Source: https://www.scribd.com/document/8481639/Mapping-Millimetre-Scale-Ground-Deformation-over-the-Frank-Slide-and-South-Peak-of-Turtle-Mountain-Alberta-Using-Spaceborne-InSAR-Technology
Timestamp: 2019-04-18 23:06:18+00:00

Document:
by the ERCB/AGS of any manufacturer's product.
Energy Resources Conservation Board, ERCB/AGS Earth Sciences Report 2007-09, 126 p.
obtaining information for Turtle Mountain, and Glen Prior and Aimee Maxfield for editorial review.
coal mines at the foot of Turtle Mountain might have triggered the slide.
mapping of the onset of collapse and proactively planning mitigation.
GPS stations on the slopes above the coal mine workings or on the talus-covered slope below South Peak.
resolution fine beam (3 m pixel size).
using EarthView InSAR Coherent Target Monitoring (CTM) software.
Synthetic Aperture Radar (PS-InSAR) technology.
concept to a technique that is being used at an increasing rate for a wide range of earth science fields.
evaluation of the results obtained by AGS.
Figure 1. Location map showing the Frank Slide on the eastern slope of Turtle Mountain, Alberta, Canada.
for Radar to detect millimetre-scale changes in the range (see below).
processing techniques (called SAR focusing) to simulate a large antenna size.
measurable phase difference in relation to the local reference phase (the transmitted oscillator phase).
wavelength. For example, if the signal has traveled by a wavelength then the phase has changed by 2π.
delay measurement, this is about 3000 times more accurate.
(InSAR) and PS-InSAR is required to understand and evaluate the results from the PS-InSAR processing.
swaths (33 beam positions; Figure 2). Table 2 lists the main characteristics of each beam mode.
Figure 2. RADARSAT-1 beam modes and beam positions (from RADARSAT International (RSI), 1996).
Beam 4 far range track, except the one acquired on April 19, 2004, which is from the Fine Beam 4 track.
to be representative of the weather for the Turtle Mountain area.
*Data collected from the Willoughby Ridge station, which is 7.1 km to the west of the South Peak of Turtle Mountain.
much of the upper eastern slope.
computation power was averaged to a 10 m grid to reduce the file size during interferometric processing.
The full feature DEM is a digital surface model that includes the heights of buildings and trees (Figure 5).
Figure 5. Sunshade relief image showing the perspective view of the full feature LiDAR DEM.
easily through a console window. Figure 6 illustrates the processing chain for CTM analysis.
Figure 6. CTM control panel showing the processing chain.
point target movements and regional ground deformation patterns.
generation because it gives rise to overall optimal baselines when paired with other image scenes.
on the data selected (Table 4).
residual phase due to error in the input orbital geometric parameters.
image is from F4F beam position.
should be reliable and distributed uniformly across the study area.
propagate into the following coherence target analysis.
EV-InSAR provides a visual tool for identifying errors and adjusting the baseline geometry accordingly.
are included in Appendix B.
• orbital residual phase has been minimized using the residual phase removal tools.
behaviour of each point target.
fitting. The ROI selection window in Figure 7 shows the backscatter image in the slant range coordinates.
from row 2074 to 2115 and column 1258 to 1282 in slant range coordinates (Figure 7).
displayed in the slant range coordinates.
accuracy of the DEM for the study area.
coherence (Figure 9), DEM error estimated (Figure 10) and linear deformation rate (Figure 11).
Figure 8. Average backscatter image generated by CTM analysis.
Figure 9. Temporal coherence image generated by CTM analysis. The Frank Slide boundary is outlined in red.
Figure 10. DEM error image generated by CTM analysis. The Frank Slide boundary is outlined in red.
Figure 11. Deformation rate image generated by CTM analysis. The Frank Slide boundary is outlined in red.
of the regional deformation pattern.
Slide boundary is outlined in red and the reference area is denoted by the black rectangle.
phase, time series of unwrapped phase and deformation profile associated with the same target shown in Figure 13.
The deformation is assumed to be nonlinear.
competitive surveying tool for monitoring of millimetre-scale dynamic deformation processes.
the targets and use only those targets that are reliable for interpretation.
them by visually examining the point profile plot of each target. The solution to this is statistical analysis.
simultaneously eliminates many fairly reliable targets for the site of interest.
phases for each CTM target identified with a temporal coherence threshold value of 0.65.
with a deformation value that is greater than three times the standard error.
standard error greater than three. The Frank Slide boundary is outlined in red.
whether the deformation rate measurement exceeds the noise level.
deformation rate to standard error greater than three.
located in the coherent area, as shown in Figure 9, and, thus, can be used for deformation pattern analysis.
