Technologies of Gravitational Wave Detection

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Beyond The Standard Quantum Limit B. W. Barr Institute for Gravitational Research University of Glasgow.
Advertisements

Gravitational Wave Astronomy Dr. Giles Hammond Institute for Gravitational Research SUPA, University of Glasgow Universität Jena, August 2010.
19. October 2004 A. Freise Automatic Alignment using the Anderson Technique A. Freise European Gravitational Observatory Roma
Dual Recycling for GEO 600 Andreas Freise, Hartmut Grote Institut für Atom- und Molekülphysik Universität Hannover Max-Planck-Institut für Gravitationsphysik.
Gravitational Wave Astronomy Dr. Giles Hammond Institute for Gravitational Research SUPA, University of Glasgow Universität Jena, August 2010.
Dennis Ugolini, Trinity University Bite of Science Session, TEP 2014 February 13, 2014 Catching the Gravitational Waves.
Laser Interferometer Gravitational-wave Detectors: Advancing toward a Global Network Stan Whitcomb LIGO/Caltech ICGC, Goa, 18 December 2011 LIGO-G v1.
Cascina, January 25th, Coupling of the IMC length noise into the recombined ITF output Raffaele Flaminio EGO and CNRS/IN2P3 Summary - Recombined.
Polarization Techniques for Interferometer Control Peter Beyersdorf National Astronomical Observatory of Japan LSC March 2002 Advanced Configurations LIGO-G Z.
Optics of GW detectors Jo van den Brand
Koji Arai – LIGO Laboratory / Caltech LIGO-G v2.
Marcus Benna, University of Cambridge Wavefront Sensing in Dual-Recycled Interferometers LIGO What is Wavefront Sensing? How does it work? –Detection of.
Matthew Evans, Ph237 April Application of Simulation to LIGO Interferometers  Who am I? »Matthew Evans, Ph.D. from Caltech on Lock Acquisition 
Higher order laser modes in gravitational wave detectors
Koji Arai – LIGO Laboratory / Caltech LIGO-G v1.
TeV Particle Astrophysics August 2006 Caltech Australian National University Universitat Hannover/AEI LIGO Scientific Collaboration MIT Corbitt, Goda,
Generation of squeezed states using radiation pressure effects David Ottaway – for Nergis Mavalvala Australia-Italy Workshop October 2005.
Recent Developments toward Sub-Quantum-Noise-Limited Gravitational-wave Interferometers Nergis Mavalvala Aspen January 2005 LIGO-G R.
The GEO 600 Detector Andreas Freise for the GEO 600 Team Max-Planck-Institute for Gravitational Physics University of Hannover May 20, 2002.
Interferometer Control Matt Evans …talk mostly taken from…
GEO‘s experience with Signal Recycling Harald Lück Perugia,
LIGO-G D Enhanced LIGO Kate Dooley University of Florida On behalf of the LIGO Scientific Collaboration SESAPS Nov. 1, 2008.
SQL Related Experiments at the ANU Conor Mow-Lowry, G de Vine, K MacKenzie, B Sheard, Dr D Shaddock, Dr B Buchler, Dr M Gray, Dr PK Lam, Prof. David McClelland.
Optical Gyroscopes for Ground Tilt Sensing in Advanced LIGO The need for low frequency tilt sensing The optics in Advanced LIGO’s suspensions must be very.
Koji Arai – LIGO Laboratory / Caltech LIGO-G v1.
Displacement calibration techniques for the LIGO detectors Evan Goetz (University of Michigan)‏ for the LIGO Scientific Collaboration April 2008 APS meeting.
LIGO- G R Amaldi7 July 14 th, 2007 R. Ward, Caltech 1 DC Readout Experiment at the Caltech 40m Laboratory Robert Ward Caltech Amaldi 7 July 14.
LIGO- G R Sensing and control, SPIE conference, June Sensing and control of the Advanced LIGO optical configuration SPIE conference at.
