Geomatics, Natural Hazards and Risk

ISSN: 1947-5705 (Print) 1947-5713 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/tgnh20

Comparing the results of PSInSAR and GNSS on

slow motion landslides, Koyulhisar, Turkey

Kemal Ozgur Hastaoglu

To cite this article: Kemal Ozgur Hastaoglu (2016) Comparing the results of PSInSAR and
GNSS on slow motion landslides, Koyulhisar, Turkey, Geomatics, Natural Hazards and Risk, 7:2,
786-803, DOI: 10.1080/19475705.2014.978822

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19475705.2014.978822

2014 Taylor & Francis

Published online: 14 Nov 2014.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 110

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=tgnh20

Download by: [203.128.244.130] Date: 15 March 2016, At: 00:48

 Geomatics, Natural Hazards and Risk, 2016
Vol. 7, No. 2, 786
803, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19475705.2014.978822

Comparing the results of PSInSAR and GNSS on slow motion

landslides, Koyulhisar, Turkey

KEMAL OZGUR HASTAOGLU*

Department of Geomatics Engineering, Faculty of Engineering,
Cumhuriyet University, Sivas 58140, Turkey

(Received 11 April 2014; accepted 15 October 2014)

There are numerous methods used nowadays to monitor landslide movements. Of

these methods, Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) and Interferometric
Downloaded by [203.128.244.130] at 00:48 15 March 2016

Synthetic Aperture Radar (InSAR) are the ones that are most commonly used. In
this study, the amounts of movements acquired via these two methods were
compared and relations between them were analysed. The Koyulhisar landslide
region was selected as the field of study. In this study, 10 Envisat images of the
region taken between 2006 and 2008 were evaluated using Persistent Scatterers
Interferometric Synthetic Aperture Radar (PSInSAR) technique and annual
velocity values at the direction of line of slight at PS points were obtained for the
region of interest. The velocity values were then obtained from PSInSAR results
and compared with those obtained from six periods of GNSS measurements that
were performed between April 2007 and November 2008 on Koyulhisar Landslide
area after which the relationship between the two was analysed. Two different
movement models from GNSS and PSInSAR results were fit to the landslide
region. The velocity values estimated from these movement models for the region
were compared and correlation between them was determined. As a conclusion, a
high correlation of r D 0.84 was determined between the models obtained from
nine GNSS points, except one point at the city centre, and PSInSAR.

1. Introduction
Landslides occupy an important part of natural disasters. Landslides, particularly
occurring near settlement areas, cause loss of life and property. Therefore, monitor-
ing landslide movements is very important. The Global Navigation Satellite System
(GNSS) and Interferometric Synthetic Aperture Radar (InSAR) methods are most
widely used in monitoring landslides. The GNSS method has been frequently used to
monitor landslides particularly in the last 20 years (Gili et al. 2000; Malet et al. 2002;
Coe et al. 2003; Hastaoglu & Sanli 2011). Similarly, the InSAR method has been fre-
quently used in monitoring landslides in the last 20 years as well (Fruneau et al.
1996; Singhroy et al. 1998; Rott et al. 1999; Crosetto et al. 2005; Motagh et al. 2013).
While monitoring landslide by GNSS method produces three-dimensional (3D) and
high-precision information, the method itself is demanding and time-consuming.
Moreover, deformation information obtained by GNSS is point-based and presents
no information on deformations in wider areas. If one desires to obtain information
about wider areas by GNSS method, measurements are needed to be done at

*Email: khastaoglu@cumhuriyet.edu.tr

2014 Taylor & Francis

 Geomatics, Natural Hazards and Risk 787

numerous GNSS points. This has a negative effect in terms of cost and time. Further-
more, no observation could be performed in monitoring the movements in volcanic
and landslide areas since access to such regions is very difficult. The areal deforma-
tion can be obtained by using interpolation methods from Global Positioning System
(GPS) results. Therefore, it is considered that in studies performed for monitoring
landslides, the use of methods such as Persistent Scatterers Interferometric Synthetic
Aperture Radar (PSInSAR) that can provide areal movement data along with the
high-precision, point-based GNSS measurements is beneficial. InSAR methods have
been commonly used in recent years to monitor areal deformations in landslide
areas.
InSAR has the potential to detect ground surface motion phenomena with the
accuracy of a small fraction of the radar wavelength on large areas with high spatial
resolution (Pratti et al. 2010). Permanent Scatterers technique called PSI (Persistent
Scatterers Interferometric) method was developed by Feretti et al. (2001). Then, the
method was improved by many researchers (Berardino et al. 2002; Hooper et al.
Downloaded by [203.128.244.130] at 00:48 15 March 2016

2004; Kampes 2005).

