## 3. Correlation of the Explorer and Nautilus detectorsThe detectors used for the crosscorrelation experiment are Explorer (Astone et al. 1993) at CERN and Nautilus (Astone et al. 1997a) in Frascati: two aluminum cylinders with mass of 2200 kg, equipped with a capacitive resonant transducer. These detectors are parallel but, due to the distance ( km), the crosscorrelation should be corrected by a factor that is 6 (Michelson 1987, Vitale et al. 1997). Their noise spectral densities have minima at the two resonances, and Hz, as shown in Fig. 1.
We recall (Astone et al. 1997b) that the spectral density of a gravitational wave background which can be measured with signal to noise ratio equal to unity with a resonant detector is related to the detector characteristics by the formula Here The bandwidth is usually smaller than 1 Hz, thus we can neglect the
frequency dependences concerning both the g.w. background and the
function and use in the analysis
Eq. (7), only considering the detector spectra frequency dependence.
For this experiment we have
tuned We choose an overlapping bandwidth of , from 907.1508 to 907.2574 Hz: in this bandwidth the averaged Nautilus spectrum is constant at the level , and the Explorer spectrum varies a factor 2, from to The Explorer data are sampled in a bandwidth of the order of 27.5 Hz from 900 to 927.5 Hz, with a sampling time of 18.18 ms; the Nautilus data in a bandwidth from 900 to 955.0, with a sampling time of 9.09 ms. We performed the experiment, by tuning the detectors, only for a relatively short period of time, obtaining hours of "good" data, on which the crosscorrelation was applied. The overlapped data cover a period of 12.57 hours from February, , 1997, 22 h, 18 m (day=35466.9298) to , 12 h, 11 m (day=35467.5916). The noise spectra of Explorer and Nautilus during this period are shown in Fig. 1. We considered "good" the Explorer basic FFT's where the noise spectral density, averaged in the bandwidth of 0.1 Hz around the resonance frequency, was smaller than thus vetoing of the spectra. From these data alone, using Eq. (2), we obtained the limit As regards Nautilus, we considered "good" the FFT's with noise below thus vetoing less than the of the spectra. From the Nautilus data alone, we obtained We remark here that at the time we performed the experiment the Nautilus sensitivity was worse than usual (Astone et al. 1997a), roughly by a factor 10 (as this detector usually works at the same sensitivity of Explorer). The above thresholds has been chosen to optimize the contribution of in Eq. (6). The Explorer detector was the one which limited the overall bandwidth of the experiment, as clearly shown in Fig. 1. The result of the crosscorrelation analysis of the data of the two
detectors is shown in Fig. 2: the lower curve shows the modulus of the
cross spectrum , compared to the
square root of the product of the two spectra
The numerical results obtained by averaging over a 0.1 Hz bandwidth are: By expressing the above in terms of , that is using Eq. (2) (with in place of ) and taking into account the factor 6 due to the distance, we get Comparing this result with those given by Eqs. (10) and (11), we notice that the gain obtained by crosscorrelating the two data sets is a factor for Explorer and a factor for Nautilus. © European Southern Observatory (ESO) 1999 Online publication: November 16, 1999 |