An ultra-low-noise, low-frequency, six degrees of freedom active vibration isolator

D. B. Newell, S. J. Richman, P. G. Nelson, R. T. Stebbins, P. L. Bender, J. E. Faller, and J. Mason

Citation: Review of Scientific Instruments 68, 3211 (1997); doi: 10.1063/1.1148269

View online: http://dx.doi.org/10.1063/1.1148269
View Table of Contents: http://scitation.aip.org/content/aip/journal/rsi/68/8?ver=pdfcov
Published by the AIP Publishing

Articles you may be interested in

Erratum: “Measurement of the VIRGO superattenuator performance for seismic noise suppression” [Rev. Sci.
Instrum. 72, 3643 (2001)]
Rev. Sci. Instrum. 73, 233 (2002); 10.1063/1.1427763

Measurement of the VIRGO superattenuator performance for seismic noise suppression

Rev. Sci. Instrum. 72, 3643 (2001); 10.1063/1.1392338

Two-dimensional low-frequency vibration attenuator using X pendulums

Rev. Sci. Instrum. 70, 1561 (1999); 10.1063/1.1149624

Multistage active vibration isolation system

Rev. Sci. Instrum. 69, 2531 (1998); 10.1063/1.1148954

An interferometric device to measure the mechanical transfer function of the VIRGO mirrors suspensions
Rev. Sci. Instrum. 69, 1882 (1998); 10.1063/1.1148858

This article is copyrighted as indicated in the article. Reuse of AIP content is subject to the terms at: http://scitationnew.aip.org/termsconditions. Downloaded to IP:
128.252.67.66 On: Tue, 23 Dec 2014 00:41:35
 An ultra-low-noise, low-frequency, six degrees of freedom active
vibration isolator
D. B. Newell,a) S. J. Richman, P. G. Nelson,b) R. T. Stebbins, P. L. Bender,c)
and J. E. Fallerc)
JILA, National Institute of Standards and Technology and University of Colorado, Boulder,
Colorado 80309-0440
J. Masond)
Metropolitan State College, Denver, Colorado 80217
~Received 20 March 1997; accepted for publication 5 May 1997!
To extend the operating frequency band of earth-based interferometric gravitational wave ~GW!
detectors down to 1 Hz, an unconventional system is required that provides approximately a factor
of one million vibration isolation for the horizontal and more for the vertical, starting at 1 Hz. To
this end, a three-stage ultra-low-noise, high-performance active and passive isolation system is
being designed and constructed in order to demonstrate that a high degree of reduction can be
achieved for vibrations at the support points of a GW detector’s final pendulum system. The first
stage of this system has been fully characterized and is the main subject of this article. It is an
equilateral triangular platform, 1.1 m on a side, with a total mass of 460 kg, including the vacuum
system that will contain the other two stages. Active isolation is achieved by six servocontrol loops,
using signals from low-frequency displacement sensors to feed back to noncontacting force
transducers. The first stage has been actively isolated from vibrations in all six degrees of freedom
by at least a factor of 100 at 1 Hz and above. The system noise limitations at 2 Hz and above are
A
roughly 2310211 and 5310211 m/ Hz for vertical and horizontal translations, respectively.
© 1997 American Institute of Physics. @S0034-6748~97!02508-2#

I. INTRODUCTION the main source of noise is ocean waves generating surface

In many scientific experiments involving precision posi-
tioning or very small forces, vibration isolation is an impor-
tant consideration. It is also a factor in an increasing number
of precision measurements, and in manufacturing processes
throughout industry. For some time, we have been develop-
ing vibration isolation techniques for application in an ad-
vanced, low-frequency gravitational wave detector. Cur-
rently, the expected useful low-frequency sensitivity of
ground-based gravitational wave ~GW! detectors, like the
Laser Interferometer Gravitational-Wave Observatory
~LIGO!1 and Virgo,2 is limited to ;10– 50 Hz by residual
seismic noise. Our goal has been to develop techniques that
will reduce the residual seismic noise to a level close to that
of other, irreducible noise sources at 1 Hz. This will require
an isolation factor of roughly 106 for the horizontal and
higher for the vertical, even if two-stage final pendulum sus-
pensions are used. In addition, very low internal and readout
noise are required. We report here the design and perfor-
mance of the first stage of our vibration isolation system.
The spectrum of seismic noise is very dependent on site
location and time. Below 50 mHz, the main source of noise
is atmospheric pressure fluctuations caused by wind
turbulence3,4 and infrasonic waves.5 From 50 to 500 mHz,
a!
Present address: Electricity Division, NIST, Gaithersburg, MD 20899.
b!
Present address: Technical Mfg. Corp., 15 Centennial Drive, Peabody, MA
01960; Electronic mail: richman@JILA.colorado.edu
c!
Staff member, Quantum Physics Division, National Institute of Standards
and Technology.
d!
Present address: LIGO Project, California Institute of Technology, Pasa-
dena, CA 91109.
and body waves in the earth’s crust at coastal areas6 with
most of the energy coming from coastlines in the vicinity of
large storms. In this frequency range, there are two dominant
features, one at roughly 60–90 mHz, corresponding to the
fundamental ocean wave frequency. Another is at twice the
fundamental ~120–160 mHz!, coming from the interaction of
the reflected and incoming ocean waves, known as the mi-
croseismic peak. Above 500 mHz, along with oceanic and
coastal body waves, the main sources of noise are local, such
as wind-blown vegetation and human activity.7 Figure 1
shows the measured vertical amplitude spectral density for
both a normal site and a relatively quiet site. To a good
approximation, vertical and horizontal translations are of the
same magnitude. Typically, the level from 1 to 10 Hz is
between 1029 and 1028 m/ Hz. A
In laboratory apparatus of average size, passive isolation
can reduce vibrations significantly at roughly 10 Hz and
above, but cannot compete at lower frequencies with the iso-
lation performance of an actively stabilized platform. Vibra-
tion isolation in one dimension can be achieved with active
systems,8–11 starting as low as 16 mHz as modeled by a
single degree of freedom, double spring–mass system ~Fig.
2!. Relative motion between m 1 ~mass or platform to be
isolated! and m 2 ~seismometer or proof mass! is detected,
filtered, amplified, and fed back to a noncontacting force
transducer acting on m 1 . This keeps the relative displace-
ment constant by forcing m 1 to track m 2 . In an ideal system
with infinite loop gain, m 2 becomes an inertial reference
within the active bandwidth since the only force acting on it
is through a length variation of the connecting spring. Be-

