40m QIL Cryo_Lab CTN SUS_Lab TCS_Lab OMC_Lab CRIME_Lab FEA ENG_Labs OptContFac Mariner WBEEShop
 40m Log, Page 66 of 335 Not logged in
ID Date Author Type Category Subject
14449   Tue Feb 12 18:00:32 2019 gautamSummaryLoss MeasurementLoss measurement setup

Another arm loss measurement started at 6pm.

14450   Tue Feb 12 22:59:17 2019 gautamSummaryLoss MeasurementY arm loss

Summary:

There are still several data quality issues that can be improved. I think there is little point in reading too much into this until some of the problems outlined below are fixed and we get a better measurement.

Details:

1. Mainly, we are plagued by the inability of the ASS system to get back to the good transmission levels - I haven't done a careful diagnosis of the servo, but the ITM PIT output always seems to run away. As a result, the later measurements are poor, as can be seen in Attachment #2.
2. For this reason, we can't easily sample different spot positions on the ETM.
3. Data processing:
• Take their ratio
• Downsample to 4 Hz by repeated application of scipy.signal.decimate by a factor of 8 each time, thrice, with the filtfilt option enabled
4. Attachment #1 and #2 are basically showing the same data - the former collects all locked (top left) and misaligned (top right) data segments and plots them with the corresponding TRY values in the bottom row. The second plot shows a pseudo-continuous time series (pseudo because the segments transitioning from locked to misaligned states have been excised).

As an interim fix, I'm going to try and use the Oplevs as a DC reference, and run the dither alignment from zero each time, as this prevents the runaway problem at least. Data run started at 11:20 pm.

Attachment 1: segmented.pdf
Attachment 2: consolidated.pdf
14451   Wed Feb 13 02:28:58 2019 gautamSummaryLoss MeasurementY arm loss

Attachment #1 shows estimated systematic uncertainty contributions due to

1. ITM transmission by +/- 0.01 % about the nominal value of 1.384 %
2. ETM transmission of +/- 3 ppm about the nominal value of 13.7 ppm
3. Mode matching efficiency into the cavity by +/- 5% about the nominal value of 92%.

In all the measurements so far, the ratio seems to be < 1, so this would seem to set a lower bound on the loss of ~35 ppm. The dominant source of systematic uncertainty is the 5% assumed fudge in the mode-matching

To do:

1. Account for uncertainties on modulation depths
2. To estimate if the amount of fluctuation we are seeing in the reflected signal even after normalizing by the MC transmission, get an estimate of statistical uncertainty in the reflected power due to
• Pointing jitter - is there some spec for the damped angular displacement of the TT1/TT2?
• Cavity length in-loop residual

Bottom line: I think we need to have other measurements and simultaenously analyse the data to get a more precise estimate of the loss.

Attachment 1: systUnc.pdf
14454   Thu Feb 14 21:29:24 2019 gautamSummaryLoss MeasurementInferred Y arm loss

Summary:

From the measurements I have, the Y arm loss is estimated to be 58 +/- 12 ppm. The quoted values are the median (50th percentile) and the distance to the 25th and 75th quantiles. This is significantly worse than the ~25 ppm number Johannes had determined. The data quality is questionable, so I would want to get some better data and run it through this machinery and see what number that yields. I'll try and systematically fix the ASS tomorrow and give it another shot.

Model and analysis framework:

Johannes and I have cleaned up the equations used for this calculation - while we may make more edits, the v1 of the document lives here. The crux of it is that we would like to measure the quantity $\kappa = \frac{P_L}{P_M}$, where $P_{L(M)}$ is the power reflected from the resonant cavity (just the ITM). This quantity can then be used to back out the round-trip loss in the resonant cavity, with further model parameters which are:

1. ITM and ETM power transmissivities
2. Modulation depths and mode-matching efficiency into the cavity
3. The statistical uncertainty on the measurement of the quantity $\kappa$, call it $\sigma_{\kappa}$

If we ignore the 3rd for a start, we can calculate the "expected" value of $\kappa$ as a function of the round-trip loss, for some assumed uncertainties on the above-mentioned model parameters. This is shown in the top plot in Attachment #1, and while this was generated using emcee, is consistent with the first order uncertainty propagation based result I posted in my previous elog on this subject. The actual samples of the model parameters used to generate these curves are shown in the bottom. What this is telling us is that even if we have no measurement uncertainty on $\kappa$, the systematic uncertainties are of the order of 5 ppm, for the assumed variation in model parameters.

The same machinery can be run backwards - assuming we have multiple measurements of $\kappa$, we then also have a sample variance, $\sigma_{\kappa}$. The uncertainty on the sample variance estimator is also known, and serves to quantify the prior distribution on the parameter $\sigma_{\kappa}$ for our Monte-Carlo sampling. The parameter $\sigma_{\kappa}$ itself is required to quantify the likelihood of a given set of model parameters, given our measurement. For the measurements I did this week, my best estimate of $\kappa \pm \sigma_{\kappa} = 0.995 \pm 0.005$. Plugging this in, and assuming uncorrelated gaussian uncertainties on the model parameters, I can back out the posterior distributions.

For convenience, I separate the parameters into two groups - (i) All the model parameters excluding the RT loss, and (ii) the RT loss. Attachment #2 and Attachment #3 show the priors (orange) and posteriors (black) of these quantities.

Interpretations:

1. This particular technique only gives us information about the RT loss - much less so about the other model parameters. This can be seen by the fact that the posteriors for the loss is significantly different from the prior for the loss, but not for the other parameters. Potentially, the power of the technique is improved if we throw other measurements at it, like ringdowns.
2. If we want to reach the 5 ppm uncertainty target, we need to do better both on the measurement of the DC reflection signals, and also narrow down the uncertainties on the other model parameters.

Some assumptions:

So that the experts on MC analysis can correct me wheere I'm wrong.