Arm Length Stabilisation for Advanced Gravitational Wave Detectors Adam Mullavey, Bram Slagmolen, Daniel Shaddock, David McClelland Peter Fritschel, Matt.
Advanced Virgo Optical Configuration ILIAS-GW, Tübingen Andreas Freise - Conceptual Design -
Koji Arai – LIGO Laboratory / Caltech LIGO-G v2.
Advanced LIGO Simulation, 6/1/06 Elba G E 1 ✦ LIGO I experience ✦ FP cavity : LIGO I vs AdvLIGO ✦ Simulation tools ✦ Time domain model Advanced.
Gravitational Waves.
Dual Recycling in GEO 600 H. Grote, A. Freise, M. Malec for the GEO600 team Institut für Atom- und Molekülphysik University of Hannover Max-Planck-Institut.
The status of VIRGO Edwige Tournefier (LAPP-Annecy ) for the VIRGO Collaboration HEP2005, 21st- 27th July 2005 The VIRGO experiment and detection of.
Gravitational Wave Observatories By: Matthew Fournier.
SQL Related Experiments at the ANU Conor Mow-Lowry, G de Vine, K MacKenzie, B Sheard, Dr D Shaddock, Dr B Buchler, Dr M Gray, Dr PK Lam, Prof. David McClelland.
LIGO-G Z March 2007, LSC meeting, Osamu Miyakawa 1 Osamu Miyakawa Hiroaki Yamamoto March 21, 2006 LSC meeting Modeling of AdLIGO arm lock acquisition.
Monica VarvellaIEEE - GW Workshop Roma, October 21, M.Varvella Virgo LAL Orsay / LIGO CalTech Time-domain model for AdvLIGO Interferometer Gravitational.
LIGO G M Intro to LIGO Seismic Isolation Pre-bid meeting Gary Sanders LIGO/Caltech Stanford, April 29, 2003.
The VIRGO detection system
LOGO Gravitational Waves I.S.Jang Introduction Contents ii. Waves in general relativity iii. Gravitational wave detectors.
Active Vibration Isolation using a Suspension Point Interferometer Youichi Aso Dept. Physics, University of Tokyo ASPEN Winter Conference on Gravitational.
The Proposed Holographic Noise Experiment Rainer Weiss, MIT On behalf of the proposing group Fermi Lab Proposal Review November 3, 2009.
LIGO-G D Advanced LIGO Systems & Interferometer Sensing & Control (ISC) Peter Fritschel, LIGO MIT PAC 12 Meeting, 27 June 2002.
Yoichi Aso Columbia University, New York, NY, USA University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan July 14th th Edoardo Amaldi Conference on Gravitational Waves.
Calibration and the status of the photon calibrators Evan Goetz University of Michigan with Peter Kalmus (Columbia U.) & Rick Savage (LHO) 17 October 2006.
Interferometer configurations for Gravitational Wave Detectors
Squeezing in Gravitational Wave Detectors
Daniel Sigg, Commissioning Meeting, 11/11/16
The Proposed Holographic Noise Experiment
Reaching the Advanced LIGO Detector Design Sensitivity
Nergis Mavalvala Aspen January 2005
Generation of squeezed states using radiation pressure effects
Nergis Mavalvala MIT IAU214, August 2002
Yoichi Aso on behalf of the LCGT ISC Group
Homodyne readout of an interferometer with Signal Recycling
Commissioning the LIGO detectors
Quantum effects in Gravitational-wave Interferometers
Quantum Optics and Macroscopic Quantum Measurement
Squeezed states in GW interferometers
Workshop on Gravitational Wave Detectors, IEEE, Rome, October 21, 2004
LIGO Detector Commissioning
LIGO Detector Commissioning
Thermal lensing effect: Experimental measurements - Simulation with DarkF & Finesse J. Marque (Measurements analysis: M. Punturo; DarkF simulation: M.
Improving LIGO’s stability and sensitivity: commissioning examples
Squeezed Light Techniques for Gravitational Wave Detection
Advanced Optical Sensing
Talk prepared by Stefan Hild AEI Hannover for the GEO-team
Measurement of radiation pressure induced dynamics
Presentation transcript:

Technologies of Gravitational Wave Detection LIGO-G1000642-V1 Technologies of Gravitational Wave Detection Koji Arai – LIGO Laboratory / Caltech

Background / Overview Introduce common technologies / terminologies Brief review of GW / GW detection Interferometer GW detectors Interferometry Sensing & Control

Interferometer GW detection

Gravitational wave General Relativity GW Gravity = Spacetime curvature Gravitational Wave = Wave of spacetime curvature GW Generated by motion of massive objects Propagates with speed of light Cause quadrupole deformation of the spacetime GW Free mass

Interferometer GW detection Michelson-type interferometers are used Differential change of the arm path lengths =>change interference condition Mirror Mirror Beamsplitter Interference Fringe Laser

Amplitude of GWs The effect of GW is very small h ~ 10-21 => distance of 1m changes 10-21m Corresponds to: change by ~1 angstrom for distance between the sun and the earth 1.5 x 1011 m changes by a size of a H atom!

Size of interferometer GW detectors Mirror GW Detection = Length measurement The longer arms, the bigger the effect GW works as strain => dx = hGW x Larm Until cancellation of the signal happens in the arms Optimum arm length Mirror Mirror Laser Mirror Laser Photodetector Photodetector

Size of interferometer GW detectors LIGO Observatories Hanford (4km&2km) Livingston (4km) \ c.f. Virgo (FRA/ITA) 3km, GEO (GER/GBR) 600m, TAMA (JPN) 300m Still shorter than the optimum length => Use optical cavity to increase life time of the photons in the arm

Components of the interferometer “Still simplified” LIGO Interferometer 4km Fabry-Perot Cavity Vacuum Chamber / Beam tube 4km Fabry-Perot Cavity Mirror Suspension Beamsplitter Recycling Mirror Photodetector Mirror Vibration Isolation System Digital Control System Mode Cleaner L~12m Laser Data Acquisition /Analysis System

Components of the interferometer 3 fundamentals of the GW detector Optics Mechanics Electronics

What can we do for the detection? An IFO produces a continuous signal in the GW channel The detector is fixed on the ground => can not be directed to a specific angle GWs and noises are, in principle, indistinguishable => Anything we detect is GW Reduce noises! Obs. distance is inv-proportional to noise level x10 better => x10 farther => x1000 more galaxies

Recent sensitivity of LIGO Sensitivity (=noise level) of Enhanced LIGO Laser shot noise Laser radiation pressure noise thermal noise seismic noise Laser intensity /frequency noise electronics noise digitization noise angular control noise ...... h= 2x10-23 /rtHz

Summary GWs ~ ripples of the spacetime Not yet directly detected ~ the effect is so small (h<10-21) Michelson-type interferometers are used GW detection is a precise length (=displacement) measurement! GW effect is very small

Summary Essentially, the larger, the better. LIGO has two largest interferometers in the world IFO consists of many components Optics / Mechanics / Electronics and their combinations (e.g. Opto-Electronics) noise and signal are, in principle, indistinguishable. Noise reduction is the matter.

Interferometry

Laser interferometry GW detection = High sensitive detection of displacement Laser interferometry is an indispensable technology (lambda ~ 1um) We use optical cavities in many places What is an optical cavity?

Any laser beam does diverge Gaussian beam Propagation of EM waves Plane wave Spherical wave Gaussian beam: A solution to paraxial approximated wave equation Amplitude distribution of the beam is Gaussian Equiphase Planes Any laser beam does diverge Rayleigh range Coherent Light source Spherical- wave like waist divergence angle Plane-wave like

Fringes Two beams overlap at the BS Differential change of the arm length => fringe condition changed Power Bright Fringe Power Dark Fringe dx

Phase measurement Why an interferometer is sensitive? the wavelength is used as a scale We can not directly read phases of the E-field => What we can use is the detected power Power depends on the optical phase by using interference Power

If you really see fringe stripes, Contrast Contrast Defect with mirror tilting If you really see fringe stripes, that’s BAD! Dark Fringe Contrast Light intensity at PD with the mirror swept