The PS (Permanent Scatterers) approach is based on a few basic observations. There
are ground targets that maintain a coherent reflectivity to the radar in time even when
observed from different looking angles (the PS). The interferometric phase in corre-
spondence of these targets is not randomized by temporal and geometric decorrelation
phenomena (Pratti et al. 2010). Decorrelation is caused by contributions from all scat-
terers within a resolution cell summing differently, due to relative movement of the
scatterers and/or a change in the looking direction of the radar platform. If, however,
one scatterer returns significantly more energy than other scatterers within the cell, the
decorrelation phase is much reduced. This is the principle behind a persistent
scatterer (PS) pixel, also referred to as a permanent scatterer(Hooper et al. 2012).
PSI technique has been used by many researchers in monitoring the landslides (Cole-
santi & Andwasowski 2006; Farina et al. 2006; Meisina et al. 2006; Herrera et al.
2009; Notti et. al. 2010; Righini et al. 2010; Liu et al. 2013). The PSInSAR is an
advanced technique in comparison with conventional InSAR technique. It has many
advantages to overcome the problems of decorrelation for generating a time series of
phase changes without atmospheric and DEM (Digital Elevation Model) residual
effects, so the PSInSAR method is preferred.
There are studies in recent years in which GNSS and PSInSAR results were used
together (Peyret et al. 2008; Yin et al. 2010; Catal~ao et al. 2011; Cigna et al. 2012;
Akbarimehr et al. 2013; Zhu et al. 2014). 3D movement amounts can be determined
by GNSS, whereas one-dimensional (1D) movement amounts can be found at the
line of slight (LOS) using the SAR method. Therefore, 3D GNSS results are con-
verted into 1D results in the LOS direction in order to explain the situation using the
two methods together.
In this study, GNSS results obtained from Koyulhisar landslide area were evalu-
ated together with the PSInSAR results. Hastaoglu (2013) conducted six-period
GNSS observations at 10 GNSS points in the landslide area between April 2007 and
November 2008 and obtained 3D annual velocity values for the points. The current
study evaluates 10 descending Envisat images taken between 2006 and 2008 by PSIn-
SAR method. The main reason that the number of images is limited by 10 was that
there are only 10 images belonging to the study area in ESAs archive where GNSS
observations were made between 2007 and 2008. Annual velocity values belonging to
the PSI points at the LOS direction were obtained as a result of the evaluation.
 788 K.O. Hastaoglu

Then, a section profile was specified which intersects the landslide area through
north
south direction. The PSI points were determined on this section. Both of the
results obtained from two methods were compared through the study field by trans-
forming the 3D velocity GNSS values on LOS direction. For the comparison pro-
cess, two separate movement models (equations (4) and (5)) were fit for the velocity
values on the LOS direction obtained from GNSS and PS methods. LOS velocity
values at every 50 m were then calculated using the models through the section repre-
senting the landslide field. Finally, the correlation between these velocity values cal-
culated was determined.

2. Field of Study
Koyulhisar is 180 km away from Sivas, Turkey. Since the study area lies upon the
Northern Anatolian Fault Zone (NAFZ), which is an active fault, the rock masses in
Downloaded by [203.128.244.130] at 00:48 15 March 2016

