1 / 23

Research and Development for Gravitational Wave Detectors

Research and Development for Gravitational Wave Detectors. Raffaele Flaminio CNRS/LMA Lyon. Ground-based GW detectors. Focus on ground based laser interferometers Most sensitive detectors in operation LIGO, Virgo, GEO, TAMA,

rusti
Télécharger la présentation

Research and Development for 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. Research and Developmentfor Gravitational Wave Detectors Raffaele Flaminio CNRS/LMA Lyon

  2. Ground-based GW detectors • Focus on ground based laser interferometers • Most sensitive detectors in operation • LIGO, Virgo, GEO, TAMA, • Some of the following applies to other kind of detectors (e.g. resonant detectors)

  3. Present reach • Gravitational collapses in the galaxy (or nearby ones) • Test upper limits of known galactic pulsars (and look for unknown ones) • Search for coalescing neutron stars up to a max distance of ~ 30 Mpc • Search for merger of binary black holes to a max distance of ~150 Mpc

  4. Toward GW astronomy • Present detectors will test upper limits • Even in the optimistic case rate too low to start GW astronomy • Need to improve thesensitivity • Increase the sensitivity by 10  increase the probed volume by 1000 • Plans to improve thepresent detectors

  5. GW roadmap: time scale • ET: Einstein Telescope • Design study selected by the EU within FP7

  6. Virgo+ 2009 LIGO 2005 AURIGA 2005 Virgo Design GEO-HF 2009 DUAL Mo (Quantum Limit) Ad LIGO/Virgo NB Advanced LIGO/Virgo (2014) Credit: M.Punturo Einstein GW Telescope GW roadmap: sensitivity scale

  7. Present limitations …. • Shot noise • - Depends on quantum nature of light • - Decreases when more photons are used • - Depends on the optical configuration adopted

  8. …. and possible improvements • Increase power stored in the interferometer • - increase laser power • - decrease optical losses • But pay attention to: • 1) Mirrors heating and thermal lensing • - better thermal compensation • - decrease light absorption • 2) Radiation pressure noise • - increase mirror mass • - optimize optical configuration • signal recycling • - use non classical light • light squeezing/quantum optics • 3) Non-linear coupling between the light fields and the mirror suspensions

  9. Present limitations … • Mirror thermal noise • - brownian motion • - due to temperature …. • - …plus any source of friction in the mirror

  10. … and possible improvements • Reduce friction in the mirrors • Friction in the coating • - Main source of friction today • - Multi-layers SiO2/Ta2O5 used today • - Ta2O5 is the lossy material • look for new materials • materials science • - SiO2 layer lossier than raw material • improve deposition process • Friction in the substrate • - Best material so far: silica • - Avoid attaching anything to preserve • mechanical quality • - Move to electrostatic actuators avoiding magnets attached to the mirror

  11. Present limitations … • Pendulum thermal noise • - same kind of brownian motion • due to temperature …- … plus friction in the suspension wires • - or friction between the wires and the mirror

  12. … and possible improvements • Decrease pendulum friction • better suspensions wires (new materials)- better wire clamping • monolithic suspensions • fused silica fibers • silicate bonding

  13. Further reduction of thermal noise • Thermal noise decrease as √T • - go to low temperatures • - friction vs temperature? • - depends on materials (materials science) • - look for optical materials with good • mechanical properties at low temperature • (silica not a good choice) • Thermal lensing • - due to laser power deposited in the mirror • - higher mirror thermal conductivity • lower thermal lensing • higher wires thermal conductivity • heat extraction more efficient • Silicon • - silicon a good candidate • - silicate bonding behavior at low T? • - thermal conductivity across bonding? • - on-going R&D Si

  14. COLD FINGER Cryogenics for GW detectors • Need to cool large masses • Vibration free cryogenics • Soft thermal links • Points of contact with underground detectors for rare events search

  15. ILIAS: the STREGA joint research activity • Strong component within the ILIAS project • Goal: thermal noise reduction for GW detectors • All the european groups working in thermal noise reduction involved • INFN (Ge, Fi, Fr, Le, Pd, Pi, Pg, Rm1, Rm2), CNRS (LKB, ESPCI,LMA), Univ Glasgow, CNR (Trento), Leiden, Jena, … • All collaborations: Virgo, GEO, ROG, Auriga, MiniGRAIL • Ingredients: • Cryogenics suspensions • Cryogenics mirrors • Materials • Thermo-elastic studies • A key role for starting the ET design study • A lot more to do • But ILIAS ends in 2009 and support available within ILIAS-NEXT very much reduced

  16. Present limitations: seismic noise • Seismic noise • residual transmission of seismic motion through the suspensions system • 'relatively large' motion at very low frequency → need for a control system → control system noise - sensitivity to weather conditions

  17. Seismic noise: possible improvements • Better active isolation • More sensitive accelerometers • Very low-frequency tilt-meters • Gryo-lasers • Softer springs ?

  18. Forthcoming limitations • Gravity gradient noise • Limitation to existing infrastructure • Will limit advanced detectors Figure: M.Lorenzini

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

  20. Further improvements: spherical cavern 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

  21. Combination of improvements 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

  22. Rüdiger, ‘85 The ET concept • Need to improve sensitivity at low frequencies • More physics is there • Present facilities limited by environmental disturbances • Seismic noise • Gravity gradients • ET Einstein Telescope • Concepts • Underground • Less seismic noise • No wind • Temperature stability • Cryogenic • 30 km beam tube • 100 m suspensions • Different geometry • Triangle?

  23. Conclusion • Present detectors are testing upper limits of GW predictions • A few upgrades ready to be implemented (Virgo+, Enhanced LIGO) • Advanced detectors should see several events/month • Sensitivity will profit from on-going R&D (e.g. coating thermal noise) • Engineering needed (e.g. monolithic suspensions) • ET Einstein Telescope • Design study should start soon • R&D activity started within FP6 (STREGA) • Should continue within FP7 • More investment needed • Points of contact with other fields of astroparticle physics • Cryogenics • Vibration isolation • Underground operation • GW will participate to ILIAS-NEXT • GW networking • Networking with underground labs • A few small R&D activities • But more investment will be needed

More Related