View
216
Download
1
Category
Tags:
Preview:
Citation preview
Stefan Hild and Andreas Freise
Advanced Virgo meeting, August 2008
Advanced Virgo beam size: Asymmetric ROCs and Coating
Thermal Noise
S. Hild Advanced Virgo, 15th of August 2008 Slide 2
PLEASE NOTE: Everything presented here is …
… just want to spread some (more or less) recent information …
S. Hild Advanced Virgo, 15th of August 2008 Slide 3
Previous statements: Symmetric ROCs give lowest Coating Thermal noise
S. Hild Advanced Virgo, 15th of August 2008 Slide 4
Current baseline of Advanced Virgo ROCs
Use identical ROCs at ITM and ETM. Beam waist in the centre of the arm cavity. Beamsize at all 4 cavity mirrors is the same
Therefore all 4 mirrors contribute in the same way to the Overall Coating Thermal noise
N_all = sqrt(IMX^2 + IMY^2 + EMX^2 + EMY^2)
BIG Question: Is it really correct that all 4 mirrors contribute in the same way ???
S. Hild Advanced Virgo, 15th of August 2008 Slide 5
Coating noise increases with the number of coating layers
S. Hild Advanced Virgo, 15th of August 2008 Slide 6
How many coating layer will there be at ETM and ITM ?
General rule of thumb: The higher the reflectivity the more coating layers are required!
Adv conceptual design transmittances: ETM = 5 x 10-6 ITM = 7 x 10-3
We don’t have the final number for the Advanced Virgo coatings … thus we use the ALIGO values for the moment …
S. Hild Advanced Virgo, 15th of August 2008 Slide 7
ETMs have stronger Coating Thermal Noise than the ITMs
For identical beam size the ETMs contribute much stronger to overall coating noise than the ITMs.
S. Hild Advanced Virgo, 15th of August 2008 Slide 8
Optimal Coating thermal noise:Asymetric ROCs
In order to minimize the thermal noise we have make the beam larger on ETM and smaller on ITM.
Equivalent to moving the waist closer to ITM.
Nice side effect, the beam in the central central area would be slightly smaller !!
Not so nice side effect: ETM and ITM have different ROCs (more spares required?)
ITM
ITM
ETM
ETM
Symmetric ROCs = non optimal Coating noise
Asymmetric ROCs = optimal Coating noise
S. Hild Advanced Virgo, 15th of August 2008 Slide 9
Coating thermal noise for asymmetric ROCs
Did a scan over various ROCs for ITM and ETM.
For each combination of ROCs we ran GWINC to evaluate detector performance.
Color indicates the binary neutron star range [Mpc].
Contour indicates beam sizes at the test masses.
S. Hild Advanced Virgo, 15th of August 2008 Slide 10
Coating thermal noise for asymmetric ROCs
Illustrating example:
Black arrow:Both beam sizes are 5.0 cm. The ROCs are about 1570m. The Coating noise is about 4.1e-24.
Blue arrow:The same level of coating noise can be achieved with a beam of only 4.8cm at the ITM.
S. Hild Advanced Virgo, 15th of August 2008 Slide 11
Summary
It seems likely that there will be a revision of the beam sizes, mirror ROCs and waist position.
We need to collect (over the next month) all important information: Sensitivity (Coating noise) Cavity stability (ROCs, g-factors, polishing accuracy, …) Diffraction losses
We will try to come up with a proposal for beam sizes and ROCs which will be presented to the VIRGO collaboration for discussion and review.
Recommended