Displaying reports 64621-64640 of 83069.Go to page Start 3228 3229 3230 3231 3232 3233 3234 3235 3236 End
Reports until 16:34, Saturday 06 June 2015
H1 ISC
stefan.ballmer@LIGO.ORG - posted 16:34, Saturday 06 June 2015 (18940)
Back up - Guardian updated to use 23W
We had one lock loss about an hour ago, but Cheryl took us right back up.

I did update the ISC_LOCK Guardian with the request for 23W during INCREASE_POWER. The only other thing we had to do manually t the very end is turn off the ESD X driver again. We also did check the the calibration line at 538.1 remained the same within measurement tolerances.
H1 ISC
evan.hall@LIGO.ORG - posted 16:18, Saturday 06 June 2015 - last comment - 17:31, Thursday 11 June 2015(18939)
Sum, null, and residual of OMC DCPDs

Using two hours of undisturbed data from last night's 66 Mpc lock, I repeated Den's sum/null stream analysis in order to see if we have a similar 1/f1/2 excess in our residual.

I took the OMC sum/null data (calibrated into milliamps), undid the effect of the DARM OLTF in order to get an estimate for the freerunning OMC current, and then scaled by the DARM optical gain (3.5 mA/pm, with a pole at 355 Hz) to get the equivalent freerunning DARM displacement. The residual is then the quadrature difference between the sum and null ASDs.

The attachment shows the sum, null, and residual ASDs, along with the anticipated coating Brownian noise from GWINC. [Just to be clear: the "sum" trace on this plot corresponds to our usual freerunning DARM estimate, although in this case it comes purely from the error signal rather than a combination of the error and control signals.]

If there is some kind of excess 1/f1/2 noise here, it is not yet large enough to dominate the residual. Right now it looks like the residual is at least a factor of 2.2 higher than the expected coating noise at all frequencies. We already know some of this is intensity noise.

The other thing to note here is that we are evidently not completely dominated by shot noise above 1 kHz.

Non-image files attached to this report
Comments related to this report
evan.hall@LIGO.ORG - 15:51, Sunday 07 June 2015 (18959)

I repeated this on a lock stretch from 2015-06-07 00:00:00Z to 02:00:00Z, but the result is pretty much the same. The best constraint we can put on coating noise right now from the residual is about a factor of 2.2 higher than the GWINC prediction. I also think the residual is not yet clean enough in this frequency band to make an inference about its spectral shape.

I tried increasing the CARM gain by 3 dB to see if the residual would decrease, but it does not (except maybe round 6 kHz; see the attached dtt pdf). So this broadband excess in the sum may not be frequency noise.

Non-image files attached to this comment
evan.hall@LIGO.ORG - 14:09, Tuesday 09 June 2015 (19027)

There is an error in the above plots.

Only the DCPD sum should be corrected by the DARM OLTF to get the equivalent freerunning noise. The DCPD null should not be corrected. To refer to noise to DARM displacement, however, all these quantities must be corrected by the DARM cavity pole.

This time I've included the DCPD dark noise (sum of A and B), also not corrected by the loop gain.

Non-image files attached to this comment
evan.hall@LIGO.ORG - 17:31, Thursday 11 June 2015 (19077)

A few more corrections and additions:

  • These plots use median averaging. As is widely known, this biases the estimate of the ASD downward by a factor of sqrt(ln(4)). This is now corrected in the new attachment.
  • I looked at the 540 Hz pcal line in order to get a tighter value for the optical gain; it is 3.85 mA/pm. I am still assuming a DARM pole of 355 Hz, which is what is currently installed in the DARM calibration.
  • The shot noise as predicted by GWINC lines up fairly well with the DCPD null stream, with minimal additional tuning of the of the parameters required. Input power is 24.2 W, with 88% transmission efficiency of the IMC. SRM transmissivity is 37%, DCPD quantum efficiency is 85%. The round-trip arm losses are set at 84 ppm, which is what I found previously was required to achieve a recycling gain of 40 W/W. Loss at the beamsplitter is 500 ppm, excess SRC loss (the "TCS loss") is 0, and SRC modematching is perfect, which are the defaults in IFOModel. Of course, we should get a better handle on these numbers and then actually verify that the GWINC shot noise estimate still agrees with the null. For now, it is just a weak indicator that we roughly understand the shot noise level.
  • The apparent low-frequency excess in the null stream (<30 Hz) seems roughly consistent with the expected contribution from dark noise that Dan and I measured a few months ago. Since Koji has retuned by hand the digital compensation of the DCPDs, ideally we should measure this again.
  • Some extra plots (cross spectrum and coherence of DCPDs A and B) and parameters file attached in zip.
Non-image files attached to this comment
H1 AOS (DetChar, SUS)
joshua.smith@LIGO.ORG - posted 14:55, Saturday 06 June 2015 - last comment - 14:43, Sunday 07 June 2015(18938)
Results so far of MC SUS DAC AutoCal - DAC glitch amplitude reduced factor 2

