40m
QIL
Cryo_Lab
CTN
SUS_Lab
TCS_Lab
OMC_Lab
CRIME_Lab
FEA
ENG_Labs
OptContFac
Mariner
WBEEShop
|
40m Log |
Not logged in |
 |
|
Thu Apr 1 00:43:33 2010, Mott, Update, General, PZT response for the innolight
|
Thu Apr 1 07:17:15 2010, Koji, Update, General, PZT response for the innolight
|
Thu Apr 1 10:21:58 2010, Mott, Update, General, PZT response for the innolight 
|
Thu Apr 1 10:47:48 2010, Koji, Update, General, PZT response for the innolight
|
Thu Apr 1 12:07:22 2010, rana, Update, General, PZT response for the innolight
|
Thu Apr 1 18:05:29 2010, Mott, Update, General, PZT response for the innolight 
|
Thu Apr 1 18:44:40 2010, Koji, Update, General, PZT response for the innolight
|
Thu Apr 1 19:59:32 2010, Mott, Update, General, PZT response for the innolight    
|
Mon Apr 12 14:20:10 2010, kiwamu, Update, Green Locking, PZT response for the innolight
|
Tue Apr 13 19:53:06 2010, Mott, Update, Green Locking, PZT response for the innolight and lightwave 6x
|
|
Message ID: 2748
Entry time: Thu Apr 1 10:21:58 2010
In reply to: 2747
Reply to this: 2749
|
Author: |
Mott |
Type: |
Update |
Category: |
General |
Subject: |
PZT response for the innolight |
|
|
Quote: |
The shape of the TF looks nice but the calibration must be wrong.
Suppose 1/f slope with 10^-4 rad/V at 10kHz. i.e. m_pm = 1/f rad/V
This means m_fm = 1 Hz/V. This is 10^7 times smaller than that of LWE NPRO.
Quote: |
Kiwamu and I measure the PZT response of the Innolight this evening from 24 kHz to 2MHz.
We locked the PLL at ~50 MHz offset using the Lightwave NPRO and and swept the Innolight with the network analyzer (using the script I made; it has one peculiar property, but it does work correctly).
We will post the plot of the Lightwave PZT response tomorrow morning.
|
|
Koji is absolutely right. I just double checked my matlab code, and saw that I divided when I should have multiplied. The correctly calibrated plots are attached here for the Innolight and the lightwave. Kiwamu and I will measure the amplitude and the jitter today. |
|
|
|
|