40m QIL Cryo_Lab CTN SUS_Lab TCS_Lab OMC_Lab CRIME_Lab FEA ENG_Labs OptContFac Mariner WBEEShop
  40m Log  Not logged in ELOG logo
Entry  Sat Jan 6 05:18:12 2018, Kevin, Update, PonderSqueeze, Displacement requirements for short-term squeezing displacement_noise.pdfnoise_budget.pdf
    Reply  Sat Jan 6 13:47:32 2018, rana, Update, PonderSqueeze, Displacement requirements for short-term squeezing 
       Reply  Sat Jan 6 23:25:18 2018, Kevin, Update, PonderSqueeze, Displacement requirements for short-term squeezing displacement_noise.pdfnoise_budget.pdfangles.pdf
          Reply  Sun Jan 7 03:22:24 2018, Koji, Update, PonderSqueeze, Displacement requirements for short-term squeezing 
             Reply  Sun Jan 7 11:40:58 2018, Kevin, Update, PonderSqueeze, Displacement requirements for short-term squeezing 
                Reply  Sun Jan 7 17:27:13 2018, gautam, Update, PonderSqueeze, Displacement requirements for short-term squeezing 
                   Reply  Sun Jan 7 20:11:54 2018, Koji, Update, PonderSqueeze, Displacement requirements for short-term squeezing 
                      Reply  Thu May 3 00:42:38 2018, Kevin, Update, PonderSqueeze, Coil driver contribution to squeezing noise budget 
Message ID: 13513     Entry time: Sun Jan 7 11:40:58 2018     In reply to: 13512     Reply to this: 13514
Author: Kevin 
Type: Update 
Category: PonderSqueeze 
Subject: Displacement requirements for short-term squeezing 

Yes, this SRC detuning is very close to extreme signal recycling (0° in this convention), and the homodyne angle is close to the amplitude quadrature (90° in this convention).

For T(SRM) = 5% at the optimal angles (SRC detuning of -0.01° and homodyne angle of 89°), we can see 0.7 dBvac at 210 Hz.

ELOG V3.1.3-