1 / 34

Lasers and Optics of Gravitational Wave Detectors

Lasers and Optics of Gravitational Wave Detectors. Rick Savage LIGO Hanford Observatory. Overview. LIGO laser requirements/performance LIGO core optics requirements/performance Optics thermal compensation system Excess absorption in H1 interferometer optics New measurement technique

bester
Download Presentation

Lasers and Optics of Gravitational Wave Detectors

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. Lasers and Optics ofGravitational Wave Detectors Rick Savage LIGO Hanford Observatory

  2. Overview • LIGO laser requirements/performance • LIGO core optics requirements/performance • Optics thermal compensation system • Excess absorption in H1 interferometer optics • New measurement technique • Dynamic response of 4-km-long optical cavity

  3. Power Recycled Michelson Interferometer with Fabry-Perot Arm Cavities end test mass 4 km (2 km) Fabry-Perotarm cavity recycling mirror input test mass Laser beam splitter signal GW detector – laser and optics

  4. Closer look - more lasers and optics

  5. Pre-Stabilized Laser System • Laser source • Frequencypre-stabilizationand actuator forfurther stab. • Compensation for Earth tides • Power stab. inGW band • Power stab. at modulation freq.(~ 25 MHz)

  6. Initial LIGO 10-W laser • Master Oscillator Power Amplifier configuration (vs. injection-locked oscillator) • Lightwave Model 126 non-planar ring oscillator (Innolight) • Double-pass, four-stage amplifier • Four rods - 160 watts of laser diode pump power • 10 watts in TEM00 mode

  7. Running continuously since Dec. 1998 on Hanford 2k interferometer Maximum output power has dropped to ~ 6 watts Replacement of amplifier pump diode bars had restored performance in other units Servo systems maintain lock indefinitely (weeks - months) LIGO I PSL performance

  8. Frequency stabilization • Three nested control loops • 20-cm fixed reference cavity • 12-m suspended modecleaner • 4-km suspended arm cavity • Ultimate goal: Df/f ~ 3 x 10-22

  9. Power stabilization • In-band (40 Hz – 7 kHz) RIN • Sensors located before and after suspended modecleaner • Current shunt actuator - amp. pump diode current • RIN at 25 MHz mod. freq. • Passive filtering in 3-mirror triangular ring cavity (PMC) • Bandwidth (FWHM) ~ 3.2 MHz 3e-8/rtHz

  10. Up to 200 mm over 4 km Prediction applied to ref. cav. temp. (open loop) End test mass stackfine actuators relieveuncompensated residual Earth Tide Compensation 100mm prediction residual

  11. Concept for Advanced LIGO laser • Being developed by GEO/LZH • Injection-locked, end-pumped slave lasers • 180 W output with 1200 W of pump light

  12. LZH/MPI Hannover Integrated front end based onGEO 600 laser – 12-14 watts High-power slave – 195 wattsM2 < 1.15 Brassboard Performance

  13. Concept for Advanced LIGO PSL

  14. Core Optics – Test Masses • Low-absorption fused silica substrates • 25 cm dia. x 10 cm thick, 20 kg • Low-loss ion beam coatings • Suspended from single loop of music wire (0.3 mm) • Rare-earth magnets glued to face and side for orientation actuation • Internal mode Qs > 2e6

  15. RITM ~ 14 km (sagitta ~ 0.6 l) ; RETM ~ 8 km Surface uniformity ~ l/100 over 20 cm. dia. (~ 1 nm rms) “Super-polished” – micro-roughness < 1 Angstrom Scatter (diffuse and aperture diffraction) < 30 ppm Substrate absorption < 4 ppm/cm Coating absorption < 0.5 ppm LIGO I core optics Caltech data

  16. Adv. LIGO Core Optics • LIGO recently chose fused silica over sapphire • Familiarity and experience with polishing, coating, suspending, thermally compensating, etc. – less perceived risk • Other projects (e.g. LCGT) still pursuing sapphire test masses • Thermal noise in coatings expected to be greatest challenge fused silica sapphire 38 cm dia., 15.4 cm thick, 38 kg

  17. Processing, Installation and Alignment Experience indicatesthat processing andhandling may besource of optical loss gluingvacuum baking wet cleaning suspendingbalancing transporting

  18. Circulating power in arm cavities ~ 25 kW for inital LIGO ~ 600 kW for adv. LIGO Substrate bulk absorption ~ 4 ppm/cm for initial LIGO ~ 0.5 ppm/cm ($) for adv. LIGO Coating absorption ~ 0.5 ppm for initial & adv. LIGO Thermo-optic coefficient dn/dT ~ 8.7 ppm/degK Thermal expansion coefficient 0.55 ppm/degK “Cold” radius of curvature of optics adjusted for expected “hot” state Thermal Issues Surface absorption depth radius Bulk absorption

  19. Coating vs. substrate absorption Surface distortion Optical path difference substrate coating coating substrate • OPD almost same for same amount of power absorbed in coating or substrate • Power absorbed in coating causes ~ 3 times more surface distortion than same power absorbed in bulk

