all the time” (NASA Solid Earth Science Working Group Report, 2002, NASA InSAR Workshop Report, 2004)
We can’t predict in advance the locations of future earthquakes and volcanic eruptions
1. “InSAR everywhere, all the time” (NASA Solid Earth Science Working Group Report, 2002, NASA InSAR Workshop Report, 2004)
24 August 2014 South Napa Earthquake
• Largest earthquake in California in 20 years.
• 1 death, ~160 injuries• $1 Billion costs to wine industry• Pre-earthquake Stripmap image
acquired by Sentinel-1A on 7 August (the day it reached nominal orbit)
• Post-earthquake image on 31 August, scheduled by special request.
Austin Elliott (UCDavis)
Elliott et al., EOS 2015
Source model from InSAR and GPSdata model residual
Slip UncertaintyNS NS
More in Elliott et al., Tuesday 15.30, Magellan
23 Nov 2014 Pico do Fogo Eruption
• 1st eruption in 20 yrs (1995)
• Flights to S. America diverted
• ~1500 evacuated people
• Two towns completely destroyed
Samara Donis (InVOLCAN)
David Calvo (InVOLCAN)
Observations
Ascending (20141103-20141127)
Descending (20141108-20141202)
Preferred Model
10-5 km ?Gonzalez et al., in review 2015
Thanks to ESA for expanding tectonic coverage
Original ESA mask
Current tectonic mask Ideal (?) tectonic mask
https://sentinel.esa.int/web/sentinel/missions/sentinel-1/observation-scenario
Why is Sentinel-1 a game changer?
Sentinel-1 Other SAR mission archives
1. Systematic acquisitions for
tectonics and volcanoes: “InSAR
everywhere all the time”
Haphazard acquisitions (multiple
modes, limited capacity)
2. TOPS: 250 km x 1000+ km:
Continental scale InSAR
Small areas imaged, usually less
than 100 km swaths.
3. Small perpendicular baselines,
acquisitions every 6/12/24 days,
ascending and descending -> high
coherence
Typically large perpendicular
baselines and long gaps between
acquisitions -> poor coherence
4. 20 year operational program,
designed for InSAR
Stand-alone missions not designed
for InSAR
5. Free, full and open data policy,
enables mass processing.
Restricted data access, often
commercial pricing
2. Continental Scale InSAR
Why is Sentinel-1 a game changer?
Sentinel-1 Other SAR mission archives
1. Systematic acquisitions for
tectonics and volcanoes: “InSAR
everywhere all the time”
Haphazard acquisitions (multiple
modes, limited capacity)
2. TOPS: 250 km x 1000+ km:
Continental scale InSAR
Small areas imaged, usually less
than 100 km swaths.
3. Small perpendicular baselines,
acquisitions every 6/12/24 days,
ascending and descending -> high
coherence
Typically large perpendicular
baselines and long gaps between
acquisitions -> poor coherence
4. 20 year operational program,
designed for InSAR
Stand-alone missions not designed
for InSAR
5. Free, full and open data policy,
enables mass processing.
Restricted data access, often
commercial pricing
3. Short revisit and Small perpendicular baselines -> Excellent Coherence
Creeping section of the North Anatolian Fault, 12-days
3. Short revisit and Small perpendicular baselines -> Excellent Coherence
Creeping section of the North Anatolian Fault, 24-days
3. Short revisit and Small perpendicular baselines -> Excellent Coherence
Creeping section of the North Anatolian Fault, 24-days
Typical ERS coherence (Cakir et al., 2005)
3. Short revisit -> rapid phenomena
Napa Postseismic deformation: 31 August – 12 September 2014
Afterslip model
NS
More in Elliott et al., Tuesday 15.30, Magellan
3. Short revisit -> rapid phenomena
Napa Postseismic deformation: 31 August – 24 September 2014
Afterslip model
NS
More in Elliott et al., Tuesday 15.30, Magellan
3. Short revisit -> rapid phenomena
Napa Postseismic deformation: 31 August – 6 October 2014
Afterslip model
NS
More in Elliott et al., Tuesday 15.30, Magellan
3. Short revisit -> rapid phenomena
Napa Postseismic deformation: 31 August – 18 October 2014
Afterslip model
NS
More in Elliott et al., Tuesday 15.30, Magellan
3. Short revisit -> rapid phenomena
Napa Postseismic deformation: 31 August – 30 October 2014
Afterslip model
NS
More in Elliott et al., Tuesday 15.30, Magellan
Why is Sentinel-1 a game changer?
Sentinel-1 Other SAR mission archives
1. Systematic acquisitions for
tectonics and volcanoes: “InSAR
everywhere all the time”
Haphazard acquisitions (multiple
modes, limited capacity)
2. TOPS: 250 km x 1000+ km:
Continental scale InSAR
Small areas imaged, usually less
than 100 km swaths.
3. Small perpendicular baselines,
acquisitions every 6/12/24 days,
ascending and descending -> high
coherence
Typically large perpendicular
baselines and long gaps between
acquisitions -> poor coherence
4. 20 year operational program,
designed for InSAR
Stand-alone missions, usually not
designed for InSAR
5. Free, full and open data policy,
enables mass processing.
Restricted data access, often
commercial pricing
Duration of time series (years)
0.11 2 3 4 5Le
ngt
h s
cale
of
ob
serv
atio
n (
km)
4. 20-year operational program
1 mm/yr rates over 100 km can be achieved with 5 years of acquisitions (12 day revisit)
Ability of Sentinel-1 to map tectonic strain above target threshold (1 mm/yr over 100 km)
Why is Sentinel-1 a game changer?
