with Dan, YamaT, SawadaT
We performed full measurements for the IFO calibration.
The analysis results will be posted at a later date.
Notes:
The DARM-related measurements were conducted after adjusting the feedforward gains (see klog#34410).
Following the same method as klog#34040 and klog#34033, we performed measurements to observe the changes in DC caused by differences in the number of whitening filter stages for ITMX-TM and BS-TM.
Measurement files (`/users/CAL/current/measurements/2025/0603/0920_*`):
0920_BS_TM_PRCL.xml : Whitening = 1 stage
0920_BS_TM_PRCL-1.xml : Whitening = 0 stage
0920_ITMX_TM_DARM_PRFPMI_WFOFF.xml : Whitening = 0 stage
0920_ITMX_TM_DARM_PRFPMI_WFON.xml : Whitening = 3 stages
- Each value is estimated based on JGW-L2314903.
- Estimated values by Pcal and Free-swing are consistent with each other at approximately 3%.
- Previous full measurement which is the reference of comparison is klog#34033.
- There is no significant change in all parameters.
- Numbers in parentheses indicate a number of engaged de-whitening filters.
- Low-frequency (<1Hz) zero/pole in disengaged de-whitening filters (see also klog#33874) are compensated based on circuit measurement only for ETMX in klog#34229 and klog#34244.
- So this effect must be considered for other suspensions.
| Free-swing | XPcal | Diff. from prev. | Figures | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| H_mich | 1.115e+09 +/- 0.0067e+09 | N/A | -2.8% | Fig.1 |
| A_BS(0) | 6.180e-11 +/- 0.039e-13 | 6.000e-11 +/- 0.048e-11 | +0.8% (Free-swing) | Fig.2-3 (for Free-swing) |
| A_ITMX(0)/A_BS(0) | 0.04956 +/- 0.00038 | same as left | -0.2% | Fig.4-5 |
| A_ITMX(0) | 3.063e-12 +/- 0.030e-12 | 3.3583e-12 +/- 0.0043e-12 | +0.7% (Free-swing) | |
| A_ITMX(3)/A_ITMX(0) | 1.1292 +/- 0.0018 | same as left | +0.1% | Fig.6-7 |
| A_ITMX(3) | 3.459e-12 +/- 0.035e-12 | 3.3583e-12 +/- 0.0043e-12 | +0.7% (Free-swing) | |
| A_ETMX_TM/A_ITMX(3) | 1.1456 +/- 0.0011 | same as left | -7.9% | Fig.8-9 |
| A_ETMX_TM | 3.962e-12 +/- 0.040e-12 | 3.8574e-12 +/- 0.0033e-12 | -0.6% (XPcal) | Fig.10-11 (for XPcal) |
| A_ETMX_IM/A_ETMX_TM | 42.1 +/- 2.4 | N/A | -7.8% | Fig.12-13 |
| A_ETMX_IM | 1.670e-10 +/- 0.097e-10 | 1.68e-10 +/- 0.10 | -8.7% (XPcal) | Fig.14-15 (for XPcal) |
| H_DARM | 2.211e+12 +/- 0.023e+12 | 2.2775e+12 +/- 0.0071e+12 | +0.9% (XPcal) | Fig.16-19 |
| 1/H_DARM | 4.522e-13 +/- 0.048e-13 | 4.391e-13 +/- 0.014e-13 | N/A | |
| A_BS(1)/A_BS(0) | 1.0423 +/- 0.0048 | same as left | +0.5% (Free-swing) | Fig.20-21 |
| A_BS(1) | 6.441e-11 +/- 0.050e-11 | 6.254e-11 +/- 0.057e-11 | +1.3% (Free-swing) | |
| H_MICH | 4.628e+08 +/- 0.036e+08 | 4.767e+08 +/- 0.044e+08 | +9.8% (Free-swing) | Fig.22-25 |
| 1/H_MICH | 2.161e-09 +/- 0.017e-09 | 2.098e-09 +/- 0.019e-09 | N/A | |
| A_PRM(1)/A_BS(1) | 27.21 +/- 0.12 | same as left | +1.0% | Fig.26-27 |
| M2P FF gain | 0.03675 +/- 0.00016 | same as left | N/A | |
| A_PRM | 8.764e-10 +/- 0.078e-10 | 8.509e-10 +/- 0.086e-10 | +2.3% (Free-swing) | |
| H_PRCL | 2.057e+09 +/- 0.018e+09 | 2.118e+09 +/- 0.021e+09 | +4.3% (Free-swing) | Fig.28-31 |
| 1/H_PRCL | 4.862e-10 +/- 0.043e-10 | 4.720e-10 +/- 0.048e-10 | N/A | |
| A_ITMX(3)/A_BS(1) | 0.05369 +/- 0.00049 | same as left | N/A | |
| M2D FF gain | 18.6 +/- 3.2 | same as left | N/A |
1) Wrong measurement file was used for DARM optical gain estimation.