Rev. Sci. Instrum. 68 (8), August 1997 0034-6748/97/68(8)/3211/9/$10.00 © 1997 American Institute of Physics 3211
This article is copyrighted as indicated in the article. Reuse of AIP content is subject to the terms at: http://scitationnew.aip.org/termsconditions. Downloaded to IP:
128.252.67.66 On: Tue, 23 Dec 2014 00:41:35
 FIG. 1. Measured vertical amplitude spectral densities. The solid curve is
laboratory No. B042 of JILA on the campus of the University of Colorado,
Boulder. The dashed curve is Building 8 of NIST at Boulder. Building 8 is
small, remote and separated from the main complex. In addition, all fans and
machinery in Building 8 were turned off during the measurements. The
spectrum below .1 Hz and above 30 Hz is limited by the seismometer’s
internal noise.
cause m 1 tracks m 2 it, too, approaches inertial space.
The loop gain and useful bandwidth of active systems
will be limited by the structural resonances of m 1 that have a
node between the sensor and actuator. Minimizing the me-
chanical path length between the sensor and actuator will
decrease the likelihood that lower frequency modes will have
a node between them and will decrease the coupling to
modes still having a node between. Both of these trends will
generally increase the available bandwidth, but the ultimate
bandwidth will still be set by the normal modes of m 1 . An-
other practical limitation to single degree of freedom active
isolation is cross coupling with other degrees of freedom.
Cross coupling can arise from misalignment between the
sensed and actuated directions, and the amount of isolation
achievable will be set by the level of cross coupling. Even
with perfect alignment, physical considerations may intro-
duce cross coupling to other degrees of freedom. For ex-
ample, LIGO’s 4 km base line will couple vertical motion
into apparent horizontal motion due to the earth’s curvature.
With these two limitations in mind, a three-stage system
is being designed and constructed to investigate and demon-
strate at least four, and preferably six, orders of magnitude
FIG. 2. A one-dimensional model of an active isolation system. Relative
displacement between m 1 and m 2 is detected, filtered, and fed back to a
noncontacting forcer acting on m 1 .
3212 Rev. Sci. Instrum., Vol. 68, No. 8, August 1997
This article is copyrighted as indicated in the article. Reuse of AIP content is subject to the terms at: http://scitationnew.aip.org/termsconditions. Downloaded to IP:
128.252.67.66 On: Tue, 23 Dec 2014 00:41:35
FIG. 3. Plan and elevation views of the apparatus showing the triangular
platform being isolated, its support structure, the seismometers, the forcers,
and the vacuum chamber that will contain the second and third stages.
vibration isolation for frequencies down to 1 Hz in all six
degrees of freedom. Each stage consists of a spring-mounted
platform that provides both active and passive isolation. Ac-
tive isolation for each stage will be achieved by servocontrol
loops, using signals from low-frequency displacement sen-
sors to feed back to noncontacting force transducers. Our
specific goals are to develop techniques for reducing vibra-
tions at the support points of the final pendulum systems of
an interferometric GW detector so that mechanically trans-
mitted vibrations are strongly reduced even down to 1 Hz,
and to provide a platform for measuring the thermal noise
continuum in the suspensions of such pendulums from 1 to
10 Hz.
Drawing on experience with one-dimensional systems,
we have designed, modeled, constructed, and tested the first
stage. The purpose of the first stage is to provide maximum
ground vibration isolation with the lowest possible internal
system noise using inexpensive components and a straight-
forward feedback topology. We start with a passive system
of reasonable physical dimensions that has resonant frequen-
cies below 2 Hz. Active isolation is accomplished by six
quasi-independent single-input single-output feedback loops,
based on low-frequency displacement sensors feeding back
to noncontacting force transducers acting along the direction
monitored by the sensor. The first stage reduces vibrations in
all six degrees of freedom by at least a factor of 100 at 1 Hz
and above. The measured noise limitations at 2 Hz and above
A
are roughly 2310211 and 5310211 m/ Hz for vertical and
horizontal translations, respectively. In this article, we de-
scribe the design, modeling, and performance of this first
stage.
II. APPARATUS
Figure 3 shows a plan and elevation view of the first
stage including the triangular platform being isolated, its
support structure, the seismometers, the forcers, and the
vacuum chamber that contains the second and third stages.
The platform being isolated is made from three aluminum I
beams bolted together by aluminum plates on the top and
bottom of each corner to form an equilateral triangle. The
platform is supported by helical springs located at each cor-
Vibration isolator
 ner with a total stretched length of 41 cm for a 460 kg load.
At each end of the spring, a specially designed universal
joint is used to provide a well-defined pivot point. Adjust-
ments of the platform height and the vertical position of a
spring relative to the platform are made by stainless-steel