1. The prior distributions are truncated independent Gaussians - truncated to avoid sampling from unphysical regions (e.g. negative ITM transmission). I've not enforced the truncation analytically - i.e. I just assume a -infinity probability to samples drawn from the unphysical parts, but to be completely sure, the actual cavity equations enforce physicality independently (i.e. the MC generates a set of parameters which is input to another function, which checks for the feasibility before making an evaluation). One could argue that the priors on some of these should be different - e.g. uniform PDF for loss between some bounds? Jeffrey's prior for $\sigma_{\kappa}$?
2. How reasonable is it to assume the model parameter uncertainties are uncorrelated? For exaple, $\eta, \beta_1, \beta_2$ are all determined from the ALS-controlled cavity scan
Attachment 1: modelPerturb.pdf
Attachment 2: posterior_modelParams.pdf
Attachment 3: posterior_Loss.pdf
14463   Sun Feb 17 17:35:04 2019 gautamSummaryLoss MeasurementInferred X arm loss

Summary:

To complete the story before moving on to ALS, I decided to measure the X arm loss. It is estimated to be 20 +/- 5 ppm. This is surprising to say the least, so I'm skeptical - the camera image of the ETMX spot when locked almost certainly looks brighter than in Oct 2016, but I don't have numerical proof. But I don't see any obvious red flags in the data quality/analysis yet. If true, this suggests that the "cleaning" of the Yarm optics actually did more harm than good, and if that's true, we should attempt to identify where in the procedure the problem lies - was it in my usage of non-optical grade solvents?

Details:

1. Unlike the Y arm, the ratio $\kappa = 1.006 \pm 0.002$ is quite unambiguously greater than 1, which is already indicative of the loss being lower than for the Y arm. This is reliably repeatable over 15 datapoints at least.
2. Attachment #1 shows the spectrum of the single-bounce off ITMX beam and compares it to ITMY - there is clearly a difference, and my intuition is to suspect some scatter / clipping, but I confirmed that on the AS table, in air, there is no clipping. So maybe it's something in vacuum? But I'm not sure how to explain its absence for the ITMX reflection. I didn't check the Michelson alignment since I misaligned ITMY before locking the XARM - so maybe there's a small shift in the axis of the X arm reflection relative to the Yarm because of the BS alignment. The other possibility is clipping at the BS?
3. Attachment #2 shows the filtered time series for a short segment of the measurement. The X arm ASS is mostly well behaved, but the main thing preventing me from getting more statistics in is the familiar ETMX glitching problem, which while doesn't directly break the lock causes large swings in TRX. Given the recent experience with ETMY satellite box, I'm leaning towards blaming flaky electronics for this. If this weren't a problem, I'd run a spatial scan of ETMX, but I'm not going to attack this problem today.
4. Attachments #3 and #4 show the posterior distributions for model parameters and loss respectively.
5. Data quality checks done so far (suggestions welcome):
• Confirmed that there is no fringing from other ITM (in this case ITMY) / PRM / SRM / ETM in the single-bounce off ITMX config, by first macroscopically misaligning all these optics (the spots could be seen to move on the AS port PD, until they vanished, at some point presumably getting clipped in-vac), and then moving the optics around in PIT/YAW and looking for any effect in the fast time-series using NDScope.
• Checked for slow drifts in locked / misaligned states - looks okay.
• Checked centering on PDA520 using both o'scope plateau method and IR viewer - I believe the beam to be well centered.

Provisional conclusions:

1. The actual act of venting / pumping down doesn't have nearly as large an effect on the round-trip loss as does working in chamber - the IX and EX chambers have not been opened since the 2016 vent.
2. The solvent marks visible with the green flashlight on ETMY possibly signals the larger loss for the Y arm.
Attachment 1: DQcheck_XARM.pdf
Attachment 2: consolidated.pdf
Attachment 3: posterior_modelParams_XARM.pdf
Attachment 4: posterior_Loss_XARM.pdf
14464   Mon Feb 18 19:16:55 2019 ranaSummaryComputersnew laptop setup: ASIA

The old IBM laptop (Asia) has died from a fan error after 7 years. WE have a new Lenovo 330 IdeaPad to replace it:

1. to enter bios, the usual FN keys don't work. Power off laptop. Insert paperclip into small hole on laptop side with upside-down U symbol. Laptop powers up into BIOS setup.
2. Insert SL 7.6 DVD into drive
3. Change all settings from modern UEFI into Legacy support. Change Boot order to put CDROM first.
4. Boot.
5. Touchpad is not detected. Hookup mouse for setup.
6. Delete windows partition.
7. Setup wireless network according to (https://wiki-40m.ligo.caltech.edu/Network). Computer name = asia.martian.
8. Set root password. Do not create user (we want to make the controls acct later using the command line so that we can set userID and groupID both to 1001).
9. Begin install...lots of disk access noises for awhile...

Install done. Touchpad not recognized by linux - lots of forum posts about kernel patching...Arrgh!

14474   Tue Mar 5 15:56:27 2019 gautamSummaryTip-TIltDiscussion points about TT re-design

Chub, Koji and I have been talking about Udit's re-design. Here are a few points that were raised. Chub/Koji can add to/correct where necessary. Summary is that this needs considerable work before we can order the parts for a prototype and characterize it. I think the requirements may be stated as:

1. The overall pendulum length should be similar to that of the SOS, i.e. ~0.3m (current length is more like 0.1m) such that the eigenfrequencies are lowered to more like ~1 Hz. Mainly we wan't to avoid any overlap with the stack eigenmodes. This may require an additional stiffening piece near the top of the tower as we have for the SOS. What is a numerical way to spec this?
2. The center of the 2" optic should be 6" from the table.
3. The mass of the optic + holder should be similar to the current design so we may use the same suspension wires (I believe they are a different thickness than that used for the SOS).
4. Ensure we can extract any transmitted beams without clipping.
6. We should preserve the footprint of the existing TTs, given the space constraints in vacuum. Moreover, we should be able to use dog-clamps to fix the tower in place, so the base plate should be designed accordingly.
7. Keep the machining requirements as simple as possible while achieving the above requirements- i.e. do we really need rounded optic holder? Why not just rectangular? Similarly for other complicated features in the current design.

