Of course I know there is a downconversion in OMC signal from 32k to 16k.

But I was just wondering if the delay comes from only downconversion.

And I can not find any significant noise in both signals because I use the triangular, which cause the higer harmonics and can hide the timing noise in frequency domain.

So I'm going to make the same measurement by using sinusoidal instead of triangular, then can see the noise in frequency domain.

I measured the noise spectrum of LSC_DARM_IN1 and OMC-LSC_DRIVE_EXC by using DTT,

while injecting the sin-wave into the OMC-LSC_DRIVE by AWG.

The attached are the results.

No significant differences appears between OMC and LSC in this measurement.

It means, in this measurement we can not figure out any timing noise which might be in LSC-clock.

In addition there are the noise floor, whose level does not change in each 3-figures. The level is about ~4*10^{-8} count/sqrt[Hz]

(The source of the noise floor is still under research.)

The 33MHz mod depth is now controlled by the OMC (C1:OMC-SPARE_DAC_CH_15).  The setting to give us the same modulation depth as before is 14000 (in the offset field).

According to my measurements I conclude that LSC-signal is retarded from OMC-signal with the constant retarded time of 92usec.
It means there are no timing jitter between them. Only a constant time-delay exists.

(Timing jitter)
Let's begin with basics.
If you measure the same signal at OMC-side and LSC-side, they can have some time delay between them. It can be described as followers.

where tau_0 is the time delay. If the tau_0 is not constant, it causes a noise of the timing jitter.

(method)
I have injected the sine-wave with 200.03Hz into the OMC-LSC_DRIVE_EXC. Then by using get_data, I measured the signal at 'OMC-LSC_DRIVE_OUT' and 'LSC-DARM_ERR' where the exciting signal comes out.
In the ideal case the two signals are completely identical.
In order to find the delay, I calculated the difference in these signals based on the method described by Waldman. The method uses the following expression.

Here the tau_s is the artificial delay, which can be adjusted in the off line data.
By shifting tau_s we can easily find the minimal point of the RMS, and at this point we can get tau_0=tau_s.
This is the principle of the method to measure the delay.  In my measurement I put T=1sec. and make the calculation every 1sec. in 1 min.

(results)
Attachment is the obtained results. The above shows the minimum RMS sampled every 1sec. and the below shows the delay in terms of number of shifts.
1 shift corresponds to Ts (=1/32kHz).  All of the data are matched with 3 times shift, and all of the minimum RMS are completely zero.
Therefore I can conclude that LSC-signal is retarded from OMC-signal with constant retarded times of 3*Ts exactly, and no timing jitter has been found.
 

The diagnostic script I've written is available in the 'caltech/users/kiwamu/work/20091026_OMC-LSC-diag/src'.

To run the script, you can just execute 'run_OMC_LSC.sh' or just call the m-file ' OMC_LSC_timinig.m'  from matlab.

NOTES:

The script destructs the lock of DARM and OMC, be careful if you are working with IFO.

I set a cron job on allegra.martian to run the diagnostic script every weekend.

I think this routine can be helpful to know how the trend of timing-shift goes

The cron runs the script on every Sunday 5:01AM and diagnostics will take about 5 min.

! Important:

During the running of the script, OMC and DARM can not be locked.

If you want to lock OMC and DARM in the early morning of weekend, just log in allegra and then comment out the command by using 'crontab -e'

As I wrote on Oct.27th, the cron job works every Sunday.

I found it worked well on the last Sunday (Nov.1st).

And I can not find any timing jitter in the data, its delay still stay 3*Ts.

I'm going to work on the X arm to measure the arm cavity finesse.

The idea is to measure the cavity transfer function to estimate the frequency of its cavity pole. That should be a more accurate measurement than that based on the cavity decay time.

I'm starting now and I'm going to inject a swept sine excitation on the OMC_ISS_EXC input cable laying on the floor nearby the AP table (see pic).

In orderf to do that I disconnected the cable from the OMC breakout box laying on the floor. I'm going to plug the cable back in as soon as I'm done.

 Since I need to measure the transfer function between TRX and MC_TRANS_DC I picked off the beam going to RFAM PD to send it to a PDA255 photodiode (cannibalized from the AbsL's PLL) which I installed on the PSL table.

I centerd the beam on the PD and I was able to see the injected signal.

I think I'm ready to measure the transfer function.

Except for the RFAM PD everything is as before.

I'm gonna go grab dinner and I should be back to keep working on that in about one hour.

 Back from dinner. Taking measurements.

I measured the transfer function between MC_TRANS and TRX and I'm attaching the result.

That looks quite strange. Something's wrong. I'll repeat it tomorrow.

for the night I'm putting everything back. I'm also reconnecting the OMC_ISS_EXC and opening again the test switch on the ISS screen.

The RFAM monitor remains disable

I would have guessed that you have to calibrate the detectors relative to each other before trying this. Its also going to be tricky if you use 2 different kinds of ADC for this (c.f. today's delay discussion in the group meeting).

I think Osamu used to look at fast transmission signals by making sure the PD at the end had a 50 Ohm output impedance and just drive the 40m long cable and terminate the receiving end with 50 Ohms. Then both PDs go into the SR785.

On Rana's suggestion I measured the trasfer function between the two photodiodes PDA255 that I'm using.

I took the one that I had on the end table and put it on the PSL table. I split the MC transmitted beam with a 50% beam splitter and sent the beams on the two diodes. (Rana's idea of picking off the beam and interposing the PDs before the ISS PDs was not doable: ISS PDs would be too close and there would be no room to install the PDA255 before them). See picture with the final setup.

The transfer function also includes the 40m long cable that I was using for the Arm Cavity measurement.

Here's what I got. It looks rather flat. Yesterday the calibration was probably not the problem in that measurement.

 I'm now going to install the PD back on the end table and measure the TFs between the excitation and several points of the loop.

(Trivia. At first, the PDs were saturating so Koji attached attenuation filters on to them. Suddenly the measurement got much nicer)

It seems that just repeating the measurement was enough to get a good transfer function of the x arm cavity. Here's what I got.

I'm going to fit the data on matlab, but at first sight, the pole seems to be at about 1.7KHz (that is where the phase is 45deg): as expected.

Probably it was useful to realign the beam on the Transmission PD. (btw, I'm using the PDA255 that was still on the X end table since the AbsL experiemtn that measured the arm length)

As for the X Arm, this the transfer function I measured for the Y arm cavity.

This time I'm using a different photodiode than the PDA255 on the Y end table.

The diode I'm using is the PDA520 from where TRY comes from.

I'm going to repeat the measurement with PDA255.

 Measurement repeated with the PDA255 PD at the end but not big changes

I disconnected the setup for the arm cavity TF measurement. I opened the scitation switch on the ISS medm screen. I reconnected the OMC ISS EXC cable to the breakout box on the floor.

The photodiode on the Y end is stilll connected.

Also the RFAm (whish is not disbaled anymore) still has a 50% beam splitter before it.

I'm also running the Align Full IFO script.

The MC2 watchdogs tripped. I just restored them.

I also had to relock the MZ and then the Mode Cleaner.

I removed the beam splitter and the PDA 255.

the beam path to the RFAM photodiode is clear again.

From fitting the arm cavity transfer functions I got the following values for the cavity pole frequencies.

X ARM: fp_x = (1720 +/- 70) Hz

Y ARM: fp_y = (1650 +/- 70) Hz

Attached are the plots from the fitting.

Steps:

1) Turn off feedback to ETMY (the ETMY button on the LSC screen).

2) Put a 1 into the YARM->MC2 output matrix element on the LSC screen.

3) Turn off FM6 (comb), FM7 (0.1:10) on the MC2_MCL filter bank. This is to make the IOO-MCL loop more stable and to reduce the IOO-MCL low frequency gain.

4) Set the MC2-LSC gain to 0.5, turn the output ON, turn ON FM4 & FM5 & FM6 of the MC2-LSC filter bank.