threaded rods connected to each pivot. The threaded rods are
held in place by brass nuts with thrust bearings on the loaded
side to ease adjustment.
Detection of relative motion is achieved by a two-axis
seismometer located on each corner of the platform. The
seismometer consists of a mass on a helical spring with the
top of the spring attached to a finely threaded screw for ver-
tical adjustment. The mass is made of two cylindrically sym-
metric brass pieces glued to a sapphire sphere such that the
center of the sphere is as close as possible to the center of
mass ~to reduce coupling of the sphere to the wobble modes
of the test mass!. To maximize the displacement sensitivity
bandwidth and reduce low-frequency noise amplification, the
horizontal and vertical resonant frequencies are made reason- FIG. 4. Layout of the six degrees of freedom, active isolation platform.
ably low at 0.8 and 1 Hz, respectively. The seismometer Relative displacements between the triangular platform and the seismom-
housing consists of an aluminum tube for the spring and an eter’s mass is detected, filtered, and fed back to noncontacting forcer trans-
ducers. For simplicity, the feedback is shown on only one corner.
aluminum base that contains the mass and the detection sys-
tem. The detection system consists of two sets of a high
power light-emitting diode ~LED! and a split photodiode,
total system stability for different sets of physical parameters
with the orientation of the photodiode split determining the
and feedback topologies, and to calculate the expected vibra-
direction of motion detected. Light from the LED passes
tion isolation performance. Various motion sensors, noncon-
through a slit, forming a line source, and is focused by the
tacting actuators, and feedback topologies were considered
sapphire sphere onto the split photodiode. The two photosen-
in the initial design phase. For active isolation in all six
sitive elements of the diode are connected in a differential
degrees of freedom, a minimum of six sensed and actuated
mode and the photocurrent is converted to a voltage by a
directions are required. This, along with the rationale of
differencing preamp, with a calibration constant of the detec-
minimum sensor–actuator path length, single-input single-
tion system of 4 mm/V. The measured equivalent displace-
A
ment noise of the detection system is 10211 m/ Hz at 1 Hz
output feedback loops, and symmetric simplicity, led to the
design outlined in Fig. 4.
and above, corresponding to shot noise. Three screws in the
base provide leveling and horizontal adjustment of the seis- A. Model description
mometer. The first stage is modeled as an equilateral triangular
The forcers used are electromagnetic voice coil linear rigid platform of mass M p and principal moments of inertia
actuators ~BEI Motion Systems Company, Model No. LA30- I xx 5I y y , and I zz . The suspension, sensors, actuators, and
27-001!. They have a force constant of 42 N/A, a peak force feedback topology all have a threefold symmetry. The plat-
of 110 N, a stroke of 60.32 cm, and a clearance of form is suspended by massless springs at each of the three
60.29 cm. The large clearance, which aids in alignment, corners. The attachment points of the springs are modeled as
and the large peak force were the main reasons for the choice frictionless pivot points. Displacements of the first stage are
of this actuator. The horizontal actuator coils are mounted to detected by seismometers located on each corner. The three
the vertical support members. Slots in the coil mounting seismometers are modeled as point masses of mass m s on
plate allow the coils to be centered with respect to the mag- massless springs. The attachment points of the seismom-
nets, and shims are added to provide tilt alignment. The hori- eters’ springs are also modeled as frictionless pivot points.
zontal magnets are mounted on the platform by a split clamp Each seismometer measures two degrees of freedom. With
to position the magnets so that the coils sit at midstroke respect to the platform’s frame of reference, the detection
when not energized. The vertical actuators are mounted un- system measures both vertical and horizontal translation of
derneath the platform due to space constraints. The vertical the seismometer’s mass with the sensed horizontal transla-
coils are mounted to the support structure and are aligned in tion being orthogonal to the radial vector passing through the
a similar fashion as the horizontal coils. Raising or lowering corner ~for example, in the 2y direction for the horizontal
the platform with the threaded rods provides midstroke ad- actuator shown in Fig. 4!. Each detected signal is filtered and
justment for the vertical forcers. fed back to a single actuator on the same corner acting along
the original sensed direction.
III. SYSTEM REPRESENTATION
The most appropriate form of energy dissipation to use
in the model is damping proportional to velocities since the
Before the apparatus was constructed, a state space rep- platform and seismometers are in air and the large electro-
resentation of the first stage was created to investigate the magnetic actuators that are used will induce eddy currents