  20. ITM Compensation Plates PRM ITM SRM ? Thermal compensation system CO2 Laser ZnSe Viewport ITM Over-heat Correction Under-heat Correction Inhomogeneous Correction Adv. LIGOconcept

  21. ITMY ITMX Anomalous absorption in H1 ifo. • Negative values imply annulusheating • Significantly more absorption in BS/ITMX than in ITMY • How to identify absorption site? TCS power is absorbedin HR coatings of ITMs

  22. Need for remote diagnostics • Water absorption in viton spring seats makes vacuum incursions very costly. • Even with dry air purge, experience indicatesthat 1-2 weeks pumping required per 8 hours vented before beam tubes can be exposed to chambers • Development of remote diagnostics to determine which optics responsible of excess absorption

  23. Spot size measurements • BeamView CCD cameras in ghost beams from AR coatings • Lock ifo. w/o TCS heating • Measure spot size changes as ifo. cools from full lock state • Curvature change in ITMX path about twice that in ITMY path ITMX ITMY

  24. Arm cavity g factor changes • Again, lock full ifo. w/o TCS heating, break lock, lock single arm and measure arm cavity g factor at precise intervals after breaking lock • g factor change in Xarm larger than Yarm by factor of ~ 1.6 • Calibrate with TCS (ITM-only surface absorption)

  25. Results and options • Beamsplitter not significant absorber • ITMX is a significant absorber~ 25 mW/watt incident • ITMY absorption also high~ 10 mW/watt incident • Factor of ~5 greater than absorption in H2 or L1 ITMs • Options • Try to clean ITMX in situ • Replace ITMX • Higher power TCS system • 30-watt TCS laser was tested • Eventually ITMX was replaced and ITMY was cleaned in-situ ETM surface ITM surface ITM bulk From analysis by K. Kawabe

  26. Origin of G-factor measurement technique • Simple question:“For a resonant optical cavity, can the Pound-Drever-Hall locking signal distinguish between frequency and length variations?” • i.e. does • Of course!Or does it?

  27. High-frequency response of optical cavities • Dynamic resonance of light in Fabry-Perot cavities(Rakhmanov, Savage, Reitze, Tanner 2002 Phys. Lett. A, 305 239).

  28. LIGO band 1FSR 2FSR High frequency length response • Peaks in length response at multiples of FSR suggest searches for GWs at high frequencies. • HF response to GWs different than length response • Different antenna pattern, but still enhancement in sensitivity

  29. High frequency response to GWs • Long wavelength approximation not valid in this regime • Antenna pattern becomes a function of source frequency as well as sky location and polarization • All-sky-averaged response about a factor of 5 lower than at low freq. • Significant sensitivity near multiples of 37.5 kHz (arm cavity FSR) Movie (by H. Elliott): Antenna pattern for one sourcepolarization as source frequency sweeps from 22 to 36 kHz

  30. G-factor Measurement Technique • Dynamic resonance of light in Fabry-Perot cavities (Rakhmanov, Savage, Reitze, Tanner 2002 Phys. Lett. A, 305 239). • Laser frequency to PDH signal transfer function, Hw(s), has cusps at multiples of FSR and features at freqs. related to the phase modulation sidebands.

  31. Misaligned cavity • Features appear at frequencies related to higher-order transverse modes. • Transverse mode spacing:ftm = f01- f00 = (ffsr/p) acos (g1g2)1/2 • g1,2 = 1 - L/R1,2 • Infer mirror curvature changes from transverse mode spacing freq. changes. • This technique proposed by F. Bondu, Aug. 2002.Rakhmanov, Debieu, Bondu, Savage, Class. Quantum Grav.21 (2004) S487-S492.

  32. H1 data – Sept. 23, 2003 • Lock a single arm • Mis-align input beam (MMT3) in yaw • Drive VCO test input (laser freq.) • Measure TF to ASPD Qmon or Imon signal • Focus on phase of feature near 63 kHz 2ffsr- ftm

  33. Data and (lsqcurvefit) fits. ITMx TCS annulus heating  decrease in ROC (increase in curvature) R = 14337 m R = 14096 m Assume metrology value for RETMx = 7260 m Metrology value for ITMx = 14240 m

  34. Summary • LIGO utilized 10-W solid state lasers • Relative frequency stability ~ 10-21/rtHz • Relative power stability ~ 10-8/rtHz • Advanced LIGO lasers: similar requirements at 200 watt power level • LIGO test masses (mirrors) 25 cm dia., 10 cm thick fused silica • Surface uniformity ~ l/100 p-v (1 nm rms) over 20 cm diameter • Coating absorption < 1 ppm, bulk absorption ~ few ppm/cm • Active thermal compensation required to match curvatures of optics • Non-invasive measurement techniques required for characterizing optics performance • High frequency responses to length and frequency modulation not the same. • Length sensitivity peaks at multiples of arm cavity FSR • Antenna pattern is frequency dependent at high frequencies • Increased sensitivity to HF gravitational waves.

More Related