I had used /users/CAL/current/measurements/2025/0630/0920_DARM_OLG.xml in which the measurement was interrupted.
Correct (re-measured) one is /users/CAL/current/measurements/2025/0630/0920_DARM_OLG-1.xml.
I re-analyzed with correct measurement results and H_DARM and 1/H_DARM were updated.
Finally, the difference from previous results is ~3% and a trend of difference will be reported by Hido-kun.
2) Comparison of the actuator efficiency ratio of ETMX and ITMX was done in wrong configuration.
I had compared A_ETMX_TM/A_ITMX_TM(3) in this time and A_ETMX_TM/A_ITMX_TM(0) in the previous measurement.
So I re-evaluated the difference by using A_ETMX_TM/A_ITMX_TM(3) in the previous measurement.
And also comparison between YPcal and XPcal was added in the table.
| Free-swing | XPcal | Diff. from prev. | Figures | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| H_mich | 1.115e+09 +/- 0.0067e+09 | N/A | -2.8% | Fig.1 |
| A_BS(0) | 6.180e-11 +/- 0.039e-13 | 6.000e-11 +/- 0.048e-11 | +0.8% (Free-swing) | Fig.2-3 (for Free-swing) |
| A_ITMX(0)/A_BS(0) | 0.04956 +/- 0.00038 | same as left | -0.2% | Fig.4-5 |
| A_ITMX(0) | 3.063e-12 +/- 0.030e-12 | 3.3583e-12 +/- 0.0043e-12 | +0.7% (Free-swing) | |
| A_ITMX(3)/A_ITMX(0) | 1.1292 +/- 0.0018 | same as left | +0.1% | Fig.6-7 |
| A_ITMX(3) | 3.459e-12 +/- 0.035e-12 | 3.3583e-12 +/- 0.0043e-12 | +0.7% (Free-swing) | |
| A_ETMX_TM/A_ITMX(3) | 1.1456 +/- 0.0011 | same as left | -0.9% | Fig.8-9 |
| A_ETMX_TM | 3.962e-12 +/- 0.040e-12 | 3.8574e-12 +/- 0.0033e-12 | -0.6% (XPcal) | Fig.10-11 (for XPcal) |
| A_ETMX_IM/A_ETMX_TM | 42.1 +/- 2.4 | N/A | -7.8% | Fig.12-13 |
| A_ETMX_IM | 1.670e-10 +/- 0.097e-10 | 1.68e-10 +/- 0.10 | -8.7% (XPcal) | Fig.14-15 (for XPcal) |
| H_DARM | 2.1246e+12 +/- 0.023e+12 | 2.1875e+12 +/-0.0073e+12 | -3.1% (XPcal) | Fig.16-19 => Fig.1-4 in this post |
| 1/H_DARM | 4.709e-13 +/- 0.050e-13 | 4.572e-13 +/- 0.015e-13 | N/A | |
| A_BS(1)/A_BS(0) | 1.0423 +/- 0.0048 | same as left | +0.5% (Free-swing) | Fig.20-21 |
| A_BS(1) | 6.441e-11 +/- 0.050e-11 | 6.254e-11 +/- 0.057e-11 | +1.3% (Free-swing) | |
| H_MICH | 4.628e+08 +/- 0.036e+08 | 4.767e+08 +/- 0.044e+08 | +9.8% (Free-swing) | Fig.22-25 |
| 1/H_MICH | 2.161e-09 +/- 0.017e-09 | 2.098e-09 +/- 0.019e-09 | N/A | |
| A_PRM(1)/A_BS(1) | 27.21 +/- 0.12 | same as left | +1.0% | Fig.26-27 |
| M2P FF gain | 0.03675 +/- 0.00016 | same as left | N/A | |