Rev. Sci. Instrum., Vol. 68, No. 8, August 1997 Vibration isolator 3213
This article is copyrighted as indicated in the article. Reuse of AIP content is subject to the terms at: http://scitationnew.aip.org/termsconditions. Downloaded to IP:
128.252.67.66 On: Tue, 23 Dec 2014 00:41:35
 and also create back emfs. Damping of the platform is incor-
porated by modeling dash pots at the location of the forcers
acting along the direction of the forcer. Absolute velocity
damping ~i.e., with respect to inertial space! of the platform
is used when modeling loop transfer functions, whereas rela-
tive velocity damping ~i.e., with respect to the ground! of the
platform is used when modeling vibration transfer functions.
Velocity damping of a seismometer’s mass with respect to
the platform’s velocity is incorporated by modeling a three-
dimensional dash pot between the position of the mass and
its equilibrium position on the platform. Estimated Q factors
of roughly 20 and 70 for the platform and seismometer nor-
mal modes, respectively, are used.
B. System stability
A complete stability analysis entails determining the lo-
cation of the system’s eigenvalues in the complex frequency
plane. A more common approach with single-input single-
output systems involves examining the loop transfer function
~LTF!. However, it is obvious that with the geometry and
final feedback topology chosen, there will be direct coupling
among individual loops. By working in the normal coordi-
nates of the platform and diagonalizing the transfer function
matrix, the feedback can be described as six independent
loops. One loop can be closed without affecting the other
five. While not the final choice for the feedback topology, it
is informative to look at independent LTFs for selecting
compensation networks before going to the coupled system.
With the three attachment points of the support springs
in the horizontal plane that intersects the center of mass of
the platform ~the c.m. plane! and assuming M p @m s to first
order in variations away from equilibrium, the unforced
equations of motion of the platform are just
q̈ i 52 v 2i q i ,
where the normal coordinates are those given in Fig. 4. If the
horizontal actuators and seismometers’ masses ~with detec-
tion systems! are also mounted in the c.m. plane, the two
horizontal translations ~x and y! and rotation about the ver-
tical ~f! are controlled and observed by the horizontal actua-
tors and sensors. Linear combinations of the horizontal sen-
sors ~actuators! make it possible to detect motion ~act! along
the individual normal coordinates x, y, and f. Similarly,
vertical translations (z) and tilts ~u and c! are then observed
and controlled by linear combinations of the vertical sensors
and actuators.
The solid line in Fig. 5 shows the LTF for one of the
horizontal normal coordinates in the form of a Bode plot. It
is assumed that all seismometers are identical. The other five
loops also have this basic form, which is completely analo-
gous to the LTF of a single degree of freedom active isola-
tion system ~illustrated in Fig. 2!. Shown in Fig. 5 are the in-
and out-of-phase normal modes of the double spring–mass
system. For frequencies below the normal modes, the rela-
tive displacement sensitivity response goes as f 2 due to the
seismometer’s mass (m 2 ) tracking displacement distur-
bances of the platform (m 1 ). For frequencies above the nor-
mal modes, the magnitude response goes as (1/f ) 2 due to
the passive isolation of the platform. This LTF has the un-
3214 Rev. Sci. Instrum., Vol. 68, No. 8, August 1997
This article is copyrighted as indicated in the article. Reuse of AIP content is subject to the terms at: http://scitationnew.aip.org/termsconditions. Downloaded to IP:
128.252.67.66 On: Tue, 23 Dec 2014 00:41:35
FIG. 5. Horizontal loop transfer function for normal coordinate feedback on
a six degrees of freedom platform. The solid curve is the uncompensated
loop transfer function and the dashed curve is after compensation has been
added for stability. These transfer functions are equivalent to those of a
one-dimensional, active isolation system outlined in Fig. 2.
usual characteristic of a total phase excursion of 360° result-
ing in two unity gain frequencies, at approximately 0.1 and
10 Hz. At the lower ~higher! unity gain frequency, the phase
is 1180° (2180°), making the system, at best, marginally
stable. To insure stability, a phase lag ~lead! needs to be
incorporated at the lower ~higher! unity gain frequency as
shown by the dashed curve in Fig. 5. In this manner, all six
feedback loops can be closed, independent of order, without
affecting the loop transfer functions of the other five.
The disadvantages of working in the normal coordinates
are that the ultimate bandwidth is lower due to longer me-
chanical paths between sensors and actuators, that the seis-
mometers’ responses need to be matched or measured well,
~1!
and in general, that the whole system is more complex. A
more straightforward approach is to take each detected signal
and feed it back to the single actuator on the same corner
acting along the original sensed direction. The solid curve in
Fig. 6 is the LTF for a horizontal sensor and actuator pair for
the same physical parameters as Fig. 5. It is similar to the
LTF of Fig. 5 with the addition of the rotational mode being
present. However, the basic form is similar with the overall
phase remaining within 6180°. The vertical LTF is similar
but with the tilt mode present. As before, a phase lead and
lag compensation filter can be incorporated to make the loop
stable. The dashed curve in Fig. 6 represents a horizontal
LTF with the other five loops closed. Notice that it is now
completely analogous to a single degree of freedom, the ac-
tive isolation LTF.
During the modeling phase, physical parameters were
varied to reveal any design constraints. If the LTFs are to
follow that of the one-dimensional case at low frequencies,
then the horizontal actuators need to remain in the horizontal
plane defined by the attachment points of the support
springs. Otherwise, below the platform’s resonant frequen-
cies, there would be a net torque about a horizontal axis on
the platform due to a difference in the lever arms between
the support springs and the actuators. The resulting tilt of the
platform would create a low-frequency cross coupling be-
Vibration isolator
 FIG. 6. Uncompensated horizontal loop transfer function for six quasi-
independent single-input single-output feedback loops on a six degrees of
freedom platform. The solid curve is for the same physical parameters as
Fig. 4. The total phase excursion remains within 6180°. The dashed curve
is a compensated horizontal loop transfer function with the other five loops
closed. Notice that it is identical to a single degree of freedom, active iso-
lation LTF.

tween the vertical and horizontal loops that would either

limit the loop gain or require a modification of the feedback
topology at low frequencies. There was also some concern
about the vertical location of the center of mass ~c.m.! with
respect to the horizontal forcers and support points ~designed
to be coincident!. Because the frequencies of the normal
modes of the platform are all roughly within a factor of 2 of
each other, the vertical location of the center of mass can be
FIG. 7. Eigenvalues of the closed-loop system. All have negative real parts
varied by as much as 617 cm without changing the unity
insuring stability. ~b! shows the eigenvalues near the origin.
gain frequencies ~eigenvalues! significantly. However, plac-
ing the c.m. above the support points is not recommended.
The model of the equivalent displacement noise for the
This makes the platform behave like an inverted pendulum,
amplifying tilts.
A
detection system is chosen to be 10211 m/ Hz, correspond-
ing to the shot noise of an optical lever detection system
As a final test of stability, the eigenvalues of the closed-
using good quality, high-power LEDs and photodiodes. It is
loop system were calculated and are shown in Fig. 7. All
assumed that the six noise sources are independent, so that
have negative real parts, insuring stability. The eigenvalues
the resulting displacements due to each source are added in
near the imaginary axis represent an uncontrollable sub-
system. The uncontrollable modes consist of the three seis-
mometers swinging ‘‘out of phase’’ with respect to each
other, such that the platform remains still. An analogous sys-
tem would be the out-of-phase mode of a tuning fork with
the input being the handle of the tuning fork. Although un-
controllable, the modes are stable, ringing down at their
natural decay rate. The remaining eigenvalues’ locations
promise at least 45° of phase margin.

C. Expected performance
The last piece of information to extract from the model
is the expected vibration isolation and the performance limi-
tation due to internal system noise. Figure 8 shows a model
of the horizontal ground vibration spectrum of a relatively
quiet site, the reduced horizontal vibration spectrum of the
FIG. 8. Expected horizontal isolation performance of the six degrees of
platform due to the isolation system, and the noise limitation freedom isolation system. The solid curve is the modeled seismic spectrum,
of the closed-loop system from the expected noise of the the dashed is the reduced vibrational spectrum of the platform, and the
detection system. A
dotted is the noise floor due to modeled detector noise of 10211 m/ Hz.

Rev. Sci. Instrum., Vol. 68, No. 8, August 1997 Vibration isolator 3215
This article is copyrighted as indicated in the article. Reuse of AIP content is subject to the terms at: http://scitationnew.aip.org/termsconditions. Downloaded to IP:
128.252.67.66 On: Tue, 23 Dec 2014 00:41:35

