Publications

Export 5 results:
Sort by: Author [ Title  (Desc)] Type Year
A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O [P] Q R S T U V W X Y Z   [Show ALL]
P
Royer, JY, Sclater JG, Sandwell DT.  1989.  A Preliminary Tectonic Fabric Chart of the Indian-Ocean. Proceedings of the Indian Academy of Sciences-Earth and Planetary Sciences. 98:7-24. AbstractWebsite
n/a
Sandwell, DT, Anderson D, Wessel P.  2005.  Plates, plumes, and paradigms. Plates, plumes, and paradigms. ( Foulger GR, Natland JH, Presnall DC, Anderson DL, Eds.).:1-10., Boulder, Colo.: Geological Society of America Abstract
n/a
Sandwell, DT.  2001.  Plate tectonics; a Martian view. Plate tectonics; an insider's history of the modern theory of the Earth. ( Oreskes N, Le Grand H, Eds.)., Boulder, CO, United States (USA): Westview Press, Boulder, CO AbstractWebsite
n/a
Sandwell, DT, Price EJ.  1998.  Phase gradient approach to stacking interferograms. Journal of Geophysical Research-Solid Earth. 103:30183-30204.   10.1029/1998jb900008   AbstractWebsite

The phase gradient approach is used to construct averages and differences of interferograms without phase unwrapping. Our objectives for change detection are to increase fringe clarity and decrease errors due to tropospheric and ionospheric delay by averaging many interferograms. The standard approach requires phase unwrapping, scaling the phase according to the ratio of the perpendicular baseline, and finally forming the average or difference; however, unique phase unwrapping is usually not possible. Since the phase gradient due to topography is proportional to the perpendicular baseline, phase unwrapping is unnecessary prior to averaging or differencing. Phase unwrapping may be needed to interpret the results, but it is delayed until all of the largest topographic signals are removed. We demonstrate the method by averaging and differencing six interferograms having a suite of perpendicular baselines ranging from 18 to 406 m. Cross-spectral analysis of the difference between two Tandem interferograms provides estimates of spatial resolution, which are used to design prestack filters. A wide range of perpendicular baselines provides the best topographic recovery in terms of accuracy and coverage. Outside of mountainous areas the topography has a relative accuracy of better than 2 m. Residual interferograms (single interferogram minus stack) have tilts across the unwrapped phase that are typically 50 mm in both range and azimuth, reflecting both orbit error and atmospheric delay. Smaller-scale waves with amplitudes of 15 mm are interpreted as atmospheric lee waves. A few Global Positioning System (GPS) control points within a Game could increase the precision to similar to 20 mm for a single interferogram; further improvements may be achieved by stacking residual interferograms.

Maia, M, Ackermand D, Dehghani GA, Gente P, Hekinian R, Naar D, O'Connor J, Perrot K, Morgan JP, Ramillien G, Revillon S, Sabetian A, Sandwell D, Stoffers P.  2000.  The Pacific-Antarctic Ridge-Foundation hotspot interaction: a case study of a ridge approaching a hotspot. Marine Geology. 167:61-84.   10.1016/s0025-3227(00)00023-2   AbstractWebsite

The Foundation hotspot-Pacific-Antarctic Ridge (PAI) system is the best documented case of a fast spreading ridge approaching a hotspot and interacting with it. The morphology, crustal structure inferred from gravity anomalies and the chemical composition of the lavas of the axial area of the PAR show evidence of the influence of the hotspot, that is presently located roughly 35 km west of the spreading ridge axis. Along-axis variation in the Mantle Bouguer anomaly is about 28 mGal, corresponding to a crustal thickening of 1.5 km where the hotspot is nearer to the PAR. Anomalous ridge elevation is 650 m and the along-axis width of the chemical anomaly is 200 km. A comparison of these axial parameters with those derived for other ridge-hotspot systems, suggests that the amount of plume material reaching the ridge axis is smaller for the Foundation-PAR system. This implies a weaker connection between the plume and the ridge. Cumulative effects of a fast spreading rate and of a fast ridge-hotspot relative motion can be responsible for this weak plume-ridge flow. The how from the hotspot may be less efficiently channelled towards the ridge axis when a fast ridge is rapidly moving towards a hotspot. (C) 2000 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.