Jess, Andy, TJ, Duncan, Detchar, 

In entry 18783 (at 19 UTC on June 2) Jeff et al performed an autocal on the SUS DACs for the Modecleaner, in response to the report in log 18739. He asked Detchar to report if the glitches are gone, if they come back over time, etc. 

What we've found so far is that the DAC glitches are still present on MC2 M3 zero crossings. Their amplitude (seen in LSC MCL and IMC alignment channels) has reduced by a factor of 2. And their amplitude does not appear to be increasing over time since the restart, on the timescale of days. 

Figure 1 shows normalized spectrograms of the DAC glitches witnessed by LSC MCL before and after the Autocal. 

Figure 2 shows a time vs SNR plot of the individual glitches (only during observation intent time) in LSC MCL (at frequency < 200Hz to be dominated by DAC glitches). The many glitches with signal-to-noise ratio of 30 are now many glitches with SNR 15-20. Autocal occurs at hour 19. 

Figure 3 shows the same plot for IMC-DOF_1_P_IN1_DQ, another good witness of these glitches. 

Figure 4 caption: The Glitchgrams on the bottom show glitchiness of IFO, not related to the MC2 DAC glitches (we think) but just to see when IFO is locked and in good state. The top plots are all normalized spectrograms. The left two plots are before autocal, MCL glitches are really loud. The right five plots are after autocal, most glitches are less loud. Where "loud" is assessed by top of color bar (admittedly poor measure).

Figure 5: Same for two IMC alignement channels DOF 1 P and DOF 2 Y that are both good witnesses of DAC glitches. 

Jess wrote nice scripts to make the glitch vs time plots so we will keep an eye on these to see when/if the amplitude increases. 

Notes: Sorry Jeff, Peter, et al, I realize now that amplitude rather than SNR, calibrated units, and the SUS VOLTMON channels would be more useful for assessing the size of the DAC glitches. We'll work on that.  

Images attached to this report
Comments related to this report
andrew.lundgren@LIGO.ORG - 14:43, Sunday 07 June 2015 (18958)DetChar, SUS
We've also made timeseries plots of the glitches in the noisemons before, just after, and several hours after the auocalibration. The glitches seem to come back most strongly in the LL DAC. The first three slides have a 10,100 Hz bandpass so the glitches can be seen clearly. The last two slide have just one second of data, so a single glitch can be seen in the raw data.
Non-image files attached to this comment
H1 AOS (DetChar, PEM)
joshua.smith@LIGO.ORG - posted 14:19, Saturday 06 June 2015 (18936)
EM glitches at End-Y coupling into DELTAL

Josh, Detchar, 

Our algorithms (hveto, upv) found that the end-Y magnetometers witness EM glitches once every 75 minutes VERY strongly and that these couple into DARM. Attached is a PDF that goes through the story somewhat narratively. Robert is aware of these and I hope that from the timing information on the last page of the PDF he may be able to predict a good time to visit EY. A good full omega scan is linked in the document too for folks that might want to look at how this couples into a bzillion channels.  

Non-image files attached to this report
H1 ISC (DetChar, ISC)
gabriele.vajente@LIGO.ORG - posted 13:38, Saturday 06 June 2015 - last comment - 14:49, Saturday 06 June 2015(18935)
Brute force coherence report

The BruCo report for the improved sensitivity can be found here:

https://ldas-jobs.ligo.caltech.edu/~gabriele.vajente/bruco_1117636216/

Some highlights:

Images attached to this report
Comments related to this report
stefan.ballmer@LIGO.ORG - 14:49, Saturday 06 June 2015 (18937)
Gabriele: I was wondering whether you see any significant differences in coherences between the data pre 2015/6/6 7:32 UTC (pick a good time where we saw about 70Mpc range) and the data after 2015/6/6 8:32 UTC. alog 18931 suggest there was an alignment shift of the signal recycling cavity between them. (I attached the summary page range plot.)

