40m QIL Cryo_Lab CTN SUS_Lab TCS_Lab OMC_Lab CRIME_Lab FEA ENG_Labs OptContFac Mariner WBEEShop
  40m Log, Page 295 of 339  Not logged in ELOG logo
ID Date Author Type Category Subjectup
  6721   Wed May 30 22:51:32 2012 DenUpdatePEMguralp isolation box

When I've put Guralps inside the isolation box, the signal from seismometers increased and was out of AA board range. I've reduced the gain of the readout box by a factor of 2. Now R2 for channels 1-6 is (2000, 1050, 1050, 2000, 1050, 1050) Ohm.

The signal increased in the frequency range 30-50 Hz. Guralp noise become better. That's good. However, it is still worse then in the manual.

As Yuta is dancing on the isolation box, Guralp signal is most time out of the AA board range. So I calculated the noise based on 5 min data. This may be enough, but I'll repeat the experiment later with 30 min data.


  6696   Tue May 29 00:35:57 2012 DenUpdatePEMguralp readout box

I measured the frequency response of the Guralp readout box and noise by providing sin signal of amplitude 50 mV at 15 Hz for channels 1-3.


It turns out that the gain is ~250, while my liso model simulated it to be 200. This is because it is hard to approximate AD620 amplifier.

Noise of the box does not seem to be too bad at low frequencies.

  6618   Mon May 7 21:46:10 2012 DenUpdateCDSguralp signal error

GUR1_XYZ_IN1 and GUR2_XYZ_IN1 are the same and equal to GUR2_XYZ.  This is bad since GUR1_XYZ_IN1 should be equal to GUR1_XYZ.  Note that GUR#_XYZ are copies of GUR#_XYZ_OUT, so there may be (although there isn't right now) filtering between the _IN1's and the _OUT's.  But certainly GUR1 should look like GUR1, not GUR2!!!

Looks like CDS problem, maybe some channel-hopping going on? I'm trying a restart of the c1sus computer right now, to see if that helps.....

Figure:  Green and red should be the same, yellow and blue should be the same.  Note however that green matches yellow and blue, not red.  Bad.




  6757   Tue Jun 5 21:09:40 2012 yutaUpdateComputer Scripts / Programshacked ezca tools

Currently, ezca tools are flakey and fails too much.
So, I hacked ezca tools just like Yoichi did in 2009 (see elog #1368).

For now,


are wrapper scripts that repeats ezca stuff until it succeeds (or fails more than 5 times).

Of course, this is just a temporary solution to do tonight's work.
To stop this hack, run /users/yuta/scripts/ezhack/stophacking.cmd. To hack, run /users/yuta/scripts/ezhack/starthacking.cmd.

Original binary files are located in /ligo/apps/linux-x86_64/gds-2.15.1/bin/ezcabackup/ directory.
Wrapper scripts live in /users/yuta/scripts/ezhack directory.

I wish I could alias ezca tools to my wrapper scripts so that I don't have to touch the original files. However, alias settings doesn't work in our scripts.
Do you have any idea?

  6768   Wed Jun 6 18:04:22 2012 JamieUpdateComputer Scripts / Programshacked ezca tools


Currently, ezca tools are flakey and fails too much.
So, I hacked ezca tools just like Yoichi did in 2009 (see elog #1368).

For now,


are wrapper scripts that repeats ezca stuff until it succeeds (or fails more than 5 times).

Of course, this is just a temporary solution to do tonight's work.
To stop this hack, run /users/yuta/scripts/ezhack/stophacking.cmd. To hack, run /users/yuta/scripts/ezhack/starthacking.cmd.

Original binary files are located in /ligo/apps/linux-x86_64/gds-2.15.1/bin/ezcabackup/ directory.
Wrapper scripts live in /users/yuta/scripts/ezhack directory.

I wish I could alias ezca tools to my wrapper scripts so that I don't have to touch the original files. However, alias settings doesn't work in our scripts.
Do you have any idea?