5) Turn on the input of MC2-LSC and the arm should now lock.

6) After locking, set the MC2-MCL gain to zero. Hopefully with a few second ramp time.

Voila!

(A comment by KA - c.f. this entry )

An interesting thing was happened in the OMC-LSC timing clock.

Right now the clock of the OMC and the LSC are completely synchronized.

 The trend data is shown below. At the first two measurements (Oct.27 and Nov.1),  LSC had constant retarded time of 3Ts (~92usec.).

The last measurement, on Nov.15, number of shifts goes to zero, this means there are no retarded time.

Also the variance between the two signal gets zero, so I conclude the OMC and the LSC are now completely synchronized.

The measurement on Nov.8 is somehow meaningless, I guess the measurement did not run correctly by an influence from megatron(?)

With Koji's help, I measured the length of the Mode Cleaner.

The new modulation frequencies (as quoted on the Marconi front panels) are: 

165.980580 MHz

 33.196116 MHz

132.784464 MHz

199.176696 MHz

The Frequency Counter readback is 165980584.101 Hz (a 4Hz difference).  All of the Marconi's front-panel frequencies read ###.##### MHz Ext, and the Frequency standard has it's "locked" light illuminated, and the 1pps input light blinking, so I think everything is still nicely locked to the frequency standard, and the frequency standard is locked to the GPS.

While changing the marconi's, I accidentally touched the MC's 29.5 MHz marconi.  It is set back to the nominal value (according to Kiwamu's rack photos) of 29.485MHz.  But the phase might be sketchy, although hopefully this doesn't matter since we don't do a double demodulation with it.

I also ran the scripts in the wiki page: How To/Diagonalize DRMI Length Control to set the DD Phases.

I propose that from now on, we indicate in the elog what frequencies we're referring to. In this case, I guess its the front panel readback and not the frequency counter -- what is the frequency counter readback? And is everything still locked to the 10 MHz from the GPS locked Rubidium clock?

Plus, what FSS Box? The TTFSS servo box? Or the VCO driver? As far as I know, the RC trans PD doesn't go through the FSS boxes, and so its a real change. I guess that a bad contact in the FSS could have made a huge locking offset.

What I meant was the VCO driver, not the FSS box.

As for the frequency, all written numbers were the Marconi displays.
The number on the frequency counter was also recorded, and so will be added to the previous entry shortly... 

Today I measured the max output power at the EOM output of one of the RF AM Stabilizers that we use to control the modulation depth. I needed to know that number for the designing of the new RF system.

When the EPICS slider of the 166 MHz modulation depth is at 0 the modulation depth is max (the slider's values are reversed : 0 is max, 5 is min; it is also 0 for any value above 5, sepite it range from 0 to 10).

I measured 9.5V from the EOM output, that is 32 dBm on a 50 Ohm impedance.

I temporarily disconnected the Heliax cable that brings the 166MHz LO to the LSC rack.

I'm doing a couple of measurement and I'll put it back in as soon as I'm done.

I replaced the SMA end connector for the 166 MHZ Local Oscillator signal that goes to the back of the flange in the 1Y2 rack. The connector had got damaged after it twisted when I was tigheting the N connector of the Heliax cable on the front panel.

 These are the losses I measured on a RG-174 cable for the two frequencies that we're planning to use in the Upgrade:

@11MHz Loss=0.22dBm/meter

@55MHz Loss=0.41dBm/meter

(The cable was 2.07m long. The input signal was +10dBm and the output voltages at the oscilloscope where: Vpk-pk(11MHz)=1.90V, Vpk-pk(11MHz)=1.82V )

They must not be dBm, must be dB

I apologize for the lack of correctness on the units in yesterday's elog entry, but I wasn't very sharp last night.

I repeated the measurement today, this time also making sure that I had a 50ohm input impedance set in the scope. These the results for the losses.

 I also measured the losses in the Heliax cable going from the 166 MHz LO to the LSC rack:

 Seems like very strange cable loss numbers. The Heliax is lossier than the RG-174? I wonder how these compare with the specs in the cable catalog?

I did the measurement on a 4.33 meter long cable with SMA connectors at the ends.

This morning I found that there was no light on the SPOB PD. I went looking at the photodetector and I found that the shutter in front of it was closed.

I switched the shutter driver from n.c. to n.o. which had the effect of opening it.

I guess we inadvertently closed the shutter with Rana when last week we were tinkering with the ITMY  camera.

This morning I've been having problems in trying to lock the X arm.

That doesn't seem to have solved the problem. The X arm can get locked but TRX slowly moves between 0.2 and 1.

The X arm is now locked with TRX stable at ~1.

I think earlier on today I was having problems with running the alignment scripts from op540. Now I'm controlling the IFO from Rosalba and I can easily and stably lock all degrees of freedom.

I needed the X arm to be locked to align the auxiliary beam of the AbsL experiment to the IFO. To further stabilize TRX I increased the loop gain from 1 to 1.5.

Now the auxiliary beam is well aligned to the IFO and the beat is going through the PRC. I'm finally ready to scan the recycling cavity.

I also changed the gain of the PRC loop from -0.1 to -0.5.

I temporarily turned off the 166 modulation.

Since last Friday either the arms or the PRC can't lock.

The montors show the beam flashing on the end mirrors, but the cavity can't get locked. The error signal looks fine. I suspect a computer problem.

Also PRC can't lock. SPOB is suspiciously stuck at about -95. Although that's not a fixed number, but covering the by hand the SPOB PD on the ITMY table doesn't change the number. I check the DC output of the photodetector and it is actually seen the beam.

Suspecting computer problems started after last Thursday's IP switch, I rebooted the frame builder, c1dcuepics, c1daqctrl and all the front ends. I then burtrestored to February 1st at 1:00 am.

Before I burtrestored c1iscepics, SPOB had gone back to more typical numbers around 0, as it usually read when PRC wasn't locked.

But burtrestoring c1iscepics, return it to the -95 of earlier.

Burterestoring to other times or dates didn't solve the problems.

 Koji and I started poking around, trying to understand what was going on.  At first, we thought it might be related to a computer error, as it seemed.

Fortunately, Rob stopped by and explained that the boost stage of the filter comes under c1lsc control, and will be turned on or off depending on the power in the arms.  Although if you turn it off, it will remain off, it just if its manually selected on, it may go on or off.

Similarly, the output from the Xarm filter bank to the ETMX  filter input will be turned on or off depending on the power in the arm.

Anyways, the locking trouble turns out to be due to no RF sidebands at 33 MHz.  The output of the Marconi was unplugged.  I don't know who, or why did it, but I've plugged it in for now, so we can lock the arms.  Let us know if you need in unplugged.  Thanks.

Joe and I started working on the new LSC FE control today. We made a diagram of the system in Simulink, but were unable to compile it.

Joe checked out the latest CDS software out of their new SVN and put it somewhere (perhaps his home directory).

We then copied the directory with the .mdl files and the CDS parts library into our real Simulink Model Directory:

/cvs/cds/caltech/cds/advLigo/src/epics/simLink

Use this and not someplace in Alex or Rob's home directory !

Joe will put in more details on Monday once he figures out how to build the new stuff. Basically, we decided not to support multiple versions of the CDS real time code here. We'll just stay synced to the latest stable ~versions.

I exported the current version of the LSC FE into our public_html/FE/ area on nodus where we will put all of the self-documenting FE diagrams:

https://nodus.ligo.caltech.edu:30889/FE/lsc_slwebview_files/index.html

To make a web setup like this, you just use the "Export to Web" feature from the top-level Simulink diagram (e.g. lsc.mdl). Choose the following options:

Note: in order to get the web page to work, I had to change the apache httpd.conf file to allow AddType file overriding. Here's the term cap of the diff:

nodus:etc>diff httpd.conf httpd.conf~
155c155
< ServerAdmin jenne@caltech.edu
---
> ServerAdmin aso@caltech.edu
225d224
<     AllowOverride FileInfo

LSC Plant Model. That is all.

Once you made a CDS model, please update the following wiki page. This will eventually help you.

http://lhocds.ligo-wa.caltech.edu:8000/40m/Electronics/Existing_RCG_DCUID_and_gds_ids

The SVN checkout was done on megatron.  It is located under /home/controls/cds/advLigoRTS

So, to compile (or at least try to) you need to copy the .mdl file from /cvs/cds/caltech/cds/advLigo/src/epics/simLink to /home/controls/cds/advLigoRTS/src/epics/simLink on megatron, then run make SYS in the advLigoRTS directory on megatron.

The old checkout from CVS exists on megatron under /home/controls/cds/advLigo.

1. Give us the designed arm length. What is the criteria?

2. The arm lengths got shorter as the ITMs had to shift to the end. To make them longer is difficult. Try possible shorter length.

 If you have a working 40m Optickle model, put it in a common place in the SVN, not in your own folder.

I can't figure out why changing the arm length would effect the RF sidebands levels. If you are getting RF sidebands resonating in the arms, then some parameter is not set correctly.

As the RF sideband frequency gets closer to resonating in the arm, the CARM/DARM cross-coupling to the short DOFs probably gets bigger.

I uploaded the latest iscmodeling package to the SVN under /trunk. It includes my addition of the 40m Upgrade model: /trunk/iscmodeling/looptickle/config40m/opt40mUpgrade2010.m.

I don't know the causes of this supposed resonances yet. I'm working  to try to understand that. It would be interesting also to evaluate the results of absolute length measurements.

Here is what I also found:

It seems that 44, 66 and 110 are resonating.

If that is real, than 37.5m could be a better place. Although I don't have a definition of "better" yet.  All I can say is these resonances are smaller there.

I calculated the phase shifts that the sidebands would pick up in the arms in the case we changed the arm length to 38.4m as proposed. I obtained the following values (in degrees):

phi(-f2) = 0.66; phi(-f1) = -0.71; phi(f1) = 0.71; phi(+f2) = -0.66

These are the plots with the results as I obtained from an Optickle simulation (the second zooms in around 38.4m).

These values agree with what Koji had already estimated (see elog entry 3023).

Since we can't make the arm longer than that, to increase the distance from the resonance, we would like to adjust the length of the short cavities to compensate for that.  For f2 (=55MHz), 0.7 degrees correspond to about 5cm. That is about the length change that we expect to make to the design.

I simulated with Optickle the effect of changing the length of either the SRC or the PRC. The best way I found to do that, was to measure the cavity circulating power when the macroscopic lengths change.

The following plots show the effect of changing either the PRC or SRC length (left or right figure), on the circulating power of both cavities at the same time (top and bottom plots).

 You can compare these with the case of perfect antiresonance as in the following plots:

It seems that the design length for the short cavities are not too bad. f1 is not optimized in the PRC, but changing the length of the cavity wold just make f2 worse in SRC.

These simulations seem to support the choice of not changing the design cavity lengths for PRC and SRC.

Of course these are only an "open loop" simulations. At the moment we don't know what would be the effect of closing the control loops. That is something I'm going to do later. It'll be part of my studies on the effects of cavity absolute length on the whole IFO.

You should have been in my lecture yesterday!
Power in the cavity is not a good index (=error signal) to judge the optimal length.
You should look at the phases of the length signals. (i.e. demodulation phase which gives you the maximum amplitude for CARM, PRC, SRC, etc)

You must move the SRC and PRC lengths at the same time.
The resonance of f1 (mostly) depends on the PRC length, but that of f2 depends on both the PRC and SRC lengths.

Right. Ultimately the phase gain inside the cavity is what we look at. Calculating that for the SBs inside PRC and SRC is actually the first thing I did.

But I kept getting very small angles. Too small, I thought. Maybe there was some problem in the way I calculated it.

Then I made a power analysis to check if the SBs were getting affected at all by that 0.7degree phase shift they're picking up in the arms.

I wanted to show the point where I am, before leaving. But, I keep working on it.