不同轨道InSAR滑坡隐患识别结果差异性分析

doi:10.13474/j.cnki.11-2246.2026.0113

测绘通报 ›› 2026, Vol. 0 ›› Issue (1): 78-84.doi: 10.13474/j.cnki.11-2246.2026.0113

不同轨道InSAR滑坡隐患识别结果差异性分析

苏卫江¹, 孙留存¹, 肖文星¹, 高永强¹, 贺文², 廖丹³, 解明礼³

1. 中国绿发投资集团有限公司, 北京 100010;
2. 四川省川建勘察设计院有限公司, 四川成都 610049;
3. 成都理工大学地质灾害防治与地质环境保护全国重点实验室, 四川成都 610059

收稿日期:2024-04-09 发布日期:2026-02-03
通讯作者: 解明礼。E-mail:565725640@qq.com
作者简介:苏卫江(1983—),男,硕士,高级工程师,研究方向为城镇建筑管理。E-mail:xwx15927576508@163.com
基金资助:
四川省自然资源厅科研项目(KJ-2024-034);地质灾害防治与地质环境保护全国重点实验室开放基金(SKLGP2024K030)

Multi-orbit InSAR discrepancy analysis of landslide hazard identification results

SU Weijiang¹, SUN Liucun¹, XIAO Wenxing¹, GAO Yongqiang¹, HE Wen², LIAO Dan³, XIE Mingli³

1. China Green Development Investment Group, Beijing 100010, China;
2. Sichuan Provincial Architectural Design and Research Institute Co., Ltd., Chengdu 610049, China;
3. State Key Laboratory of Geohazard Prevention and Geoenvironment Protection, Chengdu University of Technology, Chengdu 610059, China

Received:2024-04-09 Published:2026-02-03

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 不同轨道SAR卫星的入射角与入射方向存在较大差异,导致所获取地形形变差异性较大。以往研究多综合不同轨道开展InSAR滑坡隐患识别,但针对不同轨道识别结果差异性的原因分析较少。本文以九寨沟县城周边为试验区,收集覆盖研究区3个轨道的2020年1月—2024年6月的Sentinel-1影像,采用SBAS-InSAR解算出试验区地表形变,并解译出滑坡隐患点,从而对比分析不同轨道滑坡隐患识别的差异性。通过对比识别滑坡隐患数量、形变分布、时序形变、坡向形变汇率等指标发现,升轨55号轨道解译出4处,升轨128号轨道解译出3处,降轨62号轨道解译出1处;升轨55号轨道所识别的滑坡隐患形变范围较升轨128号轨道范围更广、形变速率更大、累计形变更大,但整体时序形变趋势大体一致;升轨55号轨道坡向形变恢复率平均值为72.69%,升轨128号轨道坡向形变恢复率平均值为68.79%。研究结果可为InSAR滑坡隐患识别技术应用提供一定的技术参考。

关键词: InSAR, 不同轨道, 滑坡隐患, 形变分布, 形变恢复率, 入射角

Abstract: The incidence angles and directions of SAR satellites with different orbits exhibit significant variations,leading to substantial discrepancies in acquired topographic deformation data.Previous studies have predominantly focused on integrating multi-orbit InSAR for landslide hazard identification,yet few have systematically analyzed the causes of discrepancies among results from different orbits.This study selects the Jiuzhaigou county area as the test site,utilizing Sentinel-1 images from three orbits (January 2020 to June 2024) to derive surface deformation via SBAS-InSAR,interpret landslide hazards,and compare the discrepancies in hazard identification across orbits.By evaluating metrics including the number of identified landslides,deformation distribution,time-series deformation,and slope aspect deformation recovery rates,the results reveal the following.Ascending orbit 55 identified 4 landslides,ascending orbit 128 detected 3,and descending orbit 62 detected 1.The deformation zones identified by ascending orbit 55 generally exhibited larger spatial coverage,higher deformation rates,and greater cumulative deformation compared to ascending orbit 128,though their overall time-series deformation trends are broadly consistent.The average slope aspect deformation recovery rates are 72.69%for ascending orbit 55 and 68.79% for ascending orbit 128.These findings provide technical insights for optimizing multi-orbit InSAR applications in landslide hazard detection.

