LIGO- G020050-00-D E7: An Instrument-builder’s Perspective Stan Whitcomb LIGO Caltech LSC Meeting Upper Limits Plenary Session 22 May 2002 LIGO Livingston.

Slides:

Advertisements

Similar presentations

Calibration of the gravitational wave signal in the LIGO detectors Gabriela Gonzalez (LSU), Mike Landry (LIGO-LHO), Patrick Sutton (PSU) with the calibration.

Advertisements

G R LIGO Laboratory1 Advanced LIGO Research and Development David Shoemaker LHO LSC 11 November 2003.

LIGO-G D Detector Installation and Commissioning Stan Whitcomb NSF Annual Review 30 April 2001 Caltech.

1 Virgo commissioning status M.Barsuglia LAL Orsay.

LIGO-G W Status of LIGO Installation and Commissioning Frederick J. Raab, LIGO Hanford Observatory.

LIGO-G W Lessons Learned From E7 at LIGO Hanford Observatory Fred Raab Daniel Sigg.

LIGO-G0200XX-00-M LIGO Laboratory1 Pre-Isolation Dennis Coyne LIGO Laboratory NSF LIGO Annual Review, at MIT 23 October 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.

LIGO Reduced Data Sets E7 standard reduced data set RDS generation for future runs decimation examples LIGO-G Z Isabel Leonor (w/ Robert Schofield)

G D Interferometer Status LSC Meeting, Ann Arbor, June 4, 2005 Daniel Sigg.

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.

Laser Interferometer Gravitational-wave Observatory1 Characterization of LIGO Input Optics University of Florida Thomas Delker Guido Mueller Malik Rakhmanov.

LIGO-G M Status of LIGO Barry Barish PAC Meeting Caltech 3-June-04 Upper limits on known pulsar ellipticities.

LIGO-G W Summary of S1 at LIGO Hanford Observatory Fred Raab 9 September 02.

LIGO-G L Peter Fritschel & Michael Zucker PAC18 meeting LIGO Livingston Observatory 18 May 2005 S5 Run Performance Goals.

LIGO-G D Commissioning PAC11, 2001 Daniel Sigg, LIGO Hanford Observatory.

LIGO-G W Status of LIGO Installation and Commissioning Frederick J. Raab, LIGO Hanford Observatory.

LIGO-G DM. Landry – Amaldi5 July 9, 2003 Laser Interferometer Gravitational Wave Observatory Monitoring LIGO Data During the S2 Science Run Michael.

LIGO-G D Installation and Commissioning Status Stan Whitcomb Program Advisory Committee 14 June 2001 Caltech.

Status of Virgo Gabriele Vajente INFN Pisa and Scuola Normale Superiore di Pisa On behalf of the Virgo Collaboration 11 th Gravitational Wave Data Analysis.

LIGO-G M Management of the LIGO Project Gary Sanders California Institute of Technology Presented to the Committee on Programs and Plans of the.

Status of LIGO Data Analysis Gabriela González Department of Physics and Astronomy Louisiana State University for the LIGO Scientific Collaboration Dec.

LIGO- G D Status of LIGO Stan Whitcomb ACIGA Workshop 21 April 2004.

LIGO-G Z Peter Shawhan, for the LIGO Scientific Collaboration APS Meeting April 25, 2006 Search for Gravitational Wave Bursts in Data from the.

Novemebr 5, 2006LSC meeting1 Virgo Update Prospects on detector performance and running schedules B. Mours.

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.

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.

LIGO-G Z April 2006 APS meeting Igor Yakushin (LLO, Caltech) Search for Gravitational Wave Bursts in LIGO’s S5 run Igor Yakushin (LLO, Caltech)

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.

LIGO Commissioning Status

LIGO-G M LIGO Status Report Barry Barish LSC Meeting - Hanford 14 Aug 01.

LIGO-G D LSC Meeting Nov An Early Glimpse at the S3 Run Stan Whitcomb (LIGO–Caltech) LIGO Scientific Collaboration Meeting LIGO Hanford.

1 LESSONS FROM VIRGO+ May 17th 2010 E. Calloni for the Virgo collaboration.

Searching for Gravitational Waves from Binary Inspirals with LIGO Duncan Brown University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee for the LIGO Scientific Collaboration.

LIGO-G D 1 Status of Detector Commissioning LSC Meeting, March 2001 Nergis Mavalvala California Institute of Technology.

LIGO- G D Gravitational Wave Observations with Interferometers: Results and Prospects Stan Whitcomb for the LIGO Scientific Collaboration 2 nd.

International Gravitational Wave Network 11/9/2008 Building an Stefan Ballmer, for the LIGO / VIRGO Scientific Collaboration LIGO G

LIGO-G M LIGO Status Gary Sanders GWIC Meeting Perth July 2001.

May 29, 2006 GWADW, Elba, May 27 - June 21 LIGO-G0200XX-00-M Data Quality Monitoring at LIGO John Zweizig LIGO / Caltech.

S.Klimenko, LSC, August 2004, G Z BurstMon S.Klimenko, A.Sazonov University of Florida l motivation & documentation l description & results l.

LIGO-G D Detector Installation and Commissioning Stan Whitcomb NSF Operations Review 26 February 2001 LIGO Hanford Observatory.

LIGO-G D Commissioning at Hanford Stan Whitcomb Program Advisory Committee 12 December 2000 LIGO Livingston Observatory.

