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: 13512     Entry time: Sun Jan 7 03:22:24 2018     In reply to: 13511     Reply to this: 13513
Author: Koji 
Type: Update 
Category: PonderSqueeze 
Subject: Displacement requirements for short-term squeezing 

Interesting. My understanding is that this is close to signal recycling, rather than resonant sideband extraction. Is that correct?

For signal recycling, we need to change the resonant condition of the carrier in the SRC. Thus the macroscopic SRC length needs to be changed from ~5.4m to 9.5m, 6.8m, or 4.1m.
In the case of 6.8m, SRC legnth= PRC length. This means that we can use the PRM (T=5%) as the new SRM.

Does this T(SRM)=5% change the squeezing level?

ELOG V3.1.3-