Key words: InSAR, multi-orbit, landslide, deformation distribution, deformation recovery rate, incidence angle

中图分类号:

P237

苏卫江, 孙留存, 肖文星, 高永强, 贺文, 廖丹, 解明礼. 不同轨道InSAR滑坡隐患识别结果差异性分析[J]. 测绘通报, 2026, 0(1): 78-84.

SU Weijiang, SUN Liucun, XIAO Wenxing, GAO Yongqiang, HE Wen, LIAO Dan, XIE Mingli. Multi-orbit InSAR discrepancy analysis of landslide hazard identification results[J]. Bulletin of Surveying and Mapping, 2026, 0(1): 78-84.

参考文献

[1] TU Kuan,YE Shirong,ZOU Jingui,et al.InSAR displacement with high-resolution optical remote sensing for the early detection and deformation analysis of active landslides in the upper Yellow River[J].Water,2023,15(4): 769.
[2] YE Kai,WANG Zhe,WANG Ting,et al.Deformation monitoring and analysis of baige landslide (China) based on the fusion monitoring of multi-orbit time-series InSAR technology[J].Sensors,2024,24(20): 6760.
[3] 李晓恩,周亮,苏奋振,等.InSAR技术在滑坡灾害中的应用研究进展[J].遥感学报,2021,25(2): 614-629.
[4] LI Xing,JÓNSSON S,CAO Yunmeng.Interseismic deformation from Sentinel-1 burst-overlap interferometry: application to the southern Dead Sea fault[J].Geophysical Research Letters,2021,48(16): e2021GL093481.
[5] WEI Lianhuan,FENG Qiuyue,LIU Feiyue,et al.Precise topographic model assisted slope displacement retrieval from small baseline subsets results: case study over a high and steep mining slope[J].Sensors,2020,20(22): 6674.
[6] ZHAO C,LU Z,ZHANG Q.Impact of topography and orbital parameters on the performance of InSAR in mountainous regions[J].IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing,2018,56(2): 710-723.
[7] XIA Ye.Synthetic aperture radar interferometry[M]//Sciences of Geodesy-I.Berlin,Heidelberg: Springer,2010: 415-474.
[8] HU J,LI Z W,DING X L,et al.Resolving three-dimensional surface displacements from InSAR measurements: a review[J].Earth-Science Reviews,2014,133: 1-17.
[9] HU J,LI Z,DING X,et al.Multi-track InSAR fusion for 3D deformation mapping of landslides in complex terrain[J].Remote Sensing of Environment,2021,263: 112541.
[10] LIU G,JIA H,ZHANG R,et al.Complementarity of ascending and descending ALOS PALSAR data for landslide detection in the Wenchuan earthquake region[J].IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing,2018,56(5): 2846-2858.
[11] ZHAO Chaoying,KANG Ya,ZHANG Qin,et al.Landslide identification and monitoring along the Jinsha River Catchment (wudongde reservoir area),China,using the InSAR method[J].Remote Sensing,2018,10(7): 993.
[12] HE Liming,PEI Panke,ZHANG Xiangning,et al.Sensitivity evaluation of time series InSAR monitoring results for landslide detection[J].Remote Sensing,2023,15(15): 3906.
[13] 高志良,解明礼,巨能攀,等.堆积层滑坡多源遥感动态演变特征分析研究[J].武汉大学学报(信息科学版),2024,49(8): 1482-1491.
[14] 何佳阳,巨能攀,解明礼,等.高山峡谷地区地质灾害隐患InSAR识别技术对比[J].地球科学,2023,48(11): 4295-4310.
[15] LU Huiyan,LI Weile,XU Qiang,et al.Active landslide detection using integrated remote sensing technologies for a wide region and multiple stages: a case study in southwestern China[J].Science of the Total Environment,2024,931: 172709.
[16] 吴琼,葛大庆,于峻川,等.广域滑坡灾害隐患InSAR显著性形变区深度学习识别技术[J].测绘学报,2022,51(10): 2046-2055.
[17] 廖明生,董杰,李梦华,等.雷达遥感滑坡隐患识别与形变监测[J].遥感学报,2021,25(1): 332-341.
[18] 蔡杰华,张路,董杰,等.九寨沟震后滑坡隐患雷达遥感早期识别与形变监测[J].武汉大学学报(信息科学版),2020,45(11): 1707-1716.
[19] YU Chen,LI Zhenhong,PENNA N T,et al.Generic atmospheric correction model for interferometric synthetic aperture radar observations[J].Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth,2018,123(10):9202-9222.

