1. Experimental tests of SA simulation Irene Fiori – Simulation Workshop – March 18, 2004 Virgo dataSiesta simulation 1. Inertial Damping simulation  test with Real Seism (the Sea-storm) 2. Marionetta  Mirror TF  ITF Lock from marionette

2. Inertial Damping Seism Reduce the SA motion below  2Hz (in particular at resonances …. IP resonance  30mHz, chain resonances  200mHz ) Helps for Lock acquisition (together with mirror Local Controls) F0 ACCELEROMETERS POSITION SENSORS (LVDTs) COIL-MAGNET C Corr Lvdt_x Acc_x (similar on z,  y ) x z F0 top view: yy (force on F0_x) + x z F0 top view: Err

3. H L L+H=1 5 Hz Open loop gain: Filters:

4. The code : MIsa SuNI 0 Sisma.out "ni_tuned.sad 0 dampTotal damping.out "defaults" UJclock masterClocks 360000 2 200. 1. UFrIFile input 1../mareggiata_guralp/guralpdispl_full_200hz.gwf UFrDump 1 input.frameH UFrUnpack Sisma_mare 0 proc.Guralp_displ input.frameH US6Set Sisma 0 Sisma_mare.out Sisma_mare.out Sisma_mare.out NULL NULL NULL /*--------------------------------------------------------------------*/ /* NEW Inertial damping GENERIC tower (A.Vicere, I.Fiori, G.Losurdo) */ /*--------------------------------------------------------------------*/ USfilterZPK hp1_acc_s0 SuNI.dxyzt.s0 0 1.0 1 0.0001 0.0 2 0.43980.000 USfilterZPK …. US6Set damping 0 viscous_s0.out NULL viscous_s2.out NULL viscous_s4.out NULL USadder error_s2 0 2 lvdt_notched_s2.out hp_acc_s2.out 1.0 1.0 …..

5. Mirror motion ID on / off, with nominal seism (…only with Simulation!)

6. SA modes Real vs Siesta Resonances F0 cross bar Siesta “nominal” SA tower (not simulated yet)

7. F0 horizontal modes (poles) [ Hz ] BS towerSiesta (% deviation) 0.0370.038 (+3%) 0.2910.296 (+2%) 0.550.59 (+7%) 0.790.77 (-2.5%) 0.990.97 (-2%) 1.221.25 (+2.5%) 1.571.60 (+1.9%) 1.881.90 (+1%) 8.5- 11.0-

8. Ground Seism in Siesta Real Seism (SEA-STORM) Nov. 16, 2003 (C1 run) y x z

9. Inertial damping (C1) Simulation fed with REAL SEISM of SEA-STORM on Nov. 16, 2004 (C1) Quiet seism (data) F0 position sensor Sensor electronic noise

10. Inertial damping (C1) Real data Siesta F0 cross-bar Simulation fed with REAL SEISM of SEA-STORM on Nov. 16, 2004 (C1) F0 accelerometer m/s^2/sqrt(Hz) Accelerometer Noise not Simulated, here

11. New local controls reading marionette position: a tilted mirror couples a  z resonance to  y (300 mHz). This resonance is not controllable: we do not have  z actuators A storm during C1 caused an increase of seismic noise @300 mHz of about 100  Big excitation of the  z resonance (coupled with  y )  Loss of lock A new mathematical solution (L5 damping) has been found that allows to: –Move the blending down to 70 mHz preserving the phase margin –Rolling off the LVDT as 1/f 3 New Inertial Damping for C2 run (from G.Losurdo) …..

12. New Inertial Damping (C2) Siesta prediction F0 accelerometer response, with Nov. 16 SEA-STORM Seism Accelerometer electronics noise

13. New Inertial Damping (C2) “fortunately” a new, even bigger, sea-storm occured during C2 … C2 C1 Ground seism

14. Marionetta  Mirror A good simulation of the Marionetta 2 Mirror mechanical TFs is important for implementing simulation of: mirrors Local Controls (  x and  y ) ITF Linear Alignement (  x and  y ) ITF Lock acting from the Marionette (z)

15. Marionetta  Mirror (z) Siesta, since v3r88 1/ f 4 Measured (Luciano)

16. Marionetta  Mirror (  y) Siesta Measured

17. Marionetta  Mirror (  x) Siesta  TM wires: 400  m 200  m Measured NOW

18. Marionetta Z modes [Hz] MeasuredSiesta (P) 0.4150.419 (+1%) (Z) 0.4220.429 (+1.5%) (P) 0.4620.465 (+0.5%) (Z) 0.4980.489 (-2%) (P) 0.50.504 (+0%) (ZP) 0.60.596 (-0%) (ZP) 0.6650.67 (+0.7%) (P) 0.740.745 (+0.5%) (Z) 0.765- (P) 0.789- (Z) 0.830.793 (-4%) (P) 0.980.96 (-2%) -(Z) 1.06 -(P) 1.08 (Z) 1.21.2 (0%) (P) 1.211.22 (0.8%) (Z) 1.37- (P) 1.39-  y modes [Hz] MeasuredSiesta (P) 0.015750.0158 (+0.3%) (Z) 0.017250.0171 (-0.9%) (P) 0.03150.0313 (-0.6%) (Z) 0.0410.0393 (-2%) (P) 0.04350.0432 (-0.7%) (Z) 0.70.698 (-0.3%) (P) 0.8750.865 (-1%) (P) 1.211.17 (-3%)  x modes [Hz] MeasuredSiesta (P) 0.4150.422 (+1.7%) (Z) 0.4490.448 (-0.2%) (P) 0.460.466 (+1%) (Z) 1.7181.727 (+0.5%) (P) 2.392.30 (-3.8%) (Z) 3.4753.7 (+7%)

19. ITF Lock with Marionetta What is there :What is still missing : C Noise DAC  dL B1p_quad B7_DC Seismic noise (5.E-8 / f 2 ) Inertial Damping (v.C2) Actuators (F7): 8.8Hz pole, DAC noise, saturation Higher modes (now TEM00) Control mirror Tx, Ty Noises: shot, thermal, laser tuning of Mario resonances B7 B1 seism F7 coil (I.Fiori, A.Gennai, G.Losurdo)

20. Compensator f 4 25 Hz G  2E+5  45°  f -2 (f 3 )

21. Linear Locking (from Marionetta) 0.1% “Lock Quality” similar to standard-lock simulation

22. Lock Transition: Mirror  Mario Err Coil RM (pole @ 480 Hz) Anti- TRIGGER Coil F7 (pole @ 8.8 Hz) x TRIGGER Ramp 10s x DAC noise (300nV/sqrt(Hz)) DAC noise (300nV/sqrt(Hz)) Err_mario Err_lisa RM coils DAC noise turned OFF

23. Lock Transition: Mirror  Marionetta 10s RAMP

24. Sensitivity curve Can improve the compensator (lower unity gain)

25. Conclusions SA Siesta simulation being tested against data, with good results most SA resonant modes reproduced within < few % tower by tower tuning, in progress. Implementation/validation of SA control loops, in progress: SA Inertial Damping Mirror local angular controls Mirror Linear Alignement (Tidal control) More complex Siesta simulations (ITF locking) also demonstrate SA simulation works satisfactory Siesta simulation being used to test/design Virgo controls