Some problems with Udit's design as it stands:

1. I noticed that the base of the TT and the center of the 2" optic are 4" separated. The SOS cage base and center of 3" optic are separated by 6". Currently, there is an adaptor piece that raises the TT height to match that of the SOS. If we are doing a re-design, shouldn't we just aim for the correct height in the first place?
2. Udit doesn't seem to have taken into account the torque due to the optic+holder in the pitch balancing calculations he did. Since this is expected to be >> that of any rod/screw we use for fine pitch balancing, we need to factor that into the calculation.
3. For the coarse pitch adjustment, we'd need to slide the wire clamping piece relative to the optic holding piece. Rather than do this stochastically and hope for the best, the idea was to use a threaded screw to realize this operation in a controlled way. However, Udit's design doesn't include the threaded hole.
4. There are many complicated machining features which are un-necessary.
14485   Mon Mar 18 18:10:14 2019 KojiSummaryGeneralTask items and priority

[Gautam/Chub/Koji] ~ Mini discussion

(Priority high to low)

• TT/IO suspension upgrade (solidworks work) -> order components -> TT characterization
• Produce spread sheetfor DB files. Learn new format of the DB file with Acromag. Develop a python code for the DB file generation (Jon->Koji)
• Rack mount? Front panel DB connectors. New circuits (PD-LED)

• Acromag iscaux1/2 & isc whitening upgrade

• new RC mirror characterization -> installation
14543   Mon Apr 15 18:29:07 2019 ranaSummaryComputersnew laptop setup: ASIA - yum issues

had trouble using YUM to update. This turned out to be a config problem with our Martian router, not the new laptop. Since I've changed the WiFi pwd awhile ago for the martian access for the CDS laptops, you'll have to enter that in order to use the laptops.

turned out to be some Access Control nonsense inside of the router. Even loggin in as admin with a cable gave some of the fields the greyed out color (had to hover over the link and then type the URL directly in the browser window). ASIA is now able to connect and use YUM + usual connections. Gautam and I have also moved the router a little to get easier view of its LED lights and not blockk its WiFi signal with the cable tray. We'll get a little shelf so that we can mount it ~1 foot off of the wall.

still, this seems like a bad laptop choice: the Lenovo Ideapad 330 will not have its touchpad supported by SL7 without compiling a new version of the kernel

14568   Wed Apr 24 17:39:15 2019 YehonathanSummaryLoss MeasurementBasic analysis of loss measurement

Motivation

• Getting myself familiar with Python.
• Characterize statistical errors in the loss measurement.

Summary

​The precision of the measurement is excellent. We should move on to look for systematic errors.

In Detail

According to Johannes and Gautam (see T1700117_ReflectionLoss .pdf in Attachment 1), the loss in the cavity mirror is obtained by measuring the light reflected from the cavity when it is locked and when it is misaligned. From these two measurements and by using the known transmissions of the cavity mirrors, the roundtrip loss is extracted.

I write a Python notebook (AnalyzeLossData.ipynb in Attachment 1) extracting the raw data from the measurement file (data20190216.hdf5 in Attachment 1) analyzing the statistics of the measurement and its PSD.

Attachment 2 shows the raw data.

Attachment 3 shows the histogram of the measurement. It can be seen that the distribution is very close to being Gaussian.

The loss in the cavity pre roundtrip is measured to be 73.7+/-0.2 parts per million. The error is only due to the deviation in the PD measurement. Considering the uncertainty of the transmissions of the cavity mirrors should give a much bigger error.

Attachment 4 shows noise PSD of the PD readings. It can be seen that the noise spectrum is quite constant and there would be no big improvement by chopping the signal.

The situation might be different when the measurement is taken from the cavity lock PD where the signal is much weaker.

Attachment 1: LossMeasurementAnalysis.zip
Attachment 2: LossMeasurement_RawData.pdf
Attachment 3: LossMeasurement_Hist.pdf
Attachment 4: LossMeasurement_PSD.pdf
14598   Wed May 8 22:11:46 2019 ranaSummaryComputersnew laptop setup: ASIA - yum issues
• setup controls user using K Thorne LLO CDS offsite workstation instructions
• modified /etc/fstab ala pianosa to NFS mount disks
• set up symlinks as other workstations
• troubles with libsasl2 and libmetaio libraries as usual for SL7 - doing symlink tricks
• setup shared .bashrc
• now running 'yum install gds-all' to see if we need more local libraries to run GDS from the shared disks...
14616   Fri May 17 10:12:07 2019 AnjaliSummaryEquipment loanBorrowed component

I borrowed one Marconi (2023 B) from 40 m lab to QIL lab.

14618   Fri May 17 16:07:25 2019 gautamSummaryEquipment loanBorrowed component

ZHL-3A (2 units) —-> QIL

 Quote: I borrowed one Marconi (2023 B) from 40 m lab to QIL lab.
14624   Mon May 20 13:16:57 2019 gautamSummaryComputersnew laptop setup: ASIA - ndscope and diaggui

Following instructions here, I installed ndscope on this machine. DTT still could not be be run from this machine, and I want to use this today - so I ran the following commands from the K. Thorne setup instructions.

yum clean metadata
yum update
yum install cds-workstation pcaspy subversion redhat-lsb  gnuradio google-chrome-stable xorg-x11-drv-nvidia epel-release redhat-lsb

Now diaggui can be opened, and spectra can be made. I'm moving this laptop to its new home at EY.

 Quote: now running 'yum install gds-all' to see if we need more local libraries to run GDS from the shared disks...
14725   Thu Jul 4 10:54:21 2019 KojiSummarySUSSuspension damping recovered, ITMX stuck

So Cal Earthquake. All suspension watchdogs tripped.

Tried to recover the OSEM damping.

=> The watchdogs for all suspensions except for ITMX were restored. ITMX seems to be stuck. No further action by me for now.

14730   Fri Jul 5 23:28:52 2019 rana, kruthiSummarySUSETMX unstuck by shaking the stack

We unstuck ETMX by shaking the stack. Most effective was to apply large periodic human sized force to the north STACIS mounts.

At first, we noticed that the face OSEMs showed nearly zero variation.