the region contain discontinuities and are usually seen to be cracked and crushed.
Depending on the steep topography in the region, there are many old and new land-
slides. The direction of motion of these landslides usually threatens residential areas
(Sendir & Yilmaz 2002).
Koyulhisar district centre is located at a region on the NAFZ which is one of the most
important seismic belts in the region. Landslides constitute a great risk due to both the
lithological properties of the rocks existing in the region and the morphology shaped by
intense active faulting. For this purpose, various observations were made in the region
for scientific and technical purposes in different periods (Toprak 1998; Sendir & Yilmaz
2002). Figure 1 presents the general geological conditions of Koyulhisar region.
Koyulhisar and the landslide regions are located very close to NAFZ which is one
of the biggest active earthquake belts. One of the most important features of active
earthquake zones are specific land forms. Along with land forms the mass move-
ments resulting in changes in land forms such as landslide, rock fall, and soil fluction,
are natural events frequently occurring on such active belts.
Old landslide masses are seen in areas close to Koyulhisar district centre and its
surrounding where Eocene aged clayey formations, Lower Miocene aged clayey and
gypsum formations and Plio-Quaternary aged sediments are observed. Most of these
landslides have a circular-failure mechanism. Koyulhisar district centre is located on
a former landslide which has a circular-failure mechanism. The former landslide
mass has continued its activity over time. However, this activity is not mass type but
local landslides occurring in the main mass (Tatar et al. 2000).
As a result of the analysis of the landslides that have occurred on the study area, it
was acquired that rainfall and the flora plays an important role. Especially, the cracks
and fissures filled with water due to high rainfall between the winter and spring sea-
sons of 1998 and 2000 before landslides caused the strength of clay fillings to be
reduced, thus contributing to the movement along failure zones. In addition, this has
also contributed to the increase in unit weight of soil burden covering the rocks and
thus increasing the extra burden on the side slopes. Dense forests over the side slopes
in the study field have slowed down the flow of water through the slope and eased the
water to seep into the soil material. As a result, forces causing the landslide (failure)
on the slope have increased (Sendir & Yilmaz 2002).
It was reported in the previous studies (Sendir & Yilmaz 2002) that the potential
slope instabilities in the study field were generally towards the south (S, SW
SE).
 Geomatics, Natural Hazards and Risk 789
Downloaded by [203.128.244.130] at 00:48 15 March 2016

Figure 1. Geologic map of the Koyulhisar Landslide area.

These are the dominant slope directions in Koyulhisar district and its surrounding. It
was observed that the former and new landslides determined within the study field
between Shlar Fault in the south and Dumanlca Fault in the north were explained
by a complex landslide system which is composed of a combination of many land-
slides through Dumanlica and Shlar Fault from north to south.
The material accumulated in the region after the landslides occurred between 1998
and 2000 is located in G onenli stream that is located on the east of Aklan district
which is on the north of Koyulhisar. The width of this slide reaches up to 2 km. The
ground water level in the region is very high and small lakes were formed in the slid-
ing mass. It is highly probable that sliding mass can move again in a season with
high rainfall since it would increase the contact of the mass with water and thus the
mass would become saturated.
 790 K.O. Hastaoglu

3. Data-sets and methods

3.1. GNSS velocities
A GNSS study was conducted in the region by Hastaoglu (2013) and 3D annual veloc-
ities belonging to 10 GNSS points in the region were obtained. The velocities obtained
are given in table 1. In order to determine the GNSS velocities, six-period GPS cam-
paigns were conducted between April 2007 and November 2008, covering about
1.5 years. Each GPS campaign was carried out on three consecutive days. Observing
session duration for static GPS measurements was about 12 h. The data-sampling rate
and elevation cut-off angle were set to 30 and 15 s, respectively. For each day and
each rover point, a position was computed for each 12-h session in ITRF 2005 using
BERNESE 5.0 relative static baseline processing strategies (Beutler et al. 2005). The
accuracy of velocities obtained from GNSS measurements were investigated in detail
by Hastaoglu and Sanli 2011. The deformation rates from the GNSS time series were
extracted using kinematic Kalman filtering method, and estimated GNSS coordinates
Downloaded by [203.128.244.130] at 00:48 15 March 2016

from BERNESE were the output for kinematic Kalman filtering method. The loca-
tions of GNSS points are shown in figure 2. The annual velocities of GNSS points are
given in table 1. Statistical tests of the expanded model were conducted, and it was
decided that the model consisting of velocities were significant (table 1). The velocity
values were divided by its root-mean-square error, and test values were computed. Sta-
tistical tests were conducted as mentioned previously and results are shown in the deci-
sion column p of table 1. If parameters have significantly changed in the kinematic
model, a sign is given in table 1. Otherwise, a sign is given.

3.2. SAR data-set and interferometric processing

PS algorithms operate on a time series of interferograms all formed with respect to a
single master SAR image. It is ultimately the level of decorrelation noise that
defines whether pixels are PS pixels or not, but an initial selection of candidate PS
pixels can be made using various proxies, the most common of which is amplitude
dispersion (Ferretti et al. 2001; Hooper et al. 2012).

Table 1. Movement parameters determined with a kinematic model between April 2007 and
September 2008 (Hastaoglu 2013).