| A_PRM | 8.764e-10 +/- 0.078e-10 | 8.509e-10 +/- 0.086e-10 | +2.3% (Free-swing) | |
| H_PRCL | 2.057e+09 +/- 0.018e+09 | 2.118e+09 +/- 0.021e+09 | +4.3% (Free-swing) | Fig.28-31 |
| 1/H_PRCL | 4.862e-10 +/- 0.043e-10 | 4.720e-10 +/- 0.048e-10 | N/A | |
| A_ITMX(3)/A_BS(1) | 0.05369 +/- 0.00049 | same as left | N/A | |
| M2D FF gain | 18.6 +/- 3.2 | same as left | N/A | |
| YPCAL/XPCAL | N/A | 0.98474 +/- 0.00080 | -0.2% | Fig.5-6 in this post |
I estimated and updated the parameters related DARM (Fig.1).
There is no strange variations (Fig2).
H_etmxtm = 3.839154366e-14 at 10Hz (0.23% from previous measurements)
H_etmxim = 1.535938431e-14 at 10Hz (-1.9% from previous measurements)
Optical_gain = 2.129473235e12 (0.07% from previous measurements)
Cavity_pole = 18.127587391 Hz (-0.76% from previous measurements)
Previous parameters are listed in klog#34393.
I investigated the variation in optical gain (specifically, the gain of the sensing function) between 0602 full calibration (klog#34033) and 0630 full calibration (Fig.3).
A decreasing trend was observed from the measurement date (June 2) toward June 20, followed by an increase thereafter.
Since a continuous change can be observed on this time scale (although further data accumulation is needed),
there is a possibility that calibration lines could not only account for statistical fluctuations, but also help suppress systematic errors by correcting for actual variations.
MICH and PRCL calibrations were updated by using the values in klog#34423 as follows.
- 1/H_MICH [K1:CAL-CS_SUM_MICH_ERR_FM1]
- A_BS(1) [K1:CAL-CS_SUM_MICH_BS_TM_FM1]
- 1/H_PRCL [K1:CAL-CS_SUM_PRCL_ERR_FM1]
- A_PRM [K1:CAL-CS_SUM_PRCL_PRM_TM_FM1]
Actual changes were shown in Fig.1.
After then line tracking parameters were also updated based on the DARM calibration parameters in klog#34424.
Updated EPICS records can be found in JGW-L2314962.
They were accepted on {observation,down,safe}.snap in klog#34426.
Finally, I raised CFC_LATCH bit and moved from CALIB_NOT_READY to READY.
Differences in foton filters shown in Fig.1 are related to klog#34424 (K1:CAL-CS_DARM_*) and klog#34425 (K1:CAL-CS_SUM_{MICH,PRCL}_*).
Differences in SDF tables shown in Fig.2 are related to klog#34411 (K1:CAL-MEAS_*) and klog#34426 (K1:CAL-CS_TDEP_*).
There is no change in guardian code and model files as shown in Fig.3 and Fig.4, respectively.