We tried unsticking it through the usual ways of putting large excitations through AWG into the pit/yaw/side DOFs. This produced only ~0.2 microns of motion as seen by the OSEMs.

After the stack shake, we used the IFO ALIGN sliders to get the oplev beam back on the QPD.

The ETMX sensor trends observed before and after the earthquake are attached.

** plots deleted; SOMEONE, tried to take raster images and turn them into PDF as if this would somehow satisfy our vetor graphics requirement. Boo. lpots must be actual vector graphics PDF

14736   Tue Jul 9 08:33:31 2019 gautamSummarySUSETMX PIT bias voltage changed by ~1V

After this activity, the DC bias voltage required on ETMX to restore good X arm cavity alignment has changed by ~1.3 V. Assuming a full actuation range of 30 mrad for +/- 10 V, this implies that the pitch alignment of the stack has changed by ~2 mrad? Or maybe the suspension wires shifted in the standoff grooves by a small amount? This is ~x10 larger than the typical change imparted while working on the table, e.g. during a vent.

Main point is that this kind of range requirement should probably be factored in when thinking about the high-voltage coil driver actuation.

 Quote: We unstuck ETMX by shaking the stack. Most effective was to apply large periodic human sized force to the north STACIS mounts.
14744   Wed Jul 10 14:57:01 2019 KojiSummaryCDSChannel recipe for iscaux upgrade

The list of the iscaux channels and pin assignments were posted to google drive.
The spreadsheet can be viewable by the link sent to the 40m ML. It was shared with foteee@gmail for full access.

Summary

• We need
5 DAC modules
5 Binary I/O modules
• Be aware that there are bundled multiple digital I/O channels such as "mbboDirect" and "mbbi".
• The full db record of the new channels need to be inferred from the existing channels.

Necessary electronics modification

1. D990694 whitening filter modification (4 modules)

This module shares the fast and slow channels on the top DIN96pin (P1) connector. Also, the whitening selector (done by an analog signal per channel) is assigned over 17pin of the P1 connector, resulting in the necessity of the second DSUB cable. By migrating the fast channels, we can swap the cable from the P1 to P2.  Also, the whitening selectors are concentrated on the first Dsub. (See Attachment1 P1)

2. D040180 / D1500308 Common Mode Board

CM servo board itself doesn't need any modification. The CM board uses P1 and P2. So we need to manufacture a special connector for CM Board P2. (cf The adapter board for P1 T1800260). See also D1700058.

3. D990543A1 LSC Photodiode Interface

PD I/F board has the DC mon channels spread over the 16pin limit. P1 21A can be connected to 6A so that we can accommdate it in the first Dsub.
Also the board uses AD797s. This is not necessary. We can replace them to OP27s. I actually don't know what is happening to those bias control, temp mon, enable, and status. These features should be disables at the I/F and the PDs. (See Attachment2 P1)

Attachment 1: D990694-B.pdf
Attachment 2: D990543A1.PDF
14747   Thu Jul 11 12:42:35 2019 gautamSummaryCDSP2 interface board

I looked into the design of the P2 interface board. The main difficulty here is geometric - we have to somehow accommodate sufficient number of D-sub connectors in the tight space between the two P-type connectors.

I think the least painful option is to stick with Johannes' design for the P1 connector. For the CM board, the P2 connector only uses 6 pairs of conductors for signals. So we can use a D-15 connector instead of 2 D-37 connectors. Then we can change the PCB shape such that the P1 connector can be accommodated (see Attachment #1). The other alternative would be to have 2 P-type connectors and 3 D-subs on the same PCB, but then we have to be extra careful about the relative positioning of the P-type connectors (otherwise they wont fit onto the Eurocrate). So I opted to still have two separate PCBs.

I took a first pass at the design, the files may be found here. I just auto-routed the connections, this is just an electrical feedthrough so I don't think we need to be too concerned about the PCB trace routing? If this looks okay, we should send out the piece for fab ASAP.

I will work on putting together the EPICS server machine (SuperMicro) this afternoon.

 Quote: 2. D040180 / D1500308 Common Mode Board CM servo board itself doesn't need any modification. The CM board uses P1 and P2. So we need to manufacture a special connector for CM Board P2. (cf The adapter board for P1 T1800260). See also D1700058.
Attachment 1: IMG_7728.JPG
14749   Thu Jul 11 13:08:36 2019 ChubSummaryCDSP2 interface board

It's nice and compact, and the cost of new 15-pin DSUB cables shouldn't be a factor here.  What does the 15p cable connect to?

14750   Thu Jul 11 13:09:22 2019 gautam SummaryCDSP2 interface board

it will connect to a 15 pin breakout board in the Acromag chassis

 Quote: It's nice and compact, and the cost of new 15-pin DSUB cables shouldn't be a factor here.  What does the 15p cable connect to?
14754   Thu Jul 11 18:15:22 2019 gautamSummaryElectronicsPSL/IOO rack checkout

I looked at the PSL/IOO racks to check for which boards, if any, require an additional P2 interface, so that we can try and design a generic one for the IMC/CM boards and whatever else may require it. While searching the elog, I saw that Koji and Johannes had already done this, see Koji's elog in this thread. Some remarks:

1. D990155 seems to be unused in both PSL and IOO racks. The one in the PSL rack has some LEMO cables plugged in to the front panel, but they go nowhere. So I think that both of these are redundant (in the assessment below, only one was marked redundant).
2. In the PSL rack, the "TTFSS Interface", "PSL PMC SERVO", and "DAQ INTERFACE" (which I think is obsolete) cards all have their P2 connectors daisy chained together, going to a cross-connect. Kruthi and I traced this to be going to a cross connect marked "J23-PSLRACK-CCP". In the PSL wiring diagram of which we have a hardcopy in the control room, it looks like these channels are related to the RefCav? So I think this is not required to be interfaced to our new Acromag DAQ system.

Conclusion: Only the IMC Servo and CM boards need their P2 connectors connected to Acromag.It would be helpful to remove the TTFSS Interface board and figure out what exactly the pin-mapping for the backplane connectors are, but I didn't do this today because there is a "High Voltage" line going to the Interface Board and I'm not actually sure of the signal chain for the FSS servo.

