40m QIL Cryo_Lab CTN SUS_Lab TCS_Lab OMC_Lab CRIME_Lab FEA ENG_Labs OptContFac Mariner WBEEShop
 40m Log, Page 183 of 339 Not logged in
ID Date Author Type Category Subject
6121   Wed Dec 14 16:19:46 2011 ZachUpdateRF SystemLO for new demod box

I'm not sure I agree with your conversions, BUT:

The IQ boards use a PE4140, fancy MOSFET array as the mixer, and according to Peregrine (manufacturer), they can be operated with 0-20 dBm LO drive. I'm not recommending we drive them at 0 dBm, but perhaps the numbers you mentioned are OK.

 Quote: The Rich demod box wants 10dBm for the local oscillator inputs, so I measured the values that we have coming out of the distribution box.  I'm using the "Spare 55MHz" and the "POP11" outputs, both of which had terminators so were not in use.  The 55MHz had ~600mV peak, so between 5 and 6 dBm.  The 11MHz had ~800mV peak, so about 8 dBm. This is not enough dBm for either.  Going in search of RF amplifiers now...

6122   Wed Dec 14 18:06:39 2011 ZachUpdateRF SystemLO for new demod box

Actually, the LO inputs to the IQ boards have AP1053 (Cougar) amps on them. These are 10 dB amps and so putting 10 dBm in puts us on the very maximum of the LO range at 20 dBm.

I think the distribution box levels are fine.

Quote:

I'm not sure I agree with your conversions, BUT:

The IQ boards use a PE4140, fancy MOSFET array as the mixer, and according to Peregrine (manufacturer), they can be operated with 0-20 dBm LO drive. I'm not recommending we drive them at 0 dBm, but perhaps the numbers you mentioned are OK.

 Quote: The Rich demod box wants 10dBm for the local oscillator inputs, so I measured the values that we have coming out of the distribution box.  I'm using the "Spare 55MHz" and the "POP11" outputs, both of which had terminators so were not in use.  The 55MHz had ~600mV peak, so between 5 and 6 dBm.  The 11MHz had ~800mV peak, so about 8 dBm. This is not enough dBm for either.  Going in search of RF amplifiers now...

6130   Sat Dec 17 11:53:46 2011 ZachUpdateSUSAborted Hysteresis test

Do you guys have timestamps for when you started/ended the test? I have been trying to take some long-term RAM data but keep getting foiled by stuff (this test, RTS upgrade, switching of RAMmon channels, etc.)

Quote:

 Quote from #6128 To test it, we are shaking all of the suspension biases +/-1.0 with a script.

The hysteresis test has been aborted.

All of the suspensions have accumulated unexpectedly big DC biases of about 5 from their nominal points.

In fact the ITMX and ITMY mirrors started being stacked to their OSEMs.
The script process has been force-quit and I have restored all the DC biases to their nominal points.
They still look okay: MC can be locked at the 00 mode, DRMI fringe is visible at AS, the green beams are resonating the arm cavities
Need another trial.

6138   Mon Dec 19 23:50:23 2011 ZachUpdateRF SystemRAMmon

I have been looking at the swings in the RAMmon channels since the heater was reengaged, to compare them to the data from beforehand (with and without the foam box). With the large grains of salt that I will list after, it appears that the EOM temperature controller does in fact reduce the amplitude of the swings by a measurable factor.

Salt:

1. The reason I have not included any plots here is because the data suck. What we should ideally have is a continuous stream of RAMmon signals split into three chunks: 1) no foam, no heat, 2) foam, no heat, and 3) foam and heat. Instead, we have pieces of each kind of data on different days, before and after the MC has been realigned, some in old channels and some in new so that the calibration is different, etc. This piecemeal shit will not do.
2. I realized that the LF boost was not engaged on the heater when I turned it on most recently. For this reason, the EOM temperature has not been stabilized as well as it might have been on diurnal timescales, and so with the boost it could be that the noise reduction is greater. For posterity, the DC suppression level is ~20x without the boost.

It seems impractical to try and rope off essentially 3 straight days where nothign major can be done to the IFO just to take RAM data. Instead, I think we should figure out a way to mimic the diurnal temperature swings on ~hour timescales. The EOM can temperature follows PSL-FSS_RMTEMP almost exactly and with a very short delay, so we can probably even accomplish this by stepping the lab A/C temperature. If this won't work, we can use an incandescent lamp or something similar to heat up the area around the EOM by a noticeable amount.

I'll try to come up with a good way to do this so that we can get some reliable data...

6197   Fri Jan 13 17:40:38 2012 ZachUpdateRF Systemfoam box and temp controller taken off of PSL table

I stole the foam EOM box and the temperature controller circuit from the PSL table so that I could continue with the RAM measurements here at the ATF.

That is all.

6219   Tue Jan 24 13:36:05 2012 ZachBureaucracyGeneralIf I'm Peter Pan...

JA - MIE - RO!

6255   Fri Feb 3 23:19:22 2012 ZachUpdateSUSOSEM testing begins

I took one of the spare OSEM satellite amps (schematic) from the cabinet down the Y arm this afternoon to begin testing. I spent most of the day amassing the melange of adapters and connectors I needed to talk to the relic. The most elusive was the über-rare 64-pin IDE connector, for which neither the 40m nor Downs or Bridge had a breakout (despite there being several Phoenix boxes on each electronics rack at the 40m---hmm...). The solution I came up with was to make a breakout cable myself, only there was no 64-pin ribbon. So, I carefully fed a 50-pin and most of a 16-pin ribbon side by side into one push-down connector, and that was that:

I also finally found a 25-pin D-sub breakout just after figuring out the proper pinout for a 25-to-9 adapter, which I thought I was going to have to use. OH WELL.

Science

The first thing I figured I'd do is measure the LED drivers' current noise and see how it compared with LISO. I powered the box up and found that the TO-3 7815 regulator was putting out +20V---bad. I assumed it was broken, so I got another one from Downs and replaced it. Powered it up again and the output was still at +20V (WTF?). My suspicion is that one of the shielding capacitors has failed in some bizarre way, but I didn't have time to check this before I was beckoned to another task. This is where I'll start again next.

Another thing Frank and I noticed as we were figuring out how the driver worked was that the current-specifying resistor of one of the driver stages had not been properly modified along with the others, so it was forcing the feedback loop to rail. This mod was done precariously by adding two perpendicular sandwiched "Radd" resistors on top of the main one, so it's also possible that the ones for this stage had just been knocked off somehow (perhaps by the massive gender-switching ribbon chain hanging down on it). Steve and I noticed that there was a label on the box complaining that some part of the amp for one of the OSEMs wasn't working, but we peeled it off and threw it away because he figured it was outdated.

Anyway, in short, the plan going forward is as follows:

• For this box
• Measure the LED driver and PD transZ amp noises with dummy components
• Compare with LISO to make sure they make sense
• Measure the noise again with an OSEM connected
• Based on the above and more LISO modeling, decide if it's a good idea to replace the LT1125's with OP497's
• Increase the dynamic range by allowing +/-10V output, rather than +/-2V as was needed for old ADCs
• After
• Systematically mirror the changes in all other boxes by switching one out at a time

6258   Tue Feb 7 03:05:08 2012 ZachUpdateSUSOSEM sat amp measurements

I did some more investigation on the OSEM box today.

Troubleshooting:

After removing some capacitors and still finding that the +15V rail was at over +20V, I decided to see if the TO-3 7815 that I removed behaved properly all by itself. It did. After some more poking around, I discovered that whoever assembled the board isolated the case of the regulator from the board. It is through the case that this package gets its grounding, so I removed the mica insulator, remounted the regulator, and all worked fine.

Since I had gotten a spare from Downs, I also replaced the LT1031 (precision 10-V reference), for fear that it had been damaged by the floating voltage regulator.

Noise measurements:

LED Driver

With the above out of the way, I was finally able to take some measurements. The first thing I did was to look at the LED drivers. I fixed the one stage that I mentioned in my last post by adding two 820-ohm resistors in parallel with the 1k, such that it was very close to all the others (which are 806 || 806 || 1k). With that, using a red LED, I measured a current of 34.5 mA (+/- 0.1) out of each of the 5 stages (UL, UR, LL, LR, S).

I then measured the current noise of each one by monitoring the voltage across the 287-ohm resistor in series with the LED. The driver works by putting the LED in the feedback path of an inverting amp. There is a 10-V input from the LT1031, and the values of the input and feedback resistors determine the current drawn through the LED. There is a buffer (LM6321) in the path to provide the necessary current.

The LISO model I made according to that description seems to make sense. I simply modeled the LED as a small resistor and asked LISO for the current through it. The transfer function shows the proper DC response of -49.15 dB(A/V) -->  34.8 mA @ 10 V, but, the estimated current noise doesn't add up with the measured levels:

I have to get to the bottom of this. Two possibilities are: 1) The buffer adds noise, and/or 2) I am modeling this invalidly.

