1 / 16

Jo van den Brand e-mail: jo@nikhef.nl

Design study for 3rd generation interferometers Work Package 1 Site identification and infrastructure. Jo van den Brand e-mail: jo@nikhef.nl. T ü bingen, October 9, 2007. Site identification issues: science. R ü diger, ‘85. Improved sensitivity compared to LIGO and Virgo

barth
Download Presentation

Jo van den Brand e-mail: jo@nikhef.nl

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Design study for 3rd generation interferometersWork Package 1Site identification and infrastructure Jo van den Brand e-mail: jo@nikhef.nl Tübingen, October 9, 2007

  2. Site identification issues: science Rüdiger, ‘85 • Improved sensitivity compared to LIGO and Virgo • Sensitivity below 10-24 1/sqrt(Hz) • Ultra-low frequency cut-off • Underground site • Multiple interferometers • 3 interferometers; triangular configuration? • 10 km long arms • 2 polarization + redundancy • Design study part of FP7 & ILIAS

  3. Courtesy: G.Cella Surface waves Compression waves Seismic displacement noise • Seismic displacement noise • Driven by wind, volcanic, seismic activity • Ocean tides, cultural noise (e.g. humans, cars) • Ground-water variations • Complicates operation of ITF, certainly in future designs with high finesse cavities • Active control systems, seismometers feedback to mirrors • Underground • Surface and compression waves • Die exponentially with depth

  4. Experience: CLIO – Prototype for LCGT

  5. Experience: underground interferometers • LISM: 20 m Fabry-Perot interferometer, R&D for LCGT, moved from Mitaka (ground based) to Kamioka (underground) • Seismic noise much lower: • Operation becomes easier • 102 overall gain • 103at 4 Hz

  6. Gravity gradient noise • Gravity gradient noise • Time varying contributions to Newtonian background driven by seismic compression waves, ground-water variations, slow-gravity drifts, weather, cultural noise • Determines low-frequency cut-off • Cannot be shielded against • Counter measures • Network of seismometers and development of data correction algorithms • Analytical studies: G. Cella • Numerical studies Figure: M.Lorenzini

  7. NN reduction in caverns Cavern radius [m] 102 less seismic noise x 104 geometrical reduction 106 overall reduction (far from surface) Spherical Cavern G.Cella Reduction factor (Compression waves not included) NN reduction of 104 @5 Hz with a 20 m radius cave 5 Hz 10 Hz 20 Hz 40 Hz Compression waves: R. De Salvo

  8. Ultra soft vibration isolation: sensitivity at low frequency Upper experimental hall 50-100 m tower to accommodate long suspension for low frequency goal Ellipsoidal/spherical cave for newtonian noise reduction Credit: R.De Salvo 10 km tunnel Working group 2

  9. Other criteria • Site selection and evaluation • Site availability and acquisition risk • Acquire land rights in reasonable time frame • Scientific suitability • Various noise sources • Construction suitability • Geological conditions (topography, hydrology) • Environmental considerations • Legal issues • Earthwork costs (local soil waste, labor costs) • Operations suitability • Supporting technical infrastructure (local University support) • Nearby communities (travel time, schools, etc.) • Operation costs (power, utilities, etc.) • Risks from environmental sources or future development • Future developments (noise sources) • Earthquakes, etc.

  10. ILC, NLC, Tesla, VLHC, Muon Source – Site requirements

  11. Dusel in USA: NSF – July 10, 2007 – 15 M$ study

  12. Site identification • Geological issues • Collaborate with earth science community • Roma 3, VU Amsterdam • Perform seismic measurements • Salt mines, granite • Geotechnical site reports • Existing mines / tunnels • Horizontal site access • Cost issues • Excavation costs • Equipment costs • Crushed rock disposal • Infrastructure • Vacuum, cryogenics Gran Sasso Salt mines

  13. Logistics for FP7 Define detailed strategy in first WP1 meeting

  14. FP7 foreseen resources • 44 kEuro travel • 1 postdoc for 3 years, 1 postdoc for 2 years • 30 kEuro for external work

  15. Contact me: jo@nikhef.nl Summary • Site selection for 3rd generation ITF • Underground site • Seismic activity, gravity gradient noise • Numerous technical issues • Collaborative design study • Interest expressed by • Caltech - LIGO • CNRS - Annecy • EGO • Florence • GEO600 • Gran Sasso • Nikhef / VU • Pisa • Roma 1, 3 • Start regular meetings (as soon as EC formalities are completed) • First meeting at Gran Sasso (E. Coccia)(Underground Lab. Community)

  16. Discussion issues • Join the N2 network `Deep Underground Science Laboratories: DLnet (0.8 MEuro)’.

More Related