Velocity/unknown (mm) Decision

Point vn ve vup T vn Tve Tvup

KH01 2.3 3.6 3.4 0.2() 0.5() 0.3()

KH02 9.9 3.8 0.7 1.2() 0.7() 0.1()
p
KH03 11.8 3.4 4.2 2.6( ) 0.5() 0.9()
KH04 3.1 1.5 11.1 0.5() 0.3() 1.0()
p
KH05 0.4 14.6 0.0 0.1() 2.8( ) 0.1()
p
KH06 15.7 1.5 10.1 1.9( ) 0.2() 1.1()
p p
KH07 64.4 47.8 2.5 9.7( ) 5.0( ) 0.2()
p
KH09 3.5 14.5 2.9 0.4() 1.7( ) 0.3()
KH10 3.6 3.5 3.1 0.5() 0.4() 0.5()
KH11 1.4 14.9 0.6 0.4() 1.6() 0.7()
 Geomatics, Natural Hazards and Risk 791
Downloaded by [203.128.244.130] at 00:48 15 March 2016

Figure 2. Processing of GNSS baselines: CMYK and IKYK are fixed (Hastaoglu and Sanli
2011).

In this study, the data-set of SAR images acquired by the Envisat satellites
(descending orbits track 78) was collected from ESA archive. For the PSI analyses,
10 archived raw Envisat images were used. These images have descending geometry
acquired between October 2006 and December 2008. SAR data dated 22 July 2007
was chosen as master and nine interferograms were calculated from this master
image. In this study, SAR images are gathered in raw format and converted to SLC
(Single Look Complex) images with ROI_PAC public software. For the interfero-
gram processing is applied with the public domain Delft object-oriented radar inter-
ferometric software (DORIS). Interferograms are produced by using Delft precise
orbits. The topographic effect is reduced by an external DEM as 3 arcsecond SRTM
data which has 90 m resolution. Geocoding is referred with World Geodetic System
1984 (WGS84) reference system. In this study, Stanford Method for Persistent Scat-
terers (StaMPS) approach was applied for the monitoring of Koyulhisar landslide.
PS process was applied with nine interferograms with the pairs which were limited
with a 494-m perpendicular baseline and 525 days temporal baseline. For the PSI
analyses, amplitude dispersion index was chosen as 0.3. A list of perpendicular base-
lines and temporal baselines is shown in table 2.
The annual velocity values at the LOS direction were obtained for PS points given
in figure 3 by PS process. Analysing figure 3, it is seen that there is a subsidence on
the former landslide mass and there is an uplift on city centre which is located on fur-
ther south. In order to observe the deformation on PS points in detail, a section was
specified through the landslide area (figure 3) and the velocity values of PS points
along this section were analysed.
 792 K.O. Hastaoglu

Table 2. List of Envisat Asar data used in the PSI approach.

Date of passes Bn (m) Btemp (day)

15 October 2006 292 280

28 January 2007 494 175
04 November 2007 230 105
23 March 2008 259 245
27 April 2008 127 280
06 July 2008 224 350
14 September 2008 449 420
19 October 2008 254 455
28 December 2008 14 525
Downloaded by [203.128.244.130] at 00:48 15 March 2016

Figure 3. Annual velocities of PS points.

 Geomatics, Natural Hazards and Risk 793

As shown in figure 3, apart from the given profile zone, there is a subsidence up to
12 mm located at the forested area in the north of study area and also there is an
uplift up to 11 mm located to the west of centre, presenting the maximum subsidence
and uplift values. As you see in figure 4, in these areas standard deviations are the
highest of all and these areas are out of the profile zones which is chosen as study
area. The reason of high standard deviations may be the number of interferograms
used in the PS process. Unfortunately, there are only 10 images belonging to the
study area in ESAs archive where GNSS observations were made between 2007 and
2008. In the literature, it is suggested to use at least 15 images for PSI processes. It is
also mentioned in Colesanti and Andwasowski (2006) and Notti et al. (2010).
Hooper et al. (2007) showed that using 12 interferograms are usually sufficient when
using StaMPS. Analysing figure 4, it is seen that standard deviations are quite low
Downloaded by [203.128.244.130] at 00:48 15 March 2016

Figure 4. Standard deviation of PS points.

 794 K.O. Hastaoglu

for the profile zone in study area. This situation shows us that the velocity values of
PS points on profile zones are accurate values. On the other hand, the time series of
some PS points in the area including KH07 and KH10 are investigated (figure 5). As
a result of this investigation, it is showed that closer PS points usually show similar
deformation trend. As the deformation trend is similar, it can be concluded that there
is no atmospheric or unwrapping error in the processes. Finally, although 10 inter-
ferograms are used for PS processing, especially the results of PS process in the land-
slide area and the city centre are quite safe.