FIG. 9. Measured ~solid curve! and modeled ~dashed curve! uncompensated
horizontal loop transfer functions.
quadrature. Notice that below the resonant frequencies of the
seismometers, the noise limitation for horizontal motion goes
as (1/f ) 4 . For a single degree of freedom closed-loop sys-
tem, system noise in the loop is canceled with a real relative
displacement between the seismometer and platform. Below
the seismometer’s resonant frequency, the feedback cancels
an apparent relative displacement by creating a relative ac-
celeration. The resulting noise displacement goes as
( f s / f ) 2 , where f s is the seismometer’s resonant frequency.
When isolating in six degrees of freedom, the feedback re-
sponsible for tilt stabilization will experience the same am-
plification of noise below the tilt seismometer’s resonant fre-
quency ~for our specific case, tilt is controlled by the vertical
loops!. The other two powers of frequency in the horizontal
noise limitation ~Fig. 8! arise from tilts and horizontal accel-
erations being indistinguishable in a constant gravitational
field. The feedback responsible for horizontal isolation tries
to cancel the real relative displacement due to tilts with a
relative horizontal acceleration. This noise amplification can
lead to low-frequency drifting for large loop gains and re-
quires a larger than desired mechanical dynamic range for
the actuators.
Nearly 40 dB of isolation at 1 Hz and above is achieved.
The other degrees of freedom have similar vibration reduc-
tion. Notice that the amount of active isolation is just the
area above 0 dB in the LTFs.
D. Measured characteristics
Figure 9 shows the measured and modeled uncompen-
sated loop transfer functions for a horizontal loop. The
physical parameters are the same as the solid curve of Fig. 6,
except that the c.m. is located 0.17 m below the support
points. The general features between the measured and mod-
eled transfer functions are similar. The normal modes are
f x 5 f y 50.8 Hz, f z 51 Hz, f f 51.4 Hz, and f c 5 f u
51.6 Hz. The departure from the model arises from the as-
sumptions made of point masses for the proof masses, mass-
less springs, and rigid structures. The seismometer’s mass
has a 0.25 Hz rotational mode and two wobble modes ~rota-
tion in u and c! at 4 Hz. The support springs have transverse
~violin! and longitudinal ~running! modes with the funda-
3216 Rev. Sci. Instrum., Vol. 68, No. 8, August 1997
This article is copyrighted as indicated in the article. Reuse of AIP content is subject to the terms at: http://scitationnew.aip.org/termsconditions. Downloaded to IP:
128.252.67.66 On: Tue, 23 Dec 2014 00:41:35
mentals at 30 and 35 Hz, respectively. The transverse and
longitudinal modes of the seismometer springs are at 20 and
25 Hz, respectively. Starting around 44 Hz are the modes of
the support structure, which are most noticeable in the hori-
zontal loop transfer function. Damping material was woven
into the springs and between the main parts of the support
structure to reduce the Q of the parasitic resonances. At
higher frequencies, the platform has its normal modes, which
will eventually put a node between the actuator and sensor.
These are located at 600 and 300 Hz for the vertical and
horizontal loops, respectively, setting an upper limit for the
active bandwidth.
E. Total feedback topology
On the six main vibration isolation loops, the compensa-
tion network was slightly modified from the simple phase
lead and lag filter. Both vertical and horizontal loops have a
bandpass filter with a high-pass corner frequency of 10 and
20 mHz for the horizontal and vertical loops, respectively,
and a low-pass corner frequency of 250 Hz for both loops.
The phase margin was increased to roughly 80° around
20–25 Hz to electronically damp the parasitic resonances of
the seismometer and support springs.
In addition to the six main vibration isolation loops,
there are low-frequency loops to keep the platform tilt stabi-
lized and the seismometers’ masses in the center of their
dynamic range. Two of the horizontal signals are combined
to resolve the two tilts, u and c, and are fed back to two of
the vertical forcers. This provides tilt stabilization and cen-
ters each seismometer’s mass horizontally. To center the
seismometer’s mass vertically, a heating element is wrapped
around the aluminum tube that contains the seismometer’s
spring. The length of the spring is held constant by feeding
back the square root of the mass’s vertical position to the
current controller of the heating element. The unity gain fre-
quency of the loop transfer functions is at a few mHz.
IV. PERFORMANCE
Shown in Fig. 10 are the ambient horizontal and vertical
vibration spectra, the resulting vibration of the platform with
all loops closed, and the system noise limitation. The vibra-
tion spectra were taken using two identical velocity output
commercial seismometers ~Teledyne Geotech, Model No.
S13! with one placed on the ground and the other on the
platform. The velocity spectral density from each seismom-
eter was measured at the same time and ten spectra were
averaged over each frequency span of 1.5, 25, and 400 Hz.
The frequency spans were appended and the transfer func-
tions of the seismometers were divided out. The expected
noise limitation is calculated by the model from the mea-
sured noise in all loops. The coherence function of the ten
averaged spectra for both vertical and horizontal spectra
showed a lack of coherence between the two seismometers
below 0.1 Hz due to the commercial seismometer’s internal
noise, and also above 20 Hz. The loss of coherence above 20
