1 / 36

High-Power Stabilized Lasers and Optics of GW Detectors

High-Power Stabilized Lasers and Optics of GW Detectors. Rick Savage LIGO Hanford Observatory. Overview. In general, I will discuss issues and hardware solutions from a LIGO perspective because of familiarity.

keran
Download Presentation

High-Power Stabilized Lasers and Optics of GW 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. High-Power Stabilized Lasers and Optics of GW Detectors Rick Savage LIGO Hanford Observatory

  2. Overview • In general, I will discuss issues and hardware solutions from a LIGO perspective because of familiarity. • Other GW interferometers (GEO, LCGT, TAMA, Virgo) face similar issues and have developed their own solutions as will be seen in subsequent talks in this session. • Lasers • Initial LIGO - ~10 watts • Requirements, performance, technical issues • Advanced LIGO ~ 200 watts • Concept, status • Optics • Initial LIGO core optics – test masses • Requirements, performance, technical issues • Advanced LIGO • Plans

  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 LIGO PSL hardware

  8. 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

  9. 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

  10. Power stabilization • Sensors located before and after suspended modecleaner • Current shunt actuator controlling amplifier pump diode current • Pre-modecleaner for RIN measured upstream of MC

  11. RIN at 20-30 MHz • Describe requirement • Give formula for filtering by PMC ala T. Ralph (from old CCD) • PMC parameters • Photo of optically contacted PMC

  12. Tidal Compensation

  13. Overall experience with LIGO I PSL • Reliability • Long locks • Pmc problems • Laser problems • Ref cav performance

  14. Core Optics – Test Masses • Core optics requirements for initial and advanced ligo • Coating requirements • Q factor • Scattering/ absorption, etc. • Thermal noise – internal modes; noise due to coatings

  15. Surface uniformity < 1 nm rms Scatter < 50 ppm Absorption < 2 ppm ROC matched < 3% Internal mode Q’s > 2 x 106 LIGO I core optics Caltech data CSIRO data

  16. Advanced LIGO core optics

  17. Preparation and installation challenges • Photos of cleaning and installation • Description of problems with etching coatings during cleaning.

  18. Practical issues • Anamolous absorption • Vacuum incursions very costly – time and risky. • Need to make remote measuements due to water absorption in spring seats

  19. CO2 Laser ZnSe Viewport Over-heat pattern Inner radius = 4cm Outer radius =11cm Over-heat Correction Under-heat Correction Inhomogeneous Correction ? Thermal compensation system

  20. ITM Compensation Plates PRM ITM SRM Next-generation TCS • Design utilizes a fused silica suspended compensation plate • Actuation by a scanned CO2 laser (Small scale asymmetric correction) and nichrome heater ring (Large scale symmetric correction) • No direct actuation on ITMs for improved noise reduction, simplicity and lower power (Sapphire)

  21. Kilometer-scale Fabry-Perot cavities • Free spectral range ~ 37.5 kHz • Plot of H_w(f) and H_L(f)

  22. G-factor measurements

  23. Pre-stabilized laser • MOPA source • Frequency reference cavity • Pre-modecleaner cavity • Electro-optics modulators for stabilization and locking to cavities • Core optics • Optical levers • Wavefront sensors • Output beams • modematching telescopes • Periscopes • Photodetectors • 15-m modecleaner cavity • Wavefront sensors and piezo-controlled input pointing • Faraday isolator • Mode-matching telescope

  24. Pre-stabilized laser • Laser source and ancillary optical components and feedback control loops necessary to provide frequency and amplitude stabilized light to the interferometers (input optics subsystem). • Requirements • ~ 10 watts of stabilized light (first generation) • Frequency pre-stabilization to the ?? Level (10 Hz to 100 kHz) • Power stabilization to the ?? level (10 Hz to 100 kHz). • Power stabilization at GW detection modulation freq. (20-30 MHz). • Availability – long (10s to 100s of hours continuous operation without loss of lock). • Insert schematic of PSL/photos

  25. LIGO 10-W laser • Master oscillator power amplifier configuration • Developed under contract with Lightwave Electronics (model 126MOPA) • Oscillator – Non-planar ring oscillator • Monolithic design • Free-running frequency stability • Free-running RIN • Power amplifier • Four-rod, double-pass

  26. 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.

  27. 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.

  28. 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

  29. 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

  30. To investigate heating via 1 mm light … • Lock ifo. for > 2 hours w/o TCS; Plaser= 2 W • Break full lock (t = 0) and quickly lock a single arm. • Misalign input beam (MMT3) in yaw • Measure temporal evolution of Hw(s) • Note: 1mm light heats both ETM and ITM • H1 Xarm dataFeb. 18, 2005

  31. Yarm measurement Feb. 19, 2005

  32. Time-dependent model based on Hello-Vinet formalism (J. Phys. France 51(1990) 2243-2261) Free parameters: “cold” radius of curvature and power absorbed Fits by eye (+,- 20%) Comparison with model – Phil Willems Xarmbulk absorption76 mW Xarmsurface absorption33 mW DR ~ 370 m DR ~ 320 m

  33. Comparison with model - Yarm • Phil Willems – time-dependent Hello-Vinet model Yarmsurface absorption25 mW Yarmbulk absorption50 mW DR ~ 250 m DR ~ 190 m

  34. Calibration using TCS heaing results • TCS calibrationXarm: 220m / 37mW = 5.9 m/mWYarm: 190m / 45mW = 4.2 m/mW • Surface (not bulk) absorption • 1064 nm heatingXarm: 293m / 5.9 m/mW = 49mWYarm: 177m / 4.2 m/mW = 42 mWAssumes all heating on surface and no absorption in ETMs • Surface-equivalent, ITM-onlyabsorption calibration 14.5 km D ~ 220 m 14.28 km 13.9 km D ~ 190 m 13.71 km

  35. “Cold” values from 1064 nm meas.ITMX: 14.226 km difference ~ 50 mITMY: 13.615 km difference ~ 100m Systematic errors? Alignment drifts – sampling different areas of TM surfaces More complex, time-dependent behavior of surface distortions? Phil Willems studying with time-dependent model of surface distortions g factor measurements and reduced data available inLIGO-T050030-00-W 14.5 km D ~ 220 m 14.28 km 13.9 km D ~ 190 m 13.71 km Issues – “cold” curvature differences

More Related