I didn't like this solution, so I hacked up something else.  I made a new single wrapper script to handle all of the utils.  It then executes the correct command based on the zeroth argument (see below).

I think moved all the binaries to give them .bin suffixes, and the made links to the new wrapper script.  Now everything should work as expected, with this new retry feature.

controls@rosalba:/ligo/apps/linux-x86_64/gds-2.15.1/bin 0$ for pgm in ezcaread ezcawrite ezcaservo ezcastep ezcaswitch; do mv $pgm{,.bin}; ln ezcawrapper $pgm; done
controls@rosalba:/ligo/apps/linux-x86_64/gds-2.15.1/bin 0$ cat ezcawrapper



if ! [ -e "$run" ] ; then
    cat <&2
This is the ezca wrapper script.  It should be hardlinked in place of
the ezca commands (ezcaread, ezcawrite, etc.), and executing the
original binaries (that have been moved to *.bin) with $retries
failure retries.
    exit -1

if [ -z "$@" ] || [[ "$1" == '-h' ]] ; then

for try in $(seq 1 "$retries") ; do
    if "$run" "$@"; then
	echo "retrying ($try/$retries)..." >&2
echo "$(basename $pgm) failed after $retries retries." >&2
exit 1

  6769   Wed Jun 6 18:22:52 2012 JamieUpdateComputer Scripts / Programshacked ezca tools


I didn't like this solution, so I hacked up something else.  I made a new single wrapper script to handle all of the utils.  It then executes the correct command based on the zeroth argument (see below).

I think moved all the binaries to give them .bin suffixes, and the made links to the new wrapper script.  Now everything should work as expected, with this new retry feature.

Yuta and I added a feature such that it will not retry if the environment variables EZCA_NORETRY is set, e.g.

$ EZCA_NORETRY=true ezcaread FOOBAR

  8068   Tue Feb 12 18:25:43 2013 JamieSummaryGeneralhalf PRC with astigmatic PR2/3

  arbcav a la mode measurement
g tangential 0.9754 0.9753 0.986 +/- 0.001
g sagital 0.9686 0.9685 0.968 +/- 0.001

Given that we're measuring different g parameters in the tangential and sagittal planes, I went back to alamode to see what astigmatism I could put into PR2 and/or PR3 to match what we're measuring.  I looked at three cases: only PR2 is astigmatic, only PR3 is, or where we split the difference.  Since the sagittal measurement matches, I left all the sagittal curvatures the same in

case 1: PR3 only

  PR2 RoC (m) PR3 RoC (m) g (half PRC)
tangential 706 -420 0.986
sagittal 706 -700 0.969

case 2: PR3 only

  PR2 RoC (m) PR3 RoC (m) g (half PRC)
tangential 5000 -700 0.986
sagittal 706 -700 0.969

case 3: PR2 and PR3

  PR2 RoC (m) PR3 RoC (m) g parameter
tangential 2000 -600 0.986
sagittal 706 -700 0.969

From Koji's post about the scans of the G&H mirrors, it looks entirely reasonable that we could have these levels of astigmatism in the optics.

What this means for full PRC

These all make the same full PRC situation:

     g (tangential):  0.966

     g (sagittal):  0.939

     ARM mode matching:  0.988


  1165   Mon Dec 1 15:09:27 2008 robUpdatePEMhalf-micron particle count is alarming
  1168   Tue Dec 2 19:51:32 2008 ranaUpdatePEMhalf-micron particle count is alarming
The 0.5 micron dust monitor count is now pretty high (36000). I wandered around the lab to see if there was anything
nasty going on but I didn't see or smell anything in particular. Since today Alberto was sitting around where the
dust monitor is while aligning the PSL beam, we should blame him. Its either garlic, cologne, or time to bathe.

The 400 day hour trend shows that while the counts are not so unusual, the 40m is dirtier than it was last year.
Attachment 1: Untitled.png
Attachment 2: dust.png
  9970   Mon May 19 09:19:44 2014 SteveUpdateLSChappy IFO

15 hours

Attachment 1: whenthinksareworking.png
  10858   Tue Jan 6 10:04:39 2015 SteveUpdateIOOhappy IOO
Attachment 1: IOO.png
  11886   Wed Dec 16 10:56:22 2015 gautamUpdateCDShard reboot of FB


Forgot to submit this yesterday...

