I realized that in my noise budget I was using higher incident power on the cavities which was the case earlier. I have made the code such that now it will update photothermal noise and pdhShot noise according to DC power measured during the experiment. The updated result for the best measurement yet brings down our estimate of the bulk loss angle a little bit.
**Final result of CTN experiment as of June 11th 2 pm:**
with shear loss angle taken from Penn et al. which is 5.2 x 10^{-7}. The limits are 90% confidence interval.
The analysis is attached.
**Adding Effecting Coating Loss Angle (Edit Fri Jun 5 18:23:32 2020 ):**
If all layers have an effective coating loss angle, then using gwinc's calculation (Yam et al. Eq.1), we would have an effective coating loss angle of:
This is worse than both Tantala (3.6e-4) and Silica (0.4e-4) currently in use at AdvLIGO.
Also, I'm unsure now if our definition of Bulk and Shear loss angle is truly the same as the definitions of Penn et al. because they seem to get an order of magnitude lower coating loss angle from their bulk loss angle.
Analysis Code |