PD Amp

I also began measuring the PD amplifier noise levels, though I only measured two of them for lack of time. I find it odd that there is a 100-ohm input series resistor on what I thought would be just a transimpedance amplifier. For that reason, I want to look into how the OSEMs are connected to this guy.

In any case, I measured the output noise of two of the PD amps by shorting the input side of the 100-ohm resistors to ground, and then I divided by their TF to get the input noise level. Here it is compared with the LISO estimate. I have plotted them in units of voltage noise at the input side of the resistors for lack of a way to infer the equivalent photocurrent noise level.

Above 2 Hz or so, the measured level agrees with the prediction. Below this, the measured noise level increases as 1/f, while it should go as the standard 1/sqrt(f) (the manufacturer-quoted 1/f corner is at 2 Hz). Another thing to get to the bottom of.

6261   Thu Feb 9 12:38:15 2012 ZachUpdateSUSOSEM LED driver noise

Frank pointed out to me that I had dumbly forgotten to include the voltage reference's noise. The LT1031 has an output noise level of ~125 nV/rHz above 10 Hz or so, and this at least makes the estimate much closer. I had also not included an extra LT1125 stage between the reference and the other stages. I guess I was tired.

The estimate is now within a factor of a few of the measured level, and it has roughly the right shape. Around 1 Hz, it looks like the measured data begin to roll up away from the model, though it's tough to say due to the effect of the AC coupling on the analyzer less than a decade below. If there is indeed extra noise here, Frank thinks it could be due to resistor current noise.

I'll switch one or two out for nicer ones and see if things change.

6267   Fri Feb 10 02:43:37 2012 ZachUpdateSUSOSEM LED driver noise *reduced*

I worked on the OSEM box a little more today, with the hopes of reducing the measured output current noise. I succeeded, at least modestly. It turns out that most of the noise was indeed caused by the crappy resistors.

Below is the circuit for one of the 5 LEDs. The output of the op-amp structure directly after the LT1031 reference is split between 5 stages identical to the structure on the right. I have shown just one (UR) for clarity. The various measurement points are explained below.

I started from the beginning of the circuit, directly after the LT1031, to make sure that the excess noise seen the other day wasn't just from a noisy reference. Below is the measured output voltage noise along with the LISO estimate. Clearly, the LT1031 is performing to spec (as it should, since it's a new part that I just put in). Note that the apparent better-than-spec performance at low frequencies is just from the AC coupling, which I needed due to the high DC level.

Since the reference was in order, the next step was to switch out some of the crappy old resistors for nicer thin-film ones. In case anyone is interested, Frank has done some detailed investigation of excess 1/f current noise in resistors. I measured the voltage noise level at the point labeled "inter-stage measurement" above, first without any modifications and then after swapping the old 10k resistors (R1 & R2) out for nice Vishay thin-film ones. There is clearly a big improvement, and the modified circuit essentially agrees with LISO now down to 1 Hz. Below this, it looks like there could still be an issue.

I wanted to see what the improvement was in the overall output current noise of the system, so I went about measuring the current noise as I had the other day (by measuring the voltage noise across R55 and dividing by the resistance). The performance was already better than the old measurement, but not at the LISO level. So, I replaced the current-setting resistors (R54 & R55)---which were actually 3 parallel resistors on a single pad in each case---by nice Vishay ones, as well. I didn't have any that were close to the original resistance of ~287 ohms, so I put three 1k ones in parallel. This of course shifts the resistance up to 333 ohms, but that only causes a ~16% change in current. I was sure to convert voltage noise into current noise with this new resistance, though.

With this change, the total output current noise is now very close to the LISO estimate as well down to ~1 Hz.

Some notes:

• First, I apologize for the noise margin at higher frequencies. I redid the higher frequency measurements with an SR560 as a preamp, but I must have screwed up the calibration because the data don't match up quite right with the LF measurements. It was clear while I was taking them that they followed the LISO trace.
• There still seems some excess noise below 1 Hz. It could be that the noisy resistors in the parallel stages were somehow still contaminating the cleaned-up channel. I'll look into this more soon.
6307   Thu Feb 23 02:20:07 2012 ZachUpdateSUSwacky state of SUS input matrices

This reminds me that the whole Dr. SUS situation never got taken care of. Where I left off, I was having issues pulling 40m data with NDS2 (which is what all the diagonalization scripts use).

What is the deal with 40m+NDS2? If it is till no-go, can we have a consensus on whether this is too important to wait for? If so, I will rewrite the scripts to use NDS and we can upgrade to NDS2 once we can prove we know how to use it.

Quote:

While Kiwamu and I were trying to investigate the the vertex glitches we were noticing excess noise in ITMX, which Kiwamu blamed on some sort of bad diagonalization.  Sure enough, the ITMX input matrix is in the default state [0], not a properly diagonalized state.  Looking through the rest of the suspensions, I found PRM also in the default state, not diagonalized.

### We should do another round of suspension diagonalization.

Kiwamu (or whoever is here last tonight): please run the free-swing/kick script (/opt/rtcds/caltech/c1/scripts/SUS/freeswing) before you leave, and I'll check the matrices and update the suspensions tomorrow morning.

[0]

 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0 1.66 1.66 -1.66 1.66 0 1.66 -1.66 -1.66 1.66 0 0 0 0 0 1

6399   Sat Mar 10 15:29:47 2012 ZachHowToComputer Scripts / ProgramsModeMatchr

For your mode matching pleasure, I have added a tool called "ModeMatchr" to the SVN under /trunk/zach/tools/modematchr/

It uses the usual fminsearch approach, but tolerates a fully astigmatic input (i.e., w0ix ≠ w0iy, z0ix ≠ z0iy) and allows for transforming to an elliptical waist  (i.e., w0fx ≠ w0fy, but z0fx = z0fy). It would be straightforward to allow for z0fx ≠ z0fy, but I have never seen a case when we actually wanted this. On the other hand, the elliptical output ability is nice for coupling to wide-angle ring cavities.

It also does the looping through available lenses for you , and retains the best solution for each lens combination in an output cell, which can then be combed with another function (getOtherSol). fminsearch is incredibly fast: with a 10-lens bank, it finds all 100 best solutions on my crappy MacBook in <10s.

I have also included the functionality to constrain the length of the total MMT to within some percentage of the optimal distance, which helps to sift through the muck .

6415   Wed Mar 14 13:27:15 2012 ZachHowToComputer Scripts / ProgramsModeMatchr

I have added to ModeMatchr the capability to fix the total MMT distance. This is nice if you are coupling to a cavity some fixed distance away. The blurb from the help:

% Note: for any total length constraint dtot_tol > 0, ModeMatchr will use
% fminsearch to find the best solutions near your nominal dtot, and then
% omit solutions whose dtot lie outside your tolerance. For dtot_tol = 0,
% ModeMatchr actively constrains dtot to your value, and then finds the
% best solution. Therefore, set dtot_tol = 0 if you have a fixed distance
% into which to put a MMT.


 Quote: For your mode matching pleasure, I have added a tool called "ModeMatchr" to the SVN under /trunk/zach/tools/modematchr/ It uses the usual fminsearch approach, but tolerates a fully astigmatic input (i.e., w0ix ≠ w0iy, z0ix ≠ z0iy) and allows for transforming to an elliptical waist  (i.e., w0fx ≠ w0fy, but z0fx = z0fy). It would be straightforward to allow for z0fx ≠ z0fy, but I have never seen a case when we actually wanted this. On the other hand, the elliptical output ability is nice for coupling to wide-angle ring cavities. It also does the looping through available lenses for you , and retains the best solution for each lens combination in an output cell, which can then be combed with another function (getOtherSol). fminsearch is incredibly fast: with a 10-lens bank, it finds all 100 best solutions on my crappy MacBook in <10s. I have also included the functionality to constrain the length of the total MMT to within some percentage of the optimal distance, which helps to sift through the muck .

6443   Mon Mar 26 12:50:24 2012 ZachUpdateelogrestarted with script

On the plus side, it was the first time I've had to do it in a while..

6478   Tue Apr 3 01:52:15 2012 ZachUpdateLSCRAM simulation for Full ifo

 Quote: I also would like to extend this script to use the DC readout, but don't know how to calculate the postion offset for AS_DC because the error signal is not zero-crossing for AS_DC anymore. Do you have any suggestions for me?

I don't think I understand the question. AS_DC should not have a zero crossing, correct?

6550   Thu Apr 19 16:21:04 2012 ZachUpdateComputer Scripts / ProgramsArbcav updated, made badass

I have modified Arbcav to be way cooler than it used to be.