23/7/2003LIGO Document G C1 LIGO S2 Overview Philip Charlton California Institute of Technology On behalf of the LIGO Scientific Collaboration.

LIGO-G Z GWDAW9 December 17, Search for Gravitational Wave Bursts in LIGO Science Run 2 Data John G. Zweizig LIGO / Caltech for the LIGO.

LIGO-G E PAC9 Meeting LIGO Laboratory at Caltech 1 The LIGO I Science Run Data & Computing Group Operations Plan 9 th Meeting of the.

LIGO-G W “Astrowatch” at LIGO Hanford Observatory Fred Raab LIGO Hanford Observatory.

LIGO-G M Overview of the LIGO Continuing Operations (FY FY2006) Proposal Gary Sanders LIGO PAC9 Meeting December 2000.

LIGO-G Z Detector Characterization Summary K. Riles - University of Michigan 1 Summary of the Detector Characterization Sessions Keith.

LIGO PAC11, Nov 2001 Syracuse proposal to NSF LIGO-G Z 1 Proposal to NSF: “Research in Gravitational Wave Detection with LIGO” Peter R.

G D H1 Squeezer Experiment L-V Meeting, LAL Orsay, June 11, 2008 ANU, AEI, MIT, CIT and LHO Ping Koy Lam, Nergis Mavalvala, David McClelland,

LIGO-G Z Report on the S2 RunK. Riles / S. Whitcomb 1 Report on the S2 Run Keith Riles (University of Michigan) Stan Whitcomb (LIGO–Caltech)

LIGO- G M LIGO Status Stan Whitcomb Oversight Committee 20 October 2004.

Gravitational Wave Data Analysis  GW detectors  Signal processing: preparation  Noise spectral density  Matched filtering  Probability and statistics.

Prospects and plans : LIGO interferometers Michael Landry LIGO Hanford Observatory LSC meeting, MIT Nov 4-5, 2006.

October 2006, LIGO Hanford Observatory

Virgo Status Detector Status Computing Data Analysis status and Plans

Installation and Commissioning Status Stan Whitcomb

Overview of E10 / S3 Hardware Injections

Nergis Mavalvala MIT IAU214, August 2002

Report on the S2 Run Keith Riles (University of Michigan)

Stochastic background search using LIGO Livingston and ALLEGRO

Status of the LIGO Detectors

Stan Whitcomb LSC meeting Livingston 21 March 2005

Virgo Update – LSC meeting

Stan Whitcomb LSC meeting Hanford 15 August 2005

Update on LLO-ALLEGRO stochastic analysis

Improving LIGO’s stability and sensitivity: commissioning examples

Status at the Prague meeting

Presentation transcript:

LIGO- G D E7: An Instrument-builder’s Perspective Stan Whitcomb LIGO Caltech LSC Meeting Upper Limits Plenary Session 22 May 2002 LIGO Livingston Observatory

LIGO- G D LSC Meeting 2 From the August LSC Meeting: “E6” run before the end of 2001 (December for two full weeks) »At least one interferometer at each observatory with at least one interferometer in full recycled configuration »Goal of significant locked coincidence data, but sensitivity not guaranteed »Analysis goal: sensitivity curves (February), full analysis (April) »if not successful, repeat the E6 run in January 2002  

LIGO- G D LSC Meeting 3 Detector Status – Last LSC Meeting All in-vacuum installation complete »Continuing installation and commissioning of control systems LHO 2 km interferometer »Locks in recycled configuration for ~1 hour times »Sensitivity ~ rms »Working to improve both LLO 4 km interferometer »Locked as Michelson with F-P Arms »Problem with seismic noise at low frequencies LHO 4 km interferometer »Commissioning just beginning

LIGO- G D LSC Meeting 4 Projected Performance – Last LSC Meeting *Expect* LHO interferometers to be operating in recycled configuration »Depends on success with digital suspension controllers LLO may operate in recycled, or possibly just recombined, mode »Final decision about 1 November »Analog suspension controllers -> different channel names, noise, filtering, limits, etc. Expect (but do not guarantee!) up to x10 improvement over already achieved Most PEM channels will be operational (though of lower priority than main interferometer components)

LIGO- G D LSC Meeting 5 Sensitivity? Preliminary Hope to take “Preliminary” off soon Snapshot in time – not representative of typical behavior Does not represent time- domain search sensitivities

LIGO- G D LSC Meeting 6 Duty Cycle? ~60% for each detector individually ~20% triple coincidence (Reminder: Science Requirement Document goal is 75%) Preliminary Optimist: »First three days came close to this goal Pessimist : »This was only 2 weeks! What happens when we try for months? »Un-recycled is an easier configuration to lock

LIGO- G D LSC Meeting 7 Assessment: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly Noise: »E7 spectral density shows steady progress from earlier levels »Too many bursts, too many lines, too much variability Duty Cycle: »E7 had extended locked sections (~10 hr) for LHO 2 km »….and extended (>24 hr) downtimes »Clearly demonstrated the need for seismic remediation at LLO Analyzability: »Successfully collected and archived the data »Need to better capture the state of the machine »Missing channels, confusing channel names, uncertain calibration Operations: »Dedication of the operators, enthusiasm of the scientific visitors »Need ability to read DMT monitor output from trend frames »Need for clearer procedures, guidelines for trouble shooting, etc.