不同轨道InSAR滑坡隐患识别结果差异性分析

Multi-orbit InSAR discrepancy analysis of landslide hazard identification results

PDF

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

参考文献

相关文章 15

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价

[1]	李景洮, 张双成, 盛磊, 张毅, 强菲, 聂腾, 刘宁, 闻繁. 时序InSAR与普适型GNSS用于西安地面沉降监测研究[J]. 测绘通报, 2026, 0(1): 18-24,46.
[2]	李朋朋, 李德伟, 李晓红, 翟雪君. 基于InSAR同震形变的地震灾害风险评估[J]. 测绘通报, 2026, 0(1): 39-46.
[3]	刘艺梁, 李永奕, 朱前, 左清军, 樊西丰, 宋琨, 申高伟, 汤罗圣. 基于时序InSAR与BiGRU的库岸滑坡形变分析与预测[J]. 测绘通报, 2026, 0(1): 51-56.
[4]	曹芮菡, 李新, 周定杰, 喜文飞, 黄广才, 王瑞亭, 郭蓁. 联合ALOS-2和Sentinel-1的复杂山区潜在滑坡识别[J]. 测绘通报, 2026, 0(1): 65-71.
[5]	韦宇辉, 刘先林, 邵羽, 董秀军, 黎浩良. 山区公路地质灾害早期识别与监测预警方法[J]. 测绘通报, 2026, 0(1): 91-99.
[6]	骆晓亮, 刘凌佳, 罗津, 王绿春, 余伟, 罗赣, 高华. 面向Web应用的海量InSAR点云高效可视化与查询方法[J]. 测绘通报, 2026, 0(1): 135-139.
[7]	莫丹丹, 火久元. 基于SBAS-InSAR技术的喀喇昆仑公路盖孜河谷段形变监测与影响因子分析[J]. 测绘通报, 2025, 0(8): 32-42.
[8]	熊春宝, 安贺雯, 苏广利. 大型引水工程地面沉降PS-InSAR监测与分析[J]. 测绘通报, 2025, 0(7): 19-25,72.
[9]	李若凡, 李勇发, 左小清, 黄成, 邢明泽, 李永宁, 张荐铭, 石超, 顾晓娜. 兰坪县InSAR形变监测与滑坡灾害早期识别[J]. 测绘通报, 2025, 0(7): 40-45.
[10]	王祥, 刘艳霞, 宗琴, 孙伟, 刘涛, 杨霞, 方金玲. 基于InSAR的广域地表及重要基础设施形变监测与预测[J]. 测绘通报, 2025, 0(7): 104-109.
[11]	李文东, 叶禹, 李霞, 魏伟, 辛存林. 融合SBAS-InSAR形变与机器学习模型的滑坡易发性评价[J]. 测绘通报, 2025, 0(7): 126-131,146.
[12]	汪晨煜, 彭军还, 薛跃明, 李旭, 张炎. 融合InSAR与信息量-逻辑回归耦合模型的滑坡动态危险性评价[J]. 测绘通报, 2025, 0(6): 43-48.
[13]	高浩亮, 李德伟, 李朋朋, 李晓红, 狄桂栓. 黄河三角洲海岸线变化与地面沉降监测分析[J]. 测绘通报, 2025, 0(6): 103-108,122.
[14]	王身丽, 刘毅, 韩昊, 杜勇. 联合SBAS-InSAR和DS-InSAR的特高压输电通道形变监测与预测[J]. 测绘通报, 2025, 0(6): 130-135,141.
[15]	杨洋, 贾洪果, 柏铮航, 刘宇辰. 联合机器学习与SBAS-InSAR的青藏高原冻土形变监测[J]. 测绘通报, 2025, 0(4): 45-50.