Main modifications:

• Can now truly model an arbitrary cavity geometry
• The previous version could only handle a few different topologies. In each case, it would unfold the cavity into the equivalent linear cavity and use the g-parameter method to calculate gouy phases, etc.
• The new model uses the closed cavity propagation matrix to find the supported mode, and then explicitly calculates the accumulated gouy phase by propagating the beam through the full cavity. This is done analytically with zR, so there is negligible slow-down.
• Now plots a diagram of the cavity geometry, both to help you and for you to verify that it is calculating the right thing (<-- this is the cool part)
• Plots the beam path and mirror locations
• Specifies whether mirrors are curved or flat
• Prints mirror parameters next to them
• Finds all intracavity waist locations and plots them
• Gives waist information (size in X, Y)

Since the information is already there, I will have the output structure include things like the input beam q parameter, which could then be fed directly to mode matching tools like ModeMatchr.

The function takes as input the same arguments as before. Example for a square cavity:

out = arbcav([200e-6 50e-6 200e-6 50e-6],[0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75],[1e10 9 1e10 9],[45 45 45 45],29.189e6,10e-6,1064e-9,1000);

i.e.,

out = arbcav(transmissivity_list, length_list, RoC_list, angle_list, modulation_freq, loss_list_or_loss_per_mirror, wavelength, num_pts_for_plot);

If you don't give it a modulation frequency, it will just plot carrier HOMs. If you don't give it RoCs and angles, it will just plot the transmission spectrum.

I'm still fine-tuning some functionality, but I should have it up on the SVN relatively soon. Comments or suggestions are welcome!

Some screenshots:

Cavity geometry plots (linear, triangular, square, bowtie):

Transmission and HOM spectra (these correspond to the square cavity at lower left, above):

6823   Sat Jun 16 12:03:41 2012 ZachUpdateGreen Lockingscanned Y arm for 5FSR

Is that time stamp really correct? I wanted to look at the signal closely to see if I could get any feeling for why it would look so different when positive vs. negative, but I do not see a triangle anywhere near this time (1023780144)...

 Quote: Interesting. It seems for me that there is a dependence of the noisiness as the beat frequency is scanned. As you increase (or decrease?) the offset, C1:ALS-BEATY-COARSE_I_IN1 becomes bigger and more crisp. The resulting out-of-loop stability also seems to be improved as you can see from the crispness of the PDH signal. Do you find why this happens? Is this because the beat S/N depends on the beat frequency due to the PD noise?

6912   Wed Jul 4 18:25:44 2012 ZachUpdateComputersNDS2 client now working on Ubuntu machines

After plenty of work, NDS2 can now be used to get site data within MATLAB using the following machines:

• allegra
• megatron
• ottavia
• pianosa
• rosalba
• rossa

What I did

NDS2 was not working on any of the machines, so the first thing I did was simply to install the newest version. I downloaded the latest tarball (0.9.1) from the LDAS Wiki, unzipped and installed it

/users/zach $tar -xvf nds2-client-0.9.1.tar /users/zach$ cd nds2-client-0.9.1

/users/zach $sudo ./configure --prefix=/cvs/cds/caltech/apps/linux64 --with-matlab=/cvs/cds/caltech/apps/linux64/matlab/bin/matlab /users/zach$ sudo make

/users/zach $sudo make install Even with the new version, it still didn't work. Solution: The main problem was that the cyrus-sasl-gssapi authentication protocol was not installed on these machines, so that even with a kerberos ticket the datalink could not be established. Using information from the LDAS Wiki, I used aptitude to install it as:$ sudo aptitude install lscsoft-auth

This group installs both the SASL protocol and the package python-kerberos

I also needed to update the kerberos config file for each machine, which is located at /etc/krb5.conf. I found that ottavia had a nice one with many realms, so I copied that one over to the other machines. In any case where there was an old config file overwritten, it is now /etc/krb5.conf.old.

Finally, the matlab path for NDS2 was still set to the old 2010a directory (/cvs/cds/caltech/apps/linux64/lib/matlab2010a) that was created by the NDS2 install when Rana originally did it. The new install I made above created the appropriate 2010b mexa64 files, so I changed the matlab path within matlab to this one:

>> rmpath /cvs/cds/caltech/apps/linux64/lib/matlab2010a

>> savepath

Now everything works fine on all these machines. As in Rana's original post, you get data in the following way:

$kinit albert.einstein %then enter password$ matlab -nosplash -nodesktop

>> d = NDS2_GetData({'H1:LSC-NPTRX_OUT16.mean'},963968415,6000,'nds.ligo.caltech.edu:31200')

d =

name: 'H1:LSC-NPTRX_OUT16.mean'

chan_type: 'm-trend'

rate: 0.0167

data_type: 'real_8'

signal_gain: 1

signal_offset: 0

signal_slope: 1

signal_units: ''

start_gps_sec: 963968415

duration_sec: 6000

data: [100x1 double]