14770   Thu Jul 18 00:51:52 2019 KojiSummaryCDSiscaux electronics modifications

Along with the plan in ELOG 14744, the ISC PD interface and the whitening filter board have been modificed. The ISC PD I/Fs were restored to the crate and the cables were connected. The whitening filteres are still on the electronics bench for some more tests before being returned to the crate.

The updated schematics were uploaded as https://dcc.ligo.org/D1900318 and https://dcc.ligo.org/D1900319

- Modification of the ISC PD interface: Jumpers between DIN96 P1 and P2. Replace all AD797s with OP27. In fact only I/F #1 (the left most)  had total 12 AD797 but the other units already had OP27s.

- Modification of the whitening filter: Jumpers between DIN96 P1 and P2.

Attachment 1: LSC_whitening2.jpg
Attachment 2: LSC_whitening.jpg
14775   Thu Jul 18 22:34:40 2019 KojiSummaryCDSiscaux electronics modifications

The whitening filter modules have been restored to the crates. The SMA cables have been restored and fastened by a spanner. The ribbon cable to the antialiasing board was also connected. The backplane cables have not been moved from the upper DIN96 connector to the lower one.

Everything is expected to be good, but just keep eyes on the LSC signals as the boards were not quantitatvely tested yet. If you find something suspicious, report on the elog.

14785   Sat Jul 20 11:57:39 2019 gautamSummaryCDSP2 interface board

The boards arrived. I soldered on a DIN96 connector, and tested that the goemetry will work. It does . The only constraint is that the P2 interface board has to be installed before the P1 interface is installed. Next step is to confirm that the pin-mapping is correct. The pin mapping from the DIN96 connector to the DB15 was also verified.

*Maybe it isn't obvious from the picture, but there shouldn't be any space constraint even with the DB37/DB15 cables connected to the respective adapter boards.

Attachment 1: IMG_7773.JPG
14818   Tue Jul 30 20:11:12 2019 ranaSummaryIMCIMC ASC: thoughts and hopes

One of the biggest challenges in LIGO is reducing the alignment control noise. If you haven't worked on it for at least a few years, it probably seems like a trivial problem. But all versions of LIGO since 2001 have been limited by ASC noise below ~50 Hz.

I think the 40m IMC is a good testbed for us to try a few approaches towards mitigating this noise in LIGO. The following is a list of steps to take to get there:

1. Using step responses and TF measurements, characterize the full existing system: SISO loop shapes, cross-couplings, and how diagnonal is the input and output matrices of the WFS. In principle, since we have 2 WFS in reflection and 1 DC QPD in the MC2 transmission, we should have full sensing of all angular DoFs.
2. Check the correct operation of the WFS heads and the whole RF chain. We want the gains in the system to be such that either the shot noise or the RF electronics noise of the head is the limiting broadband noise in the system.
3. Balancing the gains and phases of the demodulated signals is tricky, because we have no good reference. Should we use the JenneAM laser or the PSL beam?
4. Estimate the coupling from the angular feedback signal to the IMC length noise using (1) sine wave injections for linear coupling, and (2) broadband noise for nonlinear coupling.
5. We think the bilinear noise is due to the beam spot motion modulating the angle to length coupling as sensed by the laser beam. If this is true, we can increase the low frequency gain to minimize the beam spot motion (is this true?).
6. By sinusoidally driving the mirror angles we can measure the instantaneous beam spot positions. We can then derive the matrix required to convert from our angular sensors (WFS + QPD) into beam spot motion. We should modify our IMC-WFS real-time model to give us DAQ channels which are beam spot estimators.
7. Build a simulation of an IMC which has WFS, QPD, shot noise, and seismic noise.
8. Use our optimal linear-feedback design tools to make Angular loops which minimize the bilinear noise coupling.
9. Build a nonlinear controller (neural networks: dense + CNN) that outperforms the linear one by estimating the beam spot motion continuously and driving the cavity length to cancel the angle-to-length noise.

I think that steps 1-6 are well within our existing experience, but we should do it anyway so as to reduce the IMC beam motion at low frequencies, and also to reduce the 10-100 Hz frequency noise as seen by the rest of the interferometer.

Steps 7-8 are medium hard, but we can get some help from the CSWG in tackling it.

Step is pretty tough, but I would like to try it and also get some help from MLWG and CSWG to address it.

14829   Mon Aug 5 17:23:26 2019 gautamSummaryComputersWiFi Settings on asia

The VEA laptop asia was configured to be able to connect to too many WiFi networks - it was getting conflicted in its default position at the vertex and trying to hop between networks, for some reason trying to connect to networks that had poor signal strength. I deleted all options from the known networks except 40MARS. Now the network connection seems much more stable and reliable.

14877   Fri Sep 13 13:03:35 2019 KojiSummaryCDSDIN 96pin to DSUB37 adapter (single) ready for use

The PCB board of the adapter for DIN 96pin to DSUB37 conversion (single DSUB version) was delivered yesterday and I quickly soldered the connectors.

They are ready for use and stored in a JLCPCB cardboard box on a pile of acromag stuff. (Note that the lacel is written on the box with Sharpie)

Attachment 1: P_20190912_192109.jpg
14879   Mon Sep 16 09:11:37 2019 gautamSummaryCDSDIN 96pin to DSUB37 adapter (single) ready for use

I installed 6 of these in 1Y2. Three were for PD INTF #1-3, and I used three more for the AS110, REFL11, and REFL33 Demod board FEs, where the strain-reflief of the DC power cables to the Eurocrate was becoming a problem. So now there are only 4 units available as spares.

Once the strain-relieving of the Dsub cabling to 1Y3 is done, we can move ahead with testing. I'd like to put this to bed this week if possible.

