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.

Slides:



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

Bicoherence studies on LLO data Vijay Chickarmane, Gabriela Gonzalez LSU Offline analysis of bicoherence of 6hrs of data, July 12, 2002 using functions.
LIGO-G M LIGO - The Laser Interferometer Gravitational-wave Observatory Vibration and Facility Considerations (incomplete) Dennis Coyne TMT Vibration.
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.
Takanori Sekiguchi Italy-Japan Workshop (19 April, 2013) Inverted Pendulum Control for KAGRA Seismic Attenuation System 1 D2, Institute for Cosmic Ray.
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”
LIGO-G M 1 Conceptual Design Review: Initial LIGO Seismic Isolation System Upgrade Introduction Dennis Coyne April 12, 2002.
Scientific motivation –Measurement and characterization of gravitational radiation –Special interest in “burst” sources, especially in association with.
LIGO-G0200XX-00-M LIGO Laboratory1 Pre-Isolation Dennis Coyne LIGO Laboratory NSF LIGO Annual Review, at MIT 23 October 2002.
LIGO-G W Proposed LHO Commissioning Activities in May 02 Fred Raab 29 Apr 02.
LIGO-G M LIGO Laboratory1 Pre-Isolation Dennis Coyne LIGO Laboratory NSF LIGO Annual Review, at MIT 23 October 2002.
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.
rd ILIAS-GW annual general meeting 1 VIRGO Commissioning progress J. Marque (EGO)
LIGO-G D 1 Requirements Environment and constraints Performance requirements Functional requirements.
LIGO-G W Commissioning Data on Vibration Isolation & Suspensions Fred Raab 24 October 02.
Investigation of the influence of suspended optic’s motion on LIGO detector sensitivity Sanichiro Yoshida Southeastern Louisiana University.
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.
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”
Current Noise at LHO Worst wire loss inferred from in situ violin mode measurements:  =
Virgo Control Noise Reduction
1 Update on PEM - related activities: March 2012 Robert Schofield (Oregon), Anamaria Effler (LSU), Richard McCarthy (LHO), Rich Abbott (CIT), Thomas Abbott.
LIGO-G D Commissioning PAC11, 2001 Daniel Sigg, LIGO Hanford Observatory.
G D Initial LIGO improvements & Advanced LIGO P Fritschel PAC Meeting LLO, 18 May 2005.
G D Commissioning Report P Fritschel LSC meeting, LHO 15 Aug 2005.
LIGO-G Z LIGO Commissioning Report LSC Meeting, Hanover August 19, 2003 Peter Fritschel, MIT.
LIGO-G Z Detector Characterization SummaryK. Riles - University of Michigan 1 Summary of Detector Characterization Sessions Keith Riles (University.
Environmental noise studies at VIRGO Environmental contributions to Virgo readout noise (C-runs) many sources identified through coherency analyses with.
1 Environmental Coupling During S5 Robert Schofield (University of Oregon) I. PEM injection overview II.Acoustic/seismic coupling III.Seismic upconversion.
An Approach to Stabilizing Large Telescopes for Stellar Interferometry It shakes like a…. [G. Vasisht, 31 March 2006] N. Di Lieto J. Sahlmann, G. Vasisht,
LIGO-G Z E7 Correlations Nelson Christensen, Russ Bainer - Carleton College Adrian Ottewill - University College Dublin Steve Penn - Syracuse.
Enhanced LIGO with squeezing: Lessons Learned for Advanced LIGO and beyond.
Advanced interferometers for astronomical observations Lee Samuel Finn Center for Gravitational Wave Physics, Penn State.
1 Virgo Commissioning progress ILIAS, Nov 13 th 2006 Matteo Barsuglia on behalf of the Commissioning Team.
LIGO-G D Commissioning, Part II PAC 12, June 2002 Peter Fritschel, LIGO MIT.
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 Z August 16, 2006August 2006 LSC Meeting - DetChar 1 Spectral Line Working Group Report Keith Thorne, Chair.
Cascina, June 19th, Brewster window noise ? Raffaele Flaminio EGO and CNRS/LAPP Summary - Original observations - Brewster window replacement - New.
1 LESSONS FROM VIRGO+ May 17th 2010 E. Calloni for the Virgo collaboration.
LIGO-G D 1 Status of Detector Commissioning LSC Meeting, March 2001 Nergis Mavalvala California Institute of Technology.
G Z Test Mass Butterfly Modes and Alignment Amber Bullington, Stanford University Warren Johnson, Louisiana State University LIGO Livingston Detector.
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.
Status of LIGO Andri M. Gretarsson Livingston Observatory LIGO-G L.
Gabriele Vajente ILIAS WG1 meeting - Frascati Noise Analysis Tools at Virgo.
LIGO-G W Prospects for the S5 Run Fred Raab, LIGO Hanford Observatory November 8, 2005.
LIGO Livingston Observatory Commissioning Status and Proposed Commissioning Activities Prior to S1 Mark Coles May 13, 2002.
LIGO-G Z LIGO’s Thermal Noise Interferometer Progress and Status Eric D. Black, Kenneth G. Libbrecht, and Shanti Rao (Caltech) Seiji Kawamura.
LIGO-G D Commissioning P Fritschel LIGO NSF review, 23 October 2002 M.I.T.
LIGO-G Z March 21, 2007 March 2007 LIGO/Virgo Meeting - DetChar 1 S5 Spectral Line Cataloguing Keith Thorne for the Spectral Line Working Group.
Calibration and the status of the photon calibrators Evan Goetz University of Michigan with Peter Kalmus (Columbia U.) & Rick Savage (LHO) 17 October 2006.
Conor Mow-Lowry Thanks to: Krishna, Jeff, Brian, Jim, Hugh, Robert
Prospects and plans : LIGO interferometers Michael Landry LIGO Hanford Observatory LSC meeting, MIT Nov 4-5, 2006.
Fred Raab, LIGO Hanford Observatory November 8, 2005
Yuta Michimura Department of Physics, University of Tokyo
BSC HEPI Pier Amplification
PEM pre-O1 1) Current status of PEM system pre-O1: 80/90% working
Commissioning the LIGO detectors
LIGO Detector Commissioning
Status of the LIGO Detectors
LIGO Detector Commissioning
Environmental Monitoring: Coupling Function Calculator
S2 Bilinear Couplings Study
LIGO Interferometry CLEO/QELS Joint Symposium on Gravitational Wave Detection, Baltimore, May 24, 2005 Daniel Sigg.
P Fritschel LSC Meeting LLO, 22 March 2005
Improving LIGO’s stability and sensitivity: commissioning examples
Detector Characterization Session
Yuta Michimura Department of Physics, University of Tokyo
Status of KAGRA Yuta Michimura on behalf of the KAGRA Collaboration
Status of KAGRA Yuta Michimura on behalf of the KAGRA Collaboration
Interferometer Design for bKAGRA Phase 1
Yuta Michimura Department of Physics, University of Tokyo
Presentation transcript:

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 for upper limits groups - VME produced - seismic/acoustic III. Seismic/acoustic mitigation -acoustic enclosures -floating the H2 dark port

2 Up-conversion of low frequency seismic noise seismic noise from distant excavation night spectrum excites stack modes in AS_Q up-conversion reduces interferometer sensitivity night spectrum

3 DARM injection does not produce up-conversion. shaking ground at 1.2 Hz moves optic and produces up-conversion larger optic motion from actuator injection does not result in up-conversion

4 Up-conversion with injection to mimic pitch during wind Optical lever during periods of wind, quiet and actuator injections to “match” wind Hz band in AS_Q showing up-conversion during wind and actuator injection.

5 Up-conversion depends on stack motion not floor motion. Small shaker on cross-beam and large shaker on floor adjusted to produce similar optic motion......produce similar up-conversion even though floor motion differs by 10.

6 Ground shaking to excite specific motions Red: mainly beam-axis; Blue: mainly side-to side; Black: no shaking Beam-axis (AS_Q) Yaw (from optical lever) Pitch (optical lever) Side (from shadow sensor)

7 Side-to-side shaking does not produce up-conversion. Ground shaking that produces beam-axis motion produces up-conversion, but shaking that produces side-to-side motion does not.

8 Up-conversion for different shaking amplitudes 30 um/s rms 3 um/s rms

9 Up-conversion similar at LHO ETMs; is it similar at ITMs and LLO at similar velocities? LHO ETMX LHO ITMY (due to MICH) Brian’s LLO ETMX measurement

10 Brian O’Reilly’s recent LLO measurements

11 Simple model doesn’t explain tail Predicted cutoff ~52 Hz Predicted cutoff ~12 Hz Tail not proportional to velocity (differs from single frequency injections)

12 Possible sources of up-conversion back-scattering from output telescope: consistent with lack of up-conversion for side-to side brushing cables on test mass support structure - not consistent with side-to side back-scattering from optic- support structure – but why not also from BSC back wall? optic support wire at clamps

13 S4 H1-H2 coherence peak identification for stochastic group 133 Hz: Neslab PSL chillers330 Hz HVAC turbine SF01

14 Pulsars in VME crates (harmonics of Hz) Blue: VME crate on, but 7751 CPU board disconnected Black: 7751 CPU on but code not running magnetometer near VME crate detects pulsar candidate frequencies. Magnetometers elsewhere don’t. Red: normal operation of VME crate

15 Coherence between AS_Q and VME magnetometer Broad-band coherence 108 Hz peak magnetometer

Hz peak moves with air-flow to fans Blue: normal air; Red: extra air

Hz peak goes away when power supply fan disconnected.

18 Acoustic enclosures for LHO reflected port by S5 Acoustic coupling at ISCT4 was reduced beyond expectations, making it worth while to enclose what was the second worst coupling site – the reflected port. We have also ordered an enclosure for the H2 REFL port, though we don’t expect improvement.

19 ISCT10 floated yesterday, velocity down more than 10

20 Summary I.Seismic Up-conversion a. several types, focus on the anthropogenic type characterized by b. b. not reproduced by DARM injections c. not produced by side-to-side motions; possibly not by yaw (n=1) d. looks like back-scattering, at least at large amplitudes e. similar at LHO ETMX and ETMY, as well as LLO ETMX, MICH noise dominates LHO ITMY f. at least at LHO noise starts showing up at a few times background, which is not atypical of seismic transients II.Peak identification a from crate controller b. 108 from crate power supply fan c. 133 from chiller d. 330 from HVAC turbine III.Acoustic/seismic mitigation a. acoustic enclosures for LHO dark port are on their way b. H2 dark port is now floating – more than 10 reduction in velocity, should reduce H1-H2 coherence, range increased 0.5 Mpc

21