Slide boundary is outlined in red.
Figure 19. Histogram of deformation rate values of CTM targets clustered within the lower Frank Slide.
become clear after removal of the outliers (compare Figures 18 and 20).
outliers. The Frank Slide boundary is outlined in red and the reference area is denoted by the black rectangle.
deformation rate in CTM analysis.
observed in the Frank Slide: rock slope movements, talus slope movements and coal mine subsidence.
discussion of the results obtained from the PS-InSAR analysis.
slide. An aerial view of this area is shown in Figure 23.
Figure 22. Aerial view of the west side of the peak on Turtle Mountain showing South Peak, the saddle and North Peak.
The view is looking toward northeast.
South Peaks. The view is to the south.
relation to the PS-InSAR results in Section 5.5.
the Frank and Bellevue mines is discussed in Section 5.5.
Figure 24. Locations of the Frank, Hillcrest and Bellevue mines.
that no reflection can occur. This means that no suitable information is available related to motion.
identified for these areas and provide clues to possible ground movements.
Figure 25. View of the east side of Turtle Mountain illustrating the zones discussed in the following sections.
movements are represented by the PS-InSAR results.
photogrammetric targets was installed in the early 1980s by the University of Calgary (Fraser, 1983).
ellipses represent direction and amount of movement (note bar represents 2 cm of movement in upper left corner).
boulders in the peak area.
derived are questionable, due to extensive foreshortening and uncertainty associated with co-registration.
addition, the uncertainty associated with the photogrammetric measurements remains questionable.
may not represent the systematic, deep-seated deformations of the peak itself as an entire block.
error of the deformation rate, obtained from a linear regression of the unwrapped phase values for each point target.
and latitude coordinates are based on North American Datum (NAD) 83.
phases (Figure 27)—as up to approximately 4 mm in magnitude off the long-term deformation trend.
snow melt and with lower levels of deformation observed in the winter under frozen ground conditions.
Figure 28. Point profiles of wrapped phases and deformation estimates of Target sp1 on South Peak.
Figure 29. Point profiles of wrapped phases and deformation estimates of Target sp2 on South Peak.
Figure 30. Point profiles of wrapped phases and deformation estimates of Target sp3 on South Peak.
Figure 31. Profiles of wrapped phases and deformation estimates of target sp4 on South Peak.
are believed to be exposed to the radar sensor (Figure 33).
Figure 32. Lower South Peak area and CTM targets (view to west).
The deformation rates obtained from the targets in the Lower South Peak area are included in Table 7.
movement could also be an explanation for its toward-sensor movement.
Table 7. CTM targets identified for the lower South Peak area.
each point target. SNR represents signal to noise ratio calculated as the ratio of the deformation rate to its standard error.
toward the sensor, and the blue arrows movements away from the sensor.
nonlinear and was obtained by smoothing the wrapped phase values using a half-year smooth length.
deformations on the lower portion of the Frank Slide are discussed in Section 5.5.
Beam Mode 4 of the far range. It illustrates that shadow covers much of the upper slope of the Frank Slide.
Figure 39. Plan view of the lower part of the upper slope of the Frank Slide with CTM targets.
Table 8. CTM targets identified in the lower portion of the upper slope of the Frank Slide.
showing the features that will be the basis for discussion of the PS-InSAR results.
face of the mountain. Post-1903 talus predates the 2001 rock fall and postdates the 1903 landslide.
deformation pattern generated by applying Kriging interpolation to the deformation rates of CTM targets.
targets in this area show a downslope movement rate of more than 10 mm/year in the radar line of sight.
rates upslope of the Frank Mine.
Peak, and deposited boulders onto the lower slope of the Frank Slide, extending into the Crowsnest River.
on Figure 41, this area is associated with a relatively higher subsidence rate.
series of sinkholes have developed at the surface in areas where the crown of the mine has collapsed.
the 1903 slide (Figure 40).
the Frank Mine and the black rectangle indicates the reference area.
Figure 43. Statistics and histogram of the targets detected in the red polygon as shown in Figure 42.
the subsidence overlying the coal mine workings of the old Frank Mine.
specific monitoring is being undertaken.
Bellevue Mine, which is marked by white stripes. The black rectangle denotes the reference area.