14885   Mon Sep 16 20:22:19 2019 gautamSummaryCDSUpdate on the Acromag status
1. Jordan (new Engineer) and Chub neatened out the cabling at 1Y2/1Y3 today. After their work, I plugged in all the Dsubs to the rear Eurocrate DB37->DIN96 adaptors. Jordan nicely fixed up the labels on the cable with some extra sellotape for a more durable label.
2. As part of the war on cross-connects, Chub removed some cables that were piping BIO signals from the fast CDS system to the whitening boards.
• There is a SCSI to DB37 custom ribbon cable going from the BIO card in the expansion chassis to a 1U chassis box at the very bottom of 1Y2.
• This 1U box, with DCC number D080478 (but no schematic exists on the DCC or any of the usual secret hidey-holes) breaks out the 32 BIO channels to 16+16.
• Each set of 16 channels was supposed to get broken out to 8+8 via some cross connects and then goto the whitening boards. This is the part that got distrubed.
• Koji and I discussed options - if Chub cannot resotre this easily, we will make a D37--> 4*D15 breakout board, and pipe the signals via the backplane P2 connectors. This will mean ~10 more days before the LSC system can be tested.
• Some cabling to the TT DACs and an ADC were also disturbed, but these are easily restored.
3. From the hardware standpoint, some cross-struts for strain relief on the back of 1Y2 need to be installed --> Chub.
Attachment 1: acromagChecklist.pdf
14892   Tue Sep 17 23:43:34 2019 KojiSummaryCDSAcromag logic checker

For the investigation of the latch logic issue for the CARM CM board, I have made the LED logic checkers with DB breakout boards. They require the pull up voltage supply of +15V because the acromag digital out is a open corrector (well... open "source") output.

The logic from Pin1 to Pin16 of DB37 can be monitored. The DB15 connector is only for monitoring the latch enable logic.

What Gautam and I found with the logic outputs was that the latch logic works fine but occasionally we found that the top 2 bits and the bottom 4bit were processed independently.

Attachment 1: digital_checker.pdf
Attachment 2: IMG_8914.JPG
15082   Fri Dec 6 17:49:46 2019 ranaSummaryPEMJump test of seismometers: EX needs recentering

Yehonathan, please center the EX seismometer.

The attached PDF shows the seismometer signals (I'm assuming that they're already calibrated into microns/s) during the lab tour for the art students on 11/1. The big spike which I've zoomed in on shows the time when we were in the control room and we all jumped up at the same time. There were approximately 15 students each with a mass of ~50-70 kg. I estimate that out landing times were all sync'd to within ~0.1 s.

Attachment 1: Seismometers.pdf
Attachment 2: src.tgz
15083   Sun Dec 8 20:15:41 2019 ranaSummaryPEMJump test of seismometers: EX needs recentering

I have re-centered the EX (and EY) seismometers. They are Guralp CMG40-T, and have no special centering procedure except cycling the power a few times. I turned off the power on their interface box, then waited 10s before turning it back on.

The fist atm shows the comparison using data from 8-9 PM Saturday night:

1. there seems to be a factor of 2 calibration diff between the T240 near the BS, and the Guralp seismometers at the end. Which one is right? When was the last time they were cross calibrated?
2. The low coherence between BS_X and EX_X shows the problem. They should be very coherent (> 0.9) for 0.1-1 Hz.

Attachment 1: seis_all_191208.pdf
15086   Mon Dec 9 13:08:24 2019 YehonathanSummaryPEMJump test of seismometers: EX needs recentering

I check the seismometers in the last 14 hours (Attached). Seems like the coherenece is restored in the x direction.

Attachment 1: seis_191208.pdf
15093   Wed Dec 11 15:01:57 2019 JonSummaryPSLPMC cavity ringdown measurement

[Jon, Yehonathan]

We carried out a set of cavity ringdown measurements of the PMC. The 1/e decay time scale is found to be 35.2 +/- 2.4 (systematic) μs. The statistical error is negligible compared to the systematic error, which is taken as the maximum absolute deviation of any measurement from the average value.

To make the measurement, we injected the first order deflection beam of an 80 MHz AOM, then extinguished it quickly by cutting the voltage offset to the AOM driver provided by an RF function generator. A 100 MHz oscilloscope configured to trigger on the falling voltage offset was used to sample the cavity in transmission as sensed by a PDA55. We found the detector noise of the DC-coupled output of the 35.5 MHz REFL PD to be too high for a reflection-side measurement.

Further loss analysis is forthcoming.

Attachment 1: IMG_0101.jpg
15119   Mon Jan 13 23:30:53 2020 YehonathanSummaryPSLChanges made since Gautam left

As per Gautam's request, I list the changes that were made since he left:

1. The AOM driver was connected to a signal generator.

2. The first order beam from the AOM was coupled into the PMC while the zero-order beam is blocked. We might want to keep this configuration if the pointing stability is adequate.

3. c1psl got Burt restored to Dec 1st.

4. Megatron got updated.

Currently, c1susaux seems unresponsive and needs to be rebooted.

15121   Tue Jan 14 20:17:09 2020 gautamSummaryGeneralIFO recovery

Summary:

There was no light entering the IFO. I worked on a few things to bring the interferometer to a somewhat usable state. The goal is to get back to PRFPMI locking ASAP.

Details:

Problem: All fast models report a "0x4000" DC error. See Attachment #1.

Solution: I think this is a "known" issue that happened last new year too. The fix was to add a hard-coded 1 second offset to the daqd config files. However, incrementing/decreasing this offset by +/- 1 second did not fix the errors for me today. I'll reach out to JH for more troubleshooting tips.

Update 15 Jan 2020 830am: The problem is now fixed. See here.

Problem: c1susaux and c1auxey were unresponsive.

Solution: Keyed c1auxey. Rebooted c1susaux and as usual, manually started the eth0/eth1 subnets. The Acromag crate did not have to be power-cycled. ITMY got stuck in this process - I released it using the usual bias jiggling. Why did c1susaux fail? When did it fail? Was there some un-elogged cable jiggling in that part of the lab?

Problem: IMC autolocker and FSS slow processes aren't running on megatron after the upgrade.