Images attached to this comment
H1 ISC
stefan.ballmer@LIGO.ORG - posted 11:43, Saturday 06 June 2015 - last comment - 16:57, Saturday 06 June 2015(18931)
ASC control signals over 14h
Hang, Stefan

Our lock is at 14h and counting. Attached are the output control signals for the 10 optics that are controlled by the ASC system. (All of them are relieved to the top mass, so the top mass output is what I am plotting.)
There is some funny behaviour in PR2 pitch, and some of it also shows up in the BS pith nd yaw.

Also - interestingly, the sharp rise in SR2 PITCH about 10.5h ago (2015/06/06 07:55 UTC) corresponds to a drop in the inspiral range by about 10% (6Mpc), and comes from the 80Hz to 300Hz region. Whatever this noise is, it seems to be related to SRC alignment. 

The third attached plot shows the difference between before that SR2 move (2015/6/6 7:32 UTC, 67Mpc) and after (2015/6/6 8:32 UTC, 61Mpc). Sounds like SRC ASC work is not done yet.
Images attached to this report
Comments related to this report
stefan.ballmer@LIGO.ORG - 16:57, Saturday 06 June 2015 (18942)
Here are some plots of the AS_A_RF36 and AS_B_RF36 signals around the time of the SRC cavity shift (2015/06/06 07:55 UTC).

PITCH:
AS_B_RF36_I and AS_B_RF36_Q are servoed to zero - the don't see any jump.
AS_A_RF36_I and AS_A_RF36_Q both show a clear jump at that time, so there is a good chance to find a better PIT error signal.

YAW:
The jump does show up in the two I sensors in YAW as well. While the current YAW input matri seems to work for stability (18h locks), I am still not sure about its lock-point. More work needed.
Images attached to this comment
H1 SUS
cheryl.vorvick@LIGO.ORG - posted 10:28, Saturday 06 June 2015 (18930)
watching the ASC - ITMY pitch = not like the others

Here's a picture of a StripTool watching ASC_PIT and ASC_YAW outmons.

ETMs and SRM are on a different (larger) scale than all other optics.

Of all the other optics, ITMY_PIT stands out on the StripTool as having a much bigger range, about +/-250, where the range for ITMX is about half, more like +/-75.

Images attached to this report
H1 AOS
robert.schofield@LIGO.ORG - posted 09:33, Saturday 06 June 2015 (18929)
Jitter retune needed after power increase

The plot shows, in blue, the input optics jitter peaks before tuning, in black, a couple of days after tuning and just before the power increase, and, in red, the current state, several hours after the power increase. The tuning was pretty much holding until the power increase. There may have been some alignment shift with the higher power.

Non-image files attached to this report
H1 General
corey.gray@LIGO.ORG - posted 08:08, Saturday 06 June 2015 (18927)
End of Shift Summary

Around 13:58utc (6:58am), there were a couple of huge glitches.  I happened to be listening to DARM, and they had very unique sounds.  The first one sounded like someone rattling some keys or something metal.  The second one sounded more like a door slamming shut.  Very interesting.  Range dropped below 1Mpc, but amazingly stayed lock.  (L1 dropped out about 25min earlier).

Saw landscaper truck exiting gate at 7:17 (this must have been vehicle here at 5:30am).

Handing off H1 with a range around 63Mpc to Cheryl (going on 11+hrs for this current lock).

H1 CDS (DAQ)
david.barker@LIGO.ORG - posted 07:54, Saturday 06 June 2015 (18928)
CDS model and DAQ restart report, Friday 5th June 2015

model restarts logged for Fri 05/Jun/2015
2015_06_05 13:02 h1broadcast0

dmt broadcaster restart to clear freeze-up

H1 General
corey.gray@LIGO.ORG - posted 06:22, Saturday 06 June 2015 (18926)
Report After 6+Hrs

Very seismically quiet shift.  Winds under 5mph.  Saw a vehicle enter the parking lot around 5:30am as I was heading to wash dishes, but have not seen anyone (I even walked around outside looking for them.).

H1 continues to hum along in the same lock stretch and science segment.  Still hovering around 60-63Mpc, and continue to have glitches every 30-45mins.  L1 was down for a couple of hours but they just came back up and we've been double-coincident since ~12:15utc.

