ID |
Date |
Author |
Type |
Category |
Subject |
2782
|
Thu Apr 8 10:17:52 2010 |
Alberto | Update | 40m Upgrading | REFL11 Noise Vs Photocurrent |
From the measurements of the 11 MHz RFPD at 11Mhz I estimated a transimpedance of about 750 Ohms. (See attached plot.)
The fit shown in the plot is: Vn = Vdn + sqrt(2*e*Idc) ; Vn=noise; Vdn=darknoise; e=electron charge; Idc=dc photocurrent
The estimate from the fit is 3-4 times off from my analsys of the circuit and from any LISO simulation. Likely at RF the contributions of the parassitic components of each element make a big difference. I'm going to improve the LISO model to account for that.

The problem of the factor of 2 in the data turned out to be not a real one. Assuming that the dark noise at resonance is just Johnson's noise from the resonant circuit transimpedance underestimates the dark noise by 100%. |
2783
|
Thu Apr 8 10:24:33 2010 |
Alberto | Update | 40m Upgrading | REFL11 Noise Vs Photocurrent |
Quote: |
From the measurements of the 11 MHz RFPD at 11Mhz I estimated a transimpedance of about 750 Ohms. (See attached plot.)
|
Putting my hands ahead, I know I could have taken more measurements around the 3dB point, but the 40m needs the PDs soon. |
2784
|
Thu Apr 8 20:53:13 2010 |
Koji | Update | 40m Upgrading | REFL11 Noise Vs Photocurrent |
Something must be wrong.
1. Physical Unit is wrong for the second term of "Vn = Vdn + Sqrt(2 e Idc)"
2. Why does the fit go below the dark noise?
3. "Dark noise 4 +/- NaN nV/rtHz" I can not accept this fitting.
Also apparently the data points are not enough.
Quote: |
From the measurements of the 11 MHz RFPD at 11Mhz I estimated a transimpedance of about 750 Ohms. (See attached plot.)
The fit shown in the plot is: Vn = Vdn + sqrt(2*e*Idc) ; Vn=noise; Vdn=darknoise; e=electron charge; Idc=dc photocurrent
The estimate from the fit is 3-4 times off from my analsys of the circuit and from any LISO simulation. Likely at RF the contributions of the parassitic components of each element make a big difference. I'm going to improve the LISO model to account for that.

The problem of the factor of 2 in the data turned out to be not a real one. Assuming that the dark noise at resonance is just Johnson's noise from the resonant circuit transimpedance underestimates the dark noise by 100%.
|
|
2785
|
Fri Apr 9 06:45:28 2010 |
Alberto | Update | 40m Upgrading | REFL11 Noise Vs Photocurrent |
Quote: |
Something must be wrong.
1. Physical Unit is wrong for the second term of "Vn = Vdn + Sqrt(2 e Idc)"
2. Why does the fit go below the dark noise?
3. "Dark noise 4 +/- NaN nV/rtHz" I can not accept this fitting.
Also apparently the data points are not enough.
|
1) True. My bad. In my elog entry (but not in my fit code) I forgot the impedance Z= 750Ohm (as in the fit) of the resonant circuit in front of the square root: Vn = Vdn + Z * sqrt( 2 e Idc )
2) That is exactly the point I was raising! The measured dark noise at resonance is 2x what I expect.
3) I don't have uncertainties for the fit offset (that is, for the Dark Noise). The quick fit that I used (Matlab's Non Linear Least Squares method) doesn't provide 95% confidence bounds when I constrain the offset parameter the way I did (I forced it to be strictly positive).
Sure. It's not a very good fit. I just wanted to see how the data was going.
I also admitted that the data points were few, especially around the 3dB point.
Today I'm going to repeat the measurement with a new setup that lets me tune the light intensity more finely. |
2788
|
Mon Apr 12 14:20:10 2010 |
kiwamu | Update | Green Locking | PZT response for the innolight |
I measured a jitter modulation caused by injection of a signal into laser PZTs.
The measurement has been done by putting a razor blade in the middle way of the beam path to cut the half of the beam spot, so that a change of intensity at a photodetector represents the spatial jitter of the beam.
However the transfer function looked almost the same as that of amplitude modulation which had been taken by Mott (see the entry).
This means the data is dominated by the amplitude modulation instead of the jitter. So I gave up evaluating the data of the jitter measurement. |
2790
|
Mon Apr 12 17:09:30 2010 |
Alberto | Update | 40m Upgrading | REFL11 Noise Vs Photocurrent |
Quote: |
1) True. My bad. In my elog entry (but not in my fit code) I forgot the impedance Z= 750Ohm (as in the fit) of the resonant circuit in front of the square root: Vn = Vdn + Z * sqrt( 2 e Idc )
2) That is exactly the point I was raising! The measured dark noise at resonance is 2x what I expect.
3) I don't have uncertainties for the fit offset (that is, for the Dark Noise). The quick fit that I used (Matlab's Non Linear Least Squares method) doesn't provide 95% confidence bounds when I constrain the offset parameter the way I did (I forced it to be strictly positive).
Sure. It's not a very good fit. I just wanted to see how the data was going.
I also admitted that the data points were few, especially around the 3dB point.
Today I'm going to repeat the measurement with a new setup that lets me tune the light intensity more finely.
|
Here's another measurement of the noise of the REFL11 PD.
This time I made the fit constraining the Dark Noise. I realized that it didn't make much sense leaving it as a free coefficient: the dark noise is what it is.