While we were trying to get the X-arm locked to IR using MC2, frame-builder mysteriously crashed, necessitating us having to go down to the computer and perform a hard reboot (after having closed the PSL shutter and turning all the watchdogs to "shutdown"). All the models restarted by themselves, and everything seems back to normal now..

  1622   Fri May 22 17:05:24 2009 rob, peteUpdateComputershard reboot of vertex suspension controllers

we did a hard reboot of c1susvme1, c1susvme2, c1sosvme, and c1susaux.  We are hoping this will fix some of the weird suspension issues we've been having (MC3 side coil, ITMX alignment).

  88   Fri Nov 9 09:37:55 2007 steveUpdatePSLhead temp hiccup
Just an other PSL-126MOPA_HTEMP hiccup.
The water chiller is at 20.00C
Attachment 1: headtempup.jpg
  1116   Thu Nov 6 09:45:27 2008 steveUpdateMOPAhead temp hick-up vs power
The control room AC temp was lowered from 74F to 70F around Oct 10
This hold the head temp rock solid 18.45C for ~30 days as it shows on this 40 days plot.
We just had our first head temp hick-up

note: the laser chiller did not produce any water during this period
Attachment 1: htpr.jpg
  911   Tue Sep 2 10:09:03 2008 steveUpdatePSLhead temp is cooling down
The chiller was over flowing this morning.
800 cc of water was removed.
PSL-126MOPA_HTEMP peaked at 20.7 C (normal is 18.7 C)
  13269   Tue Aug 29 15:41:17 2017 KiraSummaryPEMheater circuit

I worked with Kevin and Gautam to create a heater circuit. The first attachment is Kevin's schematic of the circuit. The OP amp connects to the gate of the power MOSFET, and the power supply connects to the drain, while the source goes into the heater. We set the power supply voltage to 22V and varied the voltage of the input to the OP amp. At 6V to the OP amp, we got a current of 0.35A flowing through the heater and resistor. This was the peak current we got due to the OP amp being saturated (an increase in either of the power supplies did not change the current), but when we increased the voltage of the supply rails of the OP amp from 15V to 20V, we got a current of 0.5A. We would want a higher current than this, so we will need to get a different OP amp with a higher max voltage rating, and a resistor that can take more power than this one (it currently takes 5W of power, and is the best one we could find).

Kevin and I created a simulation of this circuit using CircuitLab to understand why the current was so low (second attachment). The horizontal axis is the voltage we supply to the OP amp. The blue line shows the voltage at the point between the output of the OP amp and the gate of the MOSFET. The orange line is the voltage at the point between the source of the MOSFET and the heater. The brown line is the voltage at the point between the heater and resistor. Thus, we can see that saturation occurs at about 2.1V. At that point, the gate-source voltage is the difference between the blue curve and the orange curve, which is about 4V, which is what we measured. Likewise, the voltage across the heater is the difference between the orange curve and the brown curve, which comes out to around 8V, which is also what we measured. Lastly, the voltage across the resistor is the brown curve, which is about 2V, which matches our observations. The circuit works as it should, but saturates too soon to get a high enough current out of it.

Gautam noted that it is important to measure the current correctly. We can't just use an ammeter and place it across the resistor or heater, because the internal resistance of the ammeter (~0.5 ohm) is comparable to the resistance we want to measure, so the current gets split between the circuit and the ammeter and we get an equivalent resistance of 1/R = 1/R0 + 1/Ra, where R0 is the resistance of the part we want to measure the current across, and Ra is the ammeter resistance. Thus, the new resistance will be lower and the ammeter will show a higher current value than what is actually there. So to accurately measure the current, we must place the ammeter in series with the part we want to measure. We initially got a 1A reading on the heater, which was not correct, and our setup did not heat up at all basically. When we placed the ammeter in series with the heater, we got only 0.35A.

