Differences between revisions 2 and 25 (spanning 23 versions)
Revision 2 as of 2018-04-29 14:23:04
Size: 2030
Comment:
Revision 25 as of 2018-05-07 15:16:21
Size: 5013
Comment:
Deletions are marked like this. Additions are marked like this.
Line 8: Line 8:
  * At dark fringe ??? mW   * At dark fringe 56 +/- 10 uW (http://klog.icrr.u-tokyo.ac.jp/osl/?r=4903)
  * signal chain (http://klog.icrr.u-tokyo.ac.jp/osl/?r=4920)
Line 11: Line 12:
  * beta = 0.12 (from error signal amplitude), 0.2 (from RF power applied to EOM) (http://klog.icrr.u-tokyo.ac.jp/osl/?r=4876 , http://klog.icrr.u-tokyo.ac.jp/osl/?r=4907)
   * RFPD transimpedance measurement was done with RFPD with different S/N.
Line 12: Line 15:
  * http://klog.icrr.u-tokyo.ac.jp/osl/?r=4487
  * http://klog.icrr.u-tokyo.ac.jp/osl/?r=4489
  * http://klog.icrr.u-tokyo.ac.jp/osl/?r=4527
Line 13: Line 19:
  * BS IM and TM use high power coil drivers instead of low power.
  * ETMY MN, TM, 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.
Line 16: Line 25:
  * slit size ~10mm, at C chamber first, and then A chamber
  * http://klog.icrr.u-tokyo.ac.jp/osl/?r=3848
Line 17: Line 28:
  * time delay, resolution ...   * Tcam update frequency ~1sec, resolution [Inoue]
  * Tcam resolution?
  * successfully monitored the beam under cryo baffles/shields
Line 21: Line 34:
  * http://klog.icrr.u-tokyo.ac.jp/osl/?r=4949
  * http://klog.icrr.u-tokyo.ac.jp/osl/?r=4960
Line 25: Line 40:
 * cooling curve (details -> CRY paper)  * 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 28: Line 48:
 * length actuation efficiency measurements for BS, comparison with expectations (http://klog.icrr.u-tokyo.ac.jp/osl/?r=4811)  * length actuation efficiency measurements for BS, comparison with expectations
 * http://klog.icrr.u-tokyo.ac.jp/osl/?r=4811
  * http://klog.icrr.u-tokyo.ac.jp/osl/?r=4909
Line 30: Line 52:
  * http://klog.icrr.u-tokyo.ac.jp/osl/?r=4898
  * http://klog.icrr.u-tokyo.ac.jp/osl/?r=4899
  * http://klog.icrr.u-tokyo.ac.jp/osl/?r=4919
  * http://klog.icrr.u-tokyo.ac.jp/osl/?r=4925
 * seismic attenuation ratio measurements for ETMY and Y
  * http://klog.icrr.u-tokyo.ac.jp/osl/?r=4927
Line 32: Line 60:
  * for BS [Fujii]
Line 34: Line 63:
 * actuation efficiency drift  * actuation efficiency drift [Yamamoto]
Line 36: Line 65:
 * visibility and optical gain drift (http://klog.icrr.u-tokyo.ac.jp/osl/?r=4775)  * visibility and optical gain drift
 * http://klog.icrr.u-tokyo.ac.jp/osl/?r=4775
Line 38: Line 68:
 * Noise budget (http://klog.icrr.u-tokyo.ac.jp/osl/?r=4834)   * duty factor
   * Total: 68.65%
   * 4/28: 81.66%
   * 4/29: 97.00%
   * 4/30: 90.36%
   * 5/01: 87.09%
   * 5/02: 86.88%
   * 5/03: 19.97%
   * 5/04: 33.58%
   * 5/05: 64.18%
   * 5/06: 55.36%
 * Noise budget
  * http://klog.icrr.u-tokyo.ac.jp/osl/?r=4834
  * http://klog.icrr.u-tokyo.ac.jp/osl/?r=4910
  * http://klog.icrr.u-tokyo.ac.jp/osl/?r=4944
Line 40: Line 84:
  * http://klog.icrr.u-tokyo.ac.jp/osl/?r=4891
  * http://klog.icrr.u-tokyo.ac.jp/osl/?r=4933
  * http://klog.icrr.u-tokyo.ac.jp/osl/?r=4871
  * http://klog.icrr.u-tokyo.ac.jp/osl/?r=4940
  * http://klog.icrr.u-tokyo.ac.jp/osl/?r=4954
 * Earthquake in Hawaii 2018-05-04 22:32:55 (UTC)
  * difference between iKAGRA and Phase-1?
   * ETMY takes ~2-3 hours to damp enough for locking. ETMX takes ~1 hour.
  * http://klog.icrr.u-tokyo.ac.jp/osl/?r=4948
  * http://klog.icrr.u-tokyo.ac.jp/osl/?r=4955
Line 43: Line 97:
 * differential seismic noise measured by Michelson (3-km CMRR)   * http://klog.icrr.u-tokyo.ac.jp/osl/?r=4942
 * 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 45: Line 102:

== 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/CWInjection|CW Injection]]

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)