Hz is present even when both seismometers are placed on the
ground separated by 1 m, possibly due to internal resonances
in the seismometers and acoustic noise in the laboratory.
Vibration isolator
 FIG. 10. Vertical ~a! and horizontal ~b! vibration isolation performance of
the closed-loop system. The solid and dashed curves are the ground and
platform vibration spectrum measured at the same time. The dotted curve is
the predicted noise limitation from the measured internal system noise.
From 2 to 20 Hz, the vertical ground motion is reduced
by a factor of 100 with the residual vertical motion of the
A
platform being roughly 4310211 m/ Hz. From 0.5 to 2 Hz
~where the loop gains are the highest!, the residual vertical
motion is caused by a noise source, which has the same
signature as air buffeting before a draft shield was added.
From 0.8 to 20 Hz, the horizontal ground motion is reduced
by a factor of roughly 50–100 with the residual motion being
limited by the internal system noise below 0.8 Hz and
A
roughly 0.5– 1310210 m/ Hz from 0.8 to 20 Hz. Above 2
Hz, neither the horizontal nor the vertical loops are noise
limited, although the shot noise limit of the imaging detec-
tors is only about a factor of 2 lower near 2 Hz. Increasing
their gains, however, would excite some destabilizing ef-
fects: structural resonances near 200 Hz, a resonance near 50
mHz arising from residual misalignment, and an interaction
at 170 mHz between the main loops and the low-frequency
tilt loops. None of these limitations are fundamental at this
level.
To fully characterize the performance of the first stage,
we injected a white-noise signal into the closed-loop system
at an equivalent displacement noise level of 1026 m/ Hz A tical motion, tilting the platform. The resulting horizontal
and monitored the response of the platform with the same
commercial seismometer. Figure 11 shows the vertical and
Rev. Sci. Instrum., Vol. 68, No. 8, August 1997
This article is copyrighted as indicated in the article. Reuse of AIP content is subject to the terms at: http://scitationnew.aip.org/termsconditions. Downloaded to IP:
128.252.67.66 On: Tue, 23 Dec 2014 00:41:35
FIG. 11. Vertical ~a! and horizontal ~b! vibration isolation performance of
the closed-loop system with the input signal being injected.
horizontal closed-loop vibration transfer functions. From 0.1
to 40 Hz, the match between the measured and modeled
response is remarkably good with an isolation factor of at
least 100 from 0.5 and above for horizontal motion and 1 Hz
and above for vertical motion. Again, below 0.1 Hz, the
measured response is limited by the commercial seismom-
eter’s internal noise, and above 40 Hz, structural modes are
present.
V. LIMITATIONS
Several factors were encountered that limited the loop
gain during the diagnostic phase, which can be generalized
into two categories. The first deals with the mechanical dy-
namic range of the actuators being exceeded due to exog-
enous inputs tilting the platform as discussed under expected
performance. The second deals with system instabilities due
to the departure from the ideal model.
Amplification of horizontal motion due to tilt noise was
first noticed from the excitation of the 0.25 Hz rotational
mode of the seismometer. Because the proof mass is sus-
pended by a helical spring, rotation of the proof mass gener-
ates vertical motion. The vertical loops would track this ver-
motion is about a factor of 100 greater than the initial verti-
cal motion. If the residual rotational motion was too great,
Vibration isolator 3217
 the horizontal loops could not be closed simultaneously with
the vertical loops. Small sections of rubber sleeves were
added to the seismometer springs to damp the rotational
mode. However, there were two other sources of tilt noise:
the low-frequency electronic noise in the compensation mod-
ules, and air currents acting directly on the platform. Lower
noise op–amps and a draft shield reduced these effects.
The general problem of severe amplification of horizon-
tal motion due to tilt can be more appropriately solved by
distinguishing between tilts and horizontal accelerations and
feeding back the appropriate signals. This can be achieved
by incorporating pure tiltmeters along with the existing
seismometers.9,12 Another solution is to use the fact that the
horizontal outputs are dominated by tilt below the seismom-
eter’s pendulum resonant frequency and modify the low-
frequency feedback loop topology to maximize the tilt stabi-
lization bandwidth. Since it did not require any additional
motion sensors, the latter solution was chosen. Initially, the
tilt compensation filter was a simple integrator with a gain
such that the active bandwidth of a tilt stabilization loop was
a few mHz, well below the active bandwidth of the main
loops. The active bandwidth was increased to 50 mHz by
incorporating a phase lead filter ~centered at 200 mHz! in
series with a two-pole active low-pass filter ~resonant fre-
quency at 600 mHz, Q51! in parallel with the existing in-
tegrator. The stability of the new tilt stabilization loops was
conditional on the main loops being closed. However, as is
always the practice, the system was modeled and the closed-
loop poles were checked to insure stability. The resulting
low-frequency ~below 0.8 Hz! tilt noise was reduced by more
than a factor of 8, allowing higher gain settings on the main
loops.
Departure from the model due to the assumptions made
of point masses for the proof masses, massless springs, and
rigid structures were discovered during the apparatus charac-
terization. When striving for an isolation factor of 100 or
