- Physical Review Journals
All JournalsPhysics Magazine

Physical Review Applied

Reuse & Permissions

It is not necessary to obtain permission to reuse this article or its components as it is available under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. This license permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided attribution to the author(s) and the published article's title, journal citation, and DOI are maintained. Please note that some figures may have been included with permission from other third parties. It is your responsibility to obtain the proper permission from the rights holder directly for these figures.

Export citation

Export citation

Choose format for download:

Download Citation
  • Open Access

Characterizing the phase-tracking limits of the GRACE follow-on flight laser

Callum S. Sambridge* and Kirk McKenzie

Samuel P. Francis, Jezabel Vilardell Sánchez, and Chris Woodruff

  • *Contact author: Callum.sambridge@anu.edu.au
PDF

Phys. Rev. Applied 24, 014015 – Published 8 July, 2025

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/q62l-3684

Abstract

The Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment–Follow On (GRACE-FO) mission measures changes in the Earth’s gravitational field using intersatellite microwave and laser links. The received optical power at which these laser links operate robustly constrains mission parameters, such as spacecraft separation, optical beam divergence angle, and technical noise requirements. This work optimizes the phasemeter, a critical component of the link, for low-received optical power phase-tracking of the GRACE-FO flight spare laser. Experimental measurements and analytical modeling demonstrated that interferometric links using the GRACE-FO flight spare laser can be tracked down to 200 femtowatts (60 dB Hz), ten times lower than the 70-dB-Hz signal strength budgeted for the GRACE-FO laser link. Operating at this level affords an increase by a factor of 3.16 in the separation, divergence angle, or relaxation to technical noise requirements over current GRACE-FO design settings.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

References (23)

  1. Richard P. Kornfeld, Bradford W. Arnold, Michael A. Gross, Neil T. Dahya, William M. Klipstein, Peter F. Gath, and Srinivas Bettadpur, GRACE-FO: The Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment Follow-On mission, J. Spacecr. Rockets 56, 931 (2019).
  2. Felix W. Landerer et al., Extending the global mass change data record: GRACE Follow-On instrument and science data performance, Geophys. Res. Lett. 47, e2020GL088306 (2020).
  3. Klaus Abich et al., In-Orbit performance of the GRACE Follow-on laser ranging interferometer, Phys. Rev. Lett. 123, 031101 (2019).
  4. D. N. Wiese, B. Bienstock, C. Blackwood, J. Chrone, B. D. Loomis, J. Sauber, M. Rodell, R. Baize, D. Bearden, K. Case, S. Horner, S. Luthcke, J. T. Reager, M. Srinivasan, L. Tsaoussi, F. Webb, A. Whitehurst, and V. Zlotnicki, The mass change designated observable study: Overview and results, Earth Space Sci. 9, e2022EA002311 (2022).
  5. K. Nicklaus, S. Cesare, L. Massotti, L. Bonino, S. Mottini, M. Pisani, and P. Silvestrin, Laser metrology concept consolidation for NGGM, CEAS Space J. 12, 313 (2020).
  6. Kolja Nicklaus, Kai Voss, Anne Feiri, Marina Kaufer, Christian Dahl, Mark Herding, Bailey Allen Curzadd, Andreas Baatzsch, Johanna Flock, Markus Weller, Vitali Müller, Gerhard Heinzel, Malte Misfeldt, and Juan Jose Esteban Delgado, Towards NGGM: Laser tracking instrument for the next generation of gravity missions, Remote Sens. 14, 4089 (2022).
  7. Noting that the interferometric measurement of GRACE-FO is not shot noise limited.
  8. D. Shaddock, B. Ware, P. G. Halverson, R. E. Spero, and B. Klipstein, in AIP Conference Proceedings (AIP, Greenbelt, MD, 2006), Vol. 873, p. 654.
  9. Callum S. Sambridge and Kirk McKenzie, Dual quadrature phasemeter for space-based interferometry, arXiv:2410.21565.
  10. B. Bachman, G. de Vine, J. Dickson, S. Dubovitsky, J. Liu, W. Klipstein, K. McKenzie, R. Spero, A. Sutton, B. Ware, and C. Woodruff, Flight phasemeter on the Laser Ranging Interferometer on the GRACE Follow-On mission, J. Phys.: Conf. Ser. 840, 012011 (2017).
  11. G. Ascheid and H. Meyr, Cycle slips in phase-locked loops: A tutorial survey, IEEE Trans. Commun. 30, 2228 (1982).
  12. An-Chi Liao, Wei-Tou Ni, and Jow-Tsong Shy, Pico-watt and femto-watt weak-light phase locking, Int. J. Mod. Phys. D 11, 1075 (2002).
  13. Paul W. McNamara, Weak-light phase locking for LISA, Classical Quantum Gravity 22, S243 (2005).
  14. John Dick, Meirong Tu, Kevin Birnbaum, Dmitry Strekalov, and Nan Yu, in Frequency Standards and Metrology (Asilomar Conference Grounds, Pacific Grove, CA, 2009), p. 405.
  15. Christian Diekmann, Frank Steier, Benjamin Sheard, Gerhard Heinzel, and Karsten Danzmann, Analog phase lock between two lasers at LISA power levels, J. Phys.: Conf. Ser. 154, 012020 (2009).
  16. Samuel P. Francis, Timothy T-Y. Lam, Kirk McKenzie, Andrew J. Sutton, Robert L. Ward, David E. McClelland, and Daniel A. Shaddock, Weak-light phase-tracking with a low cycle slip rate, Opt. Lett. 39, 5251 (2014).
  17. Callum S. Sambridge, Lyle E. Roberts, Andrew R. Wade, Jobin T. Valliyakalayil, Emily Rose Rees, Namisha Chabbra, Jue Zhang, Andrew J. Sutton, Daniel A. Shaddock, and Kirk McKenzie, Subfemtowatt laser phase-tracking, Phys. Rev. Lett. 131, 193804 (2023).
  18. Callum Scott Sambridge, Jobin Thomas Valliyakalayil, and Kirk McKenzie, Comparing link budget requirements for future space-based interferometers, Remote Sens. 16, 3598 (2024).
  19. A frequency range reflective of the phasemeter operating band used in the GRACE-FO mission.
  20. Udo von Toussaint, Bayesian inference in physics, Rev. Mod. Phys. 83, 943 (2011).
  21. A. J. Viterbi, Phase-locked loop dynamics in the presence of noise by Fokker-Planck techniques, Proc. IEEE 51, 1737 (1963).
  22. The GRACE-FO LRP data capture rate (10 Hz) is lower than the update rate of the phasemeter (16 kHz), so cycle slips in the measurement will occur across a capture period (100 ms) rather than the phasemeter update period (63μs).
  23. Robert Spero, Point-mass sensitivity of gravimetric satellites, Adv. Space Res. 67, 1656 (2021).

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. Applied 24, 014015– Published 8 July, 2025
  • Received 20 January 2025
  • Revised 30 April 2025
  • Accepted 20 June 2025
Crossmark - Check for updates button
Creative Commons Logo

Published by the American Physical Society under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. Further distribution of this work must maintain attribution to the author(s) and the published article's title, journal citation, and DOI.

Published by the American Physical Society

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation