I'm still wondering whether iteration version or simple version is closer approximation to the real situation. Sorry for few explanations here. I will try to present those on Friday.
Anyway, here is the results for both:
%*.*.*. Original matrix w/o RAM .*.*.*
REFL f1 : 1.000000 0.000000 -0.000003 -0.000005 0.000007
AS f2 : 0.000002 1.000000 0.000009 -0.003522 -0.000002
POP f1 : -3954.521443 -0.000965 1.000000 0.019081 -0.000152
POP f2 : -32.770726 -0.154433 -0.072594 1.000000 0.024284
POP f2 : 922.393978 -0.006608 1.488319 0.042948 1.000000
*** Iteration ***
%*.*.*. Resulting matrix w/ RAM .*.*.*
REFL f1 : 0.039125 -0.000000 0.003665 0.000005 -0.000007
AS f2 : 0.000010 1.000431 0.000009 -0.003500 -0.000002
POP f1 : 156.420221 -0.000246 15.586838 0.019406 -0.000154
POP f2 : 1.255806 -0.154275 0.047313 1.000008 0.024285
POP f2 : -34.814720 -0.006600 -1.884850 0.042950 1.000000
Offsets converged to:
PRCL = 2.1e-15, MICH = 1.1e-17, SRCL = -3.8e-15, CARM = 2.2e-16, DARM = 0
(POP CARMs became so much smaller compared with the other matrix below, because the offsets are added al of 5 DoFsl at once here.)
*** no iteration, offsets added for each DoF separately ***
REFL f1 : 0.020611 -0.000000 0.003600 0.000005 -0.000007
AS f2 : 0.000002 1.000000 0.000009 -0.003522 -0.000002
POP f1 : 1842.776419 -0.000198 21.533358 0.019404 -0.000132
POP f2 : -32.700639 -0.153095 -0.072481 0.999995 0.024360
POP f2 : 922.393862 -0.006435 1.488298 0.042949 0.999982
Added offsets:
PRCL = 7.5e-15, MICH = 6.25e-16, SRCL = -1.4e-14, CARM = 4.5e-16, DARM = 0
* So far, I used to add all the offsets at once. This time I add CARM and get the CARM row, add PRCL and get the PRCL row... and so on.
I
| Quote: |
|
Koji and Jamie suggested me to include the coupling between DoFs when I calculate the last matrix. So far, I just add all the pos-offsets of 5 DoFs and re-calculate the matrix again. However, once I add one DoF pos-offset, it could already change the LSC matrix therefore different pos-offset to the other four DoF, we must iterate this process until we get the equilibrium pos-offsets for 5 DoFs.
I also noticed an error in the optical configuration file. AM mod levels were smaller than that supposed to be because of the hald power going through the AM-EOMs in the MZI paths. Also I have put PM-Mods in the MZT path which gives the smaller mod indexes. So, smaller mod levels were applied both for PM and AM. As PM-AM ratio is still kept in this, so the matrices were not very wrong, I assume. I'll modify that and post the results again.
|
|