1 / 14

Status for the Q uartz Bars

Status for the Q uartz Bars. PID Upgrade Meeting, 16 th June. Y. Horii, Y. Koga, N. Kiribe (Nagoya University, Japan). Overview of our outcomes. Details reported on 27 th May. Test for Sprasil-P20 bar from Okamoto (used for ’10 beam test) using laser ( λ = 405 nm). Bulk transmission

lily
Download Presentation

Status for the Q uartz Bars

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. Status for the Quartz Bars PID Upgrade Meeting, 16th June Y. Horii, Y. Koga, N. Kiribe (Nagoya University, Japan)

  2. Overview of our outcomes Details reported on 27th May. • Test for Sprasil-P20 bar from Okamoto (used for ’10 beam test)using laser (λ = 405 nm). • Bulk transmission • I0’ / I0 = (100.0 ± 0.8) %/m. • Indicates no significant photon loss. • No position dependence so far. • Reflections from glue joint • (I2 + I3) / I1 = (0.22 ± 0.00) % for α= 2°. • Nontrivial source of the background. • Better to include in the simulationand in the PDF calculation. Mirror I0 I0’ Quartz n = 1.47 Glue (NOA63) n ~ 1.57 α Quartz n = 1.47 I1 I2 I3

  3. Position dependence for reflections from glue 5 cm 10 cm mirror glue 15 cm 20cm glue Relative positions of the two outputs are slightlychanged depending on the incident position.We cannot compare absolute positions since we changed the CCD position each time… (Angle not changed.) CCD Incidence to the points5, 10, 15, and 20 cm from the edge.

  4. For checking the reason, we measuredreflected lights at two points (1 and 2). 1 mirror glue ~90 cm 2 Ratio of the distancesafter the reflection = 3 : 8 glue Ratio of the distancesof the means = 3 : 8 ~150 cm Corresponds to the surface irregularityof the quartz of O(0.1) mrad. 1 2 Laser Distances obtained by 2-D fit (see backup slide).

  5. Spec. of the bar (from Okamoto) Orthogonality is±30’’ for surface A and B. Surface irregularity is 1 mm. Bending of O(0.1) mrad can easily be made.

  6. Note Local irregularity is O(1) Å. We need to keep in mindthat the global irregularityis O(1) mm. Global irregularity is O(1) mm.

  7. Issues When should we make a decisionforZygo, Okamoto, and OSI…? • Test for Zygo, Okamoto, and OSI materials. • Bulk • Bulk transmission (photon retainment) • Mean and width of the laser spot (mean and width at PMT) • Surface • Surface reflectivity (photon retainment) • Mean and width of the reflected spot (mean and width at PMT) • Mirror • Reflectivity (photon retainment) • Mean and width of the reflected spot (mean and width at PMT) • Glue • Refraction index (reflections at glue joints provide backgrounds) • Position dependence for all measurements. • Numerical estimation of the effect of each source to PID power.

  8. Overview of the jig for gluing Jig on a optical table of 4 mx 1.5 m. Size suitable for 130 cm bars(maximum of the bar production). Similar systems for the jointsof mirror/bar and wedge/bar. Micrometers Quartz bar (Placed on polyacetal balls.) Vinyl chloride plate (Placed for avoiding quartz-Al contact.) Upper Al plate (Position adjustable using micrometers.)(Surface irregularity < 100 mm.) Lower Al plate Rails. (Position adjustable on the rails.)

  9. Zoom in. Quartz bar is placed on the polyacetal balls (soft). Bending of quartz bar is estimated to be ~1mm. (Similar level to surface irregularity.) Push using polyacetal head. Plunger spring. Jig for adjusting and keepingposition and angles of quartz. Plunger spring. Push using polyacetal head. Polyacetal balls Push using polyacetal head. Push using polyacetal head.

  10. Benchmark • Dx, Dy < O(10) mm. • Photon loss is less than O(10) mm / 2.0 cm = O(0.1) %. • Achieved by laser displacement sensors. • Dq < O(0.1) mrad. • Position difference of the photon at PMTis typically < O(0.1) mm (smaller than thePMT channel size 5.3 mm x 5.3 mm). • Time difference of the photon at PMTis typically < O(0.1) psec(smaller thanthe PMT resolution ~ 40 psec). • Achieved by autocollimator. Dq Conservatively high quality.

  11. Plan June Week 3 Design and offer the jig for the joint. Quartz quality check. Week 4 Week 5 Quartz quality check. July Week 1 Busy with BGM/B2GM Week 2 Joint the mock-up (glass) bars. Week 3 Joint the quartz bars. Week 4

  12. Backup slides

  13. Obtain the distance by 2-D fit. 1 data MC Dx = 0.61 mm Dy = 0.18 mm 3 : 8 2 data MC Dx = 1.67 mm Dy = 0.51 mm

  14. Bending of quartz • Assume that the bar relies only on two polyacetal balls. • Flexures at the edges and the central point are O(1) mm. L1 cm L1 cm Calculation usingwell-known effective equation. In reality, we use ~100 balls per bar. Then the flexure will be less than 1 mm.

More Related