The last two images are the setup for testing of the heater. We wrapped it around an aluminum piece and covered it with a few layers of insulating material. We can stick a thermometer in between the insulation and heater to see the temperature change. In later tests, we may insulate the whole piece so that less heat gets dissipated. In addition, we used a heat sink and thermal paste to secure the MOSFET to it, as it got very hot.

Our next steps will be to get a resistor and an OP amp that are better suited for our purposes. We will also run simulations with components that we choose to make sure that it can provide the desired current of 1A (the maximum output of the power supply is 24V, and the heater is 24 ohm, so max current is 1A). Kevin is working on that now.

Attachment 1: heater_circuit.pdf
Attachment 2: simulation.png
Attachment 3: heater_setup.jpg
Attachment 4: IMG_20170829_131126.jpg
  13292   Tue Sep 5 09:47:34 2017 KiraSummaryPEMheater circuit calculations

I decided to calculate the fluctuation in power that we will have in the heater circuit. The resistors we ordered have 50 ppm/C and it would be useful to know what kind of fluctuation we would expect. For this, I assumed that the heater itself is an ideal resistor that has no temperature variation. The circuit diagram is found in Kevin's elog here. At saturation, the total resistance (we will have a 1\Omega resistor instead of 6\Omega for our new design) will be R_{tot}=R+R_{h}=1\Omega +24\Omega =25\Omega. Therefore, with a 24V input, the saturation current should be I=\frac{V_{in}}{R_{tot}}=\frac{24V}{25\Omega}=0.96A.  Therefore, the power in the heater should be (in the ideal case) P=I^2R{_{h}}=22.1184W

Now, in the case where the resistor is not ideal, let's assume the temperature of the resistor changes by 10C (which is about how much we would like to heat the whole thing). Therefore, the resistor will have a new value of R_{new}=R+50ppm/C\times 10C\times 10^{-6}=1.0005\Omega. The new current will then be I_{new}=\frac{V_{in}}{R_{new}}=0.95998A and the new power will be P_{new}=I_{new}^{2}R_{h}=22.1175W. So the difference in power going through the heater is about 0.00088W.

We can use this power difference to calculate how much the temperature of the metal can we wish to heat up will change. \Delta T=\Delta P\times (1/\kappa) /x where \kappa is the thermal conductivity and x is the thickness of the material. For our seismometer, I calculated it to be 0.012K.

  6116   Wed Dec 14 12:18:11 2011 ZachUpdateRF Systemheater reengaged

I reengaged the heater this morning, to compare it with the free-wafting and passive box-covered data. In order to make the loop stable, I had to reduce the gain of the AD620 by 10. I have increased the TEMP_MON preamp gain by 10, so the calibration should still be ~3.5 V/K into the ADC (and in DV).

Below is a screenshot showing that the RAMmon signals are pushed to some (nonzero) value, and it appears that they stay there despite the changing PSL table temperature as measured by FSS_RMTEMP. My post from last week shows that without the heater servo the temperature of the EOM can follows RMTEMP almost exactly. So, it seems like the heater is working well at low frequencies, modulo sensor noise, which ought to be low for the thermistor. Since several things (MC, etc.) have changed since out baseline data, it migth be prudent to let this sit for a little while and then disconnect the heater to see what happens.


  14105   Thu Jul 26 01:52:01 2018 terraUpdateThermal Compensationheater work update

Just a quick update: over the past few days we've taken (at least) 5 scans around each peak [carrier - HOM3] at 9.4V/0.8A, 4 scans around [carrier - HOM5] at 12V/0.9A hot state with the reflector setup. We also have (at least) 5 scans of carrier - HOM5 in cold state. I attach a rough overview of the peak magnitude shifts in the first attachment. Analysis ongoing. All data stored in annalisa/postVent/{date}

Initial shifts just based on rought peak placement in the meantime:

            [9.4V/0.8A]   [12V/0.9A]

HOM1    10 kHz         20 kHz

HOM2    18 kHz         28 kHz

HOM3     30 kHz        40 kHz

HOM4     N/A             26 kHz

HOM5     N/A             35 kHz

I also attach the heating thermal transient from today (12V/0.9A) as seen by the opLevs. We see a shorter time constant for pitch, longer for yaw, preceeded by a dip in yaw. Similar behavior yesterday for slightly less heating, though less pronounced pre-dip. The heater is offcentered on the optic horizontally; likely this is part of the induced yaw. The spikey stuff i removed is from people walking around inside during the transient.

