Summary:
I checked the calibration of the Oplevs for both ITMs, both ETMs and the BS. The table below summarizes the old and new cts->urad conversion factors, as well as the factor describing the scaling applied. Attachment #1 is a zip file of the fits performed to calculate these calibration factors (GPS times of the sweeps are in the titles of these plots). Attachment #2 is the spectra of the various Oplev error signals (open loop, so a measure of seismic induced angular motion for a given optic, and DoF) after the correction. Loop TF measurements post calibration factor update and loop gain adjustment to be uploaded tomorrow.
| Optic, DoF |
Old calib [urad/ct] |
New Calib [urad/ct] |
Correction Factor [new/old] |
| ETMX, Pitch |
200 |
175 |
0.88 |
| ETMX, Yaw |
222 |
175 |
0.79 |
| ITMX, Pitch |
122 |
134 |
1.1 |
| ITMX, Yaw |
147 |
146 |
1 |
| BS, Pitch |
130 |
136 |
1.05 |
| BS, Yaw |
170 |
176 |
1.04 |
| ITMY, Pitch |
239 |
254 |
1.06 |
| ITMY, Yaw |
226 |
220 |
0.97 |
| ETMY, Pitch |
140 |
164 |
1.17 |
| ETMY, Yaw |
143 |
169 |
1.18 |
Motivation:
We'd like for the Oplev calibration to be a reliable readback of the optic alignment. For example, a calibrated Oplev would be a useful diagnostic to analyze the drifting (?) ETMX.
Details:
- I locked and dither aligned the individual arms.
- I then used a 60 second ramp time to misalign <optic> in {ITMX, ITMY, BS, ETMX, ETMY} one at a time, and looked at the appropriate arm cavity transmission while the misalignment was applied. The amplitude of the misalignment was chosen such that in the maximally misaligned state, the arm cavity was still locked to a TEM00 mode, with arm transmission ~40% of the value when the cavity transmission was maximized using the dither alignment servos. The CDS ramp is not exactly linear, it looks more like a sigmoid near the start and end, but I don't think that really matters for these fits.
- I used the script OLcalibFactor.py (located at /opt/rtcds/caltech/c1/scripts/OL) to fit the data and extract calibration factors. This script downloads the arm cavity transmission and the OL error signal during the misalignment period, and fits a Gaussian profile to the data (X=oplev error signal, Y=arm transmission). Using geometry and mode overlap considerations, we can back out the misalignment in physical units (urad).
Comments:
- For the most part, the correction was small, of the order of a few percent. The largest corrections were for the ETMs. I believe the last person to do Oplev calibration for the TMs was Yutaro in Dec 2015, and since then, we have certainly changed the HeNes at the X and Y ends (but not for the ITMs), so this seems consistent.
- From attachment #2, most of the 1Hz resonances line up quite well (around 1-3urad/rtHz), so gives me some confidence in this calibration.
- I haven't done a careful error analysis yet - but the fits are good to the eye, and the residuals look randomly distributed for the most part. I've assumed precision to the level of 1 urad/ct in setting the new calibration factors.
- I think the misalignment period of 60 seconds is sufficiently long that the disturbance applied to the Oplev loop is well below the lower loop UGF of ~0.2Hz, and so the in loop Oplev error signal is a good proxy for the angular (mis)alignment of the optic. So no loop correction factor was applied.
- I've not yet calibrated the PRM and SRM oplevs.
Now that the ETMX calibration has been updated, let's keep an eye out for a wandering ETMX. |