Big Brother Watching?

While waiting here, I wondered what one would do if they wanted to go back to 17W.  I've never sat in the chair when H1 has made it to DC Readout and beyond.  So I was wondering when/how the laser power gets set.  I ended up clicking the "Edit" button on the Guardian Lock States medm.  Within seconds I heard a computer talking (eventually tracked it to video0).  And on this computer there is a terminal which had a python script which was saying:  "Bad News I will be watching you."  (and the computer even knew my name!)  Perhaps TJ is playing tricks on me.  :)  Or Big Brother is watching.  (For the record, I didn't change anything in the script.  I was just looking for anything about PSL Power.)

LHO General
corey.gray@LIGO.ORG - posted 02:01, Saturday 06 June 2015 (18925)
First 2hrs of OWL Shift Status

H1 Status:

Seismically quiet and winds are hovering at 10mph or below.  TJ handed off a 24W H1 with range hovering between 61-69Mpc (but with glitches every ~30min).  The latest glitch at around 12:55am (7:55utc) caused a noticeable drop in the range, but the range is now tightened up to a flatter trend between 61-63Mpc.  I haven't noticed anything noisier on our FOMs to warrant the drop in range, but it does look a little more stable/steady.

Double Coincidence:

L1 has also come back and I chatted briefly with Will & Adam.  They said their locks have generally been lasting about ~5hrs.  At any rate after our step down in range, H1 & L1 are double coincident at about 62Mpc.

Misc:

EY VEA lights still on.  (I shut off all the lights I can shut off here in the corner station for the quieter weekend.)

H1 ISC
stefan.ballmer@LIGO.ORG - posted 22:46, Friday 05 June 2015 - last comment - 12:11, Saturday 06 June 2015(18923)
Back to 23W, ESD_X switched off - 66Mpc - (and yes, back in science mode for the night)
Evan, Kiwamu, Stefan (WP 5252)

We did a couple of tunings for 2 hours tonight during the time when LLO was down. This resulted in a inspiral range of 66 Mpc.

(ASC SRC1 yaw)
First, we tried powering up the PSL power from 17 W to 23 W to see what optics ran away. We confirmed that SRM was the one who ran away in yaw through the actuation of the ASC SRC1 loop as we went to 23 W. We searched for a signal which may represent this run-away motion of SRM. It seemed that the best choice was AS_A_36_I. Therefore we mixed this signal to the existing AS_B_36_I and AS_36_Q. Right now the SRC1 yaw signal is derived by -0.6 x ASA36I + 0.3 x ASA36Q + 0.3 ASB36I.
So far it kept holding SRC without a run-away issue on a time scale of 2 hour. This change is already reflected in both ISC_LOCK and ISC_DRMI guardians. Attached is a plot with the AS 36 YAW error signals during the tuning phase and first 2h of stable locking at 23W.

(AS36 whitening gain)
When we were at 23 W, we noticed that a few rf segments of both AS_36_A and _B saturated. So we decided to decrease the whitening gain from 24 dB to 21 dB. As a compensation factor we put a gain of 1.4 in the signal conditioning digital filters (i.e. H1:ASC-AS_A(B)_RF36_I1(Q)_GAIN). In this way we avoided updating all the ASC loop gains associated with these signals. This seemed to be fine for the locking sequence as well. So we will leave them in this new whitening gain configuration. We updated the SDF accordingly.

(Switching off ETMX ESD)
Evan forced us to study the effect of the ETMX ESD bias. Evan will post a detailed alog later. We remotely switched off the ETMX ESD and saw an improvement in frequency range from 40 to 100 Hz by a few 10%.

(Calibration correction with Pcal Y)
At the beginning the range went above 70 Mpc and therefore we started checking the calibration. According to the Pcal Y line at 540 Hz, the optical gain was too low by 4% compared with the peak height from this morning -- this underestimated the displacement and hence too-high inspiral range. We then adjusted the optical gain in the OMC error path and now the Pcal line agrees with the one from this morning. So the calibration is good.

(An accidental lockloss)
At around 2015-06-06 3:21 UTC, we accidentally lost the lock due to a senior LIGO fellow mistakenly pressing a wrong button during the high power study. This was the only lockloss we had in the past 10 hours or so.
Images attached to this report
Comments related to this report
evan.hall@LIGO.ORG - 23:10, Friday 05 June 2015 (18924)

As for the EX ESD, during each lock we ramp down the bias on EX from 380 V to 0 V, after we've transitioned control of darm to EY.

We have not verified that this is in fact the optimal bias for minimizing the effect of the charge on EX; i.e., DAC noise and driver noise may still produce motion of the optic even if the applied bias voltage is 0 V.

Therefore, I spent 10 minutes tonight investigating this by trying a few different negative bias voltages with the IFO at 15 W. This didn't seem to really have an effect. However, inactivating the ESD driver did (see attachment).

At 24 W, the improvement is more noticeable. The attached png shows the comparison between tonight's spectrum and our previous best. The previous best was taken with the old EY ESD configuration, but we've seen over the past week that the new driver and the recalibration have not changed the shape or magnitude of the control noise, so the comparison is fair.

Also attached are some coherences with the new DARM spectrtum. We can see that SRCL has high coherence between 15 and 70 Hz (and also between 2 and 6 kHz... strange), and there is nonnegligible coherence with intensity from 100 to 400 Hz (this will probably be improved once Robert and Kiwamu continue their IMC WFS offset tuning).

If the EX driver does not come back on after lockloss and you cannot reset it using the EX ESD screen, then you toggle H1:ISC-EXTRA_X_BO_4 between 0 and 1 using caget.

Images attached to this comment
Non-image files attached to this comment
jameson.rollins@LIGO.ORG - 12:11, Saturday 06 June 2015 (18933)

66 Mpc!!!  You guys caught L1!  Very nice.

LHO General
thomas.shaffer@LIGO.ORG - posted 21:49, Friday 05 June 2015 (18922)
Ops Report

With the commissioning work done, the Intention Bit is set back to Undisturbed.

We are currently locked at LSC_FF.

H1 SUS
kiwamu.izumi@LIGO.ORG - posted 20:27, Friday 05 June 2015 (18921)
elliptic low pass enabled on SR2 longitudinal damping

WP 5251,

At around 2015-06-06 2:30-ish UTC, I enabled an elliptic low pass filter in the top stage longitudinal damping loop in the SR2 suspension, at FM10. This is something we meant to enable all the time (alog 18694) but somehow got disabled a couple of days ago for some reason. I updated the SDF accordingly. So fat the SR2 suspension looks behaving fine.

H1 DetChar
kiwamu.izumi@LIGO.ORG - posted 18:01, Friday 05 June 2015 - last comment - 10:00, Tuesday 09 June 2015(18918)
unidentified DARM glitches

Stefan, Kiwamu,

In this morning, DARM had many numbers of glitches which were visible in the DARM spectrum as wide band noise. We looked at various channels to see what caused the glitches, but we were not able to identify them.

We would like to get some help from the detchar people. Could you guys please look for a cause of the DARM glitches ?

The lock stretch which had a high glitch rate is the one starting at 2015-06-05 17:17 -sh to 18:00 -ish UTC. I attach an example time series of the glitches shown in OMC-DCPD A and B. We know that some of the loud ones were so large that they saturated the ADCs of the OMC DCPD.

Note that in the same lock stretch, we changed the DARM offset multiple times which changed the amount of the carrier light resonating in OMC. We do not think our activity with the DARM offset caused the high glitch rate.

Images attached to this report
Comments related to this report
stefan.ballmer@LIGO.ORG - 18:04, Friday 05 June 2015 (18919)
Here is also a DARM spectrum and time series, as well as the summary page range graph. The glitches occur in the short science segment just before 18h.
Images attached to this comment
thomas.massinger@LIGO.ORG - 11:32, Saturday 06 June 2015 (18932)DetChar, ISC

We need to do some more thorough follow-up, but I can give some quick feedback that might give some hints. The initial signs seem to suggest that the problem might be due to input pointing glitches or alignment fluctuations in the PRC.

The loudest glitches in that short science segments were coincident with ASC-REFL_A_RF9_I_PIT_OUT_DQ, which looks like it was being used as the error signal for INP1 and PRC2 loops, feeding back onto IM4 and PR2. The corresponding YAW channel was also significant, but not quite as much so. We also saw ASC-REFL_B_RF9_I_PIT_OUT_DQ as somewhat significant, which looks like it was being used in both the INP1, INP2, and PRC2 loops and feeding back on IM4 and PR2.

kiwamu.izumi@LIGO.ORG - 10:00, Tuesday 09 June 2015 (19011)

So, we now start believing that these loud glitches were related to the cleaning activity on the X arm vacuum tube (alog 18992). Here I show glitch wave forms in time series from three glitch events (out of many) that were observed in this past Friday, 5th of June.

