Differences between revisions 17 and 33 (spanning 16 versions)
⇤ ← Revision 17 as of 2018-05-07 11:56:56 →
Size: 4004
Editor: YutaMichimura
Comment:
← Revision 33 as of 2018-05-09 23:50:37 → ⇥
Size: 5632
Editor: YutaMichimura
Comment:
Deletions are marked like this. Additions are marked like this.
Line 5: Line 5:
 * input power  * Duration
  * officially (as Saito-san mentioned): Apr 28 9:00am to May 7 6:00am (GPS time: 1208908818-1209675618)
 * input power [Kokeyama, Nakano]
  * http://klog.icrr.u-tokyo.ac.jp/osl/?r=4377
  * 0.93W at PSL output
  * IMC coupling ratio is (1.20-0.72) / (1.20 - 0.25) = 51 %
Line 13: Line 18:
   * RFPD transimpedance measurement was done with RFPD with different S/N.
Line 17: Line 23:
 * suspension and coil driver configurations (difference between the final configuration)  * suspension and coil driver configurations (difference between the final configuration in [[KAGRA/Subgroups/VIS/ActuatorDesign|ActuatorDesign]])
  * BS IM and TM use high power coil drivers instead of low power.
  * ETMY MN, IM and TM use high power coil drivers instead of low power.
  * ETMX MN and IM V1/2 use high power coil drivers instead of low power. From May 4 or 5, IM H1/2/3,V3 also uses high power. ETMX TM used the default low power (not cryopayload version).
Line 21: Line 30:
  * slit size ~10mm, at C chamber first, and then A chamber
  * http://klog.icrr.u-tokyo.ac.jp/osl/?r=3848
Line 22: Line 33:
  * time delay, resolution ...
  * succeefully monitored the beam under cryo baffles/shields		   * Tcam update frequency ~1sec, resolution [Inoue]
  * Tcam resolution?
  * successfully monitored the beam under cryo baffles/shields
Line 26: Line 38:
 * initial alignment
  * https://gwdoc.icrr.u-tokyo.ac.jp/cgi-bin/private/DocDB/ShowDocument?docid=7659
Line 33: Line 47:
 * cooling curve (details -> CRY paper)
 * alignment drift during the cool down		  * cooling curve (details -> CRY paper) [Hasegawa?]
  * Platform, MN, IM, TM, shields
 * alignment drift, height change during the cool down
  * height change [Inoue]
  * not much info for alignment drift. O(100)urad in yaw [Izumi]
  * http://klog.icrr.u-tokyo.ac.jp/osl/?r=4176
Line 49: Line 67:
  * for BS [Fujii]
Line 51: Line 70:
 * actuation efficiency drift  * actuation efficiency drift [Yamamoto]
Line 67: Line 86:
  * Michelson was lockable if ETMX/Y angular fluctuation is less than a few urad. Earthquakes shook ETMY to O(100) urad.
Line 79: Line 99:
   * ETMY takes ~2-3 hours to damp enough for locking. ETMX takes ~1 hour.
Line 85: Line 106:
 * differential seismic noise measured by Michelson (3-km CMRR)  * differential seismic noise measured by Michelson (3-km CMRR), GIF-X (1.5-km CMRR), IMC (26.65-m CMRR)
  * CMRR measurement with 3-km Michelson would be difficult
  * IMC CMRR [Nakano]
Line 87: Line 110:

== Data acquisition, data transfer ==
 * latency, speed, total amount

Summary of Phase 1 Measurements

  • Summary of Phase 1 measurements for bKAGRA Phase 1 paper.

Basic configurations

Michelson initial alignment

  • details of slit method

  • Tcam and baffle PD performance (details-> Tcam paper)

    • Tcam update frequency ~1sec, resolution [Inoue]
    • Tcam resolution?
    • successfully monitored the beam under cryo baffles/shields

Installation accuracy

Cryogenics

  • cooling curve (details -> CRY paper) [Hasegawa?]

    • Platform, MN, IM, TM, shields
  • alignment drift, height change during the cool down

Suspension characterization

Sensitivity and stability

Seismic noise, arm length drift

Data acquisition, data transfer

  • latency, speed, total amount

Hardware injection test

  • CBC injection(2018/4/30 Night shift)
  • CW injection(2018/5/2 Night shift)

KAGRA/Commissioning/Phase1/Operation/MeasurementsSummary (last edited 2018-10-01 20:39:54 by YutaMichimura)