Result: the transimpedance of REFL11at 11 MHz is about 4000 Ohm.
Note:
This time, more properly, I refer to the transimpedance as the ratio between Vout @11Mhz / Photocurrent. In past entries I improperly called transimpedance the impedance of the circuit which resonates with the photodiode. |
2791
|
Mon Apr 12 17:37:52 2010 |
josephb | Update | Computers | Y end simulated plant progress |
Currently, the y end plant is yep.mdl. In order to compile it properly (for the moment at least) requires running the normal makefile, then commenting out the line in the makefile which does the parsing of the mdl, and rerunning after modifying the /cds/advLigo/src/fe/yep/yep.c file.
The modifications to the yep.c file are to change the six lines that look like:
"plant_mux[0] = plant_gndx" into lines that look like "plant_mux[0] = plant_delayx". You also have to add initialization of the plant_delayx type variables to zero in the if(feInt) section, near where plant_gndx is set to zero.
This is necessary to get the position feedback within the plant model to work properly.
#NOTE by Koji
CAUTION:
This entry means that Makefile was modified not to parse the mdl file.
This affects making any of the models on megatron. |
Attachment 1: YEP.png
|
|
Attachment 2: YEP_PLANT.png
|
|
2792
|
Mon Apr 12 17:48:32 2010 |
Aidan | Update | Computer Scripts / Programs | elog restarted |
The elog crashed when I was uploading a photo just now. I logged into nodus and restarted it. |
2795
|
Mon Apr 12 22:44:30 2010 |
Koji | Update | 40m Upgrading | REFL11 Noise Vs Photocurrent |
Data looks perfect ... but the fitting was wrong.
Vn = Vdn + Z * sqrt( 2 e Idc ) ==> WRONG!!!
Dark noise and shot noise are not correlated. You need to take a quadratic sum!!!
Vn^2 = Vdn^2 + Z^2 *(2 e Idc)
And I was confused whether you need 2 in the sqrt, or not. Can you explain it?
Note that you are looking at the raw RF output of the PD and not using the demodulated output...
Also you should be able to fit Vdn. You should put your dark noise measurement at 10nA or 100nA and then make the fitting.
Quote: |
Here's another measurement of the noise of the REFL11 PD.
This time I made the fit constraining the Dark Noise. I realized that it didn't make much sense leaving it as a free coefficient: the dark noise is what it is.

Result: the transimpedance of REFL11at 11 MHz is about 4000 Ohm.
Note:
This time, more properly, I refer to the transimpedance as the ratio between Vout @11Mhz / Photocurrent. In past entries I improperly called transimpedance the impedance of the circuit which resonates with the photodiode.
|
|
2796
|
Mon Apr 12 22:51:31 2010 |
Koji | Update | SUS | ITMX installed and aligned |
Koji
ITMX was aligned with regard to the 40m green oplev.
Now both cavities are aligned.
Next thing we are going to do is to remove PRM and SRM towers.
As well as the oplev construction for ITMs.
We anticipate the drift of the stack. So we need to revisit the alignment again.
Some tools and the level gauge were removed from the table.
Picture of the ETMX - reflection from the ITMX is hitting the mirror and Jamie's windmill.

0. The suspension tower had been placed on the table close to the door.
1. Brought the OSEMs from the clean room. Connected the satellite box to the ITMX suspension.
2. Went into the chamber. Leveled the table.
3. Released the mirror from the clamp. Put and adjust the OSEMs.
- Note that the side OSEM is located to the south side of the tower
so that we can still touch it after the placement of the TT suspension at the north side of the SOS tower.
4. Clamped the mirror. Moved the SOS tower according to the CAD layout.
5. Leveled the table again.
6. Released the mirror again and adjusted the OSEMs.
7. Turned on the end green laser pointer.
- The spot was slightly upside and left of the mirror. Adjusted it so that the spot is at the center.
8. Align ITMX in Pitch
- The spot was hitting the tube. Moved the pitch bias such that the beam get horizontal.
9. Align ITMX in Yaw
- Moved the SOS tower such that the approximate spot is on the ETMX. If I hit the right spot I could see the tube get grown green because of the huge scatter.
10. Adjusted the OSEMs again and check the alignment again. Repeated this process 2~3 times.
- Bias values at the end of the work: Pitch 0.7800 / Yaw 0.270
11. Close up the chamber
- Remove the level gauge. Some of the screws are still in the Al ship in the chamber.
- Close the light door. |
2798
|
Tue Apr 13 12:49:35 2010 |
josephb | Update | Computers | Y end simulated plant progress |
Quote: |
Currently, the y end plant is yep.mdl. In order to compile it properly (for the moment at least) requires running the normal makefile, then commenting out the line in the makefile which does the parsing of the mdl, and rerunning after modifying the /cds/advLigo/src/fe/yep/yep.c file.
The modifications to the yep.c file are to change the six lines that look like:
"plant_mux[0] = plant_gndx" into lines that look like "plant_mux[0] = plant_delayx". You also have to add initialization of the plant_delayx type variables to zero in the if(feInt) section, near where plant_gndx is set to zero.
This is necessary to get the position feedback within the plant model to work properly.
#NOTE by Koji
CAUTION:
This entry means that Makefile was modified not to parse the mdl file.
