1 S5 Environmental Disturbances: August ‘06 Robert Schofield, U of O Erik Katsavounidis (MIT), Laura Cadonati (MIT), Michele Zanolin (MIT), Dennis Ugolini.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
UNIT 5: VIBRATIONS, WAVES & SOUND
Advertisements

RECOVERING HARDWARE INJECTIONS IN LIGO S5 DATA Ashley Disbrow Carnegie Mellon University Roy Williams, Michele Vallisneri, Jonah Kanner LIGO SURF 2013.
S3/S4 BBH report Thomas Cokelaer LSC Meeting, Boston, 3-4 June 2006.
Spring LSC 2001 LIGO-G W E2 Amplitude Calibration of the Hanford Recombined 2km IFO Michael Landry, LIGO Hanford Observatory Luca Matone, Benoit.
E3/E4 Line Noise Investigation LIGO-G Z Sergey Klimenko Soma Mukherjee Bernard Whiting Bob Coldwell August 15, 2001 Outline  LLO line noise (E4.
Chapter 17 Mechanical Waves and Sound
One Arm Cavity M0 L1 L2 TM M0 L1 L2 TRIPLE QUAD 16m R = 20m, T=1% R = ∞, T=1%  Optimally coupled cavity (no mode matched light reflected back)  Finesse.
G Z 1 Block-Normal, Event Display and Q-scan Based Glitch and Veto Studies Shantanu Desai for Penn. State Burst Group And Glitch Working Group.
Takanori Sekiguchi Italy-Japan Workshop (19 April, 2013) Inverted Pendulum Control for KAGRA Seismic Attenuation System 1 D2, Institute for Cosmic Ray.
G O D D A R D S P A C E F L I G H T C E N T E R Upconversion Study with the Hilbert-Huang Transform Jordan Camp Kenji Numata John Cannizzo Robert Schofield.
1 S4 Environmental Disturbances Robert Schofield, U of O John Worden, Richard McCarthy, Doug Cook, Hugh Radkins, LHO Josh Dalrymple, SU I.Pre-S4 “fixes”
S4 Environmental Disturbances Robert Schofield, U of O I.Pre-S4 “fixes” II.Some S4 veto issues III. Early coupling results from S4 PEM injections.
1 Environmental Disturbances: S4 and Pre-S5 Robert Schofield, U of O Doug Cook, Fred Raab, Richard McCarthy, LHO I.Seismic up-conversion II.Some peak identification.
LIGO-G D 1 Requirements Environment and constraints Performance requirements Functional requirements.
1 Environmental Disturbances: Early S5 and S4 Robert Schofield, U of O Rana Adhikari, CIT, Richard McCarthy, John Worden, LHO I.HVAC flow rate reduction.
LIGO-G D 1 MEPI electroMagnetic External Pre-Isolator Backup alternative to the Hydraulic actuator approach Goal: maximum commonality with HEPI.
1 S4 Environmental Disturbances Robert Schofield, U of O John Worden, Richard McCarthy, Doug Cook, Hugh Radkins, LHO Josh Dalrymple, SU I.Pre-S4 “fixes”
R. Frey Student Visit 1 Gravitational Waves, LIGO, and UO GW Physics LIGO
Midpoint (Equilibrium) Crest (high point) Trough (low point)
Waves & Sound.
Vibrations, Waves, & Sound
Glitch Group S5 Activities LSC LSU, Baton Rouge August 15, 2006 G Z L. Blackburn, L. Cadonati, S. Chatterji, J. Dalrymple, S. Desai,
Online Veto Analysis of TAMA300 Daisuke Tatsumi National Astronomical Observatory of Japan The TAMA Collaboration 8 th GWDAW19 Dec Milwaukee, UWM,
D Q 19 March. 2008LSC-Virgo meeting1 Status of Data Quality in Virgo D. Verkindt, LAPP-CNRS on behalf of the Virgo DQ team (M. Bizouard, L. Bosi, S. Chatterji,
1 Update on PEM - related activities: March 2012 Robert Schofield (Oregon), Anamaria Effler (LSU), Richard McCarthy (LHO), Rich Abbott (CIT), Thomas Abbott.
Waves. The Nature of Waves What is a mechanical wave?  A wave is a repeating disturbance or movement that transfers energy through matter or space 
Geology 5660/6660 Applied Geophysics 17 Jan 2014 © A.R. Lowry 2014 Read for Wed 22 Jan: Burger (Ch 2.2–2.6) Last time: The Wave Equation; The Seismometer.
What you will learn: You will determine how waves transfer energy You will describe wave reflection and discuss its practical significance.
LIGO-G Z Detector Characterization SummaryK. Riles - University of Michigan 1 Summary of Detector Characterization Sessions Keith Riles (University.
LIGO-G Z Detector Characterization SummaryK. Riles - University of Michigan 1 Summary of Detector Characterization Sessions Keith Riles (University.
1 Environmental Coupling During S5 Robert Schofield (University of Oregon) I. PEM injection overview II.Acoustic/seismic coupling III.Seismic upconversion.
WAVE Basics Chapters 15.
GWDAW12, Dec , Cambridge MA1 Detection Confidence Tests for Burst and Inspiral Candidate Events Romain Gouaty *, for the LSC and the Virgo Collaboration.
Waves mechanical wave frequency electromagnetic wave amplitude
Data Quality Vetoes in LIGO S5 Searches for Gravitational Wave Transients Laura Cadonati (MIT) For the LIGO Scientific Collaboration LIGO-G Z.
1 Data quality and veto studies for the S4 burst search: Where do we stand? Alessandra Di Credico Syracuse University LSC Meeting, Ann Arbor (UM) June.
The Analysis of Binary Inspiral Signals in LIGO Data Jun-Qi Guo Sept.25, 2007 Department of Physics and Astronomy The University of Mississippi LIGO Scientific.
Behavior of an inverted pendulum in the Kamioka mine R. Takahashi (NAOJ), A. Takamori (ERI), E. Majorana (INFN) GWADW 2010 We are investigating behavior.
LIGO-G D What can we Expect for the “Upper Limit” Run Stan Whitcomb LSC Meeting 13 August 2001 LIGO Hanford Observatory A Personal Reading of.
LSC glitch group report Shourov K. Chatterji for the LSC glitch group LSC/Virgo meeting 2007 October 24 Hannover, Germany LIGO-G Z.
Yousuke Itoh GWDAW8 UW Milwaukee USA December 2003 A large value of the detection statistic indicates a candidate signal at the frequency and.
Infrasounds and Background Free Oscillations Naoki Kobayashi [1] T. Kusumi and N. Suda [2] [1] Tokyo Tech [2] Hiroshima Univ.
Searching for Gravitational Waves from Binary Inspirals with LIGO Duncan Brown University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee for the LIGO Scientific Collaboration.
1 Status of Search for Compact Binary Coalescences During LIGO’s Fifth Science Run Drew Keppel 1 for the LIGO Scientific Collaboration 1 California Institute.
G Z Test Mass Butterfly Modes and Alignment Amber Bullington, Stanford University Warren Johnson, Louisiana State University LIGO Livingston Detector.
B. Caron, G. Balik, L. Brunetti LAViSta Team LAPP-IN2P3-CNRS, Université de Savoie, Annecy, France & SYMME-POLYTECH Annecy-Chambéry, Université de Savoie,
Modeling of the Effects of Beam Fluctuations from LIGO’s Input Optics Nafis Jamal Shivanand Sanichiro Yoshida Biplab Bhawal LSC Conference Aug ’05 LIGO-G Z.
HIGH FREQUENCY GROUND MOTION SCALING IN THE YUNNAN REGION W. Winston Chan, Multimax, Inc., Largo, MD W. Winston Chan, Multimax, Inc., Largo, MD Robert.
Ground Vibrations and Air Blasts: Causes, Effects and Abatement.
Joshua Smith, Elba, Italy Elba, Italy Joshua Smith for the GEO 600 team Picture of GEO in stormy weather?? Or pics of tractors with.
LIGO-G Z Detector Characterization SummaryK. Riles - University of Michigan 1 Summary of Detector Characterization Sessions Keith Riles (University.
Detector Characterisation and Optimisation David Robertson University of Glasgow.
Welcome Back Minions Now we learn about… SOUND!!! (But first a small recap…)
Waves Objective: I will understand the difference between mechanical waves and electromagnetic waves.
LIGO-G D Glitch Investigation Update Laura Cadonati for the Glitch Investigation Group LSC meeting, Hanford November 12, 2003.
Calibration and the status of the photon calibrators Evan Goetz University of Michigan with Peter Kalmus (Columbia U.) & Rick Savage (LHO) 17 October 2006.
Alternating Current Generator
BSC HEPI Pier Amplification
PEM pre-O1 1) Current status of PEM system pre-O1: 80/90% working
LIGO S6 Detector Characterization Studies
(Y. Itoh, M.A.Papa,B.Krishnan-AEI, X. Siemens –UWM
S3 Glitch Updates Laura Cadonati
A.M. Sintes for the pulgroup
Pearson Prentice Hall Physical Science: Concepts in Action
PHYSICS Mr. BALDWIN WAVES 15-Jan-14
S2/S3 Glitch Investigation Update
Environmental Monitoring: Coupling Function Calculator
S2 Bilinear Couplings Study
ALLEGRO calibration for the LLO-ALLEGRO stochastic analysis
Chapter 11 vocabulary Medium: matter through which a wave travels
Presentation transcript:

1 S5 Environmental Disturbances: August ‘06 Robert Schofield, U of O Erik Katsavounidis (MIT), Laura Cadonati (MIT), Michele Zanolin (MIT), Dennis Ugolini (Trinity), Justin Garofoli (LHO) I.HVAC effect comes from an upconversion mechanism that is not reproduced by servo injections. II.Coupling mechanism of glitch groups voltage/magnetomer events III.Does wind excite seismic motion preferentially in the wind direction? IV.Instrumental lines near harmonics of 1 Hz and 1/15 Hz V.Dam limits inspiral range

2 Gravitational wave sensitivity improves when HVAC off Blue: All site turbines and chiller pad equipment off; Red: normal

3 HVAC effect on range Shutting HVAC down improves H1 & H2 range about ¾ Mpc. Influence likely seismic – air flow into LVEA/VEA not needed for range reduction. Half-flow about as good as HVAC off (seismic level 55% of full flow in 1-50 Hz band). For ¾ LVEA flow level, seismic rms is only 61% of full flow level. This provides better temperature control and is what we are currently using. Seismic noise possibly from turbulence in supply plenum. DARM noise at 100 Hz was likely from up-conversion of lower frequency HVAC seismic signal instead of direct coupling.

4 Onset of upconversion from mechanical shaking lower than from servo injections at 16 Hz Mechanical shaking Injection into LSC- ETMX_EXC Factor of ~5 difference

5 Upconversion greater and harmonics emphasized for shaker injections RED: shaker injection, 16 Hz; BLUE: servo injections to match pitch, yaw and displacement from shaker Conclusions: HVAC effect can be explained. We may be affected by at least 2 upconversion mechanisms. In 16 Hz region we can not discount a mechanism outside the servo system. Upconversion amplitude from shaker consistent with HVAC upconversion

6 How do mains voltage disturbances couple into DARM ? Event discovery and veto studies by Erik K. and Laura C. Magnetometers H1 and H2 AS_Q

7 Magnetometer-DARM coupling factors from PEM injections LHO LLO

8 All-station counts/count version of the H1 magnetometer-DARM transfer functions Good to a factor of ~2

9 Agreement with predictions suggests that mains voltage disturbances show up in DARM through coupling of magnetic field to test mass

10 Does wind in the Y direction mainly excite seismic motion in the Y direction? Study by Michele Zanolin and Dennis Ugolini Ratio of X to Y seismic motion for wind in the Y direction varies building to building: EY and MY more Y than X, LVEA and MX have about equal motion. EX at LHO has more X than Y seismic motion for wind in the Y direction (axes reversed)? More investigations to be done by sciMon volunteers

11 Instrumental line at J frequency and suggested checks for pulsar group Magnetometer peak at that is a member of ~1 Hz comb, but can it account for pulsar signal? Search for “pulsars” at frequencies of other members of the comb

12 Dam 60 km away sets maximum inspiral range (discovered by Justin Garofoli)

13 Dam affects inspiral range through upconversion of seismic signal at 1.2 Hz. “Bounce” of water timed at 1 to 0.3 second. Large mass bouncing on the ground at our most sensitive frequency