exists: 1

>> quit % since you've seen that the data is really here

$kdestroy % so that no one uses your credentials Some thoughts • I would like to extend this to the 32-bit machines, but I have to figure out the best way to install the proper NDS2 client without interfering with the 64-bit version. I think it is just a matter of specifying the matlabroot in the .../linux/ instead of .../linux64/ • It would be nice to find a way that the nice tool gps('MM/DD/YYYY XX:XX:XX UTC'), which calls the ligotool executable tconvert, can be automatically usable when calling NDS2 functions. Right now, there seems to be an issue preventing that: even though tconvert can be run in the terminal, gps() returns an error and even directly running unix('tconvert now') or !tconvert returns the same error. I have emailed Peter Shawhan to see if he has any advice. 6921 Thu Jul 5 13:12:12 2012 ZachUpdateComputersNDS2 client now working on Ubuntu machines From my conversations with JZ and Leo, it seemed there was no package that generated the appropriate mex files. It was clear that the right ones weren't there from the absence of a /cvs/cds/caltech/apps/linux64/lib/matlab2010b directory. I'm sorry if I screwed anything up with pynds, but I have repeatedly asked for help with NDS2+matlab and no one has done anything. It would be nice to do it via apt if there indeed is a versioned package that can make the mexs. Sorry again if I jumped the gun, but I didn't think anyone was going to do anything. I guess the only 32-bit machine I can think of is mafalda. About tconvert, I think the best solution is to make a new wrapper M-file. gps was just a convenient remnant of mDV, but all that we need is some matlab function that can output a GPS time given a date/time string. We can use whatever command-line utility you want. 7136 Thu Aug 9 12:55:15 2012 ZachUpdateelogelog was being a pain in the ass; I restarted it The elog was not responding. I attempted to restart it by running .../start-elog.csh, but this didn't work (even after the usual ~2 times it needs). Somehow pkill did not kill the daemon, so I kill -9'd it and that did the trick. I ran the start script once more and it came back online. 7782 Tue Dec 4 11:30:36 2012 ZachUpdatePSLPMC calibration for MC_F calibration In order to have less unknown, you can calibrate the PMC PZT separately. Lock the PMC and take a transfer function from either the NPRO PZT input or the FSS AOM VCO input to the PMC control signal. The VCO is better, since the calibration should be much better known, but I am not sure what the current setup of the 40m PSL is, so I don't know if the FSS is normally locked. Since you know the NPRO PZT or VCO actuation coefficients, you can assume the PMC loop (where the OL gain is high enough) is correcting for the frequency fluctuations. So, simply multiply the known coefficient by the transfer function to get the PMC PZT gain. Then, you can re-do your PMC PZT sweep measurement and be confident of the calibration. The FSR must be right, so you can get the finesse with confidence.  Quote: Hmm... Does anyone find falses in my measurement? If not, the finesse can be 4 times smaller than the value which was 5 years ago? 7965 Wed Jan 30 14:37:01 2013 ZachUpdateISSISS Design and Prototyping  Quote: Unfortunately, as noted in the file, not all of the elements are possible to analyze in liso, such as any type of op-amp with more than two inputs and one output (AD602 used in this design has 16 pins with two distinct amplifiers contained within). Typically, you can still find a way to model the important parts of the stages that are not as simply added. In the case of the differential input stage, in particular, it is important to include it because it will usually set the input noise level of the circuit. In this case, the noise is the same as the second stage (U5) and it has a gain of 1, so there is essentially no difference (up to factors of sqrt(2) or 2). You can edit the opamp.lib file and add in custom components. For the input stage, you can just pretend it is a simple non-inverting amplifier with the specified noise characteristics from the datasheet: un = 1.3n, uc = 50 Hz (see below). For dual op amps, you can usually just model each part separately. For example, the OPA2604 is a dual op amp that is included in the opamp.lib and can be treated as a single one in a model. 7966 Wed Jan 30 15:45:09 2013 ZachUpdateLockingMode spacing calc  Quote: Thus, the modes should be well separated => spacing is 4.3 MHz while FWHM is 0.311 MHz (cavity fsr = 34.5 MHz) Something looks fishy. I calculate a transverse mode spacing of 2.21 MHz---is there a factor of two missing somewhere in your analytical calculation? delta_f = (1/2/pi) * w01 - w00 = (1/2/pi) * acos(±sqrt(0.96)) /pi *2 * pi * c /2 /L = 2.21 MHz I guess that's still OK, but if you are using 11-MHz sidebands, there is a n+m=5 mode within one linewidth of resonance. Can you use 55? ------------- May I suggest my arbcav() tool for things like this? I think it's pretty handy for just this sort of calculations. I'm actually hoping to revamp the I/O to make it much cleaner and more intuitive. >> T = [0.055 20e-6]; >> L = [4.34 4.34]; >> RoC = [115.5 1e10]; >> theta = [0 0]; >> fmod = 11e6; >> lambda = 1064e-9; >> num_pts = 1000; >> loss = 50e-6; >> [fin,coefs,df] = arbcav(T,L,RoC,theta,fmod,loss,lambda,num_pts); >> fmod = 55e6; >> [fin,coefs,df] = arbcav(T,L,RoC,theta,fmod,loss,lambda,num_pts); 7975 Thu Jan 31 15:20:46 2013 ZachUpdateLockingMode spacing calc I should mention that I just found a bug in how it treats odd-mirror-number cavities. For such cavities, HG modes with odd horizontal indices should receive an extra roundtrip phase of pi/2 (due to the rotation by the cavity). Because of a numbering convention issue, arbcav actually used to apply this phase shift to even-order modes. Essentially, the only difference is that the fundamental mode was shifted to anti-resonance. Everywhere else, there are modes at both corresponding locations in frequency space, and so it does not back a big difference in terms of cavity design. Thanks to this IMC modeling we are doing at the workshop, I caught it! It has been fixed in the SVN.  Quote: I have calculated (using Zach's sweet software) the expected mode content for the various possible PRCs that we can make. Also, Zach was right about the factor of 2. I see now that I was calculating the mode spacing between a plane wave and a HOM, so the guoy phase had a factor of (n+m+1). The right thing to do is to get the spacing between the 00 mode and HOMs, so the guoy phase just has (n+m). Switching from n+m+1=2 to n+m=1, that fixes the factor of 2 problem. I attach my results as a pdf, since I'm listing out 5 configurations. Each config has a cartoon, with a small (hard to read) HOM plot, and then at the end, each HOM plot is shown again, but larger. Also, "TM" is the "test mirror", the flat G&H that we're using as the cavity end mirror. 7982 Fri Feb 1 12:22:27 2013 ZachSummaryASCOptics lit It's OK; even Siegman got it wrong---48 times. RA: NO, stil not OK.  Quote: Gouy not Guoy: http://www.rp-photonics.com/gouy_phase_shift.html pronounced Goo-eee, with the emphasis on the second syllable. 8097 Mon Feb 18 00:03:46 2013 ZachUpdateComputer Scripts / ProgramsARBCAV v3.0 I have uploaded ARBCAV v3.0 to the SVN. The major change in this release, as I mentioned, is the input/output handling. The input and output are now contained in a single 'model' structure. To define the cavity, you fill in the substructure 'model.in' (e.g., model.in.T = [0.01 10e-6 0.01]; etc.) and call the function as: model = arbcav(model); Note: the old syntax is maintained as legacy for back-compatibility, and the function automatically creates a ".in" substructure in the output, so that the user can still use the single-line calling, which can be convenient. Then, any individual parameter can be changed by changing the appropriate field, and the function can be rerun using the new, simpler syntax from then on. The function then somewhat intelligently decides what to compute based on what information you give it. Using a simple option string as a second argument, you can choose what you want plotted (or not) when you call. Alternatively, you can program the desired functionality into a sub-substructure 'model.in.funct'. The outputs are created as substructures of the output object. Here is an example: >> th = 0.5*acos(266/271) *180 /pi; OMC.in.theta = [-th -th th th]; OMC.in.L = [0.266 0.284 0.275 0.271]; OMC.in.RoC = [1e10 2 1e10 2]; OMC.in.lambda = 1064e-9; OMC.in.T = 1e-6 * [8368 25 8297 33]; OMC.in.f_mod = 24.5e6; >> OMC OMC = in: [1x1 struct] >> OMC = arbcav(OMC,'noplot') Warning: No loss given--assuming lossless mirrors > In arbcav at 274 OMC = in: [1x1 struct] FSR: 2.7353e+08 Lrt: 1.0960 finesse: 374.1568 buildup: 119.6956 df: [1000x1 double] coefs: [1000x4 double] HOM: [1x1 struct] >> OMC.HOM ans = f: [1x1 struct] pwr: [1x1 struct] >> OMC.HOM.pwr ans = carr: [15x15 double] SBp: [15x15 double] SBm: [15x15 double] Some other notes: • The annoying Mdo.m has been internalized; it is no longer needed. • For the next release, I am working on including: • Finite mirror thickness/intracavity refractive elements - If, for god knows what reason, you decide to put a mirror substrate within a cavity • Mode overlap - Calculating the overlap of an input beam to the cavity • Mode matching - Calculating a mode matching telescope into the cavity for some defined input beam • Anything else? I have added lots of information to the help header, so check there for more details. As always, your feedback is greatly appreciated. 8125 Wed Feb 20 23:25:50 2013 ZachSummaryElectronicsReplacement for the AD743: OPA140 and OPA827 I have found two great FET input chips that rival the storied, discontinued AD743. In some ways, they are even better. These parts are the OPA140 and the OPA827. Below is a plot of the input-referred voltage noise of the two op amps with Rsource = 0, along with several others for comparison. The smooth traces are LISO models. The LT1128 and AD797 are BJT-input parts, so their voltage noise is naturally better. However, the performance you see here for the FET parts is the same you would expect for very large source impedances, due to their extremely low current noise by comparison. I have included the BJTs so that you can see what their performance is like in an absolute sense. I have also included a "measured" trace of the LT1128, since in practice their low-frequency noise can be quite higher than the spec (see, for example, Rana's evaluation of the Busby Box). The ADA4627 is another part I was looking into before, the LT1012 is a less-than-great FET chip, and the AD797 a less-than-great BJT. As you can see, the OPA140 actually outperforms the AD743 at low frequencies, though it is ~2x worse at high frequencies. The OPA827 comes close to the AD743 at high frequencies, but is a bit worse at low ones. Both the OPA140 and OPA827 have the same low-frequency RMS spec, so I was hoping it would be a better all-around part, but, unfortunately, it seems not to be. The TI chips also have a few more things on the AD743: • Input current noise @ 1kHz • AD743: 6.9 fA/rtHz • OPA827: 2.2 fA/rtHz • OPA140: 0.8 fA/rtHz (!) • Input bias (offset) current, typ • AD743: 30 pA (40 pA) --- only for Vsupply = ±5 V • OPA827: ±3 pA (±3 pA) --- up to ±18V • OPA140: ±0.5 pA (±0.5 pA) (!) --- up to ±18V • Supply • Both OPA140 and OPA827 can be fed single supplies up to 36V absolute maximum • The OPA140 is a rail-to-rail op amp These characteristics make both parts exceptionally well suited for very-high source impedance applications, such as very-low-frequency AC-coupling preamplifiers or ultra-low-noise current sources. (Apologies---the SR785 I was using had some annoying non-stationary peaks coming in. I verified that they did not affect the broadband floor). R.I.P., AD743 8151 Sat Feb 23 18:01:38 2013 ZachSummaryElectronicsReplacement for the AD743: OPA140 and OPA827 Rana suggested that I measure the OPA827 and OPA140 noise with high source impedance so as to see if we could find the low-frequency current noise corner. Below is a plot of both parts with Rs = 0, 10k, and 100k. As you can see, both parts are thermal noise limited down to 0.1 Hz for up to Rs = 100k or greater. Given that the broadband current noise level for each part is ~0.5-1 fA/rtHz, this puts an upper limit to the 1/f corner of <100 Hz. This is where the AD743 corner is, so that sounds reasonable. Perhaps I will check with even higher impedance to see if I can find it. I am not sure yet what to make of the ~10-20 kHz instability with high source impedance. EDIT: The datasheets claim that they are Johnson noise limited up to 1 Mohm, but this is only for the broadband floor, I'd guess, so it doesn't really say anything about the low frequency corner.  Quote: I have found two great FET input chips that rival the storied, discontinued AD743. In some ways, they are even better. These parts are the OPA140 and the OPA827. 8420 Sun Apr 7 20:49:19 2013 ZachUpdateGeneralRestarted elog with the script, as it was down. 8428 Tue Apr 9 01:46:40 2013 ZachUpdateGeneralRestarted elog Again.  Quote: with the script, as it was down. 10019 Tue Jun 10 11:54:36 2014 ZachConfigurationWikiDokuWikis are still down Not sure if someone is already on this, but the nodus DokuWikis are still down (AIC, ATF, Cryo, etc.) I get: # DokuWiki Setup Error The datadir ('pages') does not exist, isn't accessible or writable. You should check your config and permission settings. Or maybe you want to run the installer 10022 Wed Jun 11 05:16:14 2014 ZachConfigurationWikiDokuWikis are back up It looks like auth is broken on the AIC wiki (though working fine on ATF and Cryo). I did some poking around but can't see how anything we did could have broken it.  Quote: As of this writing, the DokuWiki appears to be working. 10029 Wed Jun 11 20:09:37 2014 ZachConfigurationWikiDokuWiki situation I have been looking into the DokuWiki situation, with no great progress so far. The problem is with authentication. When you try to access the wiki, you get: "User authentication is temporarily unavailable. If this situation persists, please inform your Wiki Admin." As Evan points out, this goes away if you turn off ACL (Access Control Lists), but---as he also mentions---that just means that authentication is disabled, so the wiki becomes open. All signs point to this being a problem with the authentication mechanism. We use the 'authplain' plaintext method, where the usernames and hashed passwords are stored in a plaintext file. Evan and I have both done plenty of testing with the config settings to see if the problem goes away. Even if you restore everything to default (but enable ACL using authplain and the existing user file), you still get an error. I went as far as installing a brand new wiki on the web server, and, surprisingly, this also exhibits the problem. Interestingly, if I install an old enough version (2012-10-13), it works fine. After this revision, they transitioned their authentication methods from "backends" to "plugins", so this is a clue. As a side note, the other wikis on nodus (ATF and Cryo) are running earlier versions of DokuWiki, so they have no problems. As it stood, our options were: 1. No wiki (not even read-only, since the issue prevents logging in and also prevents anonymous reading, somehow) 2. No ACL = open wiki. Also not good. So, I created a temporary read-only version of the wiki using the aforementioned earlier DokuWiki release. It has a soft link to the real wiki data, but I deleted the user database so no one can log in and edit (I also disabled registration). It can be found at https://nodus.ligo.caltech.edu:30889/wiki_ro/. I also created a backup of the real wiki as wiki_bak to avoid any potential disasters. The simplest thing to do would be to just roll the wiki back to this working version, but that doesn't sound so smart. Clearly, it was working with the plugin structure before our snafu, and somehow our fixing everything else has broken it. Quote:  Quote: It looks like auth is broken on the AIC wiki (though working fine on ATF and Cryo). I did some poking around but can't see how anything we did could have broken it. I went into local.php and changed$conf['useacl'] = 1; to \$conf['useacl'] = 0; and it looks like the auth issue goes away (I've changed it back). This isn't a fix (we want to use access control), but it gives us a clue as to where the problem is.