This affects making any of the models on megatron.
|
To prevent this confusion in the future, at Koji's suggestion I've created a Makefile.no_parse_mdl in /home/controls/cds/advLIGO on megatron. The normal makefile is the original one (with correct parsing now). So the correct procedure is:
1) "make yep"
2) Modify yep.c code
3) "make -f Makefile.no_parse_mdl yep" |
2799
|
Tue Apr 13 19:53:06 2010 |
Mott | Update | Green Locking | PZT response for the innolight and lightwave |
I redid the PZT Phase Modulation measurement out to 5 MHz for both the Innolight and the Lightwave. The previous measurement stopped at 2MHz, and we wanted to see if there were any sweet spots above 2MHz. I also reduced the sweep bandwidth and increased the source amplitude at high frequency to reduce the noise (the Lighwave measurement, especially, was noise dominated above 1MHz). I also plotted the ratio of PM/AM in rad/RIN, since this is the ultimate criterion on which we want to make a determination.
It looks like there is nothing extremely useful above 2MHz for either laser. There are several candidates for the lightwave at about 140 kHz and again at about 1.4 MHz. The most compelling peak, however, is in the innolight at 216 kHz, where the peak is about 2.3e5 rad/RIN.
Below about 30kHz, the loop suppresses the measurement, so one should focus on the region above there. |
Attachment 1: Innolight_PM.png
|
|
Attachment 2: Innolight_AM_PM.png
|
|
Attachment 3: Innolight_PM_AM_Ratio.png
|
|
Attachment 4: Lightwave_PM.png
|
|
Attachment 5: Lightwave_AM_PM.png
|
|
Attachment 6: Lightwave_PM_AM_Ratio.png
|
|
2800
|
Tue Apr 13 20:02:02 2010 |
Koji | Update | SUS | BS chamber opened, PRM/SRM SOS removed from the table |
Bob, Steve, and Koji
We opened North heavy door of the BS chamber in the afternoon.
In the evening, Koji worked on the PRM/SRM removal.
- Cleaned up the OPLEV mirrors to create some spaces near the door.
- Clamped PRM/SRM.
- Removed OSEMs. Made a record of the OSEMs. The record is on the wiki (http://lhocds.ligo-wa.caltech.edu:8000/40m/Upgrade_09/Suspensions)
- Found the SOSs are quite easy to remove from the table as they are shorter than the MOSs.
- Put a new Al sheet on a wagon. Put the SOSs on it. Wrapped them by the Al foils.
- Carried it to the clean room. They are on the right flow bench. Confirmed the wires are still fine.
- Closed up the chamber putting a light door. |
Attachment 1: IMG_2384.jpg
|
|
2801
|
Thu Apr 15 14:47:28 2010 |
steve | Update | Electronics | 25MHZ oscillation of HP4195A |
The 1979 vintage RF spectrum analyzer HP4195A sn2904J01587 shipped out for repair today to http://www.avalontest.com
It has a 25 MHZ oscillation when you go below 150 MHZ in your sweep....atm1 with the larger amplitude shows this 25 MHZ
Atm2 is displaying full sweep-sign scans from 1 to 500 MHZ.....here one can clearly see the three segment of the scan:
1, large amplitude 25 MHZ oscillation dominating the spectrum up to 150 MHZ
2, the mid section from 150 MHZ to 300 MHZ with medium size amplitude is normal
3, from 300 MHZ to 500 MHZ the amplitude is decreasing.......showing the disadvantage of using a 300 MHZ oscilloscope
|
Attachment 1: P1060246.JPG
|
|
Attachment 2: P1060249.JPG
|
|
2802
|
Fri Apr 16 17:26:23 2010 |
Jenne | Update | PEM | Guralp Breakout Box pulled |
I pulled the Guralp breakout box from the rack, and it's sitting on the EE bench here. The game plan is to check out the Gur2X channel.
Rana and Steve have been investigating, and found that the X channel has been funky (which has been known for ~a month or two) when the seismometer has been plugged in, and also when the seismometers have been unplugged, but the box is left on. The funkyness goes away when the box is turned off. Since it's not there when the box is off, it seems that it's not a problem with the cable from the box to the ADC, or in the ADC channel. Since it is there when the box is on, but the seismometer is unplugged, it's clear that it's probably in the box itself.
Preliminarily, I've connected a set of BNC clipdoodles to the input testpoints, and another set to the output. They're both connected to a 'scope (which is on it's battery so it's not connected to any Ground), and when I tap on the circuit board the input trace is totally unchanged, but the output trace goes kind of crazy, and gets more fuzzy, and picks up a DC offset. Koji is concerned that some of the big capacitors may have an iffy connection to the board.
Investigations will continue Monday morning. |
2803
|
Fri Apr 16 17:46:54 2010 |
Koji | Update | VAC | Peeting mirrors aligned |
Steve and Koji
We aligned the peeping mirrors to look at the surface of the ITMs.
They had been misligned as we move the positions of the ITMs, but now they are fine. |
2804
|
Sat Apr 17 18:30:12 2010 |
Zach | Update | Green Locking | 1W NPRO output profile |
NOTE: This measurement is wrong and only remains for documentation purposes.
Koji asked me to take a profile of the output of the 1W NPRO that will be used for green locking. I used the razor-scan method, plotting the voltage output of a PD vs the position of the razor across the beam, both vertically and horizontally. This was done at 6 points along the beam path out of the laser box.
I determined the beam spot size at each point by doing a least-squares fit on the plots above in Matlab (using w as one of the fitting parameters) to the cumulative distribution functions (error functions) they should approximate.
I then did another least-squares fit, fitting the above "measured" beam profiles to the gaussian form for w vs z. Below is a summary.