Typically the glitches were very fast and I am guessing that the glitch itself happens on a time scale of 10 ms or maybe less. Usually the OMC DC signals or the DARM error follows with a relatively slow oscillation with a period of roughly 100 msec which I believe is an impulse response of the DARM control. All the three events showed a power drop in the carrier light everywhere ( TRX, TRY and POP) indicating that the power recycling gain dropped simultaneously. For some reason POP_A_LF showed slower power drop which I do not understand. Also, in all three events that I looked at, the OMC DCPDs showed small fluctuation roughly 20 ms before the big transient happens.

 

1. 2015-06-05 17:49 UTC

(This one contains two glitch events apart only by roughly 200 msec)

2. 2015-06-05 15:51 UTC

3. 015-06-05 17:55 UTC

 

4. High passed version of glitch event 1

(all the time series are high-passed with zpk([0], [40], 1) ). You can see a glitchy behavior in REFL WFS (as reported by TJ) as well as TRX QPD  (and a little bit in TRY QPD).

Images attached to this comment
H1 ISC (ISC)
sheila.dwyer@LIGO.ORG - posted 12:15, Tuesday 02 June 2015 - last comment - 16:49, Monday 22 June 2015(18777)
Trial of SR3 optical lever feedback to prevent locklosses

Daniel and I looked at three of the locklosses from Travis's shift last night, from 14:40, 14:02 and 11:33 UTC.  The earlier two both seem to be related to an alignment drift over 2-3 minutes before the lockloss, which shows up clearly in SR3 PIT.  (there is currently not feedback to SR3 PIT)  According to the witness sensors, this drift is only seen on M3.  No optics saturated until after the lockloss.  The DC4 centering loop, as well as both of the SRC alignment loops respond to the drift.  

Its unclear what causes the drift to accelerate in the minutes before the lockloss.  There is also a drfit of SR3 when we power up, as we noted yesterday, but this happens on a slower timescale than the dirfts that preceed a lockloss (3rd screenshot).  Also, there is a longer, slow drift that happens whenever we are locked.  

With Patrick and Cheryl I have engaged a DC coupled optical lever for SR3 PIT, we will see if this helps.  The last screen shot attached shows the MEDM screen used to turn this on or off.  

If the operators need to disable this (due to an earthquake, a trip, or if the optic becomes misalinged for any other reason) you can get to this screen from SR3, M2 OLDAMP.  

Turning off:  

turn off FM1 (labeled DC), then the input

Turning it back on:

Once the optic has settled and the beam is back on the oplev QPD, turn on the damping loop (with FM1 still off).  Average INMON (in a  command line tdsavg 10 H1:SUS-SR3_M2_OLDAMP_P_INMON), type -1 times the average into the offset, make sure the offset is engaged, and finally turn on FM1 to make the loop DC coupled.  

Since this is just a trial, Jeff is not including these changes in his current SDF cleanup campaign. 

Images attached to this report
Comments related to this report
daniel.sigg@LIGO.ORG - 13:22, Tuesday 02 June 2015 (18790)

Looking at the initial power up, we can see that an increase of a factor of ~10 causes ~0.7 µrad of pitch misalignment. During the accelerated drift in the last 3-5 minutes before the lock loss another 0.4 µrad of pitch misalignment was acquired with only ~10% of power increase. One might wonder, if we see a geometrically induced wire heating run away.

brett.shapiro@LIGO.ORG - 12:23, Saturday 06 June 2015 (18934)

I modeled how much the two front wires have to heat up to casue a bottom mass pitch of 1 microradian. A very small temperature increase is needed to predict this.

* Assuming a constant temperature profile along the wire length (I'm sure this is not the case, but it is easy to calculate), it is

0.003 [C]

* Assuming a linear temperature profile where with the max temperature is in the middle, and the ends of the wire have no temperature increase

0.006 [C]

So we can say an order of magnitude estimate is greater than 1 mC / urad and less than 10 mC / urad.

 

Calculations:

From gwinc, the thermal coefficient of expansion for C70 steel wire is

alpha = 12e-6 [1/C].