Solution: Since no one bothered to do this, I setup systemd infrastructure for doing this on megatron. To run these, you do:

sudo systemctl start MCautolocker.service
sudo systemctl start FSSSlow.service

and to check their status, use:

sudo systemctl status MCautolocker.service
sudo systemctl status FSSSlow.service

The systemd setup is currently done in a naive way (using the bash executable to run a series of commands rather than using the systemd infrastructure itself to setup variables etc) but it works. I confirmed that the autolocker can re-acquire IMC lock, and that the FSS loop only runs when the IMC is locked. I also removed the obsolete messages printed to megatron's console (by editing /etc/motd) on ssh-login, advising the usage of initctl - the updated message reflects the above instructions.

In order to do the IMC locking, I changed the DC voltage to the AOM to +1V DC (it was +0.8 V DC). In this setting, the IMC refl level is ~3.6 V DC. When using the undiffracted AOM beam, we had more like +5.6 V DC (so now we have ~65% of the nominal level) from the IMC REFL PD when the IMC was unlocked. IIRC, the diffraction efficiency of the AOM should be somewhat better, at ~85%. Needs investigation, or better yet, let's just go back to the old configuration of using the undiffracted beam.

There was also an UN-ELOGGED change of the nominal value of the PMC servo gain to 12.8, and no transfer function measurement. There needs to be a proper characterization of this loop done to decide what the new nominal value should be.

I'm going to leave the PSL shutter open and let the IMC stay locked for stability investigations. Tomorrow, I'll check the single-arm locking and the ALS system.

Attachment 1: DCerrors.png
15123   Wed Jan 15 10:04:19 2020 gautamSummaryGeneralPOX / POY locking restored

Single arm locking using POX and POY has been restored. After running the dither alignment servos, the TRX/TRY levels are ~0.7. This is consistent with the IMC transmission being ~11000 counts with the AOM 1st order diffracted beam (c.f. 15000 counts with the undiffracted beam).

 Quote: Tomorrow, I'll check the single-arm locking and the ALS system.
Attachment 1: singleArms.png
15201   Mon Feb 10 09:40:54 2020 Larry WallaceSummaryGeneralSolidWorks Computer Upgrade and Printer repair

On February 5, 2020, the Dell engineering workstation located in the 40M lab, was replaced with a newer Engineering workstation, per a request from Koji . The new workstation should perform a good deal better over the older unit. It has more cores, more memory and a better video card. Since this unit is being used by the 40M group, the Comsol s/w pkg. was also installed on the unit.

During the computer swap, Koji had a problem with a print job and it was discovered the bottom tray of the HP5550 printer was broken. The broken tray was replaced from another unit that was being disposed of.

15226   Wed Feb 26 21:43:48 2020 JonSummaryBHDProjected IFO noise budget, post-BHD upgrade

To supplement the material presented during the BHD review, I've put together a projected noise budget for the 40m. Note these are the expected interferometer noises (originating in the IFO itself), not BHD readout noises. The key parameters for each case are listed in the figure title. Also attached is a tarball (attachment 4) containing the ipython notebook, data files, and rolled-back version of pygwinc which were used to generate these figures.

Attachment 2: Comparison to aLIGO design sensitivity (phase quadrature).

Attachment 2: 40m_aligo_comp.pdf
Attachment 4: noise_budget.tar
15228   Wed Feb 26 22:09:52 2020 gautamSummaryBHDProjected IFO noise budget, post-BHD upgrade

The quantum noise curves here are not correct. c.f. amplitude quadrature noise budget.

15241   Mon Mar 2 23:49:03 2020 JonSummaryBHDProjected IFO noise budget, post-BHD upgrade

Updated noise budget curves, now computed using the latest version of pygwinc. This resolves the inconsistency between the gwinc quantum noise curves and Gautam's analytic calculations. As before, the key configuration parameters are listed in the figure titles.

Attachment 3: Comparison to aLIGO design (phase quadrature)

 Quote: The quantum noise curves here are not correct. c.f. amplitude quadrature noise budget.
Attachment 3: 40m_aligo_comp.pdf
15244   Tue Mar 3 18:11:05 2020 JonSummaryBHDProjected IFO noise budget, post-BHD upgrade

Revised noise estimates, correcting a couple of factor of 2 and factor of pi errors found in the coil driver noise calculation. Also resolves a strain vs. displacement units confusion using the new pygwinc. Gautam and I have checked these noises against the analytical predictions and believe they are now accurate. Attachments are again:

Attachment 3: Comparison to aLIGO design (phase quadrature)

Attachment 3: 40m_aligo_comp.pdf
15256   Thu Mar 5 19:45:23 2020 JonSummaryPSLC1PSL in-situ test results

We've completed almost all of the in-situ testing of the c1psl channels. During this process, we identified several channels which needed to be rewired to different Acromags (BIO sinking v. sourcing). We also elected to change the connector type of a few channels for practical advantages. Those modifications and other issues found during testing are detailed below. Also attached are the updated channel assignments, with a column indicating the in-situ testing status of each channel.

Post-installation modifications

• All four channels connected to the sourcing BIO module were found to in fact require sinking I/O. They were reassigned to sinking BIO modules. Affected channels:
• C1:PSL-FSS_FASTSWEEP
• C1:PSL-FSS_SW1
• C1:PSL-FSS_SW2
• C1:PSL-PSL_Shutter
• Added a new AI channel:
• C1:PSL-FSS_MIXERM
• Removed an unneccessary AI channel:
• C1:PSL-FSS_LODET
• Moved two AI channels from BNC connectors to a new Dsub connector (labelled DB25M-2 in the spreadsheet).
• C1:PSL-FSS_RCTEMP
• C1:PSL-FSS_RMTEMP_VOLTS