It seems reasonable, though I know that M2 < 1 is fishy, as it implies less divergence than ideal for that waist size. Also, like Koji feared, the waist is inside the box and thus the scan is almost entirely in the linear regime.

|
2807
|
Mon Apr 19 11:31:04 2010 |
Aidan | Update | Green Locking | 1W NPRO output profile |
Quote: |
Koji asked me to take a profile of the output of the 1W NPRO that will be used for green locking. I used the razor-scan method, plotting the voltage output of a PD vs the position of the razor across the beam, both vertically and horizontally. This was done at 6 points along the beam path out of the laser box.
I determined the beam spot size at each point by doing a least-squares fit on the plots above in Matlab (using w as one of the fitting parameters) to the cumulative distribution functions (error functions) they should approximate.
I then did another least-squares fit, fitting the above "measured" beam profiles to the gaussian form for w vs z. Below is a summary.
It seems reasonable, though I know that M2 < 1 is fishy, as it implies less divergence than ideal for that waist size. Also, like Koji feared, the waist is inside the box and thus the scan is almost entirely in the linear regime.

|
There is a clearly a difference in the divergence angle of the x and y beams - maybe 10-20%. Since the measurements are outside the Rayleigh range and approximately in the linear regime, the slope of the divergence in this plot should be inversely proportional to the waists - meaning the x- and y- waist sizes should differ by about 10-20%. You should check your fitting program for the waist.
|
2809
|
Mon Apr 19 16:27:13 2010 |
Aidan | Update | Green Locking | Raicol crystals arrived and we investigated them |
Jenne, Koji and I opened up the package from Raicol and examined the crystals under the microscope. The results were mixed and are summarized below. There are quite a few scratches and there is residue on some of the polished sides. There is a large chip in one and there appear to be gaps or bands in the AR coatings on the sides.
There are two albums on Picassa
1. The package is opened ...
2. The crystals under the microscope.
Crystal |
Summary |
724 |
Chip in the corner of one end face, Otherwise end faces look clean. Large scratch on one polished side. |
725 |
End faces look good. Moderate scratch on one polished face. Residue on one polished face. |
726 |
Tiny dot on one end face, otherwise look okay. Large bands in one polished face. Moderate scratch on polished face |
727 |
Large, but shallow chip on one polished face. End faces look clean. Bands in one of the polished faces. |
|
2810
|
Mon Apr 19 16:31:42 2010 |
Kevin | Update | PSL | Innolight 2W Laser |
Koji and Kevin
We unpacked the Innolight 2W laser, took an inventory, and scanned the operations manual.
[Edit by KA]
The scanned PDFs are placed on the following wiki page
http://lhocds.ligo-wa.caltech.edu:8000/40m/Upgrade_09/PSL
We will measure the P-I curve, the mode profile, frequency actuator responses, and so on. |
2811
|
Tue Apr 20 00:32:30 2010 |
Jenne | Update | PEM | Guralp Breakout Box put back |
Quote: |
I pulled the Guralp breakout box from the rack, and it's sitting on the EE bench here. The game plan is to check out the Gur2X channel.
Rana and Steve have been investigating, and found that the X channel has been funky (which has been known for ~a month or two) when the seismometer has been plugged in, and also when the seismometers have been unplugged, but the box is left on. The funkyness goes away when the box is turned off. Since it's not there when the box is off, it seems that it's not a problem with the cable from the box to the ADC, or in the ADC channel. Since it is there when the box is on, but the seismometer is unplugged, it's clear that it's probably in the box itself.
Preliminarily, I've connected a set of BNC clipdoodles to the input testpoints, and another set to the output. They're both connected to a 'scope (which is on it's battery so it's not connected to any Ground), and when I tap on the circuit board the input trace is totally unchanged, but the output trace goes kind of crazy, and gets more fuzzy, and picks up a DC offset. Koji is concerned that some of the big capacitors may have an iffy connection to the board.
Investigations will continue Monday morning.
|
The Guralp Box appears to be back in working order. It's reinstalled with the 2 seismometers plugged in.
In order:
* Koji suggested retouching the through-board solder joints on the broken channel (EW2 = Gur2X) with a bit of solder to ensure the connections were good. Check.
* "C7", one of the giant 1uF capacitors on each channel is totally bypassed, and since that was one of the original suspects, Rana removed the (possibly) offending capacitor from EW2.
* Rana and I isolated the craziness to the final differential output stage. We tried each of the testpoints after the individual gain / filter stages, and found that the signals were all fine, until after the output stage.
* I started to remove the resistors in the output stage (with the plan to go through the resistors, capacitors, and even the amplifier chip if neccessary), and noticed that 2 of the 1k resistors came off too easily, as if they were just barely connected in the first place. After replacing only the 4 1k resistors, the craziness seemed to be gone. I poked and gently bent the board, but the output wouldn't go crazy. I declared victory.
* I reinstalled the box in its normal spot, and put Gur2 (which had been out by the bench for use as a test signal) back next to the other seismometers. We are in nominal condition, and should be able to do a huddle test this week.
I looked at the time traces of all the seismometer channels, and they all looked good. I'll put a spectra in in the morning....I'm too impatient to wait around for the low frequency FFTs.