Sentinel-1 Other SAR mission archives
1. Systematic acquisitions for
tectonics and volcanoes: “InSAR
everywhere all the time”
Haphazard acquisitions (multiple
modes, limited capacity)
2. TOPS: 250 km x 1000+ km:
Continental scale InSAR
Small areas imaged, usually less
than 100 km swaths.
3. Small perpendicular baselines,
acquisitions every 6/12/24 days,
ascending and descending -> high
coherence
Typically large perpendicular
baselines and long gaps between
acquisitions -> poor coherence
4. 20 year operational program,
designed for InSAR
Stand-alone missions, usually not
designed for InSAR
5. Free, full and open data policy,
enables mass processing.
Restricted data access, often
commercial pricing
UK-PAF
Sentinel-1 archivemainly for
Copernicus core services
1-monthSentinel-1
rolling archive
SLCs
LiCS processing facility
processing facility
storage facility (and future public
services)
HarwellFarnborough
Sentinel-1 SAR processor
CEDA
5. “Free, full and open” data policy Mass Processing
Outline1. Why do we care about deformation observations
for tectonics and volcanoes?
2. Why is Sentinel-1 a game changer?
3. COMET plans for routine processing
INSARAP
Global Tectonics: 55 Mkm2 Ice: 5 Mkm2
Europe: 10 Mkm2
Total: 70 Mkm2
Data throughput = 0.5 TB/day [~1PetaByte over 5 years]
Geographical coverage
Processing strategy
T=0 ~1 yr (?) +12 days +24 days +36 days
Orbit Models (real time + precise)
Atmospheric Models (real time + reanalysis)
Initial time seriesInitial linear rates
Updated time seriesUpdated linear rates
Continuous, near-global processing
Interferogram(displacement)
Interferogram(displacement)
SAR images
Interferogram(displacement)
Time-series for each pixel
Strain-rate map
InSARprocessor
Time-series processor
Average velocity
map
Strain inversion
Precise orbits
Atmos. correction
Ifgmfilter
Earthquakemodels
GP
Svelo
cities
Geophysicalinversion
Volcanomodels
Work flowData
Processed data
Derivedproducts
Models
Work flow
Interferogram(displacement)
Interferogram(displacement)
SAR images
Interferogram(displacement)
Time-series for each pixel
Strain-rate map
InSARprocessor
Time-series processor
Average velocity
map
Strain inversion
Precise orbits
Atmos. correction
Ifgmfilter
Earthquakemodels
GP
Svelo
cities
Geophysicalinversion
Data
Processed data
Derivedproducts
Models Volcanomodels
INSARAP presentations today
Gonzalez poster (6), Tuesday
Bekaert, Tues 10.00, Big HallWalters, Tues 12.30, Big Hall+ Tues poster: Crippa (20)
Spaans, Thurs 16.00, Magellan
Wang, Weds 15.50, Big Hall
Elliott, Tues 15.30, MagellanHussain, Weds 11.50, Big Hall+ Tues posters: Ingleby (61), Amey (68), Lloyd (82)
Hooper, Thurs 15.20, MagellanHamlyn, Thurs 11.50, MagellanArnold, Thurs 9.00, Magellan+ Thurs posters: Biggs (76), Ebmeier (79), Gaddes (77), Gineaux (80), Bagnardi (85)
Global validation of ERA-Interim wet delay
• Major global variation in quality of ERA-I wet delay retrieval
• We can now consider the uncertainties associated with applying atmospheric corrections
Walters et al. Tuesday 12:30, Big HallSession: InSAR Theory and Techniques (2)
BAD
GOOD
Recursive Adaptive Spectral Phase filtering
RSF Filtered phase
Gonzalez et al. Tuesday Poster Session #6
5x5 boxcar Cousin based coherence
Improved pixel selection via identification of cousins
• Identify pixels with on average similar behaviour (Similar to SqueeSAR methods of Ferretti et al, 2011)
• We use mean amplitude and mean amplitude difference between master and slave
Spaans et al. Thursday 16:00, MagellanSession: Applications – Volcanoes (3)
Improved pixel selection via identification of cousins
Full interferogram Our method Small baselines
• Identify pixels with on average similar behaviour (Similar to SqueeSAR methods of Ferretti et al, 2011)
• We use mean amplitude and mean amplitude difference between master and slave
Spaans et al. Thursday 16:00, MagellanSession: Applications – Volcanoes (3)
Turkey
Iran
Using InSAR to Map Strain in Eastern Turkey
Method in Wang and Wright, GRL 2012; Turkey case study in Walters et al., JGR 2014
Using InSAR to Map Strain in Eastern Turkey
Solution from GPS Solution from InSAR
Method in Wang and Wright, GRL 2012; Turkey case study in Walters et al., JGR 2014
What will we be seeing at Fringe 2020?
• High-resolution, time-varying, global 3D maps of crustal velocities and strains.
• Automatic alert systems for volcanoes
• Complete catalogue of deformation models for continental earthquakes with M>6
• Integration with GNSS for near-real-time monitoring.
• Many scientific surprises!
INSARAP
More information on INSARAP, and download processed data at http://insarap.orgCOMET: http://comet.nerc.ac.uk
@NERC_COMET@timwright_leeds@EwFProject
Recommended