11058   Mon Feb 23 15:04:10 2015 ZachUpdateGeneralElog restarted

The elog crashed while I was creating an entry to the Cryo log. I restarted it with the start-elog.csh script.

2888   Thu May 6 17:54:44 2010 Zach Korth -- Committee Oversight (Fun Division)OmnistructureTMIMinutes from the Lab Organization Commitee meeting

Where are we going to put the tiki bar? The ice cream machine? I am disappointed in the details that appear to have been glossed over..

 Quote: Today we met and we finally come up with a lot of cool, clever, brilliant, outstanding ideas to organize the lab. You can find them on the Wiki page created for the occasion. http://lhocds.ligo-wa.caltech.edu:8000/40m/40m_Internals/Lab_Organization Enjoy!

7934   Wed Jan 23 20:46:46 2013 Zen MasterUpdateLockingPR-flat cavity status - locks!

 Quote: I (with help from Q)

6392   Fri Mar 9 11:59:38 2012 Zweizig the ELOG MavenSummaryCDSNDS2 restart

Hi Rana,

It looks like the channe list file has a few blank lines that the channel list reader is choking on. I removed the lines and it is working now.. I have made the error message a bit more obvious (gave the file name  and line number) and allowed it to ignore empty lines so this won't cause problems with future versions (when installed). The bottom line is nds2 is now running on mafalda.
Best regards,

John

13434   Fri Nov 17 16:31:11 2017 aaronOmnistructureComputersAcromag wired up

# Acromag Wireup Update

I finished wiring up the Acromags to replace the VME boxes on the x arm. I still need to cut down the bar and get them all tidy in the box, but I wanted to post the wiring maps I made.
I wanted to note specifically that a few of the connections were assigned to VME boxes but are no longer assigned in this Acromag setup. We should be sure that we actually do not need to use the following channels:

### Channels no longer in use

• From the VME analog output (VMIVME 4116) to the QPD Whitening board (no DCC number on the front), 3 channels are no longer in use
• From the anti-image filter (D000186) to the ADC (VMIVME 3113A) 5 channels are no longer in use (these are the only channels from the anti-image filter, so this filter is no longer in use at all?)
• From the universal dewhitening filter (D000183) to a binary I/O adapter (channels 1-16), 4 channels are no longer in use. These are the only channels from the dewhitening filter
• From a second universal dewhitening filter (D000183) to another the binary I/O adapter (channels 1-16), one channel is no longer in use (this was the only channel from this dewhitening filter).
• From the opti-lever (D010033) to the VME ADC (VMIVME 3113A), 7 channels are no longer in use (this was all of the channels from the opti lever)
• From the SUS PD Whitening/Interface board (D000210) to a binary I/O adapter (channels 1-16), 5 channels are no longer in use.
• Note that none of the binary I/O adapter channels are in use.

Attachment 1: AcromagWiringMaps.pdf
14022   Tue Jun 26 20:59:36 2018 aaronUpdateOMCprep for vent in a couple weeks

I checked out the elog from the vent in October 2016 when the OMC was removed from the path. In the vent in a couple weeks, we'd like to get the beam going through the OMC again. I wasn't really there for this last vent and don't have a great sense for how things go at the 40m, but this is how I think the procedure for this work should approximately go. The main points are that we'll need to slightly translate and rotate OM5, rotate OM6, replace one mirror that was removed last time, and add some beam dumps. Please let me know what I've got wrong or am missing.

[side note, I want to make some markup on the optics layouts that I see as pdfs elsewhere in the log and wiki, but haven't done it and didn't much want to dig around random drawing software, if there's a canonical way this is done please let me know.]

Steps to return the OMC to the IFO output:

1. Complete non-Steve portions of the pre-vent checklist (https://wiki-40m.ligo.caltech.edu/vent/checklist)
2. Steve needs to complete his portions of the checklist (as in https://nodus.ligo.caltech.edu:8081/40m/12557)
3. Need to lock some things before making changes I think—but I’m not really sure about these, just going from what I can glean from the elogs around the last vent
1. Lock the IMC at low power
2. Align the arms to green
3. Lock the arms
4. Center op lev spots on QPDs
5. Is there a separate checklist for these things? Seems this locking process happens every time there is a realignment or we start any work, which makes sense, so I expect it is standardized.
4. Turn/add optics in the reverse order that Gautam did
1. Check table leveling first?
2. Rotate OM5 to send the beam to the partially transmissive mirror that goes to the OMC; currently OM5 is sent directly to OM6. OM5 also likely needs to be translated forward slightly; Gautam tried to maintain 45 deg AOI on OM5/6.
3. A razor beam dump was also removed, which should be replaced (see attachment 1 on https://nodus.ligo.caltech.edu:8081/40m/12568)
4. May need to rotate OM6 to extract AS beam again, since it was rotated last time
5. Replace the mirror just prior to the window on the AP table, mentioned here in attachment 3: https://nodus.ligo.caltech.edu:8081/40m/12566
1. There is currently a rectangular weight on the table where the mirror was, for leveling
5. Since Gautam had initially made this change to avoid some backscattered beams and get a little extra power, we may need to add some beam dumps to kill ghosts
1. This is also mentioned in 12566 linked above, the dumps are for back-reflection off the windows of the OMC
6. Center beam in new path
7. Check OMC table leveling
8. AS beam should be round on the camera, with no evidence of clipping on any optics in the path (especially check downstream of any changes)
14051   Wed Jul 11 15:57:00 2018 aaronUpdateOMCReviving OMC electronics
Gautam showed me the electronics racks for the OMC PZTs and DAQ. I'm in the process of chasing down what channels we need, and confirming that we'll be able to plug the old antialiasing/imaging boards into the current DAC/ADC boards. I found what I think was Rob Ward's simlink model for the omc, located at