Attached are the before and after pictures of the output stage of EW2 / Gur2X. The "before" is the one with the OUT+ and OUT- words upsidedown. The "after" picture has them right side up. |
Attachment 1: Gur2X_before_20Apr2010.jpg
|
|
Attachment 2: Gur2X_after_replace_100k_resistors_20Apr2010.jpg
|
|
2812
|
Tue Apr 20 07:48:42 2010 |
steve | Update | PSL | ion pump HV turned on |
We found ref-cavity HV was off yesterday afternoon. It was turned back on. |
2813
|
Tue Apr 20 08:00:52 2010 |
steve | Update | SUS | ETMY damping restored |
ETMY sus damping was restored |
2816
|
Tue Apr 20 11:14:31 2010 |
Aidan | Update | Green Locking | Raicol crystals arrived and we investigated them |
Here is Crystal 724 polished side 2 with all photos along the length stitched together |
2817
|
Tue Apr 20 13:00:52 2010 |
Zach | Update | elog | elog restarted |
I restarted the elog with the restart script as it was down. |
2818
|
Tue Apr 20 13:02:14 2010 |
Zach | Update | Green Locking | 1W NPRO output profile |
EDIT: I used an IFIT (inverse fast idiot transform) to change the x-axis of the plot from Hz to m. I think xlabel('Frequency [Hz]') is in my muscle memory now..
I have redone the beam fit, this time omitting the M2, which I believe was superfluous. I have made the requested changes to the plot, save for the error analysis, which I am still trying to work out (the function I used for the least squares fit does not work out standard error in fit parameters). I will figure out a way to do this and amend the plot to have error bars.
|
2819
|
Tue Apr 20 13:37:36 2010 |
Jenne | Update | Green Locking | 1W NPRO output profile |
Quote: |
I have redone the beam fit, this time omitting the M2, which I believe was superfluous. I have made the requested changes to the plot, save for the error analysis, which I am still trying to work out (the function I used for the least squares fit does not work out standard error in fit parameters). I will figure out a way to do this and amend the plot to have error bars.
|
Are you sure about your x-axis label? |
2820
|
Tue Apr 20 18:02:22 2010 |
Jenne | Update | COC | New SRM and PRM Hung |
[Jenne, Steve]
We removed the old SRM and PRM from their cages, and are temporarily storing them in the rings which we use to hold the optics while baking. Steve will work on a way to store them more permanently.
We then hung the new SRM (SRMU03) and new PRM (SRMU04) in the cages. We were careful not to break the wires, so the heights will not have changed from the old heights.
The optics have not been balanced yet. That will hopefully happen later this week. |
2821
|
Tue Apr 20 19:37:02 2010 |
Koji | Update | Green Locking | 1W NPRO output profile |
Beautiful fitting.
Quote: |
EDIT: I used an IFIT (inverse fast idiot transform) to change the x-axis of the plot from Hz to m. I think xlabel('Frequency [Hz]') is in my muscle memory now..
I have redone the beam fit, this time omitting the M2, which I believe was superfluous. I have made the requested changes to the plot, save for the error analysis, which I am still trying to work out (the function I used for the least squares fit does not work out standard error in fit parameters). I will figure out a way to do this and amend the plot to have error bars.
|
|
2822
|
Tue Apr 20 20:15:37 2010 |
Kevin | Update | PSL | Innolight 2W Output Power vs Injection Current |
Koji and Kevin measured the output power vs injection current for the Innolight 2W laser.
The threshold current is 0.75 A.
The following data was taken with the laser crystal temperature at 25.04ºC (dial setting: 0.12).
Injection Current (A) |
Dial Setting |
Output Power (mW) |
0.000 |
0.0 |
1.2 |
0.744 |
3.66 |
1.1 |
0.753 |
3.72 |
4.6 |
0.851 |
4.22 |
102 |
0.954 |
4.74 |
219 |
1.051 |
5.22 |
355 |
1.151 |
5.71 |
512 |
1.249 |
6.18 |
692 |
1.350 |
6.64 |
901 |
1.451 |
7.08 |
1118 |
1.556 |
7.52 |
1352 |
1.654 |
7.92 |
1546 |
1.761 |
8.32 |
1720 |
1.853 |
8.67 |
1855 |
1.959 |
9.05 |
1989 |
2.098 |
9.50 |
2146 |
|
Attachment 1: PvsI_2W.jpg
|
|
2823
|
Wed Apr 21 10:09:23 2010 |
kiwamu | Update | Green Locking | waist positon of Gaussian beam in PPKTP crystals |
Theoretically the waist position of a Gaussian beam (1064) in our PPKTP crystal differs by ~6.7 mm from that of the incident Gaussian beam.
So far I have neglected such position change of the beam waist in optical layouts because it is tiny compared with the entire optical path.
But from the point of view of practical experiments, it is better to think about it.
In fact the result suggests the rough positioning of our PPKTP crystals;
we should put our PPKTP crystal so that the center of the crystal is 6.7 mm far from the waist of a Gaussian beam in free space.
(How to)
The calculation is very very simple.
The waist position of a Gaussian beam propagating in a dielectric material should change by a factor of n, where n is the refractive index of the material.
In our case, PPKTP has n=1.8, so that the waist position from the surface of the crystal becomes longer by n.
Now remember the fact that the maximum conversion efficiency can be achieved if the waist locates at exact center of a crystal.
Therefore the waist position in the crystal should be satisfied this relation; z*n=15 mm, where z is the waist position of the incident beam from the surface and 15 mm is half length of our crystal.
Then we can find z must be ~8.3 mm, which is 6.7 mm shorter than the position in crystal.
