Southeastern Louisiana University / LIGO Livingston 1 Modeling the Input Optics using E2E R. Dodda, T. Findley, N. Jamal, K.Rogillio, and S. Yoshida, Southeastern.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
LIGO - G R 1 HAM SAS Test Plan at LASTI David Ottaway November 2005 LIGO-G Z.
Advertisements

G R LIGO Laboratory1 Advanced LIGO Research and Development David Shoemaker LHO LSC 11 November 2003.
LIGO-G D Suspensions Update: the View from Caltech Phil Willems LIGO/Caltech Livingston LSC Meeting March 17-20, 2003.
Lock Acquisition with Auxiliary Lasers Main Question to be answered for the design : What is the goal of auxiliary lasers ? 1. lock independently the arms.
1 Virgo commissioning status M.Barsuglia LAL Orsay.
E2E school at LLO1  Han2k »Model of the LHO 2k IFO »Designed for lock acquisition study  SimLIGO1 »Model of all LIGO 1 IFOs »Designed for –noise hunting.
LIGO-G M 1 Conceptual Design Review: Initial LIGO Seismic Isolation System Upgrade Introduction Dennis Coyne April 12, 2002.
LIGO-G9900XX-00-M LIGO Status and Plans Barry Barish 5 June 2000 Gravitational Waves: A Challenge to Theoretical Astrophysics Trieste, 5-9 June 2000.
Status of the LIGO Project
Investigation of the influence of suspended optic’s motion on LIGO detector sensitivity Sanichiro Yoshida Southeastern Louisiana University.
LIGO-G D partial ADVANCED LIGO1 Development Plan R&D including Design through Final Design Review »for all long lead or high risk subsystems »LIGO.
Measurement of the laser beam profile at PSL to Mode Cleaner interface for the 40 Meter Prototype Interferometer A table of contents 1. Introduction 1.1.
LIGO-G M LIGO Laboratory1 Adv. LIGO Facilities Modifications (FAC) Plans, Schedule, Costs, Team Plan, Schedule Costs Team.
Laser Interferometer Gravitational-wave Observatory1 Characterization of LIGO Input Optics University of Florida Thomas Delker Guido Mueller Malik Rakhmanov.
LIGO-G9900XX-00-M LIGO Status and Plans Barry Barish March 13, 2000.
The LIGO Project ( Laser Interferometer Gravitational-Wave Observatory) Rick Savage – Scientist LIGO Hanford Observatory.
LIGO-G M April 5, 2006 Interferometer Sensing and Control (ISC) Cost and Schedule Breakout Presentation NSF Review of Advanced LIGO Project Richard.
Active Seismic Isolation Systems for Enhanced and Advanced LIGO Jeffrey S. Kissel 1 for the LSC 1 Louisiana State University The mechanical system for.
LIGO-G Z1 E2e modeling of violin mode S. Yoshida Southeastern Louisiana University V. Sannibale M. Barton, and H. Yamamoto Caltech LIGO NSF: PHYS
GWADW 2010 in Kyoto, May 19, Development for Observation and Reduction of Radiation Pressure Noise T. Mori, S. Ballmer, K. Agatsuma, S. Sakata,
Design of Stable Power-Recycling Cavities University of Florida 10/05/2005 Volker Quetschke, Guido Mueller.
LIGO-G W Commissioning and Performance of the LIGO Interferometers Reported on behalf of LIGO colleagues by Fred Raab, LIGO Hanford Observatory.
LIGO-G M Management of the LIGO Project Gary Sanders California Institute of Technology Presented to the Committee on Programs and Plans of the.
LIGO-G M 1 Conceptual Design Review: Initial LIGO Seismic Isolation System Upgrade Development, Implementation Plan & Schedule Dennis Coyne April.
G M 1 Advanced LIGO Update David Shoemaker LSC/Virgo MIT July 2007.
Status of LIGO Data Analysis Gabriela González Department of Physics and Astronomy Louisiana State University for the LIGO Scientific Collaboration Dec.
LIGO-G D The LIGO-I Gravitational-wave Detectors Stan Whitcomb CaJAGWR Seminar February 16, 2001.
LIGO- G D The LIGO Instruments Stan Whitcomb NSB Meeting LIGO Livingston Observatory 4 February 2004.
LIGO-G D “First Lock” for the LIGO Detectors 20 October 2000 LIGO Hanford Observatory Stan Whitcomb.
Matt Evans, LSC March 2003 (G E)1 Lock Acquisition in LIGO  Who am I? »Matt Evans »Caltech graduate  What is Lock Acquisition? »The process.
LSC August G Z Gingin High Optical Power Test Facility (AIGO) 1 High Optical Power Test Facility - Status First lock, auto-alignment and.
