Mitigation of Newtonian Noise Using Superconducting Gravity Gradiometer

  • Slides: 13
Download presentation
Mitigation of Newtonian Noise Using Superconducting Gravity Gradiometer Ho Jung Paik University of Maryland

Mitigation of Newtonian Noise Using Superconducting Gravity Gradiometer Ho Jung Paik University of Maryland GW Astronomy, Korea August, 2016

Newtonian gravity noise § Seismic and atmospheric density modulations cause Newtonian gravity gradient noise

Newtonian gravity noise § Seismic and atmospheric density modulations cause Newtonian gravity gradient noise (NN), which cannot be shielded. § Advanced laser interferometers will be limited by the NN due to Rayleigh waves below 10 Hz. NN dominated by Rayleigh waves § On way to reduce the NN is by going underground. At z = - 200 m, NN is reduced by a factor of 36 at 10 Hz and 3 at 3 Hz. § KAGRA: 200 m depth, ET: proposed to be at 100 -200 m depth. Paik 2

Mitigation of NN for surface detectors § Seismic motion and atmospheric density modulations are

Mitigation of NN for surface detectors § Seismic motion and atmospheric density modulations are measured by using seismometers and microphones. § Apply coherent noise cancellation by Wiener filtering. Data from reference channels are used to provide a coherent estimate of the NN. Residual from Wiener noise cancellation § Inhomogeneity and a change of spatial correlation due to scattering and local sources may produce systematic errors. Paik 3

Could SGG be used to mitigate NN? § 13 - and 23 -comp SGGs

Could SGG be used to mitigate NN? § 13 - and 23 -comp SGGs could be used to measure and remove X( ) and Y( ) precisely without relying on external seismometers. § Worthy mitigation goal: x 5 improvement to 2 10 23 Hz 1/2 at 10 Hz. SGG § At 1 -10 Hz, NN is uncorrelated between interferometer test masses. One SGG must be co-located with each test mass. Paik 4

Sensitivity requirement Paik 5

Sensitivity requirement Paik 5

Correlation requirement § Mitigation factor S is limited by correlation CSN between interferometer test

Correlation requirement § Mitigation factor S is limited by correlation CSN between interferometer test mass and NN sensor: Beker et al. , GRG 43, 623 (2011) § SGG with < 0. 8 m must be brought to within 0. 8 m to the test mass. § Such a small SGG would not be sensitive enough and cannot be brought to such proximity to the test mass. § Is there a way out? Paik 6

Bypassing correlation requirement § Rayleigh waves are surface waves with no phase shift along

Bypassing correlation requirement § Rayleigh waves are surface waves with no phase shift along z. Interferometer test mass § CSN = 1 for SGG of any as long as its test masses occupy the same (x, y) with interferometer test mass. § Solution: Locate an SGG with only vertical arm under each test mass. SGG is sufficiently well isolated from seismic noise by pendulum suspension. SGG test masses Paik 7

SGG with 4 -m arm § SGG with only vertical arm ( = 4

SGG with 4 -m arm § SGG with only vertical arm ( = 4 m, M = 1. 5 ton, T = 4. 2 K) is located under each interferometer test mass. Parameter SGG Each test mass M 1. 5 103 kg § SQUIDs are further cooled to 0. 1 K to reach 10 noise level. Arm-length 4 m Antenna temperature T 4. 2 K SQUID temperature TSQ 0. 1 K DM quality factor QD 107 Has been demonstrated using two-stage SQUID. § Seismic noise is rejected to one part in 109 by CM rejection. Amplifier noise number n 10 Detector noise Sh 1/2(f ) 2 10 20 Hz 1/2 § Scattering of Rayleigh waves off underground cavity and NN from local sources must be examined. NN mitigation by using SGG appears to be feasible! Paik 8

Use of co-located tilt meters Harms and Venkateswara (2016) § Test mass displacement due

Use of co-located tilt meters Harms and Venkateswara (2016) § Test mass displacement due to Rayleigh waves: Interferometer test mass § A tilt meter under the test mass measures Completely correlated with the test mass displacement even in the presence of multiple waves. Tilt meter § Solution: Locate a sensitive tilt meter under each test mass. § Technically, the tilt meter approach seems to be more straightforward. § What are the pros and cons of the two approaches? Further analyses are needed. Paik 9

What is Earthquake Early Warning ? S -W av e P -W av e

What is Earthquake Early Warning ? S -W av e P -W av e ability to provide a few to tens of seconds of warning before damaging seismic waves arrive Sa n A Fa ndr ul ea t s S-P time 10

Blind zones of EEWS § To reduce the blind zone, can we use gravity

Blind zones of EEWS § To reduce the blind zone, can we use gravity signals that travel at c, much faster than seismic waves? Blind zone size in California (Kuyuk and Allen, 2013) § GRACE and GOCE missions have measured static gravity changes after vs before large earthquakes. § Can dynamic gravity signals following fault rupture be measured quickly? From presentation by P. Ampuero (Caltech Seismolab) Paik 11

Expected dynamic gravity signal Ampuero et al. , Prompt detection of fault rupture for

Expected dynamic gravity signal Ampuero et al. , Prompt detection of fault rupture for earthquake early warning (preprint) Gravity signal following a rupture Epicentral distance = 70 km Next stage: h = 10 15 Hz 1/2, MANGO: h = 10 20 Hz 1/2 Paik SNR after 5 s SNR after 10 s 12

SEED (Superconducting Earthquake Early Detector) § By levitating two Nb test masses (M =

SEED (Superconducting Earthquake Early Detector) § By levitating two Nb test masses (M = 10 kg, L = 50 cm) separated along z axis, h 13 and h 23 are measured. § To reject the seismic noise to below the intrinsic noise, CMRR = 109 is achieved. Sensitive axes must be aligned to 10 5 rad. § Test masses are cooled to 1. 5 K and coupled to 120 SQUIDs via a capacitor bridge transducer. at 70 km QD SQUID 120 SQUID Paik 13