The attached figure shows the relation clearly. Note that the waist radius doesn't change. |
Attachment 1: focal_positin_edit.png
|
|
2824
|
Wed Apr 21 11:32:31 2010 |
josephb | Update | CDS | 40m CDS hardware update and software requests |
This is mostly a reminder to myself about what I discussed with Jay and Alex this morning.
The big black IO chassis are "almost" done. Except for the missing parts. We have 2 Dolphin, 1 Large and 1 Small I/O Chassis due to us. One Dolphin is effectively done and is sitting in the test stand. However, 2 are missing timing boards, and 3 are missing the boards necessary for the connection to the computer. The parts were ordered a long time ago, but its possible they were "sucked to one of the sites" by Rolf (remember this is according to Jay). They need to either track them down in Downs (possibly they're floating around and were just confused by the recent move), get them sent back from the sites, or order new ones (I was told by one person that the place they order from them notoriously takes a long time, sometimes up to 6 weeks. I don't know if this is exaggeration or not...). Other than the missing parts, they still need to wire up the fans and install new momentary power switches (apparently the Dolphin boards want momentary on/off buttons). Otherwise, they're done.
We are due another CPU, just need to figure out which one it was in the test stand.
6 more BIO boards are done. When I went over the plans with Jay, we realized we needed 7 more, not 6, so they're putting another one together. Some ADC/DAC interface boards are done. I promised to do another count here, to determine how many we have, how many we need, and then report that back to Jay before I steal the ones which are complete. Unfortunately, he did not have a new drawing for the ASC/vertex wiring, so we don't have a solid count of stuff needed for them. I'll be taking a look at the old drawings and also looking at what we physically have.
I did get Jay to place the new LSC wiring diagram into the DCC (which apparently the old one never was put in or we simply couldn't find it). Its located at: https://dcc.ligo.org/cgi-bin/private/DocDB/ShowDocument?docid=10985
I talked briefly with Alex, reminded him of feature requests and added a new one:
1) Single part representing a matrix of filter banks
2) Automatic generation of Simulated shared memory locations and an overall on/off switch for ADC/DACs
3) Individual excitation and test point pieces (as opposed to having to use a full filter bank). He says these already exist, so when I do the CVS checkout, I'll see if they work.
I also asked where the adl default files lived, and he pointed me at ~/cds/advLigo/src/epics/util/
In that directory are FILTER.adl, GDS_TP.adl, MONITOR.adl. Those are the templates. We also discovered the timing signal at some point was changed from something like SYS-DCU_ID to FEC-DCU_ID, so I basically just need to modify the .adl files to fix the time stamp channel as well. I basically need to do a CVS checkout, put the fixes in, then commit back to the CVS. Hopefully I can do that sometime today.
I also brought over 9 Contec DO-32L-PE boards, which are PCIe isolated digital output boards which do into the IO chassis. These have been placed above the 2 new computers, behind the 1Y6 rack.
|
2825
|
Wed Apr 21 15:53:57 2010 |
Jenne | Update | PEM | Seismometers now on the granite slab |
The 3 seismometers are now on the granite slab. The Ranger is now aligned with the Xarm (perpendicular to the Mode Cleaner) since that's the only way all 3 would fit on the slab. |
Attachment 1: P4210048.JPG
|
|
2826
|
Wed Apr 21 16:48:38 2010 |
josephb | Update | CDS | Hardware update |
Alberto and myself went to downs and acquired the 3rd 4x processor (Dual core, so 8x cores total) computer. We also retrieved 6 BIO interface boards (blue front thin boxes), 4 DAC interface boards, and 1 ADC interface boards. The tops have not been put on yet, but we have the tops and a set of screws for them. For the moment, these things have been placed behind the 1Y6 rack and under the table behind the 1Y5 rack
.
The 6 BIO boards have LIGO travelers associated with them: SN LIGO-S1000217 through SN LIGO-S1000222. |
2827
|
Wed Apr 21 21:46:53 2010 |
Koji | Update | IOO | MC spot diagnosis |
Zach and Koji
We measured uncalibrated angle-to-length coupling using tdssine and tdsdmd.
We made a simple shell script to measure the a2l coupling.
Details:
- Opened the IMC/OMC light door.
- Saw the large misalignment mostly in pitch. Aligned using MC2 and MC3.
- Locked the MC in the low power mode. (script/MC/mcloopson AND MC length gain 0.3->1.0)
- Further aligned MC2/3. We got the transmission of 0.16, reflection of 0.2
- Tried to detect angle-to-length coupling so that we get the diagnosis of the spot positions.
- Tried to use ezcademod. Failed. They seems excite the mirror but returned NaN.
- We used tdssine and tdsdmd instead. Succeeded.
- We made simple shell script to measure the a2l coupling. It is so far located users/koji/100421/MCspot
- We blocked the beam on the PSL table. We closed the chamber and left.
|
2828
|
Wed Apr 21 21:56:27 2010 |
Kevin | Update | PSL | Innolight 2W Vertical Beam Profile |
Koji and Kevin measured the vertical beam profile of the Innolight 2W laser at one point.
This data was taken with the laser crystal temperature at 25.04°C and the injection current at 2.092A.
The distance from the razor blade to the flat black face on the front of the laser was 13.2cm.
The data was fit to the function y(x)=a*erf(sqrt(x)*(x-x0)/w)+b with the following results.