Channels in this model:
• 27 or 29 total ADC channels are used (depending whether we keep 2 spare adc chans)
• 4 each go to ASC_QPD1/2 (8 chans total)
• 5 go to TRANS_PD1, TRANS_PD2, REFL_PD, TRANS_PD1_UF, TRANS_PD2_UF. These PD are used for ASC and LSC.
• 2 go to the LSC, one each for DVMDC, DVMAC, X3DC, and X4DC
• 12 go to the ASC_PZT
• 2 go to the SPARE_ADC (not sure what this is)
• I think these channels are (or were at some point) defined in memory by /cvs/cds/caltech/chans/ipc/G1.ipc
• I found this from elog 2860; it mentions that these should eventually be migrated over to a file C1.ipc, but I don't see any OMC channels in that file or any of the 'old' C1.ipc files, so I suppose it never happened or they were removed later
• During this vent, we won't have ASC, so
• 10 or 14 DAC channels are used (depending whether we keep 4 spare dac chans)
• 2 from the LSC, one for CLK_OUT and one for "LSC"
• 8 from ASC, including P1A, P1B, P2A, P2B, P1OSC, Y1OSC, P2OSC, Y2OSC
• I think these channels are (or were at some point) saved to frames due to /cvs/cds/caltech/chans/daq/C1OMC.ini, which I found from elog 2073
• At some point, the 33MHz mod depth was controlled by one of the spare OMC chans, C1:OMC-SPARE_DAC_CH_15. See elog 2126. I assume this is no longer the case, since c1omc is defunct.
• Durnig this vent, we won't have ASC and don't need to CLK_OUT the LSC, so we may just need one DAC channel

As of at least Nov 2009, the .par file for the OMC was located at /cvs/cds/gds/param/tpchn_C2 (see elog 2316)

Electronics inventory:
• Kepco HV supply, "OMC-L-PZT", labels indicate it goes to 250V, needs to be tested  ("TESTED OK 2014OCT12")
• Tip/Tilt Piezo Driver, LIGO D060287
• HV Piezo Driver, LIGO D060283
• QPD Whitening Board, D060214
• LIGO D050374/D050387
• LIGO D050368/D050373

Need to check:

• Can the ADC/DAC adapter boards (eg D0902006) drive whatever ~10V control signal we need across ~10m of SCSI cable?
•
14052   Wed Jul 11 16:23:21 2018 aaronUpdateOMCCoordination of the Output Mode-cleaner Mirror Insertion Expedition (COMMIE)

I started this document on my own with notes as I was tracing the beam path through the output optics, as well as some notes as I started digging through the elogs. Let's just put it here instead....

1. Beam from AS port into OMMT
2. Reflect off OM5-PJ
1. TO DO: check that the PZT works
2. 40/P/F/L, 1525-45-P
3. Pick off from OMPO
1. TO DO: determine how much power is needed for the pick off, choose an appropriate optic (for this vent probably 50-50 is fine)
2. The PO beam goes to OM6
4. Reflect off MMT1???
1. TO DO: determine if this mirror has a PZT, get it working
1. Has a PZT?
2. Which PZT channel on the DAQ?
3. Is there a cable going to from the DAC to the PZT?
4. Is the PZT functional?
5. How many PZTs does this mirror actually have?
2. TO DO: determine the real name of this optic, find its recent history in the elog
3. TO DO: determine the correct telescope parameters to optimally couple into the mode cleaner given the following:
4. TO DO: look up how the radius of curvature (RC) of the OMC has changed, and therefore what telescope parameters are necessary
5. Focused by MMT2???
1. TO DO: determine if this mirror has a PZT
1. Has a PZT?
2. Which PZT channel on the DAQ?
3. Is there a cable going to from the DAC to the PZT?
4. Is the PZT functional?
5. How many PZTs does this mirror actually have?
2. TO DO: determine the real name of this optic, find its recent history in the elog
6. Columnated by MMT3???
1. TO DO: determine if this mirror has a PZT
1. Has a PZT?
2. Which PZT channel on the DAQ?
3. Is there a cable going to from the DAC to the PZT?
4. Is the PZT functional?
5. How many PZTs does this mirror actually have?
7. Steered by MMT4???
1. TO DO: determine the real name of this optic
2. TO DO: why is this optic so small? Looks different from the rest, maybe weird space constraint
8. Steered by MMT5???
1. TO DO: why is this optic so large compared to OMMT4?
2. TO DO: is there a more space efficient way of steering this beam, or even some way that avoids having to steer with three distinct optics
9. Steered by MMT6???
1. TO DO: Can this optic be removed with some clever new beam path?
10. Cleaned by the OMC
1. TO DO: Where does the promptly reflected beam from OMC1 go after it exits the chamber?
2. TO DO: check the PZTs
1. Has a PZT?
2. Which PZT channel on the DAQ?
3. Is there a cable going to from the DAC to the PZT?
4. Is the PZT functional?
5. How many PZTs does the OMC actually have?
3. TO DO: Determine if a new OMC configuration would be more ideal for the squeezing experiment
1. This is a large task, not part of this immediate vent
4. TO DO: What is done with the OMC reflection? What is done with the transmission?
5. TO DO: Check the logs about how the OMC had been in use; should be mostly from rob ward
11. Reflected beam goes to the next chamber
12. Transmitted beam is split by OM7???
1. TO DO: find the actual name of this optic
2. TO DO: why does this have the R/T that is does?
13. Reflected beam goes to my OMPD
1. TO DO: figure out what this PD is used for, and whether we even need it
1. I think this might be the camera mentioned in 40m elog 21
2. Elog 42 says the 4 QPDs for the OMC have meds screens located under C2TPT—is this a clue for channel names?
14. Transmitted beam is reflected to the next chamber by OM8???
1. TO DO: determine the name of this optic
2. TO DO: Where does this beam go? What is it used for?
1. Transmission through OM5? Probably don’t need…
2. OMMT1 transmission
3. OMMT steering mirror transmissions
4. OMC transmissions? Probably not?
5. OMPD transmission?
6. OM8 transmission
7. Green scattering off of the window where the beam goes after GR_SM5
8. Backscatter from the OMC prompt reflection to the window
9. Backscatter from the OMC reflection to the window
10. Backscatter from the MC beam off the window (this beam just travels through this chamber, interacts with no optics; there is also what looks like a small blue beam on this diagram, so maybe need to dump that backscatter too)
11. Backscatter from the PO beam from OM6 going through the chamber window
12. Backscatter from IM1 out the window
13. There is a small blue beam from OMMT3 that goes through this window as well, I’m not sure exactly what is is from or for, or if it is physical (there are a few of these strange blue lines, i'm probably just misreading the diagram)
16. TESTS TO DO
1. Characterize the PZT control
2. Lock the OMC with a PZT dither lock
1. Eg elog 59
3. “Tap-tap-tappy-tap test” to find resonanes
1. Look at combination of PDH error signal and DCPD signal???
2. See elog 86 for results from initial OMC install—Nov 2007
4. Check wiggling wires, etc
5. TFs to check? Vertical TF?
6. OMC Length check— see for eg elog 768
1. Mode matching calculation for new radius of curvature optics—see elog 1271
1. The current MMT is not the optimal configuration even for the old Rc (see 3077 and 3088)

• Entry 590 has a labelled picture of the optics setup with OMC
• Mention of omcepics at elog 894
• Some important changes happened in elog 1823
• 1''->2'' mirror out of the vacuum--I should check whether this is still there, or if it has been moved
• [many more changes.....]
• There were at one time 2 cameras monitoring OMCT and R (see 4492, 4493)
• Some OMC PZT HV supply info is at elog 4738, 4740...
• There are some photos of the OMC table at elog 5120, and a note about moving some optics
• Not strictly about the OMC, but I really like Suresh's diagram 6756, I'll make something similar for the OMC electronics
• although it is about adding the tip tilt electronics, which I think required a new flange for the OMC chamber
• OMC stage 1 and 2 are the steering mirrors going into the OMC, and were controlled by EPICS chans (6875, 6884)
• these PZT HV supplies lived in OMC_SOUTH (or maybe 1Y3? see elog 6893), the driver in OMC_NORTH (LIGO-D060287)
• Photos of these supplies in 7696
• There are pictures of the OMC and its PZTs in 7401
• The OMC HV supply was moved to power a different set of PZTs (see 7603)
• Talk of replacing the PZTs with picomotors or tip/tilts in 7684
• More pictures of the OMC table before the OMC was 'removed' are here (8114) and in 12563/12571 Gautam links to a Picassa album with pictures from just before the beam was diverted
14056   Thu Jul 12 12:26:39 2018 aaronUpdateGeneralOMC revival

We found a diagram describing the DC Readout wiring scheme on the wiki page for DC readout (THIS DIAGRAM LIED TO US). The wiring scheme is in D060096 on the old DCC.

Following this scheme for the OMC PZT Driver, we measured the capacitance across pins 1 and 14 on the driver end of the cable nominally going to the PZT (so we measured the capacitance of the cable and PZT) at 0.5nF. Gautam thought this seemed a bit low, and indeed a back of the envelope calculation says that the cable capacitance is enough to explain this entire capacitance.

Gautam has gone in to open up the HV driver box and check that the pinout diagram was correct. We could identify the PZT from Gautam's photos from vent 79, but couldn't tell if the wires were connected, so this may be something to check during the vent.

UPDATE:

Turns out the output was pins 13 and 25, we measured the capacitance again and got 209nF, which makes a lot more sense.

14060   Thu Jul 12 21:16:25 2018 aaronUpdateOMCChecking OMC Electronics

In preparation for tomorrow's vent, I'm checking some of the OMC-related electronics we plan to use.