Fabry-Perot Optical Resonator Cavities Two facing high reflective mirror When the optical phase of the incident beam matches the phase in the cavity => resonance 2 mirror cavity = Fabry-Perot (FP) more mirrors = ring cavity not much difference R=99% R~100% Laser ~400W 1W

Fabry-Perot Optical Resonator Cavities Conservation of energy: Ri+Ti+Li = 1 When 2kL = n(2p), (ie, L=nl/2), Ecir , Etran maximized  resonance!

a larger phase change is obtained FP circulating field Power Gain DL = l /2 Cavity: a larger phase change is obtained D f = ffsr = c/2L d f Free Spectral Range: fFSR = c/2L Finesse = d f /ffsr dL or f Dn = D(2kL)/2p = Df/ffsr = DL/(l /2) Phase enhancement factor NFP=2F/Pi

Optical cavity How useful are the optical cavities? FP arms: Enhance the phase change in the MI arm = larger response to GWs

Optical cavity Power recycling Increase the light power towards the BS compound mirror

Optical cavity Spacial mode filtering Signal Recycling Freq Stabilization (Mode Cleaner/Ref Cav) Cavity length (L) and Laser freq (f) are equivalent =>Use L as a reference of f e.g. dL~1pm, L~0.1m => freq stability of 10-11 (df=3kHz for f~300THz) Spacial mode filtering Signal Recycling

Pound-Drever-Hall technique (PDH) Signal extraction scheme for the cavities Phase modulation -> RF optical sidebands Reflected beam -> detected / demodulated V Laser Electro-Optic Modulator Faraday Isolator or Pick-off mirror dL or f

Summary Interferometer is a sensitive device Because we are reading the phase of the light Optical cavity is more sensitive Because the phase change is enhanced by the cavity Optical cavities are useful! The PDH technique

Sensing & Control

Sensing and Control Feedback controls are a common technique in the instruments and measurements For high sensitivity, we use interferometry. The response of the interferometers are nonlinear Michelson: moderately Fabry-Perot: highly nonlinear Presence of seismic disturbance We need to control the mirror positions

Sensor A sensor is an instrument to convert a physical quantity to a signal --- mostly a voltage signal linear sensor nonlinear sensor (almost) useless (IFO) No control control needed needed V V V dx dx dx

Mirror motion The mirrors of the interferometer is suspended At low frequency (f<1Hz), the vibration isolation is not effective Mirror swings an order of lambda (~um) [sec]

Asymptotically Linear Sensor Nonlinear sensor can also be used as a linear sensor by utilizing feedback control “error signal” e.g. PDH signal Servo Lock! The IFO is locked at its most sensitive state

Actuators In particular for the current GW IFO case, coil-magnet pairs are used to actuate the position and angles of the mirrors magnet

Lock Acqusition The moment of lock acquisition Intracavity power One arm Locked! Another arm Locked!

Block diagram If the sensor is linear we don’t need feedback disturbance sensor error signal Verr = H dx i.e. dx = Verr / H

Block diagram When the feedback is applied: disturbance stabilized disturbance error signal actuator sensor servo filter feedback signal Open loop transfer function

Effect of a feedback to the signals Linear sensor Response with feedback (error signal) Response with feedback (feedback signal) the size of the signal depends on the fb gain (G) G<<1 the error signal is good G>>1 the fb signal is good disturbance sensor error signal sensor (incl. the feedback loop) disturbance error signal sensor (incl. the feedback loop) disturbance feedback signal

For stable feedback control linear range to accomodate residual dxs stabilized disturbance Modeling of a control loop helps you error signal disturbance actuator range to cancel the disturbance servo filter shape based on a control theory feedback signal

Example of an open loop TF Unity Gain Frequency bigger gain at LF bigger phase margin at UGF smaller gain at HF Phase margin

Supression of the error signal By knowing H, A, F, we can reproduce the original disturbance level

Summary With feedback control, we can treat a nonlinear system as a linear system Feedback control is the key for GW interferometers to keep their performance An openloop transfer function is to be designed in each case. Feedback control changes the signals from the system. Modeling always helps to understand how the original signals are.