40m QIL Cryo_Lab CTN SUS_Lab TCS_Lab OMC_Lab CRIME_Lab FEA ENG_Labs OptContFac Mariner WBEEShop
 40m Log, Page 251 of 339 Not logged in
ID Date Author Type Category Subject
17061   Thu Aug 4 22:14:38 2022 KojiUpdateIOOWFS investigation

WFS/MCTRANS_QPD Power Spectra

Attachment 1: HEPA ON

WFS1/2 PIT/YAW Spectra are stabilized below 1Hz (0.1Hz for WFS1P)

MC2 TRANS PIT is largely contaminated by the other WFS loops.
MC2 TRANS YAW is slightly contaminated but not much compared to the one for pitch.

Attachment 2: HEPA OFF

Again, WFS1/2 PIT/YAW Spectra are stabilized below 1Hz (0.1Hz for WFS1P)

MC2 TRANS PIT is still contaminated but better.
MC2 TRANS YAW is not contaminated.

Observation

WFS1/2 signals are largely disturbed when PSL HEPA is ON. Probably the amount of HEPA air flow was not optimized.
Above 1Hz, invacuum suspension are quieter than the beam incident on the IMC.

The dirty WFS signals are fedback to the mirrors. Due the large motion of the beam and also the imperfection of the actuator matrix cause the MC2 spot rather moves than stabilized.

This means that the WFS loops should leave the mirrors untouched above 1Hz i.e. The loop bandwidths should be low (~<0.1Hz). (Yes I know)
However, the simple gain reduction (x10) does make the servos unstable. So more adjustment is necessary. (<-Not for today)

Attachment 1: Screenshot_2022-08-04_22-17-19.png
Attachment 2: Screenshot_2022-08-04_22-18-45.png
16943   Fri Jun 24 12:13:16 2022 JCUpdateIOOWFS issues

[Yuta, JC]

It seems that early this morning MC got very misaligned. Yuta was able to align the Mode Cleaner again by individually adjusting the MC1 MC2, and MC3. Once transmission reach ~12000, we went ahead and turned on WFS. Oddly enough, the transmission began plummeting and MC fell out of lock. After this, Yuta reset the WFS offsets and realigned the WFS QPDs. We then locked MC and turned on WFS once again, but the same issue happened. After fiddeling around with this, we found the if we set C1:IOO-MC2_TRANS_PIT_OUTPUT and C1:IOO-WFS1_YAW_OUTPUT equal to 0, WFS does not cause this issue. Is there a proper to reset WFS, aside from only zeroing the offsets?

Attachment 1: WFS.png
16946   Sat Jun 25 14:29:48 2022 AnchalUpdateIOOWFS issues

This issue is very weird and still unresolved. Without WFS loops, we'll have to realign IMC often and we might loose IMC alignment completely during weekends or long weekends.

I tried following things today but nothign worked:

• Blocked WFS PDs and reset DC offsets (sitemap>C1IOO>C1IOO_WFS_MASTER>! Actions>Correct WFS DC Offsets).
• Switched off MC chamber lights.
I felt that they might be on, but later I feel that wasn't the case. Anyways, this didn't help.
• Algined IMC manually using cavAlign tool with MC2-MC3 and then tweaking MC1 and MC3 a little bit. Reach 13.6k in C1:IOO-MC_TRANS_SUM. Then I unlocked IMC with autolocker off, centered beam on WFSs (they were pretty off even though we have been centering them this week), and then reset RF offsets (sitemap>C1IOO>C1IOO_WFS_MASTER>! Actions>Correct WFS DC Offsets). This did not help either.
• The fact that IMC started misbehaving since Thursday onwards was bugging me that maybe the FE models did not come online properly, that maybe some RTS link is broken in IOO model which is causing the feedback loop to not work. So I went ahead and restarted all models, that didn't help either.
• Now we have a restartAllModels.sh script which restarts all cds system and restores state to just before restarting. It also makes sure that watchdogs are engaged safely particularly for new suspesnions where alignment offsets are ramped.

We need to investigate this as first priority. Maybe some cable is loose, some PD power supply not working etc. Until we fix this, people should align IMC to > 12000 transmission counts whenever they have a spare 5 min. We need to work in place of WFS for sometime.

16947   Sat Jun 25 20:23:59 2022 KojiUpdateIOOWFS issues

I could run the WFS servo (6dofs) for more than 15min by flipping the sign for the MC2 Pit and WFS1 Yaw. (See attachments)

This may mean that the sign of the loops / the input matrix / the output matrix, as well as the sensors and actuators, have the problem.
Isn't it the time to measure the sensing/actuation matrices? Maybe Tomislav already has the data?

I have reverted the changes as you may need more careful investigation.

Attachment 1: Screen_Shot_2022-06-25_at_20.23.21.png
Attachment 2: Screen_Shot_2022-06-25_at_20.29.24.png
16949   Mon Jun 27 12:32:45 2022 yutaUpdateIOOWFS issues fixed

[Anchal, Yuta]

We found that MC1 local damping loop signs were revereted to the state before our standardization on June 7th (40m/16898), but the WFS output matrix was not reverted.
This caused the sign flip in the feedback to MC1, which caused the IMC WFS issue.
This probably happened when we were restarting the models after RTS modeling (40m/16935). We might have used wrong snap files for burt-restoring.

We went back to the snapshot taken at 09:19 June 21, 2022 and now the IMC WFS is working,

16835   Fri May 6 13:48:34 2022 AnchalUpdateBHDWFS loop instability fixed

[Yuta, Anchal]

We investigated why WFS loop wasn't working. It seemed like WFS1 PIT error signal has a huge offset which would push the loop to misalign all optics' PIT. So we did the following steps:

• Cover the WFS with Aluminium foils. Run Sitemap>IOO>C1_IOO_WFS_MASTER>!Actions>Correct WFS DC offsets.
• Then center the WFS beams on the QPDS while looking at C1:IOO-WFS1/2_PIT/YAW_DC channels.
• Then Switch off WFS loop, Switch off Autolocker, toggler the PSL Shutter so that IMC unlocks and does not catch lock back, and tehn run Sitemap>IOO>C1_IOO_WFS_MASTER>!Actions>Correct WFS RF offsets.
• The above script found significant changes required in WFS1 RF offsets. After this, we opened the shutter and WFS loops were working fine.
14876   Fri Sep 13 10:53:40 2019 aaronUpdateIOOWFS loop measurements

I'm scripting the WFS sensing matrix measurements. I haven't really scripted DTT before, so I'm trying to find documentation or existing scripts. I came across this elog where Gautam measured a sensing matrix during DRMI lock, and he pointed me to some .xml files used for these measurments.

14878   Mon Sep 16 05:08:04 2019 ranaUpdateIOOWFS loop measurements

not need to use DTT. I'm attaching some half-finished notebooks that give the gist.

2. Downsample the data for ease of use.
4. demodulate the data at the specified frequencies.

That's it! Now you have the complex, single frequency TFs. Next you invert the matrix.

Attachment 1: LSCsensingMatrix.ipynb
{
"cells": [
{
"cell_type": "markdown",
"source": [
"# Get some ASC data - Calculate Sensing Matrix \n",
"### also make the radar plots"
]
},

... 327 more lines ...
Attachment 2: ASCsensingMatrix.ipynb
{
"cells": [
{
"cell_type": "markdown",
"source": [
"# Get some ASC data - Calculate Sensing Matrix \n",
"### also make the radar plots"
]
},

... 325 more lines ...
14880   Mon Sep 16 11:55:58 2019 rikaUpdateIOOWFS loop measurements

[rika, aaron]

We aligned optics of WFS as it was. Now auto-locker is working to lock MC.

But it still doesn't lock. We notice that the c1lsc machine doesn't work. So we run rebootCILSC.sh.

Now we reset the hardware!

17:11

After reset, auto locking didn't work well. Gautum and Aaron reboot slow c1ioo. Then it works, and Gautam returned the MC to a good alignment.

We found the beam is not in the center of the QPD, we (turned off the MC autolocker and MC loop, then) realigned to make beam to get in to the QPD center. Afterwards we start auto locking.

With the WFS on, the maximum MC transmission we observe is 14,700 counts; after the transmission level stabilizes (MC_TRANS pit and yaw brought to 0), the MC transmission is only 14,200 counts. Perhaps the MC_TRANS QPD offsets need adjustment. We relieve the WFS servo of its DC offsets. This is the configuration we'll use for WFS loop measurements this week.

14886   Tue Sep 17 09:41:48 2019 gautamUpdateIOOWFS loop measurements

 But it still doesn't lock. We notice that the c1lsc machine doesn't work. So we run rebootCILSC.sh.
14887   Tue Sep 17 10:34:48 2019 aaronUpdateIOOWFS loop measurements

I'm using the notebooks from rana as a starting point, and making a script to measure and fill the WFS sensing matrix. It lives at /users/aaron/WFS/scripts/WFSsensingMatrix.ipynb for now. Here's what it does; what's been tested is in green, untested is goldenrod, uncoded is fire brick.

1. Sets up an nds connection, listening to the WFS channels and the MC#_PIT/YAW IN1 channels.
2. Loops over the excitation channels. For now, I'm assuming the user is injecting excitations one at a time in awggui; in principle, we could excite the various MC angular dof at several frequencies and take a single measurement, or use the natural frequencies of the suspensions.
1. For each excitation, grab the data
2. Filter the data. I'm using a 30 Hz to 40 Hz cheby filter
3. Take an FFT, hold on to that for future reference
4. Generate an LO at the excitation frequency, and demodulate the signals. Strong low pass.
5. The single-frequency transfer function is now [WFS channel] / [excited MC channel]. Each iteration of this loop generates a column of the sensing matrix.
3. Invert the sensing matrix
4. Populate in the appropriate channels of the WFS_OUTMATRIX

# Grabbing data with nds

To run these on pianosa, I ran (inside the jupyter notebook)

import sys
!{sys.executable} -m pip install astropy --user

I'm getting an error when starting the nds2 connection

conn = nds2.connection('192.168.113.201', 31200)
Failed to establish a connection[INFO: Request SASL authentication protocol]+


I didn't find anything on the elog about this error, but I'm looking at the nds user manual. The problem was, I didn't have a valid Kerberos ticket; I opened one on Pianosa with my albert.einstein (note all caps ligo.org).

kinit aaron.markowitz@LIGO.ORG

I'm now able to run the scripts Rana mentions, but I haven't been able to grab the channels I want (eg C1:SUS-MC1_ASCPIT_IN1_OUT); it says the channel isn't found. When I check how many of the Caltech channels are available (conn.count_channels('C1*')), there are none. I was connecting to nds.ligo.caltech.edu, but this must be the wrong server (it has all the channels for the sites). fb and fb1 (and the IP they point to, 192.168.113.201) cannot be connected to, giving the error 'Error occurred trying to write to socket.'

I recall that in the cryo lab, we need to use port 8088 to get data from cymac1, and indeed substituting 31200 -> 8088 lets me access the C1 channels (I can count the channels), but no matter what time I request, nds tells me there is no data available (gap). Gautam came by and diagnosed that the gaps I'm seeing in the frames' data are real, fb is down (see elog).

# WFS Sensing Matrix Script

## Saving extra channels

Continuing, I'm going to modify the script to grab live data. I'm using the iterate and next methods. I noticed that the MC2_TRANS pit/yaw channels are not saved to frames, even though WFS1/2 pit/yaw are. Since I expect I'll want to lookback at these channels, I followed the instructions for adding a daq channel, uncommenting the following line in /opt/rtcds/caltech/c1/chans/daq/C1IOO.ini:

[C1:IOO-MC2_TRANS_PIT_OUT_DQ]
acquire=1
datarate=512
chnnum=10186
datatype=4
[C1:IOO-MC2_TRANS_YAW_OUT_DQ]
acquire=1
chnnum=10189
datarate=512
datatype=4

I made a backup of the old version of this .ini file, which can be found in /users/aaron/backups/190917_C1IOO.ini. I did not remake the model, as I couldn't find the c1ioo model in /opt/rtcds/caltech/c1/userapps/trunk or from the matlab command prompt. I restarted the fb via telnet, but didn't restart the model or check the svn (got an error?). The _DQ channels are now reachable on dataviewer, so things seem to be working.

## awgpy

I also tried importing cdsutils, so I can control awg in the same script that we read out the sensing matrix, but I'm getting the python3 error when I import cdsutils:

No module name '__version'

I tried pip upgrading cdsutils, but it's already up-to-date. I get the above error even if I switch to a python 2 kernel; cdsutils is installed in the python2.7 directory, so I don't know why pip is finding it when I'm running a python 3 kernel. I can move on from this for now, but it would be useful to be able to script the excitation along with the measurement.

# Changes to the user environment

## jupyter on donatella

Tangentially related, Rika wanted to be running some jupyter notebooks while working on donatella. I ran, on donatella:

conda install jupyter

hm, that didn't work. Also jupyter is installed when you install conda, so I'm not sure how there is a version of conda but not of jupyter. I also see that pip and pip3 are not recognized commands on donatella.

## scipy on pianosa

I noticed that some of the functions in the scipy signal processing toolbox were out of date on pianosa. The cheby and welch filters now accept additional kwargs (for eg, before you needed to give IIR filter methods a cutoff frequency normalized to the Nyquist rate, but now you can give it the frequencies and sampling rate separately).

I want to update this package, but I hesitate to break everyone's existing scripts.

14888   Tue Sep 17 10:47:44 2019 rikaUpdateIOOWFS loop measurements

[aaron, rika]

Once stop the auto-locker and realigned to make beam to get into QPD again.

After we lock MC, we took TFs from suspension MC1/2/3 PIT/YAW to WFS1/2 PIT/YAW.

-----

Diagnotics test tools

range: 7 Hz to 50 Hz

avarage=61

Column 0: WFS2_PIT   1: WFS2_YAW   2:WFS1_PIT   3: WFS1_YAW   4: TRANCE_PIT   5:TRANCE_YAW

-----

I'm wondering weather the MC1data I saved is correct, becouse I found the channel was changed when I exported MC2 data. So I took MC1 data again.

We got all data for TFs already.  Each data is devided to real part and imaginary part. Then we are arranging the datas to obtain TFs.

TF of MC2 is attachiment 1. So tomorrow, I make other TF.

 Quote: [rika, aaron] We aligned optics of WFS as it was. Now auto-locker is working to lock MC. But it still doesn't lock. We notice that the c1lsc machine doesn't work. So we run rebootCILSC.sh.   Now we reset the hardware!   17:11 After reset, auto locking didn't work well. Gautum and Aaron reboot slow c1ioo. Then it works, and Gautam returned the MC to a good alignment. We found the beam is not in the center of the QPD, we (turned off the MC autolocker and MC loop, then) realigned to make beam to get in to the QPD center. Afterwards we start auto locking. With the WFS on, the maximum MC transmission we observe is 14,700 counts; after the transmission level stabilizes (MC_TRANS pit and yaw brought to 0), the MC transmission is only 14,200 counts. Perhaps the MC_TRANS QPD offsets need adjustment. We relieve the WFS servo of its DC offsets. This is the configuration we'll use for WFS loop measurements this week.

Attachment 1: MC2.pdf
14896   Wed Sep 18 14:45:52 2019 rikaUpdateIOOWFS loop measurements

[aaron, rika]

## Gettng TFs

In the data we got yesterday, we can see some filter's effect.

But it is not good coherence above 10Hz, so we mesured again. And this time we save the data as xml file.

And also we chaned the frequency regions broader to watch corner frequency of suspension.

-----

Diagnotics test tools

range: 0.1 Hz to 100 Hz

points: 120

Amplitude: 1000

----

but at low frequency, the mode maching cavity was unloked cause of too much shaking.

So, we saw single frequency TF, and searched the good amplitude.

First, I tried to get TF @0.1~1 Hz .

-----

0.1 to 1 Hz

points: 61 (I think it's too much becous it takes about an hour)

amplitude: 5

-----

The TFs and coherence of MC1/PIT to each QPD is below. [above window: coherence, below: TF]

During the mesurement, something happened @0.2-0.3Hz so I stopped it.

We found the coherence of WFS1P and WFS2Y is not good, but others are good.

we guess that it could come from alignment which made Q chainging to small.

Finaly, I also got the  .xml data of MC1P 1 Hz to 10 Hz. In this time,

-----

1 to 10 Hz

points: 41

amplitude: 90

-----

## Making matrics

Now we took single frequency 6 TFs (MC1/2/3 PIT/YAW) @7Hz (Because this frequency has good coherence in all channel).

Aaron wrote the script using dtt to making matrics.

Quote:

[aaron, rika]

Once stop the auto-locker and realigned to make beam to get into QPD again.

After we lock MC, we took TFs from suspension MC1/2/3 PIT/YAW to WFS1/2 PIT/YAW.

-----

Diagnotics test tools

range: 7 Hz to 50 Hz

avarage=61

Column 0: WFS2_PIT   1: WFS2_YAW   2:WFS1_PIT   3: WFS1_YAW   4: TRANCE_PIT   5:TRANCE_YAW

-----

I'm wondering weather the MC1data I saved is correct, becouse I found the channel was changed when I exported MC2 data. So I took MC1 data again.

We got all data for TFs already.  Each data is devided to real part and imaginary part. Then we are arranging the datas to obtain TFs.

TF of MC2 is attachiment 1. So tomorrow, I make other TF.

 Quote: [rika, aaron] We aligned optics of WFS as it was. Now auto-locker is working to lock MC. But it still doesn't lock. We notice that the c1lsc machine doesn't work. So we run rebootCILSC.sh.   Now we reset the hardware!   17:11 After reset, auto locking didn't work well. Gautum and Aaron reboot slow c1ioo. Then it works, and Gautam returned the MC to a good alignment. We found the beam is not in the center of the QPD, we (turned off the MC autolocker and MC loop, then) realigned to make beam to get in to the QPD center. Afterwards we start auto locking. With the WFS on, the maximum MC transmission we observe is 14,700 counts; after the transmission level stabilizes (MC_TRANS pit and yaw brought to 0), the MC transmission is only 14,200 counts. Perhaps the MC_TRANS QPD offsets need adjustment. We relieve the WFS servo of its DC offsets. This is the configuration we'll use for WFS loop measurements this week.

Attachment 1: Screenshot_from_2019-09-18_18-15-34.png
14957   Tue Oct 8 20:39:42 2019 aaronUpdateIOOWFS loop measurements

I installed nds2 on donatello with yum, but still can't import nds2.

14958   Wed Oct 9 09:37:28 2019 aaronUpdateIOOWFS loop measurements

I installed nds2 again, this time successfully with

conda install -c conda-forge python-nds2-client

14868   Tue Sep 10 15:41:37 2019 aaronUpdateIOOWFS measurements

[rika, aaron, rana]

We are getting the MC locked in anticipation of making some WFS transfer function measurements.

The PSL screen was all white boxes, so I keyed the PSL crate and burt restored the settings from 11:19am Sep 5 (somewhat earlier than we started rebooting computers). Following this, I ran Milind's unstick.py and then the PSL autolocker script; both worked on the first go, great work Milind!

The modecleaner autolocking script is having substantially more trouble. Rana found that pitch and yaw sliders for all MC optics have been swapped--we think it's because the camera at MC2 has been rotated. Note that for now, sliding pitch gives a change in yaw, and sliding yaw changes pitch.

## Improving MC alignment

We noticed that with the WFS servo on, the modecleaner would be well aligned for a while (MC trans ~ 14000), only to lose lock after several minutes. We held the MC2_TRANS_PIT/YAW outputs at 0, so the MC2 QPD does not affect the WFS loop; the beam is well centered on WFS1/2, but not on the MC2 QPD, and with this signal out of the loop MC TRANS recovers to ~15000 counts (consistent with the quiet times over the last 90 days, see attachment 2). Attachment 1 shows the MC lock degrading, followed by some noise where we lost lock, and finally a visible increase in MC trans when we remove the MC2 QPD from the WFS loop.

### mode cleaner alignment setting

MC1 Pich 4.4762     Yow 4.4669

MC2 Pich 3.7652     Yow -1.5482

MC3 Pich -0.4159    Yow 1.1477

After automatic locking MC, we stopped automatical locking and took alignment to the center of QPD.

And then again did the automatic locking MC. Finaly Rana move to best alignment.

### Mode cleaner Alignment Setting

MC1 Pich 4.4942   Yow 4.6956

MC2 Pich 3.7652   Yow -1.5600

MC3 Pich -0.3789   Yow 1.1477

## Measured sine response

We used diaggui to measure the response of WFS1/WFS2/MC2 pitch (yaw) to excitations in MC1/MC2/MC3 pitch (yaw). Seeing fluctuations of amplitude ~1 on the MCX_PIT/YAW_OUT channels, we used an amplitude 0.01 excitation at 20 Hz. We will work on scripting some of this tomorrow.

Attachment 1: Screenshot_from_2019-09-10_18-51-28.png
Attachment 2: mctrend_190910.png
14871   Wed Sep 11 10:26:56 2019 aaronUpdateIOOWFS measurements

## Gameplan

We should also have a plan for the next couple weeks so we are organized; heavily adapted from. Here's what I'm thinking this morning:

1. Construct the input/output matrix for the WFS. (basically, what we did yesterday)
1. Measure a transfer function of MC[1, 2, 3]_[PIT, YAW] to [WFS1, WFS2, MC2_TRANS]_[PIT, YAW]. The transfer function above the loop bandwidth (few seconds BW, so we will excite >~ 10 Hz) characterizes the response of the sensor to the excitation.
2. Invert the resulting 3x3 matrix and populate the inverted matrix at WFS_OUTMATRIX. This will map the WFS basis to the MC optics' pit/yaw basis.
3. Script this process. If we make changes (for example, moving the telescoping lenses) to make this matrix more diagonal, we'll want to do these steps many times.
2. Characterizing the loop
1. Optimize the demodulation phase -- we want to minimize the signal in Q. This should also be automated. I found documentation in the white Wave Front Sensing binder
1. Misalign a mirror in pitch or yaw, and rotate the phase to minimize the magnitude of Q (maximize I); this angle is 'R' on the WFSx_SETTINGS screen.
2. We should measure a step response applied to each angular dof of the MC optics.
3. Guoy Phase Calibration
3. Characterizing / Calibrating the WFS heads
1. The DCC has LIGO test procedures for their WFS RFPD, as does the white binder; the following checks are relevant for our WFS, and this is how I think we should carry them out (not identical to the procedure as written in the document). For many of these, we'll want to set up the JenneAM laser with a network analyzer for RF modulation.
1. DC path transimpedance
1. Measure the DC power of JenneAM with a power meter, and direct the beam to each of the QPD quadrants. Make sure the beam fits on a single quadrant.
2. This will give us the product of the PD efficiency and DC transimpedance gain
3. Last time this was measured (white WFS binder)
2. notch tuning -- we are going to measure the TF, but I won't tune it without someone as ancient as the electronics
1. Using the network analyzer, measure a transfer function from the laser AM to the QPD head's RF output
1. Is there a pickoff available? The LIGO testing procedures recommend a FET probe
2. We should do this while measuring the DC transimpedance for each quadrant
3. notch rejection ratios
1. While taking the RF transfer function, use the delta marker to record the difference between the notch and the RF operating frequency.
4. RF transimpedance
1. Illuminate the PD with white light from an incandescent bulb (a shot-noise limited source)
1. 6-10 mA of photocurrent should be generated
2. Use an RF spectrum analyzer and low noise RF pre-amplifier (gain ~20dB) to measure the shot noise limited spectrum
3. A piece of scotch tape can be used to make the light uniformly illuminate the QPD
4. Convert this RF PSD to an rms amplitude (voltage) spectral density, and also note the DC photocurrent. This can be used to calculate the RF transimpedance with
1. $Z_\mathrm{RF} = \sqrt{\frac{V_\mathrm{rms}^2I_\mathrm{DC}}{3.2\times 10^{-19}}}$
5. Shot noise limited input sensitivity
1. Measure the RF PSD with the beam blocked and light off; this is the dark photocurrent, and can be used to calculate the shot noise limited sensitivity.

References:

• Binders of documents about the 40m WFS
• LIGO ISC WFS RFPD test procedure (T1200347 is dual frequency, T1200380 is single frequency)
• The associated datasheet template is in T1200381
• Wavefront Sensor (T960111). This document even has a calibration protocol with forms to fill in during testing, so I've printed an extra copy of that appendix.

## Automation

It would be good to script some of what we did yesterday. I'm checking out some scripts I'd used for Qryo and armloss measurements to remember the best way to do this.

• Existing WFS scripts (I didn't try these)
• WFS_DC_offsets -- sets the WFS QPD dark offsets
• block beam, then run script
• MC2_TRANS_offsets -- sets the MC2 transmission offset (why isn't this in the same script as WFS_DC_offsets?)
• MC should be aligned, beams centered on WFS, WFS servo off
• mcWFSallowOn(Off) -- turns on (off) the ASC filter module outputs
• mcwfshold -- turns off the input to WFS servos, but holds the current values of MC optic biases
• mcwfsoff -- turns off the mc wfs loop
• First, turns off the WFS outputs (eg WFS1_PIT OUTPUT)
• Turns off the MC WFS input gains
• Holds the WFS loop outputs

## Miscellany

I noticed yesterday that the PSL_shutterqst box is white, and I've seen timeout requests when eg the reboot script tries to open/close the PSL shutter. It seems like a shutter that should open, so I should find the aux machine to restart it.

14872   Wed Sep 11 14:37:43 2019 aaronUpdateIOOWFS measurements

[aaron, rika]

We identified the Jenne laser and found a long optical fiber that might be able to transport our beam to the AP table.

Now we're searching for documentation on using this laser. Kevin and John measured a TF last year. Koji advised that we needn't worry too much, the current limit is already set correctly and we need only power on the laser.

We moved the breadboard (including a couple PDs, collimating lenses, laser, steering mirrors, etc) over to the AP table, and set it on top of the panel next to the WFS. We mounted the laser on the AP table, and added one lens with f~68 mm after the laser to fit the beam on a single quadrant; the beam was about 1mm diameter (measured by eye) when it entered the QPD. We turned the laser driver on at ~19.4 mA, and directed it to WFS2 via the last two steering mirrors before WFS2.

We monitored the QPD segments' DC level with ndscope on a laptop, and were able to send the beam to each of the four quadrants in turn. We set up the Agilent network analyzer to drive the laser's amplitude modulation and sent the RF signal from the LEMO output on the QPD head directly to the network analyzer. We will take the measurements tomorrow morning.

Attachment 1: 20190911_WFS.jpg
Attachment 2: 20190911_WFS_2.jpg
14874   Thu Sep 12 12:42:31 2019 aaronUpdateIOOWFS measurements

[rika, aaron]

At Seiji and Gautam's suggestion, we added an additional RF photodiode (NewFocus 1611) to the system so we can calibrate our transfer functions. The configuration is now laser -> BS --> lenses -> QPD and BS --> lenses -> RFPD. We added lenses to get the beams focused on the RFPD and QPD heads, and are again set up for TF measurement.

We took the following data. These parameters were consistent across all measurements:

• 1kHz IF BW
• log sweep with 801 points
• 32 averages
• auto attenuation
• -10 dBm excitation amplitude
• 19.2 mA DC current to the laser
• The DC level of the reference PD is -, and with the beam blocked (dark current) it is
 Measurement file parameters WFS2_SEG1 / RFPD TFAG4395A_12-09-2019_155901.txt 100 MHz - 500 MHz WFS2_SEG1 / RFPD TFAG4395A_12-09-2019_160811.txt 10 MHz - 100 MHz WFS2_SEG1 / RFPD TFAG4395A_12-09-2019_170234.txt 100 kHz - 10 MHz WFS2_SEG2 / RFPD AG4395A_12-09-2019_183125.txt 100 MHz - 500 MHz WFS2_SEG2 / RFPD TFAG4395A_12-09-2019_183614.txt 10 MHz - 100 MHz WFS2_SEG2 / RFPD TFAG4395A_12-09-2019_183930.txt 100 kHz - 10 MHz WFS2_SEG3 / RFPD TFAG4395A_12-09-2019_225243.txt 100 MHz - 500 MHz WFS2_SEG3 / RFPD TFAG4395A_12-09-2019_225601.txt 10 MHz - 100 MHz WFS2_SEG3 / RFPD TFAG4395A_12-09-2019_225922.txt 100 kHz - 10 MHz WFS2_SEG4 / RFPD TFAG4395A_12-09-2019_230758.txt 100 MHz - 500 MHz WFS2_SEG4 / RFPD TFAG4395A_12-09-2019_232058.txt 10 MHz - 100 MHz WFS2_SEG4 / RFPD TFAG4395A_12-09-2019_234447.txt 100 kHz - 10 MHz

After taking the data for segment 1, I moved the beam to segment 2. The beam didn't fit on segment 2 without partially illuminating segment 1 (tested by maximizing the signal on segment 2, then blocking the beam. If the beam is entirely on one segment, only that segment should be effected; in this case, we found that segment 1's DC signal also changed when the beam was blocked). We readjusted the telescoping lenses to get the beam a bit smaller, and now the beam fits on segment 2. We know it is entirely on segment 2 because small beam movements do not change the signal on segment 2.

We are trying to take the remaining data, but AGmeasure keeps hanging while sending the data (after taking the measurement, over 10 min). We tried restarting the network analyzer to no avail. I was able to grab the data by cancelling the measurement and running

AGmeasure --getdata -i vanna

I've uploaded the spectrum for segment 1 in the meantime. Zero model is on the way.

When I finished up the measurements on WFS2, I removed the cables from the AP table and closed the cover.

EDIT: I forgot to switch the LEMO connector to measure the other segments, so we measured the RF signal from segment 1 even when the beam was on segments 2-4. We'll have to try again tomorrow.

Attachment 1: WFS2_TFs.pdf
Attachment 2: D755499D-9FDF-4E2B-BFC1-016B459DD35D.jpeg
14875   Fri Sep 13 10:36:03 2019 aaronUpdateIOOWFS measurements

[rika, aaron]

We are at it again. Rika is setting up the TF measurement, I'm looking into scripting the WFS sensing matrix measurement we made earlier in the week so we can return to it next week.

 Measurement file parameters WFS2_SEG1 / RFPD 100 MHz - 500 MHz WFS2_SEG1 / RFPD 10 MHz - 100 MHz WFS2_SEG1 / RFPD 100 kHz - 10 MHz WFS2_SEG2 / RFPD TFAG4395A_13-09-2019_181415.txt 100 MHz - 500 MHz WFS2_SEG2 / RFPD TFAG4395A_13-09-2019_180955.txt 10 MHz - 100 MHz WFS2_SEG2 / RFPD TFAG4395A_13-09-2019_182918.txt 100 kHz - 10 MHz WFS2_SEG3 / RFPD TFAG4395A_13-09-2019_121533.txt 100 MHz - 500 MHz WFS2_SEG3 / RFPD TFAG4395A_13-09-2019_123820.txt 10 MHz - 100 MHz WFS2_SEG3 / RFPD TFAG4395A_13-09-2019_123243.txt 100 kHz - 10 MHz WFS2_SEG4 / RFPD TFAG4395A_13-09-2019_161834.txt 100 MHz - 500 MHz WFS2_SEG4 / RFPD TFAG4395A_13-09-2019_170007.txt 10 MHz - 100 MHz WFS2_SEG4 / RFPD TFAG4395A_13-09-2019_172001.txt 100 kHz - 10 MHz

When we mesuring TF of SEG4, the beam leaking to SEG1 about 1%.

We finished mesurement SEG2-4 and get the figure by running PDH_calibrate.ipynb .

edit: We observed during segment 2 measurements that blocking the beam reduced the DC level of segment 1 by less than 1%, but still clearly observable. As you can see in the plots, something is suspicious about the normalization of these TFs. We took segment 1 data a few days before the other segments, so perhaps we weren't getting the full beam on the reference PD during the later measurements? When I make this measurement for WFS1, I will try to fix some of these problems by choosing different telescoping optics, and I will consider whether removing the QPD heads from their table will improve the measurement.

Attachment 1: TF-.png
Attachment 2: WFS2_TFs.pdf
14882   Mon Sep 16 12:38:59 2019 aaronUpdateIOOWFS measurements

I wanted to make a zero model of this circuit to get a handle on the results. I couldn't import zero on pianosa, and I tried pip installing zero, but was denied due to not finding version 3.0.3 of matplotlib. I finally got it to install using

pip3 install zero --user

Oddly, even though I can now import zero when I open a python3 session from the command line, when I open a jupyter notebook and switch to a python3 kernel, the zero module is still unavailable. I think I recall that conda manages the jupyter environment -- is pip managing an entirely separate environment (annoying)?

edit: Yeah, it was something like that. I reminded myself how this works with this article.

14929   Thu Oct 3 11:38:35 2019 aaronUpdateIOOWFS measurements

I set up the spectrum analyzer to make the WFS head RF transfer function measurement (V/W) on WFS1. I placed the Jenne laser on the AP table, along with the reference PD power supply, laptop, and laser power supply. The Agilent output AM modulates the laser; the reference PD is again NewFocus 1611, with its AC output sent to Agilent's R channel and DC output sent to an oscilloscope;

At Koji's suggestion, I've started setting up a small breadboard to hold the fiber collimator, BS, and reference PD. I haven't really used fiber optics before, I'd appreciate another set of eyes before I get too deep.
Gautam showed me the collimator and fiber BS.

I closed the PSL shutter while checking for a location to place the breadboard, and opened it while writing this. Headed back to Cryo to pick up the large incandescent bulb we'd borrowed over the summer.

9526   Tue Jan 7 16:41:08 2014 manasaUpdateIOOWFS moving MC suspensions

Quote:

The trend shows a big jolt to the MC1/3 pointing this morning at 8:30.

### Was anyone working anywhere near there today? There is no elog.

If not, we will have to put a 'no janitor' sign on all of the 40m doors permanently to prevent mops misaligning our interferometer.

The MC trend for the last 2 days shows that the MC suspensions were kicked again earlier today.  Looking back at the suspension channel INMONs along with the MC trans sum shows that the suspensions get kicked everytime MC locks and unlocks. (Attch:1)

So I checked the effect of WFS on the suspensions by disabling and enabling the WFS feedback servo (Attch:2).

Since the IMC is not at it best pointing, whenever the  MC autolocker runs and enables the WFS, the suspensions look like they are getting kicked.  But really, it's just the WFS doing their job.

Edit, JCD:  What this really means is that our DC MC pointing is bad, and we need to move the MC suspensions to offload the WFS.  (All of the WFS output numbers for MC1 and 3 were around 100, which is pretty big for those numbers).  We should resurrect the WFS offloading scripts so that we can do this more regularly, and not have to do it by hand.

Attachment 1: 2dayMCtrend.png
Attachment 2: WFSvsMCsuspensions.png
6612   Mon May 7 12:57:34 2012 DenUpdateIOOWFS noise in MC

I've measured coherence between seismometer signals and OSEMS of MC 1,2,3

GUR1 was rotated on the angle pi / 4 relative to x arm to match suspos axis of MC1 and MC3. Coherence between MC2 and GUR2_X is high, between MC3 and GUR1_X is ~0.2 but is compensated by GUR1_Y, between MC1 and GUR1_Y below 1Hz is ~0.5 and is not compensated by GUR1_X.

Then I measured coherence between GUR1_Y and MC3 OSEMS in 3 regimes :

• FEEDBACK OFF, WFS OFF
• FEEDBACK ON, WFS OFF
• FEEDBACK ON, WFS ON

Once WFS are ON, signal becomes noisy, FEEDBACK is OK. Then I measured coherence between MC_F and GUR2_X with WFS ON and OFF

Coherence between MC_F and GUR2_X is less when WFS are ON in the range 0.2 - 1 Hz and 4 - 10 Hz. Moreover PSD of MC_F seems to be higher at 10 - 100 Hz. But this may be caused by other reasons.

Then I measured the coherence between IN and OUT signals in WFS_SERVO

One filter bank adds noise to WFS signals and because of that we loose coherence between MC_F and seismic motion.

6613   Mon May 7 17:28:29 2012 DenUpdateIOOWFS noise in MC

 Quote: One filter bank adds noise to WFS signals and because of that we loose coherence between MC_F and seismic motion.

This effect is due to C1:IOO-WFS1_PIT_LIMIT=2000. When I turned if off, coherence between C1:IOO-WFS_PIT input and output signals restored

The other thing is that WFS actuate on the angular motion, but this couples to the position motion. We need to diagonalize the actuator.

6614   Mon May 7 19:39:52 2012 KojiUpdateIOOWFS noise in MC

OK. Then we should make this number bigger such that the coherence is still completely maintained.
Is this set in the auto locker? Or manually set?

 Quote: This effect is due to C1:IOO-WFS1_PIT_LIMIT=2000. When I turned if off, coherence between C1:IOO-WFS_PIT input and output signals restored

6615   Mon May 7 20:15:37 2012 DenUpdateIOOWFS noise in MC

Quote:

OK. Then we should make this number bigger such that the coherence is still completely maintained.
Is this set in the auto locker? Or manually set?

 Quote: This effect is due to C1:IOO-WFS1_PIT_LIMIT=2000. When I turned if off, coherence between C1:IOO-WFS_PIT input and output signals restored

LIMIT is set manually, auto locker does not change it. I've put C1:IOO-WFS1_PIT_LIMIT=4000, it seems to be fine for now.

10681   Thu Nov 6 12:58:28 2014 KojiUpdateIOOWFS offset was reset

IMC WFS operating point seemed to get degraded.

- IMC WFS feedback was relieved.

- WFS servo was turned off.

- IMC alignment was tuned carefully

- /opt/rtcds/caltech/c1/scripts/MC/WFS/WFS_FilterBank_offsets was run

- WFS servo was turned on again

7710   Wed Nov 14 00:56:19 2012 JenneUpdateIOOWFS on, PZT2 ~set, AS camera back

WFS are back on, and working nicely.  Den and I had seen a problem (which I had seen before) that when you turn on the integrators in the WFS loops, the MC Refl value gets worse (goes up).  Koji reminded me that he had a nice elog (7452) on how to get the MC awesome.  Ayaka and I last night stopped after Step 7.  Step 8, zeroing the WFS offsets, is the secret important thing that I keep forgetting.  I ran the script /opt/rtcds/caltech/c1/scripts/MC/WFS/WFS_FilterBank_offsets, then turned on the WFS loop, and the WFS are working just fine now.

I'm back to wishing that I had control over PZT1.  I went back and forth for a while between 1Y4 and the ETMY table to get the IPANG beam centered on the QPD.  Initially, the beam was coming out of the vacuum a little high.  The digital HV power supply is pitch, and the analog HV power supply is yaw.  When I get the beam reasonably well centered on IPANG, with a beautiful, non-clipped, beam, the beam is much too high on IPPOS.  The beam barely hits the top of the first out of vac steering mirror, and then is too high on the QPD.  It looks like (based on the sum value) that the beam is on the diode, just entirely in the upper 2 quadrants.  But if I try to fix this, since IPANG has a longer lever arm, the IPANG beam doesn't come out of the vacuum.  I have compromised by getting the beam on IPANG, centered in pitch and ignoring IPPOS pitch.  For yaw, since moving PZT2 only makes one of POS or ANG good at a time, I split the difference, so the beam is not really centered in yaw on either, but it's close on both.

AS beam is back on the camera.  I forgot that, especially since the beam at REFL is pretty bright, I had moved the AS and REFL cameras out of the beam so we didn't crispy-fry the CCDs.  Therefore, the camera spots are no longer a reference of spot position. We can still eyeball the position on, say, the 2" lens, but that's not any kind of accurate.  I put the AS camera back to it's normal place, so the AS beam is going toward AS55 and AS110, and a little bit is going to the camera.  I have not yet aligned the beams actually on to the PDs.

REFL beam is dumped by a razor dump after the 2" lens.  Manasa did some work (elog 7666) to the REFL path, and I'm not 100% sure how it was before, so I leave it to her to please work on during the day tomorrow.  I think we need to put back the Y1 that used to be there, but I don't know where the optic is.  I put a yaw dither on the PRM with awggui, and saw the REFL beam moving at my 2Hz dither frequency, so this time we actually have a useful beam coming out.

6982   Wed Jul 18 00:36:22 2012 JenneUpdateIOOWFS oscillating

I was trying to lock and look at the ASS for the Yarm, but the transmitted power was oscillating very near 1Hz.  Eventually I looked at the mode cleaner, and it was also moving around at a similar frequency.  I took spectra of the ETMY SUS damping feedback signals, and they (POS, PIT, YAW) saw this 1Hz motion too (see attached plots...same data, one is a zoom around 1Hz).

As a first place to start, I turned off the WFS, which immediately stopped the MC oscillation.  Turning the WFS back on, the oscillation didn't come back.  I'm not sure what happened to make the WFS bad, but I perhaps had the ASS dither lines on (I've had them on and off, so I'm not sure), although turning off the dither lines didn't make the WFS any better.

As an aside, the MC refl with the WFS off was ~1.5, rather than the ~0.5 with the WFS on, which means that the PSL beam and the MC axis are not well matched.

Attachment 1: Yarm_oscillating_1Hz_while_WFS_crazy_full_17July2012.pdf
Attachment 2: Yarm_oscillating_1Hz_while_WFS_crazy_17July2012.pdf
5819   Sat Nov 5 01:10:29 2011 SureshUpdateIOOWFS output matrix measured (open loop)

The scripts and screens needed to make the MC WFS ouput matrix are once again functional

I corrected the WFS lockins' phases to ensure that the Q outputs are minimised.  Since all the lockins have the same relative phase with respect to the oscillator I found that the same phase works for all of them.  About 90 deg in this case.

The scripts used to make the WFS outmatrix measurement live in /cvs/cds/rtcds/caltech/c1/scripts/MC/WFS

1) setupWFSlockins:   This script makes sure that all the ASC, WFS_ LKIN and WFS_servo filter banks used in this measurement are set up properly.  It also sets the WFS_lockin oscillator to 10 Hz.  There are filter modules in the SIG filter bank of the WFS demodulators.

2) senseWFSoutMATRX:  This script cycles through the various MC actuators ( MC 1 2 3 : PIT and YAW ) and measures the response of the various ASC sensors (WFS and MC2_TRANS QPD).

3) The data collected by the sensWFSoutMATRX can be analysed with a matlab file called " wfsmatrix3.m " located in a subdirectory under WFS called 'matlab'.   I have added some comments in this file to make it easier to follow.   The output of this file, at the moment, gives only the " Actuation Vectors " for WFS1P, WFS2P, WFS1Y and WFS2Y.  It ignores the MC2TransQPD for now.

4)  The lockin outputs are given below ( the 'reduceddata' )

wfs1p      wfs2p      mc2tp      wfs1y      wfs2y     mc2ty

mc1p    0.2926   -0.4086    0.2926    0.0340    0.0064    0.0001
mc2p   -0.2830   -1.3060   -0.2833    0.0628    0.1171   -0.0003
mc3p   -0.3283   -0.3455   -0.3288   -0.0456    0.0275    0.0000
mc1y    0.0440    0.0261    0.0429    0.7204    0.9351   -0.0008
mc2y   -0.1006    0.0850   -0.1036   -1.5509   -0.3882    0.0165
mc3y     0.0150   -0.0832    0.0144    0.1114   -1.0573    0.0006

5) The actuation vectors are given below

 Pitch WFS1P WFS2P MC1 1.00 -0.86 MC2 -0.12 -1 MC3 -0.72 0.09

 Yaw WFS1Y WFS2Y MC1 0.16 0.59 MC2 -1.00 0.20 MC3 0.51 -1

6) This measurement was performed with the WFS servo loops open. I will try to close the loops with this matrix and run the script again to measure the output matrix in closed loop.

7) This a.vectors obtained above are significantly different from that obtained a while ago (elog 5668) before the lockin demod phases (relative to each other) were fixed.  This could also be because both are open loop measurements and we might have wandered into the nonlinear regime of the WFS sensors.

5834   Mon Nov 7 15:49:26 2011 jamieUpdateIOOWFS output matrix measured (open loop)

 Quote: The scripts used to make the WFS outmatrix measurement live in /cvs/cds/rtcds/caltech/c1/scripts/MC/WFS

I assume you mean /opt/rtcds/caltech/c1/scripts/MC/WFS.

As I've tried to reitterate many times: we do not use /cvs/cds anymore.  Please put all new scripts into the proper location under /opt/rtcds.

5899   Tue Nov 15 19:59:41 2011 SureshUpdateIOOWFS output matrix measured (open loop)

Quote:

 Quote: The scripts used to make the WFS outmatrix measurement live in /cvs/cds/rtcds/caltech/c1/scripts/MC/WFS

I assume you mean /opt/rtcds/caltech/c1/scripts/MC/WFS.

As I've tried to reitterate many times: we do not use /cvs/cds anymore.  Please put all new scripts into the proper location under /opt/rtcds.

Yes the files are in /opt/rtcds/caltech/c1/scripts/MC/WFS.

I just went to wherever the 'scripts' alias takes me, found the 'pwd' and did a cp+paste of the path.   I checked to be sure that 'scripts' takes me to /opt/rtcds/caltech/c1/scripts/.

So why does the pwd show /cvs/cds.... instead of /opt/rtcds  ?

5321   Mon Aug 29 19:14:31 2011 SureshUpdateIOOWFS phase adjustments

[Valera, Suresh]

1) To see if there are significant dark-offsets on the WFS sensors we closed the PSL shutter and found that the offsets are in the 1% range.  We decided to ignore them for now.

2) To center the MC_REFL beam on the WFS we opened the PSL shutter, unlocked the MC and then centered the DC_PIT and DC_YAW signals in the C1IOO_WFS_QPD screen.

3) We then looked at the power spectrum of the I and Q signals from WFS1 to see if the spectrum looked okay and found that some of the quadrants looked very different from others.  The reason was traced to incorrect Comb60 filters.   After correcting these filters we adjusted the R phase angle in the WFS1_SETTINGS screen to suppress the 1Hz natural oscillation signal in the Q channels of all the four quadrants.  We repeated this process for WFS2

4) To see if the relative phase of all four quadrants was correct we first drove the MC_length and tried to check the phase of the response on each quadrant.  However the response was very weak as the signal was suppressed by the MC servo.  Increasing the drive made the PMC lock unstable.  So we introduced a 6Hz, 50mVpp signal from an SR785 into the MC_servo (Input2) and with this we were able to excite a significant response in the WFS without affecting the PMC servo.    By looking at the time series of the signals from the quadrants we set the R phase angle in WFS_Settings such that all the quadrants showed the same phase response to the MC_length modulation.

Using the larger response were were able to further tweak the R angle to supress the Q channels to about 1% of the I phase signals.

5)  I then edited the c1ioo.mdl so that we can use the six lockins just as they are used in MC_ASS.  However we can now set elements of the SEN_DMD_MATRX (sensor demod matrix) to select any of the MCL, WFS PIT and YAW channels (or a linear combination of them) for demodulation.  The change is shown below.  While compiling and model on C1IOO FE machine there were problems which eventually led to the FB crash.

4289   Mon Feb 14 15:59:49 2011 JenneUpdateIOOWFS quantum efficiency as a function of angle

[Larisa and Jenne]

A few weeks ago (on the 28th of January) I had tried to measure the quantum efficiency of one quadrant of the WFS as a function of angle.  However, Rana pointed out that I was a spaz, and had forgotten to put a lens in front of the laser.  Why I forgot when doing the measurement as a function of angle, but I had remembered while doing it at normal incidence for all of the quadrants, who knows?

Anyhow, Larisa measured the quantum efficiency today.  She used WFS2, quadrant 1 (totally oil-free), since that was easier than WFS1.  She also used the Jenne Laser (with a lens), since it's more stable and less crappy than the CrystaLasers.  We put a 50 Ohm terminator on the RF input of the Jenne Laser, since we weren't doing a swept sine measurement.  Again, the Ophir power meter was used to measure the power incident on the diode, and the reflected power, and the difference between them was used as the power absorbed by the diode for the quantum efficiency measurement.  A voltmeter was used to measure the output of the diode, and then converted to current as in the quote below.

Still on the to-do list:  Replace the WFS2 diode.  See if we have one around, otherwise order one.  Align beams onto WFS so we can turn on the servo.

QE = (h*c)/(lambda*e) * (I/P)

Where I = (Volts from Pin1 to GND)/2 /500ohms
P = Power from laser - power reflected from diode.
h, c, e are the natural constants, and lambda is 1064nm.
Also, I/P = Responsivity



Larissa is going to put her data and plots into the elog shortly....

4307   Wed Feb 16 10:35:40 2011 Larisa ThorneUpdateIOOWFS quantum efficiency as a function of angle

Here is the followup on Jenne's February 14th, 2011 update on the quantum efficiency measurements of WFS2.

http://nodus.ligo.caltech.edu:8080/40m/4289

Attached is a PDF of my calculations, based on measurements ranging between 0-25 degrees in 5 degree increments.

The graph at the bottom plots these angles versus the calculated quantum efficiency at each point and the responsivity. Since quantum efficiency and responsivity only differ by a factor of some natural constants (lamda, e, h, c), I used a graph with two vertical axes, because the points would be plotted at essentially the same location if quantum efficiency (%)  and responsivity (Amps/Watts) were graphed on two separate plots.

The calculated values for quantum efficiency based on my measurements (labelled "ExpAverage") were pretty close to what Jenne had calculated in earlier attempts, which was around 60%. Just to test, I compared my quantum efficiency result against the calculation of quantum efficiency using the responsivity value for silicon, 0.5 Amps/Watt, which is labelled as "Spec". Comparison of "ExpAverage" and "Spec" shows that they differ by only about 2%, so I conclude that the theoretical quantum efficiency calculated using a given responsivity agrees with my measurement-based experimental result.

Attachment 1: QEcalcs.pdf
1820   Mon Aug 3 14:15:50 2009 JenneUpdateIOOWFS recentered

I am (was) able to get the mode cleaner mostly locked, but because WFS2 wasn't centered, the MC would drift, then lose lock.  I recentered both the WFS (after unlocking the MC and the MZ), and am now about to commence relocking both of those.

/end{quick update}

Note to self:  WFS get centered based on the direct reflection from MC1.  Once the MC is close enough, the WFS are enabled, and they twiddle all 3 MC mirrors to minimize their error signal.  Moral of the story: make sure the WFS are centered.

12900   Wed Mar 22 16:58:25 2017 gautamUpdateIMCWFS sensing matrix measurements

I've taken a bunch of transfer function measurements from the MC ASC PIT and YAW channels to the WFS error signals using the same set of DTT templates Koji used while characterizing the WFS loops a couple of months ago, before the IMC RF changes. Analysis is underway and I will post the results here shortly...

As an aside, Rana had added 10dB and 20dB gains to all of the WFS filter banks yesterday. I tried engaging the 10dB gains on the two MC2_TRANS PD loops, and this did not seem to induce any instability. I stepped both loops and saw that as expected, the 1/e times for both of these loops is about 45 seconds now (compared to ~150 seconds at the nominal gain). These have been running all day today, and the IMC seems well behaved, so I am going to leave these on for now... Jacking up the gain on the MC2_TRANS_QPD loops by 20dB induced instability - same story for the 4 WFS loops with 10dB additional gain...

12901   Thu Mar 23 01:44:53 2017 gautamUpdateIMCWFS sensing matrix measurements

Thanks to Koji's nice MATLAB script using DttData functions, I was able to quickly analyze the TF data. Essentially, this measurement was a repetition of what was done here. The difference is that the modulation depth has been increased by ~25x compared to that measurement from December 2016. Here are the measured TFs (before accounting for the 1/f^2 normalization) for the various quadrants and the PIT/YAW channels:

The plots above are just to illustrate that the measurement was clean between the band over which the averaging will be done to compute the TF amplitude - i.e. 7-15Hz. The full summary of TF amplitudes, standard deviations, and the sensing matrix in the style of the referenced elog (the actual excel spreadsheet is Attachment #4, minus some of the graphics Koji had on his excel sheet):

Inverting those matrices, we get the matrices that diagonalize the sensor-actuator chain:

PITCH:

$\begin{pmatrix} -0.00518 & -0.00305 & -639.6\\ 0.00354 & -0.00281 & 198.8\\ 0.00102 & 0.00672 & -756.6 \end{pmatrix}$

YAW:

$\begin{pmatrix} 0.00523 & -0.00276 & -856.7\\ 0.000318 & 0.00010 & -366.4\\ 0.00039 & -0.00548 & -851.9 \end{pmatrix}$

I will try implementing these matrices tomorrow and take a look at the step responses of the loops - the idea is that perhaps the system wasn't optimally diagonalized before and perhaps we can now improve the bandwidths of all the loops.

Attachment 1: IMC_WFS_segment_TF.pdf
Attachment 2: IMC_WFS_channels_TF.pdf
Attachment 3: TFsummary.pdf
Attachment 4: IMC_WFS_170322.xlsx.zip
12902   Thu Mar 23 08:43:11 2017 ranaUpdateIMCWFS sensing matrix measurements

For sensing matrix, better to use single frequency sine response. We don't want to measure around the bounce or above the 28 Hz cutoff filters in the MC SUS.

12867   Sun Mar 5 12:41:23 2017 gautamUpdateIMCWFS servo-steppin

I've been sitting on some data for a while now which I finally got around to plotting. Here is a quick summary:

Attachment #1: I applied a step input to the offset of each of the six WFS loops and observed the step response. The 1/e time constant for all 4 WFS loops is <10s suggesting a bandwidth a little above 0.1Hz. However, the MC2 P and Y loops have a much longer time contant of ~150s. Moreover, it looks like the DC centering of the spot on the QPD isn't great - the upper two quadrants (as per the MEDM screen) have ~3x the cts of the lower pair.
I did not (yet) try increasing the gain of this loop to see if this could be mitigated. I accidentally saved this as a png, I will put up the pdf plot

Attachment #2: This is a comparison of the WFS error signals with the loops engaged (solid lines) vs disabled (dashed lines). Though these measurements were taken at slightly different times, they are consistent with the WFS loop bandwidths being ~0.1Hz.

Attachment #3: Comparison of the spectra of the testpoint channels and their DQ counterparts at the same time which are sampled at 512Hz. It does not look like there is any dramatic aliasing going on, although it is hard to tell what exactly is the order of the digital AA filter implemented by the RCG. Further investigation remains to be done... For reference, here are some notes: T1600059, T1400719

GV 7 March 2017 6pm: It looks like we use RCG v2.9.6, so it should be the latter document that is applicable. I've been going through some directories to try and find the actual C-code where the filter coeffs are defined, but have been unsuccessful so far...

 Quote: I will update with the in-loop error signal spectra, which should give us some idea of the loop bandwidth. I will look into lowering the sampling rate, and how much out-of-band power is aliasing into the 0-256 Hz band and update with my findings.

Attachment 1: WFS_stepping.png
Attachment 2: WFS_comparisons.pdf
Attachment 3: WFSdigitalAA.pdf
15965   Thu Mar 25 15:31:24 2021 gautamUpdateIOOWFS servos

The servos are almost certainly not optimal - but we have the IFO sort of working, so before we make any changes, let's make a strong case for it. Once the loop TFs and noises (e.g. the sensing noise reinjection you maybe saw) are fully characterized and a new loop is shown to perform better, then we can make the changes, but until then, let's continue using the "nominal" configuration and keep all the WFS loops on . I turned everything back on.

BTW, MC2_ASCPIT_IN1 isn't the correct channel to measure the sensing noise re-injection, you need some other sensor, e.g. is the MC transmission (de)stabilized. 0-20 Hz is where I expect the WFS is actually measuring above the sensing noise.

12838   Fri Feb 17 20:10:18 2017 gautamUpdateIMCWFS servos turned back on

[Koji, gautam]

Turns out the "problem" with WFS2 and the apparent offset accumulation on the IMC Servo board is probably a slow machine problem.

Today, Koji and I looked at the situation a little more closely. This anomalous behaviour of the C1:IOO-MC_SUM channel picking up an offset seems correlated with light being incident on WFS2 head. Placing an ND filter in front of WFS 2 slowed down the rate of accumulation (though it was still present). But we also looked at the in-loop error signal on the IMC board (using the "Out 2" BNC on the front panel), and this didn't seem to show any offset accumulation. Anyways, the ability of the Autolocker doesn't seem to be affected by this change, so I am leaving the WFS servo turned on.

The new demod phases (old +45degrees) and gains (old gains *0.2) have been updated in the SDF table. It remains to see that the WFS loops don't drag the alignment over longer timescales. I will post a more detailed analysis here over the weekend...

Also, we thought it would be nice to have DQ channels for the WFS error signals for analysis of the servo (rather than wait for 30 mins to grab live fine resolution spectra of the error signals with the loop On/Off). So I have added 16 DQ channels [recorded at 2048 Hz] to the c1ioo model (for the I and Q demodulated signal from each quadrant for the 8 quadrants). The "DRATE" for the c1ioo model has increased from ~200 to 410. Comparing to the "DRATE" of c1lsc, which is around 3200, we think this isn't significantly stretching the DAQ abilities of the c1ioo model...

12839   Sat Feb 18 14:09:06 2017 ranaUpdateIMCWFS servos turned back on

Yikes. Please change the all teh WFS DQ channels sample rates from 2048 down to 512 Hz. I doubt we ever need anything about 180 Hz.

There is sometimes an issue with this: if our digital AA filters are not strong enough, the noise about above 256 Hz can alias into the 0-256 Hz band. We ought to check this quantitatively and make some elog statement about our AA filters. This issue is also seen in DTT when requesting a low frequency spectrum: DTT uses FIR filters which are sometimes not sharp enough to prevent this issue.

12840   Sat Feb 18 21:50:48 2017 gautamUpdateIMCWFS servos turned back on

Here is a comparison of the error signal spectra after increasing the IMC modulation depth, to the contribution with RF inputs / whitening inputs terminated (which I borrowed from Koji's characterization of the same in Dec 2016, these shouldn't have changed).

Some general observations:

1. This data was taken with the WFS servos disabled, but with the IMC hand-aligned to a good state (MC_TRANS ~15,000). The error signal spectra are from the new DQ channels (but still sampled at 2048Hz, I had not implemented the change to 512Hz).
2. The error signals seem to have increased by ~25x , which is consistent with how much we expect the modulation depth to have increased
3. The bump around 1 Hz is now cleaerly visible in all 16 channels, as is the bounce peak at 16Hz (relative to Dec 2016). In general, between 0.1Hz and 5Hz, there is now a fair bit of daylight between the error signals and the electronics noise contribution.

I will update with the in-loop error signal spectra, which should give us some idea of the loop bandwidth.

I will look into lowering the sampling rate, and how much out-of-band power is aliasing into the 0-256 Hz band and update with my findings.

 Quote: Yikes. Please change the all teh WFS DQ channels sample rates from 2048 down to 512 Hz. I doubt we ever need anything about 180 Hz. There is sometimes an issue with this: if our digital AA filters are not strong enough, the noise about above 256 Hz can alias into the 0-256 Hz band. We ought to check this quantitatively and make some elog statement about our AA filters. This issue is also seen in DTT when requesting a low frequency spectrum: DTT uses FIR filters which are sometimes not sharp enough to prevent this issue.

Attachment 1: WFS_error_noise.pdf
4148   Thu Jan 13 03:00:01 2011 JenneUpdateIOOWFS shenanigans

My goal this afternoon was to measure the quantum efficiency of the MC WFS.  In the process of doing this, I discovered that when I reverted a change in the MCWFS path (see elog 4107 re: this change), I had not checked the max power going to the WFS when the MC unlocks.

Current status:

MC locks (is locked now).  No light going to WFS at all (to prevent MC WFS french-fry action).  Quantum Efficiency measured.

The Full Story:

Power to WFS:

Rana asked me to check out the quantum efficiency of the WFS, so that we can consider using them for aLIGO.  This involves measuring the power incident on the PDs, and while doing so, I noticed that WFS1 had ~160mW incident and WFS2 had ~240mW incident while the mode cleaner was unlocked.  This is bad, since they should have a max of ~10mW ever.  Not that 200mW is going to destroy the PD immediately, but rather the current out, with the 100V bias that the WFS have, is a truckload of power, and the WFS were in fact getting pretty warm to the touch.  Not so good, if things start melting / failing due to extended exposure to too much heat.

The reason so much power was going to the WFS is that it looks like Yuta/Koji et. al., when trying to use the WFS as a MC1 oplev, changed out 2 of the beam splitters in the MC WFS / MC Refl path, not just one.  Or, we've just been crispy-frying our WFS for a long time.  Who knows?  If it is option A, then it wasn't elogged.  The elog 3878 re: BS changeout only mentions the change of one BS.

Since the MC Refl path has a little more than ~1W of power when the MC is unlocked, and the first BS (which was reverted in elog 4107) is a 10% reflector, so ~100mW goes to the MC Refl PD, and ~900mW goes to the MC WFS path.  In front of a Black Hole beam dump was sitting a BS1-33, so we were getting ~300mW reflected to be split between the 2 WFS, and ~600mW dumped.  The new plan is to put a W2 window in place of this BS1-33, so that we get hopefully something like 0.1% reflected toward the WFS, and everything else will be dumped.  I could not find a W2-45S (everything else is S, so this needs to be S as well).  I found a bunch of W2-0deg, and a few W2-45P.  Does anyone have a secret stash of W2-45S's???  To avoid any more excessive heat just in case, for tonight, I have just left out this mirror entirely, so the whole MC WFS beam is dumped in the Black Hole.  The WFS also have aluminum beam dumps in front of them to prevent light going in.  None of this affects the MC Refl path, so the MC can still lock nice and happily.

Quantum Efficiency Measurement:

I refer to Jamie's LHO elog for the equation governing quantum efficiency of photodiodes: LHO 2 Sept 2009

The information I gathered for each quadrant of each WFS was: [1] Power of light incident on PD (measured with the Ophir power meter), [2] Power of light reflected off the PD (since this light doesn't get absorbed, it's not part of the QE), and [3] the photo current output by the PD (To get this, I measured the voltage out of the DC path that is meant to go to EPICS, and backed out what the current is, based on the schematic, attached).

I found a nifty 25 pin Dsub breakout board, that you can put in like a cable extension, and you can use clip doodles to look at any of the pins on the cable.  Since this was a PD activity, and I didn't want to die from the 100V bias, I covered all of the pins I wasn't going to use with electrical tape.  After turning down the 100V Kepco that supplies the WFS bias, I stuck the breakout board in the WFS.  Since I was able to measure the voltage at the output of the DC path, if you look at the schematic, I needed to divide this by 2 (to undo the 2nd op amp's gain of 2), and then convert to current using the 499 Ohm resistor, R66 in the 1st DC path.

I did all 4 quadrants of WFS1 using a 532nm laser pointer, just to make sure that I had my measurement procedure under control, since silicon PDs are nice and sensitive to green.  I got an average QE of ~65% for green, which is not too far off the spec of 70% that Suresh found.

I then did all 8 WFS quadrants using the 1064nm CrystaLaser #2, and got an average QE of ~62% for 1064 (58% if I exclude 2 of the quadrants....see below).  Statistics, and whatever else is needed can wait for tomorrow.

Problem with 2 quadrants of WFS2?

While doing all of this, I noticed that quadrants 3 and 4 of WFS2 seem to be different than all the rest.  You can see this on the MEDM screens in that all 6 other quadrants, when there is no light, read about -0.2, whereas the 2 funny quadrants read positive values.  This might be okay, because they both respond to light, in some kind of proportion to the amount of light on them.  I ended up getting QE of ~72% for both of these quadrants, which doesn't make a whole lot of sense since the spec for green is 70%, and silicon is supposed to be less good for infrared than green.  Anyhow, we'll have to meditate on this.  We should also see if we have a trend, to check how long they have been funny.

Attachment 1: D990249-B-1_MCWFS_schematic.pdf
4149   Thu Jan 13 12:56:57 2011 ranaUpdateIOOWFS shenanigans

Actually, I just found out that there are different flavors of 'YAG-444'.

There's a YAG-444AH and also a YAG-444-4AH. I'm not sure which one we have or even which is better. The diode's internal resistance is not listed.

They also say explicitly that he 'YAG Enhancement' is just using thicker Silicon. Since the absorption of 1064 nm light in Silicon is very small, most of the light just goes in and then comes back out without depositing much of the power.

Attachment 1: PerkinElmerQPDs.pdf
5042   Wed Jul 27 10:04:29 2011 SureshUpdateIOOWFS transfer function measurements

This is part of the WFS activity.  So far I have completed the following tasks:

1)  I fixed the MEDM screens up to a point where they can be used for locking.  There are still some buttons which invoke non-existing screens and some blank fields.  But the basic filter banks and input  and output matrices are fixed.

2) I copied all the old filter banks into the new screens both in the WFS head and in the WFS Master, where the servo filters are located.  The I and Q filter banks in the WFS heads have been switched on.

3) I <=> Q phase settings in the WFS head for each quadrant:  We have assumed that the I and Q are orthogonal so D=90 for all cases.  I set the R phase to minimise the signal in all the Q lines.  So the signal is largely in the I phase.  I used Sine Response feature in DTT while supplying an excitation signal to MC2_ASCPIT_EXC.  At times I used the YAW instead of PIT if I did not get enough coherence.  This was set manually by watching the Q phase signal and minimising that by adjusting the R angle.  It was in general possible to get this correct to a deg.   There are several old scripts to do this in the MC/WFS but they do not work since most of them are based on the ezlockin or ezcademod functions.    I will try to fix the ezWFS1phase and ezWFS2phase scripts to automate this.  Some channel names have to be changed in these.

4) I measured the transfer function between the mirror motions [(MC1, MC2, MC3) x (PIT, YAW)] and the sensor DoF [(WFS1, WFS2) x (PIT, YAW)].  The measurements are reported below.  The plan is to invert this matrix and use it as the Out_Matrix.

I list here the various steps I took in making this measurement.

a) Set the DC offsets on the individual quadrants to zero using an old script (which I updated with the new channel names).  The script is called McWFS_dc_offsets and is located in the $scripts$/MC/WFS directory.   Note that before doing this the PSL shutter was closed.  This script sets a basic EPICS parameter called AOFF for each channel.  These are listed in cvs/cds/caltech/target/c1iool0 .

b) Then the PSL beam into the MC was steered to optimise coupling into MC (described in my earlier post today).  This is because we use the input beam as a reference while setting up the WFS.

c) Unlock the MC and center the directly reflected beam from the MC on the WFS.  We use the DC monitors on the C1IOO_WFS_QPD.adl screen to center the spot on the WFS head.

d) Then used the WFSoffsets script to set the offsets in the I and Q filter banks to zero.  This script uses the ezcaservo to look at the OUT16 channels and zeroes them by setting an appropriate offset.  I took care to switch off all slow filters in the I and Q filter banks before this operation was carried out .  Only the 60Hz comb filter was on.

e) Opened the PSL shutter and relocked the MC

f) Then I measured the transfer co-efs by oscillating the optic (exciting a specific degree of freedom) and observing the response in the WFS sensor degrees of freedom.   These are tabulated above.

Next

I plan to use this matrix and prepare the Output matix and then close the WFS servo loops.

10431   Tue Aug 26 23:46:55 2014 ericqUpdateIMCWFS tuneup

I decided to see what I could do with the new WFS setup.

First, I adjusted the WFS digital demod angles. Once I ensured that the static MC alignment and DC alignment onto the WFS was good, I drove MC2 in pitch with the WFS output off. I then did the usual thing of making the Q peak at the excitation frequency go away. Here are the changes:

• WFS1 Q1: 7 -> -24 (-31)
• WFS1 Q2: 6.5 -> -9.5 (-16)
• WFS1 Q3: -6.5 -> -26.5 (-20)
• WFS1 Q4: 47 -> 30 (-17)
• WFS2 Q1: -51 -> -39 (-12)
• WFS2 Q2: -39 -> -21 (-18)
• WFS2 Q3: -32 -> -20 (-12)
• WFS2 Q4: -120 -> -108 (-12)

I then drove each MC mirror in pitch and yaw respectively, and measured the TF from excitation to the WFS signal (dB Magnitude, sign):

 Mirror DoF WFS1 Pitch WFS1 Yaw WFS2 Pitch WFS2 Yaw MC1 Pit -67.7,+ -81.9,+ -58.9,- -83.7,+ Yaw -82.5,- -48.7,- -83.7,+ -112.3,- MC2 Pit -50.4,- -77.1,- -54.2,- -67.9,+ Yaw -82.1,- -52.9,+ -59.6,- -44.0,- MC3 Pit -59.7,- -97.3,+ -62.0,+ -83.9,- Yaw -78.0,+ -52.9,+ -67.3,+ -51.4,+

I looked through some old ELOG's of Suresh's and used similar logic to scripts/MC/WFS/wfsmatrix2.m to generate a new output matrix. (This involves creating a null sensing vector that is orthogonal to the measured ones, and inverting that matrix)

Old:

 Pitch WFS1 WFS2 MC2T YAW WFS1 WFS2 MC2T MC1 -1 0.044 0 MC1 -1 -0.294 0 MC2 0.19 1 1 MC2 -0.26 -0.045 -1 MC3 0.5 -0.681 0 MC3 -.9 1 0

New:

 Pitch WFS1 WFS2 MC2T YAW WFS1 WFS2 MC2T MC1 0.835 -1 0 MC1 -1 -0.229 0 MC2 -0.948 -0.433 1 MC2 0.317 -1 -1 MC3 -1 0.865 0 MC3 0.743 0.628 0

I had to flip a gain or two to keep things stable, then measured the WFS error signal spectra to see if this made anything better. The WFS1 spectra look better, but WFS2 not so much.

The loops would need a more thorough investigation, but for now, they're at least a little calmer. The MC is stabler than immediately after the upgrade, but there's still room for improvement.

10432   Wed Aug 27 09:12:47 2014 KojiUpdateIMCWFS tuneup

I'm sure that the 1~3Hz motion comes from the mirror motion, but not 100% sure what is causing
the broad stochastic noise. If this is the beam jitter, this penetrates to the IFO via the WFS servos.
Is there any way to characterize this noise in order to compare it with the actual (estimated) motion of the mirrors?

ELOG V3.1.3-