# First up is the HV Piezo Driver (D060283).

(well, technically the first up was the Kepco HV power supply... but I quickly tested that its output works up to 300V on a multimeter. The power supply for OMC-L-PZT is all good!)

According to the DCC, the nominal HV supply for this board is 200V; the board itself is printed with "+400V MAX", and the label on the HV supply says it was run at 250V. For now I'm applying 200V. I'm also supplying +-15V from a Tektronix supply.

I used two DB25 breakout boards to look at the pins for the DC and AC voltage monitors (OMC_Vmon_+/-, pins 1/6, and OMC_Vmon_AC+/-, pins 2 and 7) on a scope. I hooked up a DS345 function generator to the piezo drive inputn (pins 1,6). According to the 2013 diagram from the DCC, there is just one drive input, and an alternative "dither in" BNC that can override the DAC drive signal. I leave the alternative dither floating and am just talking to the DAC pins.

Aspects of the system seem to work. For example, I can apply a sine wave at the input, and watch on the AC monitor FFT as I shift the frequency. However, anything I do at DC seems to be filtered out. The DC output is always 150V (as long as 200V comes from the supply). I also notice that the sign of the DC mon is negative (when the Vmon_+ pin is kept high on the scope), even though when I measure the voltage directly with a multimeter the voltage has the expected (+) polarity.

A few things to try:

• The DC_Readout electronics scheme on the wiki has separate oscillator and control inputs. This diagram has lied to us in the past and is older, and the traces on top of the breadboard seem to only go to pins 1 and 6, but I'm going to first try to apply a voltage across pins 2 and 7 in case there actually is a separate control I'm ignoring.
• Driving on these pins seems to do nothing

On further investigation this was the key clue. I had the wrong DCC document, this is an old version of this board, the actual board we are using is version A1 of D060283-x0 (one of the "other files")

Gautam and Koji returned at this point and we started going through the testpoints of the board, before quickly realizing that the DC voltage wasn't making it to the board. Turns out the cable was a "NULL" cable, so indeed the AC wasn't passing. We swapped out the cable, and tested the circuit with 30V from the HV supply to trim the voltage reference at U14. The minimum voltage we could get is 5V, due to the voltage divider to ground made by R39. We confirmed that the board, powered with 200V, can drive a sine wave and the DC and AC mons behave as expected.

14064   Fri Jul 13 10:54:55 2018 aaronUpdateVACVent 80

[aaron, steve]

Steve gave me a venting tutorial. I'll record this in probably a bit more detail than is strictly necessary, so I can keep track of some of the minor details for future reference.

Here is Steve's checklist:

• Check that all jam nuts are tightened
• all viewports are closed
• op levs are off
• take a picture of the MEDM screens
• Check particle counts
• Check that the cranes work & wiped
• Check that HV is off

Gautam already did the pre-vent checks, and Steve took a screenshot of the IFO alignment, IMC alignment, master op lev screen, suspension condition, and shutter status to get a reference point. We later added the TT_CONTROL screen. Steve turned off all op levs.

We then went inside to do the mechanical checks

• N2 cylinders in the 40m antechamber are all full enough (have ~700psi/day of nitrogen)
• We manually record the particle count
• this should be <10,000 on the 0.5um particles to be low enough to vent, otherwise we will contaminate the system
• note: need to multiply the reading on the particle counter by 10 to get the true count
• the temperature inside the PSL enclosure should be 23-24C +/- 3 degrees
• We recorded the particle counts at ~830 and ~930, and the 0.5um count was up to ~3000
• We put a beam stop in front of the laser at the PSL table
• Checked that all HV supplies are either off or supplying something in air
• we noticed four HV supplies on 1X1 that were on. Two were accounted for on the PSL table (FSS), and the other two were for C1IOO_ASC but ran along the upper cable rack. We got ahold of Gautam (sorry!) and he told us these go to the TT driver on OMC_SOUTH, where we verified the HV cables are disconnected. We took this to mean these HV supplies are not powering anything, and proceeded without turning these HV off.
• There are HV supplies which were all either off or supplying something in-air at: 1Y4, 1Y2, OMC N rack, 1X9 (green steering HV)
• Checked that the crane works--both move up and down
• vertex crane switch is on the wall at the inner corner of the IFO
• y arm crane switch is on the N wall at the Y end
• turn off the cranes at the control strip after verifying they work
• While walking around checking HV, we checked that the jam nuts and viewports are all closed
• we replaced one viewport at the x arm that was open for a camera

After completing these checks, we grabbed a nitrogen cylinder and hooked it up to the VV1 filter. Steve gave me a rundown of how the vacuum system works. For my own memory, the oil pumps which provide the first level of roughing backstream below 500mtorr, so we typically turn on the turbo pumps (TP) below that level... just in case there is a calibrated leak to keep the pressure above 350mtorr at the oil pumps. TP2 has broken, so during this vent we'll install a manual valve so we can narrow the aperture that TP1 sees at V1 so we can hand off to the turbo at 500mtorr without overwhelming it. When the turbos have the pressure low enough, we open the mag lev pump. Close V1 if things screw up to protect the IFO. This 6" id manual gatevalve will allow us throttle the load on the small turbo while the maglev is taking over the pumping  The missmatch in pumping speed is 390/70 l/s [ maglev/varian D70 ]  We need to close down the conductive intake of the TP1 with manual gate valve so the 6x smaller turbo does not get overloaded...

We checked CC1, which read 7.2utorr.

Open the medm c0/ce/VacControl_BAK.adl to control the valves.

Steve tells me we are starting from vacuum normal state, but that some things are broken so it doesn't exactly match the state as described. In particular, VA6 is 'moving' because it has been disconnected and permanently closed to avoid pumping on the annulus. During this v ent, we will also keep pumping on the RGA since it is a short vent; steve logged the RGA yesterday.

We began the vent by following the vacuum normal to chamber open procedure.

1. VM1 closed
2. We didn't open VM3, because we want to keep the RGA on
3. Closed V1
4. Connect the N2 to the VV1 filter
1. first puged the line with nitrogen
2. We confirmed visually that V1 is closed
5. We opened VM2 to pump on the RGA with the mag lev pump.
1. This is a nonstandard step because we are keeping the RGA pumped down.
2. The current on TP3 is ~0.19A, which is a normal, low load on the pump
6. VV1 opened to begin the vent at ~10:30am
1. use crescent wrench to open, torque wrench wheel to close
2. Keep the pressure regulator below 10 psi for the vent. We started the vent with about 2psi, then increased to 8psi after confirming that the SUS sensors looked OK.
7. We checked the pressure plot and ITMX/ETMX motion to make sure we weren't venting too quickly or kicking the optics
1. Should look at eg C1:SUS-ITMX_SENSOR_LL, as well as C1:Vac-P1_pressure
8. Once the pressure reaches 25torr, we switched over to dry air
1. wipe off the outside dolly wheels with a wet rag, and exit through the x-arm door to get the air. Sweep off the area outside the door, and wipe off new air containers with the rag.
2. Bring the cylinder inside, get the regulator ready/purged, and swap relatively quickly.
3. We increased the vent speed to 10psi.
4. Steve says the vents typically take 4 of 300 cf cylinders from Airgas "Ultra Zero" AI  UZ300 that contains 0.1 PPM of THC

Everything looks good, so I'm monitoring the vent and swapping out cylinders.

At 12:08pm, the pressure was at 257 torr and I swapped out in a new cylinder.

Steve: Do not overpressurize the vacuum envelope! Stop around 720 Torr and let lab air do the rest. Our bellows are thin walled for seismic isolation.

Attachment 1: vent80wtiptilts.png
14072   Sat Jul 14 16:04:34 2018 aaronUpdateOMCChecking OMC Electronics

# Next check is the DCPD/OMMT Satellite Box

I traced a cable from the OMC electrical feedthrough flanges to find the DCPD/OMMT Satellite Box (D060105). I couldn't find the DCC number or mention of the box anywhere except this old elog.

Gautam and I supplied the box with power and tested what we think is the bias for the PD, but don't read any bias... we tracked down the problem to a suspicious cable, labelled.

We confirmed that the board supplies the +5V bias that Rich told us we should supply to the PDs.

We tested the TFs for the board from the PD input pins to output pins with a 100kHz low pass (attached, sorry no phase plots). The TFs look flat as expected. The unfiltered outputs of the board appear bandpassed; we couldn't identify why this was from the circuit diagram but didn't worry too much about it, as we can plan to use the low passed outputs.

Attachment 1: Screenshot_2018-07-14_17.53.40.png
Attachment 2: Screenshot_2018-07-14_17.57.17.png
14120   Tue Jul 31 22:50:18 2018 aaronUpdateOMCOMC Expected Refl Signal

I learned a lot about lasers this week from Siegman. Here are some plots that show the expected reflectivity off of the OMC for various mode matching cases.