4. Comparing the results of GNSS and PSInSAR

In order to compare the GNSS and PSInSAR results obtained, a section line com-
posed of three parts (north
south direction) was specified through the top to the toe
of the landslide area (figure 6). Then, the velocities associated with GNSS and PS
points along this section line. PS points which are not located 200 m away from the
Downloaded by [203.128.244.130] at 00:48 15 March 2016

section line which is used to determine the points within the study field were excluded
from the data-set. The section graph of the velocities associated with the PS points
within the landslide area is given in figure 6.
GNSS velocities obtained are three-dimensional. In order to compare them to
PSInSAR results, 3D GNSS velocities were transformed into 1D velocities in the
LOS direction by using the formulae given in equation (1). Then, LOS values associ-
ated with GNSS points given in figure 7 were calculated through the section line spec-
ified on north
south direction within the landslide area.
The 3D (in the east, north, and vertical (up) directions) orthogonal components
of the surface displacement of a point on the Earths surface is stated as
D dx ; dy ; dz T . The formula of projection of the surface displacement vector D to
the line of sight can be written as

dLOS sT D (1)
s cos ah sin u sin ah sin u cos uT (2)

where dLOS , s, and D and denote the LOS displacement, the satellite unit vector, and
the surface displacement vector, respectively. For a detailed description of the satel-
lite unit vector and its parameters, see equation (1) (Arkan et al. 2009). I use master
acquisition parameters for heading, ah and u incidence angle, of an Envisat I2
descending pass. Using those common GNSS points of measurements in equations
(1) and (2), velocities in the radar LOS were computed. The results of GNSS are illus-
trated in figure 7.
Figure 7 shows the velocities associated with GNSS and PS points along the sec-
tion line. As the figure is analysed, it is seen that the velocity value of the GNSS point
at 4700 m of the section is way too different than the others. This is the GNSS point
denoted by KH07. When the GNSS velocities of the point KH07 is analysed, a hori-
zontal movement different than the other points in the landslide area is observed. In
Hastaoglus (2013) study, it was stated that this movement might be due to a local
movement independent from the landslide movement in the region. They also indi-
cated the instantaneous change of water level in the well located within the Police
Department and emphasized that the velocities found for the point KH07 showed
that it is a local movement different than the main landslide movement. On the other
 Geomatics, Natural Hazards and Risk 795
Downloaded by [203.128.244.130] at 00:48 15 March 2016

Figure 5. Time series of some PS points.

 796 K.O. Hastaoglu
Downloaded by [203.128.244.130] at 00:48 15 March 2016

Figure 6. Annual velocities of PS points and profile.

hand, Tatar et al. (2000) suggested that some deformations are observed around
KH07 and these deformations are due to local landslides in the main mass. The main
cause of local landslides is the water that saturates the material by infiltrating from
the crack systems.
Analysing the section given in figure 7, it was observed that there is a disconfor-
mity between GNSS and PSInSAR results obtained for the point KH07. It was
stated that the movement in the point KH07 is local. Having a small amount of
movements in the point KH07 located 250 m away from the point KH10 is a proof
for the argument that the movement in the point KH07 is local.
The main reason why the movement in the point KH07 was not determined by
PSInSAR method was that there were no PS points around the point KH07 within
the 50-m-radius area shown in green in figure 8. In summary, it is considered that PS
results did not reflect the local movement since the movement around the point
KH07 is local and there were no PS points in this area. From this argument, this
point was excluded in the comparison of GNSS and PSInSAR results and the results
given in figure 9 were obtained.
 Geomatics, Natural Hazards and Risk 797
Downloaded by [203.128.244.130] at 00:48 15 March 2016

Figure 7. LOS velocities of GNSS and PSInSAR points along the profile.

Analysing figure 9, it is seen that the results obtained from the GNSS and PS
results are in good conformity. In order to both mathematically express this confor-
mity and obtain the movement model from the methods, movement curves were fit
to associated velocity values. This process was carried out separately for GNSS and
PS results by using equations (3) and (4), respectively, for LOS velocities associated
with GNSS and PS points and obtained along the profile. The estimated models are
given in figure 9.