more at 1 Hz ~i.e., large loop gains!, alignments must be
precise and stable with time. Initially, the support springs
were rigidly attached to both the support structure and the
platform. With this configuration, it was difficult to deter-
mine where the pivot point was in order to align the horizon-
tal forcers. Moreover, the rigidly attached springs would ex-
ert a torque on the platform that changed if the spring and
threaded rod assembly was moved to adjust the attachment
point. Specially designed universal joints in the form of a
hardened steel eye and U bolt were incorporated to provide a
better-defined pivot point. This quickly revealed another
alignment limitation involving the forcers. With the round
coil and radial field magnet actuators used, the coil and mag-
net must be coplanar and coaxial,13 otherwise there will be a
transverse force component or torque. With the actuators
used, for example, if the center line of the coil is 0.25 mm
off of the center line of the magnet, then 0.2% of the forcing
vector is in the transverse direction. This is equivalent to a
temperature change of 1 °C of the support springs. Actuators
using square coils and linear field magnets can greatly reduce
this unwanted cross coupling and have been incorporated
into the second and third stages.
3218 Rev. Sci. Instrum., Vol. 68, No. 8, August 1997
This article is copyrighted as indicated in the article. Reuse of AIP content is subject to the terms at: http://scitationnew.aip.org/termsconditions. Downloaded to IP:
128.252.67.66 On: Tue, 23 Dec 2014 00:41:35
VI. DISCUSSION
The first stage of a three-stage active vibration isolator
has been completed. It isolates vibrations in all six degrees of
freedom by a factor of 100 at 1 Hz and above with the
internal system noise limitations at 2 Hz and above at
A
roughly 2310211 and 5310211 m/ Hz for vertical and
horizontal translations, respectively. It has been fully charac-
terized and meets the required specifications towards the
goal of extending the operating frequency band of earth-
based interferometric GW detectors down to 1 Hz. Work on
the second and third stages continues with preliminary re-
sults showing vertical isolation factors of more than 1000 at
1 Hz and above for the second stage.14 The main effort is in
characterizing the multistage, closed-loop system and in the
development of ultra-low-noise interferometric displacement
detectors with a displacement sensitivity goal of 3
310215 m/ Hz.A
The displacement isolation and low internal system
noise of the first stage exceeds all commercially available
active isolation systems in the frequency range of 1–10 Hz
due to the low-noise displacement sensors used. While some
velocity transducers have better displacement resolution at
higher frequencies and may be easier to use, the resulting
horizontal displacement due to noise amplification goes as
(1/f ) 5 below the seismometer’s resonant frequency when
used to isolate multiple degrees of freedom. The resulting
low-frequency drifting requires even a larger dynamic range
for the actuators, and is usually intolerable for most applica-
tions.
While the first stage has been designed with the specific
application of isolating the support points of the final pendu-
lums in interferometric GW detectors, it can be used for
other purposes. If the required settling time is short ~above
the active bandwidth of the low-frequency stability loops!,
then it is not ideally suited for fast moving payloads or being
exposed to large external forces, other than mechanical vi-
brations, such as those found in forced air environments.
However, it can provide an extremely stable inertial refer-
ence for monitoring displacements of manufacturing pro-
cesses and can offer superior vibration reduction for delicate
experimental equipment such as scanning tunneling micro-
scopes, highly stabilized laser reference cavities, and GW
detectors.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors would like to thank Peter Saulson for his
input during the initial design phase and the JILA Instrument
Shop for the construction of the vibration isolation platform.
This work has been supported in part by NSF Grant Nos.
PHY-8712072, PHY-9108333, and PHY-9208524.
1
A. Abramovici et al., Science 256, 325 ~1992!.
2
C. Bradaschia et al., Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res. A 289, 518
~1990!.
3
B. A. Kimball and E. R. Lemon, J. Geophys. Res. 75, 6771 ~1970!.
4
J. A. McDonald and E. Herrin, Boundary-Layer Meteorol. 8, 419 ~1975!.
5
G. G. Sorrells and E. J. Douze, J. Geophys. Res. 79, 4908 ~1974!.
6
R. A. Haubrich and K. McCamy, Rev. Geophys. 7, 539 ~1969!.
7
D. C. Agnew, Rev. Geophys. 24, 579 ~1986!.
Vibration isolator
 8
J. E. Faller and R. L. Rinker, NBS Dimensions 63, 25 ~1979!. 12
C. C. Speake and D. B. Newell, Rev. Sci. Instrum. 61, 1500 ~1990!.
9 13
N. A. Robertson, R. W. P. Drever, I. Kerr, and J. Hough, J. Phys. E 15, For similar alignment problems, see T. P. Olsen, W. L. Tew, E. R. Will-
1101 ~1982!. iams, R. E. Elmquist, and H. Sasaki, IEEE Trans Instrum. Meas. IM-40,
10
P. R. Saulson, Rev. Sci. Instrum. 55, 1315 ~1984!. 115 ~1990!.
11 14
A. Giazotto, D. Passuello, and A. Stefanini, Rev. Sci. Instrum. 57, 1145 As reported at the 14th International Conference on General Relativity and
~1986!. Gravitation, Florence, Italy, August 1995.

Rev. Sci. Instrum., Vol. 68, No. 8, August 1997 Vibration isolator 3219
This article is copyrighted as indicated in the article. Reuse of AIP content is subject to the terms at: http://scitationnew.aip.org/termsconditions. Downloaded to IP:
128.252.67.66 On: Tue, 23 Dec 2014 00:41:35