Reduced chi squared = 14.07
x0 = (1.964 +- 0.002) mm
w = (0.216 +- 0.004) mm
a = (3.39 +- 0.03) V
b = (3.46 +- 0.03) V |
Attachment 1: bp2.jpg
|
|
Attachment 2: bp2.dat
|
razor height (mm) Voltage (V)
2.75 6.89
2.50 6.90
2.30 6.89
2.25 6.89
2.20 6.75
2.15 6.47
2.13 6.20
2.10 6.05
2.07 5.88
... 17 more lines ...
|
2829
|
Wed Apr 21 22:11:48 2010 |
rana | Update | PSL | Innolight 2W Vertical Beam Profile |
Back in Gainesville in 1997, I learned how to do this using the chopper wheel. We had to make the assumption that the wheel's blade was moving horizontally during the time of the chop.
One advantage is that the repetitive slices reduces the random errors by a lot - you can trigger the scope and average. Another advantage is that you can download the average scope trace using USB, floppy, or ethernet instead of pencil and paper.
But, I never analyzed it in enough detail to see if there was some kind of nasty systematic error. |
2830
|
Wed Apr 21 23:35:37 2010 |
Koji | Update | PSL | Innolight 2W Vertical Beam Profile |
Good fit. I assumed sqrt(x) is a typo of sqrt(2).
Quote: |
Koji and Kevin measured the vertical beam profile of the Innolight 2W laser at one point.
This data was taken with the laser crystal temperature at 25.04°C and the injection current at 2.092A.
The distance from the razor blade to the flat black face on the front of the laser was 13.2cm.
The data was fit to the function y(x)=a*erf(sqrt(x)*(x-x0)/w)+b with the following results.
Reduced chi squared = 14.07
x0 = (1.964 +- 0.002) mm
w = (0.216 +- 0.004) mm
a = (3.39 +- 0.03) V
b = (3.46 +- 0.03) V
|
|
2832
|
Thu Apr 22 15:44:34 2010 |
josephb | Update | Computers | |
I updated the default FILTER.adl file located in /home/controls/cds/advLigo/src/epics/util/ on megatron. I moved the yellow ! button up slightly, and fixed the time string in the upper right. |
Attachment 1: New_example_CDS_filter.png
|
|
2833
|
Thu Apr 22 20:28:40 2010 |
Jenne | Update | PEM | Seismometer Noise Characteristics |
Quote from elog 2237, 11 Nov 2009: |
The attached plot shows the spectra of the 3 Z axes of the 3 seismometers we have (this data is from ~20Aug2009, when the Ranger was in the Z orientation) in Magenta, Cyan and Green, and the noise of each of the sensors in Red, Blue and Black. The noise curves were extracted from the spectra using the Huddle Test / 3 Corner Hat method. The Blue and Black traces which are just a few points are estimates of the noise from other spectra. The Blue points come from the Guralp Spec Sheet, and the Black comes from the noise test that Rana and I did the other day with the Ranger (elog 2223).
I'm not really happy with the black spectra - it looks way too high. I'm still investigating to see if this is a problem with my calibration/method....
|
So, as it turns out (surprise), I'm a spaz and forgot a 2*pi when calibrating the Guralp noise spectra from the spec sheet. I noticed this when redoing the Huddle Test, and comparing my Spec Sheet Guralp noise with Rana's, which he shows in elog 2689. When going from m/s^2, the units in the spec sheet, I just tilted the line by a factor of frequency. Koji pointed out that I needed a factor of 2*pi*f. That moves the Guralp spec line in the plot in elog 2237 (to which this entry is a reply) down by ~6, so that my measured noise is not, in fact, below the spec. This makes things much more right with the world.
In other news, I redid the Huddle analysis of the 2 Guralp seismometers, ala Rana's elog 2689. The difference is now we are on the granite slab, with soft rubber feet between the floor and the granite. We have not yet cut holes in the linoleum (which we'll do so that we're sitting directly on the 40m's slab).
Rana> this seems horrible. Its like there's a monster in there at 6-7 Hz! Either the seismos are not centered or the rubber balls are bad or Steve is dancing on the granite slab again.
|
Attachment 1: Gur1_Gur2_noise.png
|
|
2834
|
Thu Apr 22 21:42:24 2010 |
Alberto | Update | PSL | Innolight 2W Vertical Beam Profile |
What kind of fit did you use? How are the uncertainties in the parameters obtained? |
2836
|
Fri Apr 23 21:02:14 2010 |
rana, joe | Update | LSC | Started dev of LSC FE |
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 |
2837
|
Sat Apr 24 15:05:41 2010 |
Kevin | Update | PSL | 2W Vertical Beam Profile |
The vertical beam profile of the Innolight 2W laser was measured at eight points along the axis of the laser.
These measurements were made with the laser crystal temperature at 25.04°C and the injection current at 2.091A. z is the distance from the razor blade to the flat black face of the front of the laser.