LSC-March  LIGO End to End simulation  Lock acquisition design »How to increase the threshold velocity under realistic condition »Hanford 2k simulation.
Calibration in the Front End Controls Craig Cahillane LIGO Caltech SURF 2013 Mentors: Alan Weinstein, Jamie Rollins Presentation to Calibration Group 8/21/2013.
M. Mantovani, ILIAS Meeting 7 April 2005 Hannover Linear Alignment System for the VIRGO Interferometer M. Mantovani, A. Freise, J. Marque, G. Vajente.
Modeling the Input Optics with e2e T. Findley, S. Yoshida, D. Dubois, N. Jamal, and R. Dodda Southeastern Louisiana University LIGO-G D.
G Z Test Mass Butterfly Modes and Alignment Amber Bullington, Stanford University Warren Johnson, Louisiana State University LIGO Livingston Detector.
MODELING THE CALIBRATED RESPONSE OF THE ADVANCED LIGO DETECTORS Luke Burks 2013 LIGO Caltech SURF Mentors: Alan Weinstein, Jameson Rollins Final Presentation.
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.
LIGO-G W LIGO Detector Commissioning Reported on behalf of LIGO colleagues by Fred Raab, LIGO Hanford Observatory.
LIGO-G D Beam Jitter Estimate at the OMC: Enhanced and Advanced LIGO Vuk Mandic LSC Meeting LSU, 08/14/06.
LSC Meeting at LHO LIGO-G E 1August. 21, 2002 SimLIGO : A New LIGO Simulation Package 1. e2e : overview 2. SimLIGO 3. software, documentations.
Aligning Advanced Detectors L. Barsotti, M. Evans, P. Fritschel LIGO/MIT Understanding Detector Performance and Ground-Based Detector Designs LIGO-G
LIGO-G0200XX-00-M LIGO Laboratory1 Modeling the Input Optics using E2E S. Yoshida, R. Dodda, T. Findley, K.Rogillio, and N. Jamal, Southeastern Louisiana.
LIGO-G D Commissioning at Hanford Stan Whitcomb Program Advisory Committee 12 December 2000 LIGO Livingston Observatory.
The Effect of Transverse Shifts on the LIGO Interferometer Doug Fettig - Oregon State University Mentor: Biplab Bhawal.
External forces from heat links in cryogenic suspensions D1, ICRR, Univ. Tokyo Takanori Sekiguchi.
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.
LIGO-G D Online Digital Signal Processing NSF Review, October 23, 2002 Daniel Sigg, LIGO Hanford Observatory.
Monica VarvellaIEEE - GW Workshop Roma, October 21, M.Varvella Virgo LAL Orsay / LIGO CalTech Time-domain model for AdvLIGO Interferometer Gravitational.
Elba Gravitational Wave Adv. Detector Workshop1May 22, 2002 Simulation of LIGO Interferometers 1. End to End simulation 2. Lock acquisition 3. Noise.
Progress of Shintake Monitor (ATF2 IP-BSM) KEK site meeting 2008/10/31 Takashi Yamanaka.
LIGO-G D Commissioning P Fritschel LIGO NSF review, 23 October 2002 M.I.T.
G R 2004 Plan Update LIGO Systems meeting 22 Jan 04 dhs.
The cancelation of displacement- and frequency- noise using four mach-zehnder interferometer Keiko Kokeyama Ochanomizu University / NAOJ.
Yoichi Aso Columbia University, New York, NY, USA University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan July 14th th Edoardo Amaldi Conference on Gravitational Waves.
LIGO-G Z1 e2e modeling of seismic isolation S. Yoshida 1 and H. Yamamoto 2 1. Southeastern Louisiana University 2. Caltech LIGO.
Calibration in the Front End Controls Craig Cahillane Luke Burks LIGO Caltech SURF 2013 Mentors: Alan Weinstein, Jamie Rollins Presentation to Calibration.
Time domain simulation for a FP cavity with AdLIGO parameters on E2E
Time domain simulation for a FP cavity with AdLIGO parameters on E2E
LCGT Seismic Attenuation System LCGT-SAS
Signal recycling R&D at LAL: Influence in Virgo
Design of Stable Power-Recycling Cavities
LIGO Detector Commissioning
LIGO Detector Commissioning
LIGO Interferometry CLEO/QELS Joint Symposium on Gravitational Wave Detection, Baltimore, May 24, 2005 Daniel Sigg.
P Fritschel LSC Meeting LLO, 22 March 2005
HAM SAS Test Plan at LASTI
Simulating the Advanced LIGO Interferometer Using the Real Control Code Juan F. Castillo.
Lessons Learned from Commissioning of Advanced Detectors
HAM-SAS Mechanics Status of modeling V.Boschi, V. Sannibale.
Presentation transcript:

Southeastern Louisiana University / LIGO Livingston 1 Modeling the Input Optics using E2E R. Dodda, T. Findley, N. Jamal, K.Rogillio, and S. Yoshida, Southeastern Louisiana University – Acknowledgement – LIGO Livingston Observatory, SURF 2004, NSF B. Bhawal, M. Evans, V. Sannibale, and H. Yamamoto

Southeastern Louisiana University / LIGO Livingston 2 Objectives A simulation model will be very convenient to study the impact of ground motion on the input optics, and on the input beam. Therefore, we seek to do the following: 1. Build an IO box using E2E ( time domain). 2. Integrate it with the Simligo. 3. Run simulation with real-time ground motion.

Southeastern Louisiana University / LIGO Livingston 3 The IO and Simligo boxes

Southeastern Louisiana University / LIGO Livingston 4 The Process 1.Make a Small Optic Suspension (SOS) box, and validate it. 2.Use the SOS box to damp the motion of an optic when real-time ground motion is given. 3.Create a Mode Cleaner (MC) box, and try to lock the cavity when real-time ground motion is given to the Mode Cleaner optics. 4.Put all the optics ( MCs, SM, and MMTs ) in order, and create the Input Optic (IO) box. 5.Use the IO box in Simligo, and run the simulation for the entire detector.

Southeastern Louisiana University / LIGO Livingston 5 Validating SOS – Role of the Table Top motion MC1 Yaw motion using two different schemes Schematic diagram of the SOS box with HAM motion as input

Southeastern Louisiana University / LIGO Livingston 6 HAM stack box  dt ACCX X in Y in Table u Table v )( 0 )( ),(,),( xktiykti eAtxveAtyu    )( 21  kkk  Table yaw = )},(),({ 2 1 )( txviktyu x v y u       )},(),(){(txvtyuki  HAM table Vibration isolation stacks Accelerometer Calculating the HAM table’s yaw U V q

Southeastern Louisiana University / LIGO Livingston 7 Dependence of k on frequency

Southeastern Louisiana University / LIGO Livingston 8 Calculating the suspension point motions of the optics u(x,y)= U - y v(x,y)= V + x U: table’s center of mass translational motion V: table’s center of mass translational motion : table’s yaw motion U V q MMT3 (-0.8, 0.6) (0, 0) MC3 (0.75, -0.05) MC1 (0.75, -0.25) SM (0.75, 0.45) MMT1 (0.1, 0.4)

Southeastern Louisiana University / LIGO Livingston 9 MC2 and MC3 MC2 Pend MC2 Yaw MC3 Pend MC3 Yaw

Southeastern Louisiana University / LIGO Livingston 10 Damped MC1 pendular motion

Southeastern Louisiana University / LIGO Livingston 11 Mode Cleaner box – Preliminary Results

Southeastern Louisiana University / LIGO Livingston 12 Conclusions l HAM table motion estimated from the ACC[XY] DAQ signal l MC1, MC3 local damping optimized l MC box constructed and being tested l Combination of MC and IFO in progress