VPS 5:9 10 17 x5 1:0 10 12 x4 6:4 10 9 x3

1:7 10 5 x2 0:0179x 7:8905 (3)

VGPS 4:6 10 13 x4 5:4 10 9 x3 1:9 10 5 x2 0:0234 x 7:8638 (4)

where VPS , VGPS, and x denote the annual GNSS velocities (direction of LOS),
annual PS velocities (direction of LOS), and the distance from profile, respectively.
In order to acquire the reliability of the estimated models in equations (3) and (4)
R-square values for two models were calculated. Coefficient of determination (R-
squared) indicates the proportionate amount of variation in the response variable y
explained by the independent variables x in the model. The GNSS model R-squared
and PSInSAR R-squared values are 0.43 and 0.49, respectively. Models explain
about 50% of the variability in the response variable.
 798 K.O. Hastaoglu
Downloaded by [203.128.244.130] at 00:48 15 March 2016

Figure 8. PS points of around the KH07.

Two different movement models obtained for GNSS and PSInSAR are given in
figure 10. As both of the models are carefully examined, it is observed that there is a
subsidence in the initial 1-km part of the section (top of the landslide), uplift in
between 2 and 5 km (city centre), and subsidence in the last 1-km part (toe of the
landslide). As a conclusion, movement trends in two models are in conformity with
each other. In order to determine the relationship between two models, velocity val-
ues at every other 50 m were calculated. Then, correlation value was found from
equation (5) for the velocities calculated from two models.

P
VPS VPS VGPS VGPS
RVPS ; VGPS q
P
(5)
2P 2
VPS VPS VGPS VGPS

where VPS and VGPS denote mean values for the annual GNSS velocities (direction
of LOS) and annual PS velocities (direction of LOS), respectively. The correlation
value R was found as 0.84. As acquired from these results, the velocities obtained
from two models justify each other.
 Geomatics, Natural Hazards and Risk 799
Downloaded by [203.128.244.130] at 00:48 15 March 2016

Figure 9. LOS velocities of GNSS and PSInSAR points along the profile without of KH07.

Figure 10. PSInSAR and GNSS fitting models by using GNSS and PSInSAR velocities.
 800 K.O. Hastaoglu
Downloaded by [203.128.244.130] at 00:48 15 March 2016

Figure 11. The zones along to profile.

5. Conclusions
In this study, that is different from previous studies in which PS and GNSS data are
processed together, movement models obtained from two methods for LOS velocities
are fitted. Then, the success of the methods (PS and GNSS) is investigated by calcu-
lating the correlation between two models. In this study, the velocities obtained from
six-period GNSS measurements done for the Koyulhisar landslide region between
2007 and 2008 and the one obtained from the 10 Envisat archive radar image during
the same period were compared and landslide movement models were estimated. As
a conclusion, both the GNSS and PSInSAR results (except one GNSS point) along
the section on the landslide area had a correlation of 0.84. It is considered that the
main reason why the GNSS and PSInSAR velocity values at the point KH07 do not
conform to each other was that there are no PS points in the area within 50-m radius
around the point. In addition, as stated before in previous studies, it is considered
that the movement at the point KH07 is local and it may cover a small area. Thus,
the movement at the point could not be determined by PS.
 Geomatics, Natural Hazards and Risk 801

As GNSS velocity values extracted from the data-set, subsidence and uplifts in
LOS direction cover the same regions along the section according to movement mod-
els obtained from both of the data-set. As seen in Figure 11, the LOS values of both
models on the landslide area divide the area into four regions. According to these
movement models, an uplift is observed at the initial 1000-m part of the section
(Zone I), i.e. top of the landslide area, whereas a subsidence is observed at Zone II
(1000
2500-m part along the section) where it includes former landslide mass. By
the effect of this subsidence, an uplift is observed at Zone III (2500
5000 m) where
city centre is located and finally a subsidence is also observed at Zone IV. In order to
understand the up field and downfield movements well, geophysical and geological
studies must be done in the field.
In summary, both GNSS and PSInSAR results justify each other and present gen-
eral information about the landslide mass movement. It can be said that the weak-
ness of PS method is that the deformation at point KH07 could not be determined
by PS method since the deformation at that point is local and in horizontal direction.
Downloaded by [203.128.244.130] at 00:48 15 March 2016

The GNSS method has also a weakness since the movement at the point KH07 was
determined by GNSS, but it cannot be found if the movement is areal or not by only
using the GNSS measurements.
As a conclusion, in this study, GNSS method was effective in determining the local
point deformations in particular whereas PS method is powerful in determining the
areal movement trend of the whole landslide area. However, it is considered that bet-
ter results would be obtained by the utilization of both the methods in landslide
regions such as Koyulhisar landslide region where there exist local movement inde-
pendent from the movement of the main mass.

