|
40m
QIL
Cryo_Lab
CTN
SUS_Lab
TCS_Lab
OMC_Lab
CRIME_Lab
FEA
ENG_Labs
OptContFac
Mariner
WBEEShop
|
| PSL |
Not logged in |
 |
|
|
 Thu Jan 10 10:39:27 2019, anchal, DailyProgress, NoiseBudget, New noise budget code is ready, but
|
 Mon Aug 12 11:56:21 2019, anchal, DailyProgress, NoiseBudget, Adding specifics of discepancy
|
Tue Aug 13 11:59:56 2019, anchal, DailyProgress, NoiseBudget, Checking the differences between old and new noisebudget 
| |
Tue Aug 13 17:05:53 2019, aaron, DailyProgress, NoiseBudget, Checking the differences between old and new noisebudget
| |
Tue Sep 24 15:40:33 2019, anchal, DailyProgress, NoiseBudget, Adding specifics of discepancy 2
| |
Tue Sep 24 17:11:13 2019, anchal, DailyProgress, NoiseBudget, Adding specifics of discepancy 2 (More)
| |
Tue Sep 24 19:39:06 2019, anchal, DailyProgress, NoiseBudget, Checking variation in estimated Coating Brownian Noise with Loss Angles
| |
Fri Sep 27 16:40:49 2019, anchal, DailyProgress, NoiseBudget, Checking variation in estimated Coating Brownian Noise with Loss Angles Better Plots
| |
Mon Sep 30 11:14:41 2019, anchal, DailyProgress, NoiseBudget, Checking variation in estimated Coating Brownian Noise with Loss Angles 2D Plots
| |
Mon Sep 30 12:25:24 2019, rana, DailyProgress, NoiseBudget, Checking variation in estimated Coating Brownian Noise with Loss Angles 2D Plots
| |
Mon Sep 30 20:08:42 2019, anchal, DailyProgress, NoiseBudget, Checking variation in estimated Coating Brownian Noise with Beam Radius
| |
Tue Oct 1 13:46:49 2019, anchal, DailyProgress, NoiseBudget, Using bayesian inference to estimate loss Angles
| |
Wed Oct 2 15:13:27 2019, anchal, DailyProgress, NoiseBudget, Checking variation in estimated Coating Brownian Noise with Beam Radius
| |
Wed Oct 23 13:21:12 2019, anchal, DailyProgress, NoiseBudget, Fixed all discrepancies.
| |
Fri Jun 12 12:34:08 2020, anchal, DailyProgress, NoiseBudget, Resolving discrepancy #1 concretly
|
|
|
Message ID: 2431
Entry time: Tue Sep 24 15:40:33 2019
In reply to: 2388
Reply to this: 2432
|
| Author: |
anchal |
| Type: |
DailyProgress |
| Category: |
NoiseBudget |
| Subject: |
Adding specifics of discepancy 2 |
|
|
Today I ran the two codes with the same parameter values to check if the effective reflectivities calculated during the calculation of thermo-optic nose matches. They do match exactly actually. Attached is an over plot.
Coating effective coefficient of thermo-refractive effect comes out to be:
Old Code: 8.61(46)e-05 K**-1
New Code: (8.59+/-0.21) e-05 K**-1
So this discrepancy was not really there. I was just comparing apples with oranges earlier.
| |
Discrepancy #2
The effective coating CTR in the previous code was 7.9e-5 1/K and in the new code, it is 8.2e-5 1/K. Since this value is calculated after a lot of steps, it might be round off error as initial values are slightly off. I need to check this calculation as well to make sure everything is right. Problem is that it is hard to understand how it is done in the previous code as it used matrices for doing complex value calculations. In new code, I just used ucomplex class and followed the paper's calculations. I need more time to look into this too. Suggestions are welcome.
|
|
|
|
|