The voltage from a photodiode was measured for the razor at a number of heights. Except for the first two points, one scan was made with the razor moving down and a second scan was made with the razor moving up. This data was fit to
y = a*erf(sqrt(2)*(x-x0)/w) + b with the following results:
z(cm) (±0.1cm) |
w(mm) |
chi^2/ndf |
3.9 |
0.085 ± 0.006 |
77.09 |
6.4 |
0.130 ± 0.004 |
12.93 |
8.8 down |
0.145 ± 0.008 |
66.57 |
8.8 up |
0.147 ± 0.008 |
18.47 |
11.6 down |
0.194 ± 0.010 |
64.16 |
11,6 up |
0.214 ± 0.009 |
27.23 |
14.2 down |
0.177 ± 0.008 |
49.95 |
14.2 up |
0.183 ± 0.007 |
29.85 |
16.6 down |
0.205 ± 0.006 |
18.35 |
16.2 up |
0.203 ± 0.007 |
17.16 |
19.2 down |
0.225 ± 0.007 |
18.92 |
19.2 up |
0.238 ± 0.011 |
25.56 |
21.7 down |
0.292 ± 0.006 |
11.30 |
21.7 up |
0.307 ± 0.008 |
11.85 |
The values for w and its uncertainty were estimated with a weighted average between the two scans for the last six points and all eight points were fit to
w = w0*sqrt(1+(z-z0)2/zR2) with the following results:
chi^2/ndf = 17.88
w0 = (0.07 ± 0.13) mm
z0 = (-27 ± 121) mm
zR = (65 ± 93) mm
It looks like all of the data points were made in the linear region so it is hard to estimate these parameters with reasonable uncertainty. |
Attachment 1: vbp.jpg
|
|
2838
|
Sat Apr 24 15:50:47 2010 |
Koji | Update | PSL | re: 2W Vertical Beam Profile |
1. The vertical axis should start from zero. The horizontal axis should be extended so that it includes the waist. See Zach's plot http://nodus.ligo.caltech.edu:8080/40m/2818
2. Even if you are measuring only the linear region, you can guess w0 and z0, in principle. w0 is determined by the divergence angle (pi w0/lambda) and z0 is determined by the linear profile and w0. Indeed your data have some fluctuation from the linear line. That could cause the fitting prescision to be worse.
3. Probably the biggest reason of the bad fitting would be that you are fitting with three parameters (w0, z0, zR) instead of two (w0, z0). Use the relation ship zR= pi w0^2/lambda. |
2839
|
Sun Apr 25 02:56:07 2010 |
rana | Update | LSC | Started dev of LSC FE |
LSC Plant Model. That is all. |
2840
|
Sun Apr 25 10:40:21 2010 |
Koji | Update | LSC | Started dev of LSC FE |
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
|
2841
|
Mon Apr 26 10:21:45 2010 |
josephb | Update | LSC | Started dev of LSC FE |
Quote: |
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).
|
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. |
2843
|
Mon Apr 26 11:14:04 2010 |
Koji | Update | Green Locking | Temperature scan for PPKTP |
I scanned the temperature of the crystal oven on Friday night in order that we can find the optimal temperature of the crystal for SHG.
The optimal temperature for this crystal was found to be 36.2 deg.
The crystal is on the PSL table. The incident beam on the crystal is 27.0mW with the Newport power-meter configured for 1064nm.
The outgoing beam had 26.5mW.
The outgoing beam was filtered by Y1-45S to eliminate 1064nm. According to Mott's measurements, Y1-45S has 0.5% transmission for 1064nm, while 90% transmission for 532nm. This means I still had ~100uW after the Y1-45S. This is somewhat consistent with the offset seen in the power-meter reading.
First, I scanned the temperature from 28deg to 40deg with 1deg interval.The temperature was scaned by changing the set point on the temperature controller TC-200.The measurements were done with the temperature were running. So, the crystal may have been thermally non-equilibrium.
Later, I cut the heater output so that the temperature could be falling down slowly for the finer scan. The measurement was done from 38deg to 34deg with interval of 0.1deg with the temperature running.
I clearly see the brightness of the green increase at around 36 deg. The data also shows the peak centered at 36.2deg. We also find two lobes at 30deg and 42deg. I am not sure how significant they are. |
Attachment 1: SHG_pow.png
|
|
2844
|
Mon Apr 26 11:29:37 2010 |
josephb | Update | Computers | Updated bitwise.pm in RCG SVN plus other fixes |
To fix a problem one of the models was having, I checked the CVS version of the Bitwise.pm file into the SVN (located in /home/controls/cds/advLigoRTS/src/epics/util/lib), which adds left and right bit shifting funtionality. The yec model now builds with the SVN checkout.
Also while trying to get things to work, I discovered the cdsRfmIO piece (used to read and write to the RFM card) now only accepts 8 bit offsets. This means we're going to have to change virtually all of the RFM memory locations for the various channels, rather than using the values from its previous incarnation, since most were 4 bit numbers. It also means it going to eat up roughly twice as much space, as far as I can tell.
Turns out the problem we were having getting to compile was nicely answered by Koji's elog post. The shmem_daq value was not set to be equal to 1. This caused it to look for myrimnet header files which did not exist, and caused compile time errors. The model now compiles on megatron.
[Edit by KA: 4 bit and 8 bit would mean "bytes". I don't recall which e-log of mine Joe is referring.]
|
2845
|
Mon Apr 26 12:24:58 2010 |
josephb | Update | General | Daily Downs update |
Talked with Jay briefly this morning.
We are due another 1-U 4 core (8 CPU) machine, which is one of the ones currently in the test stand. I'm hoping sometime this week I can convince Alex to help me remove it from said test stand.
The megatron machine we have is definitely going to be used in the 40m upgrade (to answer a question of Rana's from last Wednesday's meeting). Thats apparently the only machine of that class we get, so moving it to the vertex for use as the LSC or SUS vertex machine may make sense. Overall we'll have the ASS, OMC, Megatron (SUS?), along with the new 4 1-U machines, for LSC, IO, End Y and End X. We are getting 4 more IO chassis, for a total 5. ASS and OMC machine will be going without full new chassis.
Speaking of IO chassis, they are still being worked on. Still need a few cards put in and some wiring work done. I also didn't see any other adapter boards finished either. |