Acknowledgements
The author would like to thank Sivas Cumhuriyet University and The Scentfc and Techno-
logcal Research Councl of Turkey for supporting the studies under CUBAP project M 468 and
TUBITAK Project 111Y111. Interferometric data were processed using the public domain SAR
processor DORIS, StaMPS and satellite orbits used are from Delft University of Technology.
The author is grateful to the European Space Agency (ESA) for providing Envisat data under
TRHK001. Fatih Poyraz is acknowledged for his support with the PSInSAR process.

References
Akbarimehr M, Motagh M, Haghshenas-Haghighi M. 2013. Slope stability assessment of the
Sarcheshmeh Landslide, northeast Iran, investigated using InSAR and GNSS observa-
tions. Remote Sens. 5:3681
3700. doi:10.3390/rs5083681
Arikan M, Hooper A, Hanssen R. 2009. Radar time series analysis over West Anatolia. Fringe
2009 Workshop; Frascati. 30 November
4 December (ESA SP-677, March 2010).
Berardino P, Fornaro G, Lanari R, Sansosti E. 2002. A new algorithm for surface deformation
monitoring based on small baseline differential SAR interferograms. IEEE Trans Geo-
sci Remote Sens. 40:2375
2383.
Beutler G, Bock H, Brockmann E, Dach R, Fridez P, Gurtner W, Hugentobler U, Ineichen D,
Johnson J, Meindl M, et al. 2005. Bernese Gps Software Version 5.0 Draft. Astronom-
ical Institute, University of Berne.
Catal~ao J, Nico G, Hanssen R, Catita C. 2011. Merging GNSS and atmospherically corrected
InSAR data to map 3-D terrain displacement velocity. IEEE Trans Geosci Remote
Sens. 49:2354
2360.
 802 K.O. Hastaoglu

Cigna F, Osmanoglu B, Cabral-Cano E, Dixon TH, Avila-Olivera JA, Gardu~ no-Monroy VH,
Demets C, Wdowinski S. 2012. Monitoring land subsidence and its induced geological
hazard with synthetic aperture radar interferometry: a case study in Morelia, Mexico.
Remote Sens Environ. 117:146
161.
Coe JA, Ellis WL, Godt JW, Savage WZ, Savage JE, Michael JA, Kibler JD, Powers PS,
Lidke DJ, Debray S. 2003. Seasonal movement of the Slumgullion landslide deter-
mined from Global Positioning System surveys and field instrumentation. Eng Geol.
68:67
101.
Colesanti C, Andwasowski J. 2006. Investigating landslides with spaceborne Synthetic Aper-
ture Radar (SAR) interferometry. Eng Geol. 88:173
199.
Crosetto M, Crippa B, Biescas E. 2005. Early detection and in-depth analysis of deformation
phenomena by radar interferometry. Eng Geol. 79:81
91.
Farina P, Colombo D, Fumagalli A, Marks F, Moretti S. 2006. Permanent scatterers for land-
slide investigations: outcomes from ESA-SLAM project. Eng Geol. 88:200
217.
Ferretti A, Prati C, Rocca F. 2001. Permanent scatterers in SAR interferometry. IEEE T Geo-
sci Remote. 39:8
20.
Downloaded by [203.128.244.130] at 00:48 15 March 2016

Fruneau B, Achache J, Delacourt C. 1996, Observation and modelling of the Saint-Etienne-de-