Figure 45. Statistics and histogram of the targets detected in the red polygon shown in Figure 44.
angles in both a left and right-looking mode could help to remedy some of the problems.
underground coal mines from April 2004 to October 2006, but do not shed light on 1903 conditions.
understand the potential hazards associated with the Bellevue Mine.
for additional ground monitoring stations.
and differentiate between isolated point target movement and regional ground deformation.
few targets (only 4) can be identified for this area.
to the radar sensor. As a result, no reliable targets can be found for most of the eastern slope.
with the east-dipping geometry, causes the slope to look smooth to the radar signal.
for PS InSAR application and reliable deformation measurements have been successfully obtained.
Figure 46. Slope angle map of the Frank Slide. The black line outlines the Frank Slide boundary.
surveying tools. Also, the refinement algorithm in CTM appears far from being robust and reliable.
the case of favourable land cover type and geometry.
Figure 47. Time series of wrapped phase values of Target up7 as shown in Figure 39.
Figure 48. Linear deformation model and resultant deformation estimates of Target up7 as shown in Figure 39.
estimates of Target up7 as shown in Figure 39.
deformation estimates of Target up7 as shown in Figure 39.
Government of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta; Department of Geology, University of Alberta, 28 p.
Atlantis Scientific Inc. (2004): EV-InSAR version 3.1 user’s guide; Atlantis Scientific Inc., 317 p.
2004/2005; unpublished report prepared for Alberta Geological Survey, 35 p.
epoch 5; unpublished report prepared for Alberta Geological Survey, 37 p.
Electronics Engineers, Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, v. 41, no. 7, p. 1685–1701.
with the permanent scatterers technique; Engineering Geology, v. 68, p. 3–14.
Geoscience and Remote Sensing Symposium, Hamburg, Germany, Abstract, p. 1–3.
Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, v. 38, no. 5, p. 2202–2212.
Environment Research Management Division, Report L0-83, 43 p.
International Journal of Remote Sensing, v. 17, no. 10, p. 1803–1835.
Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, v. 62, no. 6, p. 763–768.
Publishers, Dordrecht, Netherlands, 308 p.
Remote Sensing (3rd edition), v. 2, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York, New York, 750 p.
surface; Review of Geophysics, v. 36, p. 441–500.
Department of the Interior (Canada) Annual Report, 1902-1903, Part 8, 17 p.
report, 2005; Alberta Energy and Utilities Board, EUB/AGS Earth Sciences Report 2006-07, 88 p.
and Remote Sensing, v. 57, p. 241–262.
RADARSAT International (RSI) (1996): RADARSAT geology handbook; unpublished manual, 70 p.
Rosen, P.A., Hensley, S., Joughin, I.R., Li, F.K., Madsen, S.N., Rodriguez, E. and Goldstein, R.M.
Electronics Engineers, v. 88, p. 333–376.
International Geoscience and Remote Sensing Symposium, Toulouse, France, v. 7, p. 4362–4364.
radar observations; Journal of Geophysical Research, v. 91, no. B5, p. 4993–4999.
Geoscience and Remote Sensing, v. 32, no. 4, p. 823–836.
determine the range or distance from the antenna to the ground target.
between the sensor and the target; φ atmosphere is the phase contributed by the atmosphere.
in a single SAR image is, in general, quite random and of no practical purpose on its own.
the Canadian Space Agency (CSA).
interferometry) or two passes of the same antenna (repeat-pass interferometry; Figure 52).
(Figure 52), different points on the surface will be at slightly different relative positions from the antennas.
acquisitions, and φ noise is the phase noise that includes the term Δφ scattering in equation .
the baseline and the horizon (see Figure 52).
perpendicular baseline and dz is the surface elevation above a reference elevation (see Figure 52).
DEM obtained from the shuttle radar topography mission is a good example (Rabus et al., 2003).
new suite of InSAR techniques called Persistent/permanent Scatterer Interferometry (PS-InSAR).
Ferretti et al., 2000, 2001).
the identified targets with respect to a reference target.
been developed. These techniques seek to implement the PS technique by using modified approaches.
described below (Atlantis Scientific Inc., 2004).
differential interferometric phase ( φ differential ) over the stable region.
phase ( φ differential ) over the stable region, is removed from the differential phase for each interferogram.
change phase due to imperfect removal of the atmospheric change phase ( Δφ atmosphere ).
temporal coherence value is used as the estimate of the temporal coherence value for that pixel as well.
where n is the total number of the interferograms used for CTM analysis.
deformation phases from the previous iteration of the linear model remain the same.
can be obtained only over the coherent targets.
temporal coherence value ( γ ), which is calculated using Equation 18.
interferograms as recommended by Atlantis Scientific Inc. (2004).
data from Atlantis Scientific Inc., 2004).
leads to a higher temporal coherence and, thus, many more targets identified as the coherent targets.
model is very challenging and requires some a priori knowledge about the deformation history.
in coregistration of the master image to the DEM as well.
flat-Earth phase, but may fail when a large portion of the view is too decorrelated to see the fringes.
interferograms are included, for the reader’s benefit.
