![[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],Terrain Observation by Progressive Scans (TOPS) F. De Zan and A. Monti Guarnieri , “TOPSAR: Terrain Observation by Progressive Scans,” IEEE Trans. On Geoscience and Remote Sensing , vol. 44, no. 9, Sept. 2006.]()
Recommandé
Recommandé
Contenu connexe
Tendances
Tendances (20)
En vedette
En vedette (10)
Similaire à TH1.L09 - INVESTIGATIONS ON TOPS INTERFEROMETRY WITH TERRASAR-X
Similaire à TH1.L09 - INVESTIGATIONS ON TOPS INTERFEROMETRY WITH TERRASAR-X (20)
Plus de grssieee
Plus de grssieee (20)
TH1.L09 - INVESTIGATIONS ON TOPS INTERFEROMETRY WITH TERRASAR-X
- 1. Investigations on TOPS Interferometry with TerraSAR-X Pau Prats , Luca Marotti, Steffen Wollstadt, Rolf Scheiber Microwaves and Radar Institute (HR) German Aerospace Center
- 3. TOPS Time-Frequency Diagram P. Prats, R. Scheiber, J. Mittermayer, A. Meta and A. Moreira, “Processing of Sliding Spotlight and TOPS SAR Data Using Baseband Azimuth Scaling,” IEEE Trans. On Geoscience and Remote Sensing , vol. 48, no. 2, Feb. 2010.
- 4. *M. Bara, R. Scheiber, A. Broquetas and A. Moreira, “Interferometric SAR Signal Analysis in the Presence of Squint,” IEEE Trans. On Geoscience and Remote Sensing , vol. 38, no. 5, Sep. 2000. SAR Impulse Response in the Presence of Squint*
- 7. *R. Scheiber and A. Moreira, “Coregistration of Interferometric SAR Images Using Spectral Diversity,” IEEE Trans. On Geoscience and Remote Sensing , vol. 38, no. 5, Sep. 2000. Look separation Coregistration error Spectral Diversity
- 10. R. Bamler, M. Eineder, “Accuracy of Differential Shift Estimation by Correlation and Split-Bandwidth Interferometry for Wideband and Delta-k SAR Systems,” IEEE Geoscience and Remote Sensing Letters, vol. 2, no. 2, April 2005. Conventional SD SD with Overlap Region CRB Spectral Diversity: Performance
- 11. Not Corrected Corrected Results with Real Data: Mexico City (Descending)
- 12. 22 days repeat-pass (20.09.2009 – 12.10.2009) Results with Real Data: Mexico City (Descending) azimuth range
- 13. 5 months repeat-pass (20.09.2009 – 21.02.2010) Results with Real Data: Mexico City (Descending) azimuth range
- 14. ScanSAR – TOPS Interferogram Comparison 11-day repeat-pass TOPS SNR degradation at burst edges ScanSAR azimuth range azimuth range
- 15. Stripmap - TOPS DEM Comparison 11-day repeat-pass DEM = 15m For atm = 5mm DEM = 27m
- 16. t a f a t a f a TOPS – Stripmap Interferograms: Rationale
- 17. 11-day repeat-pass TOPS Stripmap TOPS – Stripmap Interferograms
- 18. 22 days 44 days 66 days 88 days 110 days 132 days 154 days
- 19. 20.09.2009 – 30.01.2010 Measured subsidence
- 21. Thank you for your attention!
