%0 Journal Article
%@ 2072-4292
%A Ilieva, Maya
%A Polanin, Piotr
%A Borkowski, Andrzej
%A Gruchlik, Piotr
%A Smolak, Kamil
%A Kowalski, Andrzej
%A Rohm, Witold
%A Institute of Geodesy and Geoinformatics, Wroclaw University of Environmental and Life Sciences,
%A Department of Surface and Structures Protection, Central Mining Institute,
%A Institute of Geodesy and Geoinformatics, Wroclaw University of Environmental and Life Sciences,
%A Department of Surface and Structures Protection, Central Mining Institute,
%A Institute of Geodesy and Geoinformatics, Wroclaw University of Environmental and Life Sciences,
%A Department of Surface and Structures Protection, Central Mining Institute,
%A Institute of Geodesy and Geoinformatics, Wroclaw University of Environmental and Life Sciences,
%D 2019
%F epos:2293
%I MDPI
%J Remote Sensing
%K mining subsidence; InSAR; Knothe–Budryk modelling; levelling validation
%N 7
%P 745
%T Mining Deformation Life Cycle in the Light of InSAR and Deformation Models
%U https://episodesplatform.eu/eprints/2293/
%V 11
%X The Sentinel-1 constellation provides an effective new radar instrument with a short revisit time of six days for the monitoring of intensive mining surface deformations. Our goal is to investigate in detail and to bring new comprehension of the mine life cycle. The dynamics of mining, especially in the case of horizontally evolving longwall technology, exhibit rapid surface changes. We use the classical approach of differential radar interferometry (DInSAR) with short temporal baselines (six days), which results in deformation maps with a low decorrelation between the satellite images. For the same time intervals, we compare the radar results with prediction models based on the Knothe–Budryk theory for mining subsidence. The validation of the results with ground levelling measurements reveals a high level of resemblance of the DInSAR subsidence maps (−0.04 m bias with respect to the levelling). On the other hand, aside from the explicable exaggeration, the location of the subsidence trough needs improvement in the forecasted deformations (0.2 km shift in location, a deformation velocity four times higher than in DInSAR). In addition, a time lag between DInSAR (compatible with extraction) and prediction is revealed. The model improvement can be achieved by including the DInSAR results in the elaboration of the model parameters.