Figure 54. Interferogram (upper) and coherence (lower) images from Run 1. See Appendix B text for details.
Figure 55. Interferogram (upper) and coherence (lower) images from Run 2. See Appendix B text for details.
Figure 56. Interferogram (upper) and coherence (lower) images from Run 3. See Appendix B text for details.
Figure 57. Interferogram (upper) and coherence (lower) images from Run 4. See Appendix B text for details.
Figure 58. Interferogram (upper) and coherence (lower) images from Run 5. See Appendix B text for details.
Figure 59. Interferogram (upper) and coherence (lower) images from Run 6. See Appendix B text for details.
Figure 60. Interferogram (upper) and coherence (lower) images from Run 8. See Appendix B text for details.
Figure 61. Interferogram (upper) and coherence (lower) images from Run 9. See Appendix B text for details.
Figure 62. Larger area of Interferogram from Run 9 showing atmospheric effect. See Appendix B text for details.
Figure 63. Interferogram (upper) and coherence (lower) images from Run 10. See Appendix B text for details.
Figure 64. Larger area of Interferogram from Run 10 showing atmospheric effect. See Appendix B text for details.
Figure 65. Interferogram (upper) and coherence (lower) images from Run 11. See Appendix B text for details.
Figure 66. Larger area of Interferogram from Run 11. See Appendix B text for details.
Figure 67. Interferogram (upper) and coherence (lower) images from Run 12. See Appendix B text for details.
Figure 68. Interferogram (upper) and coherence (lower) images from Run 13. See Appendix B text for details.
Figure 69. Larger area of Interferogram from Run 13. See Appendix B text for details.
Figure 70. Interferogram (upper) and coherence (lower) images from Run 14. See Appendix B text for details.
Figure 71. Interferogram (upper) and coherence (lower) images from Run 15. See Appendix B text for details.
Figure 72. Larger area of interferogram from Run 15. See Appendix B text for details.
Figure 73. Interferogram (upper) and coherence (lower) images from Run 16. See Appendix B text for details.
Figure 74. Larger area of Interferogram from Run 16. See Appendix B text for details.
Figure 75. Interferogram (upper) and coherence (lower) images from Run 17. See Appendix B text for details.
Figure 76. Larger area of Interferogram from Run 17. See Appendix B text for details.
Figure 77. Interferogram (upper) and coherence (lower) images from Run 18. See Appendix B text for details.
Figure 78. Interferogram (upper) and coherence (lower) images from Run 19. See Appendix B text for details.
Figure 79. Larger area of Interferogram from Run 19. See Appendix B text for details.
Figure 80. Interferogram (upper) and coherence (lower) images from Run 20. See Appendix B text for details.
Figure 81. Interferogram (upper) and coherence (lower) images from Run 21. See Appendix B text for details.
Figure 82. Larger area of Interferogram from Run 21. See Appendix B text for details.
Figure 83. Interferogram (upper) and coherence (lower) images from Run 22. See Appendix B text for details.
Figure 84. Larger area of interferogram from Run 22 showing atmospheric effect. See Appendix B text for details.
Figure 85. Interferogram (upper) and coherence (lower) images from Run 23. See Appendix B text for details.
Figure 86. Larger area of interferogram from Run 23. See Appendix B text for details.
Figure 87. Interferogram (upper) and coherence (lower) images from Run 24. See Appendix B text for details.
Figure 88. Larger area of interferogram from Run 24. See Appendix B text for details.
Figure 89. Interferogram (upper) and coherence (lower) images from Run 25. See Appendix B text for details.
Figure 90. Larger area of interferogram from Run 25. See Appendix B text for details.
Figure 91. Interferogram (upper) and coherence (lower) images from Run 26. See Appendix B text for details.
Figure 92. Larger area of interferogram from Run 26. See Appendix B text for details.
Figure 93. Interferogram (upper) and coherence (lower) images from Run 27. See Appendix B text for details.
Figure 94. Interferogram (upper) and coherence (lower) images from Run 28. See Appendix B text for details.
Figure 95. Larger area of Interferogram from Run 28. See Appendix B text f or details.

References: v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.