- 22. 88 days 110 days 132 days 154 days 22 days 44 days 66 days
- 25. ScanSAR – TOPS Interferogram Comparison 11-day repeat-pass ScanSAR TOPS
Notes de l'éditeur
- Concerning your questions: 1) if baseband az. Scaling is used for sliding spot and spot it is less effective than azimuth scaling + Specan, right? Baseband azimuth scaling is more efficient for sliding spotlight when using azimuth scaling+specan (1 FFT and one phase product less), but less efficient for spotlight with azimuth scaling+specan. Note than in the current TSX operational processor for sliding spotlight you need to make several steps for side-lobe supression (what Jesus did), while with the new approach you can do these within the matched filter. For normal spotlight you don't need these additional steps as the weighting is performed in time domain before azimuth compression. 2) What is the correct name of the Algorithm: ECS for TOPSAR? I would say something like ECS with baseband azimuth scaling. Although we developed the algorithm for TOPS, maybe it is good not to relate it to TOPS exclusively, as it can also be applied to other modes (indeed, it is more efficient for sliding spotlight than existing approaches, as commented in the previous point). In general, I think our solution can be interesting in any mode (existing or to be invented) where there is some azimuth steering of the antenna, or alternatively, where there is a Doppler centroid variation along azimuth within the data take.
- Concerning your questions: 1) if baseband az. Scaling is used for sliding spot and spot it is less effective than azimuth scaling + Specan, right? Baseband azimuth scaling is more efficient for sliding spotlight when using azimuth scaling+specan (1 FFT and one phase product less), but less efficient for spotlight with azimuth scaling+specan. Note than in the current TSX operational processor for sliding spotlight you need to make several steps for side-lobe supression (what Jesus did), while with the new approach you can do these within the matched filter. For normal spotlight you don't need these additional steps as the weighting is performed in time domain before azimuth compression. 2) What is the correct name of the Algorithm: ECS for TOPSAR? I would say something like ECS with baseband azimuth scaling. Although we developed the algorithm for TOPS, maybe it is good not to relate it to TOPS exclusively, as it can also be applied to other modes (indeed, it is more efficient for sliding spotlight than existing approaches, as commented in the previous point). In general, I think our solution can be interesting in any mode (existing or to be invented) where there is some azimuth steering of the antenna, or alternatively, where there is a Doppler centroid variation along azimuth within the data take.
- Concerning your questions: 1) if baseband az. Scaling is used for sliding spot and spot it is less effective than azimuth scaling + Specan, right? Baseband azimuth scaling is more efficient for sliding spotlight when using azimuth scaling+specan (1 FFT and one phase product less), but less efficient for spotlight with azimuth scaling+specan. Note than in the current TSX operational processor for sliding spotlight you need to make several steps for side-lobe supression (what Jesus did), while with the new approach you can do these within the matched filter. For normal spotlight you don't need these additional steps as the weighting is performed in time domain before azimuth compression. 2) What is the correct name of the Algorithm: ECS for TOPSAR? I would say something like ECS with baseband azimuth scaling. Although we developed the algorithm for TOPS, maybe it is good not to relate it to TOPS exclusively, as it can also be applied to other modes (indeed, it is more efficient for sliding spotlight than existing approaches, as commented in the previous point). In general, I think our solution can be interesting in any mode (existing or to be invented) where there is some azimuth steering of the antenna, or alternatively, where there is a Doppler centroid variation along azimuth within the data take.
- Thank you for your attention!
- Concerning your questions: 1) if baseband az. Scaling is used for sliding spot and spot it is less effective than azimuth scaling + Specan, right? Baseband azimuth scaling is more efficient for sliding spotlight when using azimuth scaling+specan (1 FFT and one phase product less), but less efficient for spotlight with azimuth scaling+specan. Note than in the current TSX operational processor for sliding spotlight you need to make several steps for side-lobe supression (what Jesus did), while with the new approach you can do these within the matched filter. For normal spotlight you don't need these additional steps as the weighting is performed in time domain before azimuth compression. 2) What is the correct name of the Algorithm: ECS for TOPSAR? I would say something like ECS with baseband azimuth scaling. Although we developed the algorithm for TOPS, maybe it is good not to relate it to TOPS exclusively, as it can also be applied to other modes (indeed, it is more efficient for sliding spotlight than existing approaches, as commented in the previous point). In general, I think our solution can be interesting in any mode (existing or to be invented) where there is some azimuth steering of the antenna, or alternatively, where there is a Doppler centroid variation along azimuth within the data take.