[janbu]

Hi all,

While the new repository is implemented, you can try using the Python script sentineleof (https://pypi.org/project/sentineleof/).

Hope this helps.

[janbu]

Hi,
I am using windows. I’ve scanned through the files and haven’t noticed any obvious difference between the >1GB and <1GB.
I agree that is good to know if this is confirmed by others and hopefully there will be ways to go around it. Maybe a functionality from the Time Series Module to split the area in tiles (separate archives, maybe with a polygon defined by the user)?
Best

[janbu]

Thanks. I did a few tests creating kmz of different sizes (by filtering the n. of points) and wanted to circle back the results here, as it may help others with the same issue. I found that files <1GB are working fine, while files over 1GB keep returning the above-mentioned error.
Regards

[janbu]

Thank you for the prompt answer. Yes, I was able to open the selected subsets kml individually. I have also followed your suggestion and read the kml as text. Based on the attached image, could you confirm is the links to the files are missing? I can of course provide more info or the file itself if needs to be checked. Would be interesting to know if other users had similar issues or have been successful with kmz over 1GB.

Yes, I did use the csv but the KML is very useful for clients and users that do not use GIS software.
I saw the QGIS plugin a few years ago but I have never tested it. I think it’s time to try it out 🙂

Thanks

Attachments:

You must be logged in to view attached files.

[janbu]

Awsome! Thanks

[janbu]

Thanks. I’ve double-checked the graph and as per the image attached, is a full graph (with 11027 connections). The few interferograms I’ve plotted seems ok. Of course, I couldn’t manually plot over 11K interferograms but there are 11028 interferograms in the respective folder.

I’ve also tried to run it again using other filtering parameters for the interferogram processing but I got the same issue.

One note (if useful at all). When I was extracting the AOI, I got the message the area was within a single burst.

Regards

Attachments:

You must be logged in to view attached files.

[janbu]

Thanks, Daniele,
I thought of the workaround in exporting to CSV, then GIS, etc., but I am not aware of ways to export kml with Time series.
Maybe this is something to consider for future developments?
Thanks

[janbu]

Yes. Not all of them as they are over 3000 (full graph), but they look normal.

[janbu]

Unfortunately, after creating the MT adaptive mask, I did process all the interferograms, selecting the “MT adapt” in the presets of the InSAR Params. Left everything else as default, processed the interferograms and created the coherence map with the results described.
Thanks

[janbu]

Thank you. That was helpful.
I have proceeded with the MT adaptive filter, created the interferograms and generated the coherence map.
In order to get QPS (using the MT adaptive filter) I am assuming I would select points based on spatial coherence
When plotting the Spatial Coherence I basically get a map of all zero and in fact, no points can be selected (e.g in MISP) using the Spatial Coherence.
Am I missing something?
Thanks

Attachments:

You must be logged in to view attached files.

[janbu]

Noticed that the files weren’t successfully uploaded. Here is the download link:
https://we.tl/t-Ij6K3h4fLq
Thanks

[janbu]

Thanks.
Attached is the log file and the exportPar if needed.
Cheers

[janbu]

Sorry…file named GRA4 is actually in the APS module (when reading the SPMRAutosave).

Here are attached the following the images. MISP7 shows the “error” in the deformation pattern.

Cheers

Attachments:

You must be logged in to view attached files.

[janbu]

Thank you for the prompt answer. That was very helpful.
– Regarding the first question/answer, is that valid also if after the Graph Ref (GRA) we recompute the atmosphere in the APS? Is that recommended (or when it is recommended)?

– I noticed that when we upload the autoconnex to the GRA, by default a connection coher threshold is populated. In may case was 0.63. Does it make sense to increase it (in order to create more robust clusters? In my case, I set 0.88 (see images attached below. Should I keep lower (as default)?

In the GRA I have densified the points by lowering the threshold to 0.7 and skipping the initial mask. After the GRA, I have recomputed the APS. The parameters seemed OK.

Unfortunately, in the MISP, the deformation (and vel) parameters have a strong/unrealistic variation, I presume along junction of the 2 frames (sentinel). In a couple of previous standard precessing (no GRA) I didn’t have that effect.
What is it happening here? Are my steps/reasonings right?

Thank you in advance

Attachments:

You must be logged in to view attached files.

[janbu]

The problem was fixed by removing the firewall completely.

[Author]

Posts