From the HLTS model at ../SusSVN/sus/trunk/Common/MatlabTools/TripleModel_Production/hltsopt_wire.m

wire length L = 0.255 [m]

front-back wire spacing s = 0.01 [m]

The change in wire length for pitch = 1 urad is then

dL = s * pitch = 0.01 * 1e-6 = 1e-8 [m]

* For uniform wire heating of dT, this change comes from

dL = alpha * L * dT

So, solving for dT

dT = dL / (alpha * L) = 1e-8 / ( 12e-6 * 0.255 ) = 0.0033 [C]

* For a linear temperature increase profile (max at middle, 0 at ends), I break the wire into many constant temperature segments of length Lsegment.

The temperature increase profile is a vector defined by

dT = dTmax * TempPrile

where TempProfile is a vector of the normalized shape of the temperature prodile. It is triangular, 0 at the ends and 1 at the peak in the middle. Each element of the vector corresponds to a constant temperature segment of the wire. dTmax is a scalar representing the maximum temeprature increase at the middle of the wire.

The change in wire length is then given by

dL = sum( alpha * Lsegment * TempProfile ) * dTmax

solving for dTmax

dTmax = dL / sum( alpha * Lsegment * TempProfile )

with 101 segments, this gives us

dTmax = 0.0063 [C]

about double the uniform heating case.

* I also considered that since the wire has significant stress due to the test mass weight, the Young's modulus's temperature dependence might cause a different effective thermal expansion coefficient alpha_effective. This appears to be a negligible effect.

From gwinc, the temperate dependence of the young's modulus E is

dE/dT = -2.5e-4 [1/C]

and young's modulus E is

E = 212e9 [Pa]

from https://alog.ligo-la.caltech.edu/aLOG/index.php?callRep=12581, we know that the change in spring length due to the modulus of eleasticity dependence is

dL = -dE/dT * dT * Tension / Stiffness

where Tension is the load in the wire and Stiffness is the vertical stiffness of the wire.

The Stiffness is given by

Stiffness = E * A / L = E * pi * r^2 / L

where A is the cross sectional area of the wire, and r is the radius.

So plugging this in above

dL = -dE/dT * dT * Tension * L / ( E * pi * r^2 )

We get the correction on alpha by dividing this by L and dT, which eliminates both from the equation. From the HLTS model, the bottom mass is 12.142 kg and the wire radius is 1.346e-4 m.

Tension = 12.142 * 9.81 / 4 = 29.8 [N]

The correction on alpha is then

-dE/dT * Tension / ( E * pi * r^2 ) = 2.5e-4 * 29.8 / (212e9 * pi * 1.346e-4^2) = 6.2e-7 [1/C]

This changes alpha from

12e-6 to 12.6e-6 [1/C]

Not enough to matter for the estimates above.

keita.kawabe@LIGO.ORG - 16:49, Monday 22 June 2015 (19163)

Localizing the heat source:

I made a calculation of the heat absorption by wires.

Based on Brett's temperature estimate, assuming the radiation as the only heat dissipation mechanism, the heat the front wires should be absorbing is about 1uW total per two wires when SR3 tilts by 1 urad regardless of the temperature distribution.

If you only look at the power, any ghost beam coming from PRC power (about 800W per 20W input assuming recycling gain of 40) can supply 1uW as each of these beams has O(10mW) or more.

I looked at BS AR reflection of X reflection, CP wedge AR both ways, and ITM AR both ways. I'm not sure about the first one, but the rest are mostly untouched by anything and falls on SR3 off centered.

The attachment depicts SR3 outline together with the position of CP wedge AR (green) and ITM AR (blue) reflections, assuming the perfect centering of the main beam and the SR3 baffle on SR3. Note that ITMX AR reflection of +X propagating beam falls roughly on the same position on SR3 as ITMY AR reflection of +Y propagating beam. Ditto for all ITM and CP AR reflections. The radius of these circles represent the beam radius. The power is simply 20W*G_rec(40)*(AR(X)+AR(Y))/4 (extra factor of 2 due to the fact that the AR beam goes through the BS) for ITM and CP, and 20W*40*AR/2 for BSAR of -X beam.

I haven't done any more calculations and I don't intend to, but just by looking at the numbers (total power in green and blue beams in the figure is about 240mW, 5 orders of magnitude larger than the heat absorbed by wires), and considering that the centering on SR3 cannot be perfect, and that SR3 baffle is somewhat larger than SR3 itself, and that CP alignment is somewhat arbitrary, it could be that these blobs seeps through the space between the baffle and the SR3 and provide 1uW.