Tinee landslide using SAR interferometry. Tectonophysics. 265:181
190.
Gili JA, Corominas J, Rius J. 2000. Using global positioning system techniques in landslide
monitoring. Eng Geol. 55:167
192.
Hastaoglu KO. 2013, Investigation of the groundwater effect on slow-motion landslides by
using dynamic Kalman filtering method with GNSS: Koyulhisar town center. Turk J
Earth Sci. 22:1033
1046.
Hastaoglu KO, Sanli DU. 2011. Monitoring Koyulhisar landslide using rapid static GNSS: a
strategy to remove biases from vertical velocities. Nat Hazards (ISI). 58:1275
1294.
Herrera G, Davalillo JC, Mulas J, Cooksley G, Monserrat O, Pancioli V. 2009. Mapping and
monitoring geomorphological processes in mountainous areas using PSI data: central
Pyrenees case study. Nat Hazards Earth Syst Sci. 9:1587
1598.
Hooper A, Bekaert D, Spaans K, Arikan M. 2012. Recent advances in SAR interferometry
time series analysis for measuring crustal deformation. Tectonophysics.
514
517:1
13.
Hooper A, Segall P, Zebker H. 2007. Persistent scatterer interferometric synthetic aperture
radar for crustal deformation analysis, with application to Volcan Alcedo, Galapagos.
J. Geophys Res B Solid Earth. 112:1
21.
Hooper A, Zebker H, Segall P, Kampes B. 2004. A new method for measuring deformation on
volcanoes and other natural terrains using InSAR persistent scatterers. Geophys Res
Lett. 31:1
5.
Kampes BM. 2005. Displacement parameter estimation using permanent scatterer interferom-
etry. [PhD thesis]. Delft: Delft University of Technology.
Liu P, Li Z, Hoey T, Kincal C, Zhang J, Zeng Q, Muller JP. 2013. Using advanced InSAR
time series techniques to monitor landslide movements in Badong of the Three Gorges
region, China. Int J Appl Earth Obs Geoinf. 21:253
264.
Malet JP, Maquaire O, Calais E. 2002. The use of global positioning system techniques for the
continuous monitoring of landslides: application to Yhe Super-Sauze earthflow
(Alpes-de-Haute-Provence, France). Geomorphology. 43:33
54.
Meisina C, Zucca F, Fossati D, Ceriani M, Allievi J. 2006. Ground deformation monitoring by
using the permanent scatterers technique: the example of the Oltrepo Pavese (Lombar-
dia, Italy). Eng Geol. 88:240
259.
Motagh M, Wetzel HU, Roessner S, Kaufmann H. 2013. A TerraSAR-X InSAR study of land-
slides in southern Kyrgyzstan, Central Asia. Remote Sens Lett. 4:657
666.
Notti D, Davalillo JC, Herrera G, Mora O. 2010. Assessment of the performance of X-band
satellite radar data for landslide mapping and monitoring: Upper Tena Valley case
study. Nat Hazards Earth Syst. 10:1865
1875.
 Geomatics, Natural Hazards and Risk 803

Peyret M, Djamour Y, Rizza M, Ritz J-F, Hurtrez J-E, Goudarzi MA, Nankali H, Chery J, Le
Dortz K, Uri F. 2008. Monitoring of the large slow Kahrod landslide in Alborz moun-
tain range (Iran) by GNSS and SAR interferometry. Eng Geol. 100:131
141.
Pratti C, Ferretti A, Perissin D. 2010. Recent advances on surface ground deformation mea-
surement by means of repeated space-borne SAR observations. J Geodynamics.
49:161
170.
Righini G, Pancioli V, Casagli N. 2010. Updating landslide inventory maps using persistent
scatterers interferometry (PSI) in the Biferno River Basin (Central Italy). Proceedings
of EGU 2010 General Assembly; Vienna. May 3
7.
Rott H, Scheuchl B, Siegel A, Grasemann B. 1999. Monitoring very slow slope movements by
means of SAR interferometry: a case study from a mass waste above a reservoir in the
Otztal Alps, Austria. Geophys Res Lett. 26:1629
1632.
Sendir H, Yilmaz I. 2002. Structural, geomorphological and geomechanical aspects of the
Koyulhisar landslides in the North Anatolian Fault Zone (Sivas-Turkey). Environ
Geol. 42:52
60.
Singhroy V, Mattar KE, Gray AL. 1998. Landslide characteristics in Canada using interfero-
Downloaded by [203.128.244.130] at 00:48 15 March 2016

metric SAR and combined SAR and TM images. Adv Space Res. 21:465
476.
Tatar O, Aykanat O, Kocbulut F, Yilmaz I, Sendir H, K urcer A, Sa
glam B. 2000. Landslide
Investigation and Evaluation Report of Koyulhisar Town Centre and Services Build-
ing of Police Chief. Turkish.
Toprak V. 1988. Neotectonic characteristics of the North Anatolian Fault Zone between
Koyulhisar and Susehri (NE Turkey). METU J Pure Appl Sci. 21:155
168.
Yin Y, Zheng W, Liu Y, Zhang J, Li X. 2010. Integration of GNSS with InSAR to monitoring
of the Jiaju landslide in Sichuan, China. Landslides. 7:359
365.
Zhu W, Zhang Q, Ding X, Zhao C, Yang C, Qu F, Qu W. 2014. Landslide monitoring by com-
bining of CR-InSAR and GNSS techniques. Adv Space Res. 53:430
439.