Issues identified during testing

• Digital calibration. The following channels work, but we need to verify their EPICS calibration parameters (EGUF/EGUL):
• C1:PSL-FSS_FASTGAIN
• C1:PSL-FSS_FAST
• C1:PSL-PMC_MODET
• IMC servo board. The Acromag channels themselves were found to work, but the linearity of the mbbo gain stages are in question (i.e., a potential problem with the board). GV is currently testing the servo board.
• PSL QPD board apears to be dead. We connected a scope directly to the test points on the board and measured a high level of noise and no signal (for all four of the QPD channels). I understand this QPD has not been used in some time, so it may not have been noticed before.
• WFS DC channels are saturating when the IMC is unlocked. The acceptance range of the Acromag ADC is only +/-10 V, but we measured sensor voltages as high as ~14 V. It appears that the old ADCs were somehow accepting a range of 0 to +20 V instead of -10 to +10 V. However, the Acromags do not support the input range 0-20 V. Since SNR is not critical for these channels (they're used only for initial alignment), I propose we simply install a voltage divider inside the chassis, just before the Acromag, for each of these signals.
Attachment 1: c1psl_feedthrough_wiring_-_By_Connector_(3).pdf
15266   Wed Mar 11 18:12:53 2020 gautamSummaryPSLWFS Demod board modifications

[koji, gautam]

Attachment #1 shows the relevant parts of the schematic of the WFS demod board (not whitening board).

• The basic problem was that the switchable gain channels were not accounted for in the Acromag channel list 😒.
• What this meant was that the DC gain was set to the default x100 (since the two DG211s that provide the switchable x10 and x1 gain options had their control logic pins pulled up to +5V because these pins weren't connected to any sinking BIO channel).
• Rather than set up new connections to Acromags inside the chassis (though we have plenty of spares), Koji and I decided to make these fixed to x1 gain.
• The actual fix was implemented as shown in the annotated schematic. There are some pictures 📷 of the PCB in the DCC entry linked above.
• Amusingly, this board will now require a sourcing BIO unit if we want to still have the capability of switching gains.

Before removing the boards from the eurocrate:

• I dialled down the Kepco HV supplies
• disconnected all the cabling to these boards after noting down cable numbers etc.

After Koji effected the fix, the boards were re-installed, HV supplies were dialled back up to nominal voltage/currents, and the PMC/IMC were re-locked. The WFS DC channels now no longer saturate even when the IMC is unlocked 👏 👏 . I leave it to Yehonathan / Jon to calibrate these EPICS channels into physical units of mW of power. We should also fix the MEDM screen and remove the un-necessary EPICS channels.

Later in the evening, I took advantage of the non-saturated readbacks to center the beams better on the WFS heads. Then, with the WFS servos disabled, I manually aligned the IMC mirrors till REFLDC was minimized. Then I centered the beam on the MC2 transmission QPD (looking at individual quadrants), and set the WFS1/2 RF offsets and MC2 Trans QPD offsets in this condition.

 Quote: WFS DC channels are saturating when the IMC is unlocked.
Attachment 1: D980233-B_Mar2020Mods.pdf
15300   Tue Apr 7 15:30:40 2020 JonSummaryNoiseBudget40m noise budget migrated to pygwinc

In the past year, pygwinc has expanded to support not just fundamental noise calculations (e.g., quantum, thermal) but also any number of user-defined noises. These custom noise definitions can do anything, from evaluating an empirical model (e.g., electronics, suspension) to loading real noise measurements (e.g., laser AM/PM noise). Here is an example of the framework applied to H1.

Starting with the BHD review-era noises, I have set up the 40m pygwinc fork with a working noise budget which we can easily expand. Specific actions:

• Updated the 40m fork to the latest pygwinc version (while preserving the commit history).
• Added a directory ./CIT40m containing the 40m-specific noise budget files (created by GV).
• Added an ipython notebook CIT40m.ipynb at the root level showing how to generate a noise budget.
• Integrated our DAC and seismic noise estimators into pygwinc.
• Marked the old 40m NB repo as obsolete (last commit > 2 yrs ago). Many of these noise estimates are probably stale, but I will work with GV to identify which ones can be migrated.

I set up our fork in this way to keep the 40m separate from the main pygwinc code (i.e., not added to as a built-in IFO type). With the 40m code all contained within one root-level directory (with a 40m-specific name), we should now always be able to upgrade to the latest pygwinc without creating intractable merge conflicts.

15302   Mon Apr 13 16:51:49 2020 ranaSummaryDAQNODUS: rsyncd daemon / service set up

I just now modified the /etc/rsyncd.conf file as per Dan Kozak's instructions. The old conf file is still there with the file name appended with today's date.

I then enabled the rsync daemon to run on boot using 'enable'. I'll ask Dan to start the file transfers again and see if this works.

controls@nodus|etc> sudo systemctl start rsyncd.service controls@nodus|etc> sudo systemctl enable rsyncd.service Created symlink from /etc/systemd/system/multi-user.target.wants/rsyncd.service to /usr/lib/systemd/system/rsyncd.service. controls@nodus|etc> sudo systemctl status rsyncd.service ● rsyncd.service - fast remote file copy program daemon    Loaded: loaded (/usr/lib/systemd/system/rsyncd.service; enabled; vendor preset: disabled)    Active: active (running) since Mon 2020-04-13 16:49:12 PDT; 1min 28s ago  Main PID: 4950 (rsync)    CGroup: /system.slice/rsyncd.service            └─4950 /usr/bin/rsync --daemon --no-detach

Apr 13 16:49:12 nodus.martian.113.168.192.in-addr.arpa systemd[1]: Started fast remote file copy program daemon. Apr 13 16:49:12 nodus.martian.113.168.192.in-addr.arpa systemd[1]: Starting fast remote file copy program daemon...

15313   Fri Apr 24 00:26:59 2020 ranaSummaryPEML.A. EQ from Tuesday night
Attachment 1: April22-EQ.pdf
15325   Tue May 12 17:51:25 2020 ranaSummaryComputer Scripts / Programsupdated LESS syntax highlight on nodus

apt install source-highlight

then modified bashrc to point to /usr/share instead of /usr/bin

15331   Thu May 14 00:47:55 2020 gautamSummaryComputer Scripts / Programspcdev1 added to authorized keys on nodus

This is to facilitate the summary page config fines to be pulled from nodus in a scripted way, without being asked for authentication. If someone knows of a better/more secure way for this to be done, please let me know. The site summary pages seem to pull the config files from a git repo, maybe that's better?

ELOG V3.1.3-