The red thing is where BSAR reflection of -X beam would be if it is not clipped by the SR2 scraper baffle. If everything is as designed, SR2 scraper baffle will cut off 90% of the power (SR2 edge is 5mm outside of the center of the beam with 8mm radius), and remaining 10% comes back to the left edge of the red circle.

Any ghost beam originating from SRC power is (almost) exhonerated, because the wire (0.0106"=0.27mm diameter) is much smaller than any of the known beams such that it's difficult for these beams to dump 1uW on wires. For example the SRC power hitting SRM is about 600mW per 20W input, SRM AR reflection is already about 22uW.

Details of heat absorption:

When the temperature on a section of wire rises, the stretching of that section is proportional to the length of that section itself and the rise in temperature. Due to this, the total wire stretch is  proportional to the temperature rise integrated over the wire length (which is equial to the mean temperature rise multiplied by the wire length) regardless of the temperature distribution as is shown in effect by Brett's calculation:

stretch prop int^L_0 t dL = mean(t) * L

where L is the length of the wire and t is the difference from the room temperature.

Likewise, the heat dissipation of a short wire section of the length dL at temperature T+t via radiation is

sigma*E*C*dL*[(T+t)^4-T^4] ~ 4*sigma*E*C*dL*T^3*t

where sigma is Stefan-Boltzmann constant, E the emmissivity, C the circumference of the wire, T the room temperature (about 300K). The heat dissipation for the entire length of wire is obtained by integrating this over the length, and the relevant integral is int^L_0 t dL, so again the heat dissipation via radiation is proportional to the temperature rise integrated over the wire length regardless of the temperature distribution:

P(radiation) ~ 4*sigma*E*T^3*(C*L)*mean(t).

I assume the emmissivity E of the steel wire surface to be O(0.1). These wires are drawn, couldn't find the emissivity but it's 0.07 for polished steel surface and 0.24 for rolled steel plate.

I used T=300K, t=3mK (Brett's calculation for both of the temperature distributions), C=pi*0.0106", L=0.255m*2 for two front wires, and obtained:

P(radiation) ~ 0.8uW ~ 1uW.

ITM AR:

ITM has a wedge of 0.08 deg, thick side down.

ITM AR reflection of the beam propagating toward ETM is deflected by 2*wedge in +Z direction. For the beam propagating toward BS, ITM AR reflects the beam, deflecting down, and this beam is reflected by ITM and comes back to BS. Deflection of this beam relative to the main bean is -(1+n)*wedge.

AR beam displacement at BS is +14mm for +Z-deflection and -17mm for -Z-deflection. Since the BS baffle hole "radius" seen from ITMs is 100+ mm, and since the beam radius is about 53mm, AR  beams are not blocked much by BS baffle and reaches SR3.

ITM AR reflectivity is about 300ppm.

CP AR:

Similar calculation  for CP except that they have horizontal wedge, thick part being -Y for CPX and -X for CPY.

CP wedge is about 0.07 degrees.

I only looked at the surface of CP that is opposite of the ITM, and assumed that the surface facing ITM is more or less parallel to ITM AR, within an accuracy of O(100urad).

I assumed that S1 is the surface close to the ITM, and took S2 AR numbers from galaxy web page (43.7ppm for X, 5ppm for Y).

BS AR propagation:

BS wedge is 0.076 degrees, with a reflectivity of 50ppm.

Deflection of BS AR reflection of -X beam relative to the main beam is NOT -2*wedge as BS is tilted by 45 degrees. With some calculation it turns out that it is about -0.27 degrees, with a displacement of +48mm (positive = +X).

This beam is not obstructed at all by the BS baffle, hits SR3 and makes it to SR2 baffle edge. What made it to the SR2 surface doesn't go to SRM and instead comes back to SR3 as SR2 is convex  and the beam is heavily off-centered.

If there's no SR2 baffle and if SR2 is much larger, the center of the reflected beam is going to be  50cm in -X direction from the center of SRM, which happens to be on SR3.

I don't know what happens to the edge scattering and the reflection from SR2, but both of these are highly dependent on SR2 centering.

Images attached to this comment
Displaying reports 64621-64640 of 83069.Go to page Start 3228 3229 3230 3231 3232 3233 3234 3235 3236 End