The main equation to know is 11.29 in Siegman, the total reflection coefficient going into the cavity:

$R=r-\frac{t^2}{r}\frac{g(\omega)}{1-g(\omega)}$

Where r is the mirror reflectivity (assumed all mirrors have the same reflectivity), t is the transmissivity, and g is the complex round-trip gain, eq 11.18

$g(\omega)=r_1r_2(r_3...)e^{-i\phi}e^{-\alpha_0p}$

The second exponential is the loss; in Siegman the \alpha_0 is some absorption coecfficient and p is the total round trip length, so the product is just the total loss in a round trip, which I take to be 4*the loss on a single optic (50ppm each). \phi is the total round trip phase accumulation, which is 2\pi*detuning(Hz)/FSR. The parameters for the cavity can be found on the wiki.

I've added the ipynb to my personal git, but I can put it elsewhere if there is somewhere more appropriate. I think this is all OK, but let me know if something is not quite right.

Attachment 1: omcRefl.pdf
14141   Mon Aug 6 20:41:10 2018 aaronUpdateDAQNew DAC for the OMC

Gautam and I tested out the DAC that he installed in the latter half of last week. We confirmed that at least one of the channels is can successfully drive a sine wave (ch10, 1-indexed). We had to measure the output directly on the SCSI connector (breakout in the FE hard drive cabinet along the Y arm), since the SCSI breakout box (D080303) seems not to be working (wiring diagram in Gautam's elog from his SURF years).

I added some DAC channels to our c1omc model:
PZT1_PIT
PZT1_YAW
PZT2_PIT
PZT2_YAQ

And determined that when we go to use the ADC, we will initially want the following channels (even these are probably unnecessary for the very first scans):
TRANS_PD1
TRANS_PD2
REFL_PD
DVMDC (drive voltage monitor, DC level)
DVMAC ("", AC level, only needed if we dither the length)

I attach a screenshot of the model, and a picture of where the whitening/dewhitening boards should go in the rack.
Attachment 1: OMCDACmdl.png
14153   Fri Aug 10 11:29:39 2018 aaronConfigurationUpgradeParts list for BHD

I've started putting together a list of things we'll need to buy to do BHD readout. I'm still messing around with more detailed optics layouts, but wanted to get a list started here so people can let me know if I'm missing any big, obvious categories of goods.

My current plan makes minimal changes to the signal path going to the OMC, and tries to just get the LO beam into the OMC with minimal optics. I'm not thinking of any of the optics as suspended, and it requires several reflections of the LO beam, so probably this is not an excellent configuration, but it's a start for getting the parts list:

1. My current thought is to use the MC reflection, the beam that heads from MC1 to MCR1, as the LO beam
1. From MCR1, send the LO to a BS that directs it into an MMT, oriented along x (and lets us keep the MC refl PO)
2. After the two MMT optics, the beam will be traveling along -x, and can be directed to a mirror that sends it towards -y to two steering mirrors that send it along -x then +x near the top of the table (perpendicular to the signal MMT.
3. Then, send it to a PBS, which replaces the mirror directly after the signal MMT. This is where it combines
2. Beam is then sent to the steering mirrors to bring it into the OMC
3. In parallel, the signal beam is going through the same path it has now, including the pickoff beam, with the one change that we need a HWP somewhere before the PBS, and the PBS replaces the mirror directly after the MMT (and needs to move a bit closer to have the beam properly directed)

I started making a layout of this scheme, but it's probably not going to work so I'm going to make a quick layout of this more major modification instead:

1. Both the MCR beam and the AS beam come in about parallel. Send each to a PO mirror.
2. The PO mirror directs both beams into parallel MMT aligned along x
3. From the MMT, each is directed to a pair of steering mirrors located where the OMC MMT is located now
4. From the steering mirrors go to the PBS that combines the signal and LO
5. Then to two more steering mirrors to get into the OMC, which may be moved towards +x
6. From the OMC go to the BHD PBS

## What we need

### Optics

• HWP for just before the LO combines with the signal
• HWP for just before the signal combines with the LO (is this necessary?)
• PBS to replace OM5 (combines the LO and the signal)
• Two MMT optics
• Two piezo-driven TT optics for steering the LO to the PBS
• One additional non-piezo optic for between the LOMMT and the LO-TTs
• One additional BS to get the LO into the MMT (and to let us still have the PO)
• -1 optic—we pick up one mirror that we replace with the PBS

### Optomechanics

• 2x HWP mounts
• 1x PBS mount
• 2x mounts for piezo-driven TT
• 2x MMT optic mounts—I didn’t take a close enough look at these during the vent to know what we need here
• 2x mounts for ordinary optics
• 9x clamps for optics mounts (maybe fewer if some are on blocks)
• 9x posts for optics mounts

### Electronics

• HV supply for the new TTs
• Are the HWP actively controlled? We might need something to drive those?
• Do we have enough DAC/ADC channels?

## Questions

These are mostly just miscellaneous

1. What of these optics need to be suspended? If we need suspensions on all of the LO optics, including the MMT, I’m not sure we’re going to be able to fit all of this on the table as I envision it…..
2. What if anything can we put out of vacuum (HWP for example)?
3. Do we actually need two MMT?
14155   Sun Aug 12 10:59:34 2018 aaronConfigurationUpgradeParts list for BHD

That seems fine, I wasn't thinking of that beam. in that case could we just have a PBS directly behind MMT2 and send both beams to the same OMMT?

Alternatively we can move OM5 and the beam path OMPO-OMMTSM towards -y, then put the LO-OMMT parallel to the existing OMMT but displaced in +x... we'd have to move the existing OMC and BHD towards +x as well.

 Quote: Can we use the leakage beam from MMT2 on the OMC table as the LO beam? I can't find the spec for this optic, but the leakage beam was clearly visible on an IR card even with the IMC locked with 100 mW input power so presumably there's enough light there, and this is a cavity transmission beam which presumably has some HOM content filtered out.
14158   Mon Aug 13 17:20:07 2018 aaronConfigurationUpgradeParts list for BHD

I've attached the diagram of what I mean.

There are a couple caveats and changes that would have to be made that are not included in this diagram, because they would be made on different tables.

1. I moved MMT2, which means the other MMT optics would have to be adjusted to accomodate this. I checked out the configuration on the BS table and this seems doable with a small rotation of MMT1 and maybe PJ2.
2. I don't know the best way to get the OMC REFL beam out... thoughts?
3. This diagram is kind of crappy after my edits, someone should tell me how to avoid collapsing all layers when I open these layout diagrams in inkscape, because I ended up editing the layout in Acrobat instead, where the lack of object grouping caused a bunch of the optics to lose one or two lines along the way.
4. I didn't include all beam paths explicitly but can if this looks like a good configuration.
5. The optic that picks off the transmission through MMT2 will need to move a bit, but there was a clamp in the way; this should be a minor change.
6. The optic just before the OMC needs to be moved up a bit.
7. The optic after the signal OMMT should be changed to a PBS and translated a bit; this is where the LO and signal beams will combine

Gautam also had some questions about the BHD/OMC timeline and plan. I feel somewhat on shaky ground with the answers, but figured I'd post them so I can be corrected once and for all.

1. Is the plan really to use the current OMC setup to make a homodyne measurement?
1. I'm not sure where on the timeline the new OMC and BHD switchover are relative to each other. I have been imagining doing the swap to BHD before having a new OMC.
2. I thought the current OMC resurrection plan was to do DC readout and not homodyne?
1. I think the OMC resurrection plan is leading to DC readout, but when we switch over to BHD we'll be able to operate at the dark fringe. Is that right?
3. Is it really possible to use our single OMC to clean both the LO and dark port beams? Isn't this the whole raging debate for A+?
1. My understanding is yes, with the LO and DP in orthogonal polarizations. It's not clear to me why we expect to be able to do this while there is a debate for A+, perhaps our requirements are weaker. It is something I should calculate, I'll talk to Koji.
4. A layout diagram would be really useful.
1. Attached now.
5. Where in the priority list does this come in?
1. I am a leaf in the wind. I think this comes well after we have the OMC resurrected, we just want to get a sense for what parts we need so we can order them before the fiscal year closes.
Quote:

That seems fine, I wasn't thinking of that beam. in that case could we just have a PBS directly behind MMT2 and send both beams to the same OMMT?

Alternatively we can move OM5 and the beam path OMPO-OMMTSM towards -y, then put the LO-OMMT parallel to the existing OMMT but displaced in +x... we'd have to move the existing OMC and BHD towards +x as well.

 Quote: Can we use the leakage beam from MMT2 on the OMC table as the LO beam? I can't find the spec for this optic, but the leakage beam was clearly visible on an IR card even with the IMC locked with 100 mW input power so presumably there's enough light there, and this is a cavity transmission beam which presumably has some HOM content filtered out.

Attachment 1: BHD_layout.pdf
ELOG V3.1.3-