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
Message ID: 283     Entry time: Mon Jan 28 19:35:55 2008
Author: rana 
Type: Summary 
Category: PEM 
Subject: Accelerometer and Seismometer Coherences 
The attached PDF shows that there is some strange behavior at low frequencies.

From the plot it looks like to me that the Wilcoxon accelerometers (which are supposed to have good response down to 0.05 Hz) are not displaying real seismic motion below 0.3 Hz. Because the coherence length for seismic waves at those frequencies should be 100's of meters we should expect that the accelerometers would have good coherence (>0.8) down there. Instead, my guess is that its all air currents, temperature, or electronics noise. These sensors are not reliable indicators for the microseism.

The Ranger seismometer, however, seems to work fine down to just below the microseism. The Ranger is mounted down around the X end and pointing in the z-direction. The coherence I plotted between it and EX_Z is larger than any other acc/seis pair (as expected).

JM and I discussed what could be done; if we get a SURF student who's into building stuff we can ask them to make a styrofoam hut for the Wilcoxons to see if that helps anything. JM also asked what the point of all this is.

IF we want to do good Adaptive Noise subtraction then we need sensors which can sense the motion which disturbs the mirrors and they need to sense it with a good SNR to get a good subtraction ratio. If the styrofoam thing doesn't work, we should probably look into getting a Guralp 3-axis seismometer for the corner area and just move the accelerometers down to the ends. The sites have Guralp CMG-40T units (~ 8k$). I think we should check out the CMG-3T or the CMG-3ESP.

Does anyone know someone in the Geo depts that we can borrow one from?
Attachment 1: Acc.pdf  104 kB  | Hide | Hide all
Acc.pdf
ELOG V3.1.3-