I've left the heater and LSC off for the night. Heater off at 2:07 am local time.

Please don't touch the oplevs; we're taking a cool down measurement.

Attachment 1: OpLev_thermal_drift.pdf
Attachment 2: hotColdAll.pdf
  9499   Fri Dec 20 01:24:11 2013 DenUpdateLSChigh bandwidth loop achieved for yarm

Koji, Den

CM Servo with POY11 successfully engaged. UGF: ~15kHz.

Tonight we decided to repeat one arm locking using high-bandwidth CM servo. We low-passed AO signal to avoid saturations of the EOM. We tried different configurations that compromise between noise and loop phase margin and ended up with a pole at 30kHz. SR560 is used as a low-pass filter.

Another problem that we faced was big (~2.6V) electronic offset at the input of 40:4000 BOOST. Once engaged, cavity would be kicked out of lock. We calibrated this offset to be almost half linewidth of the cavity (~300pm). To avoid lock loss during engaging the boost we increased common mode gain to maximum (31 dB).

Measured OL is attached. UGF is 15kHz, phase margin is 60 degrees. We have also simulated evolution of loop shape during bringing AO path. Plot is attached.

The final procedure is

  • set common gain up to 31dB, AO gain to 8dB, MC IN2 gain 10dB, CM offset 0.7V
  • lock arm with CM slow path with bandwidth of 200 Hz
  • enable AO path, gradually increase slow and fast gains by 12 dB
  • enable boost
Attachment 1: CM_OL_meas.pdf
Attachment 2: cm_ol_sim.pdf
Attachment 3: CM_slow_fast_cross.pdf
  9501   Fri Dec 20 03:34:40 2013 KojiUpdateLSChigh bandwidth loop achieved for yarm

This too huge offset difference with/without "BOOST" switch should be checked.

  9507   Fri Dec 20 22:45:02 2013 KojiUpdateLSChigh bandwidth loop achieved for yarm

I checked the offset situation in the CM servo boost circuit. 

- The offset voltage on the CM servo screen is a raw DAC output. This number is diluted by the voltage divider before the amplifier.
  So, the actual offset of the boost circuit was much smaller. (~20mV)

- There is a offset trimmer on the board. This was adjusted so that the boost does not generate an output offset.

- So the default offset is 0V.

- When the arm was locked with (digital) POY11, the CM servo offset is necessary to be -2.7 (now).
  This means that analog POY11Q and digital POY11 has different offset for the best resonance transmission.
  That is believable if POY11I is contributing to the digital POY11 signal.

  7645   Wed Oct 31 14:31:34 2012 SteveUpdatePEMhigh particle count

High particle count confirmed with #2 counter

Attachment 1: highparticlec.png
  7680   Wed Nov 7 11:43:29 2012 SteveUpdatePEMhigh particle count ALART

The BS camber is open only. We should close ASAP

Outside air quality is 1.7- 2.2  million particles  / cf min of 0.5 micron

Attachment 1: highpartcount.png
  8001   Tue Feb 5 10:18:54 2013 SteveUpdatePEMhigh particle count ALART



The BS camber is open only. We should close ASAP

Outside air quality is 1.7- 2.2  million particles  / cf min of 0.5 micron

 Air is still bad and the chambers are closed. Before lunch  Jamie repointed the PRM oplev. Manasa and I reset oplevs: BS and ITMX.

ETMX and ETMY are fine.

SRM and ITMY oplevs needs more work.

 The bad outside air quality is pushing up the inside counts.

The outside air is 5 million counts / cf min for 0.3 micron and 2 million counts / cf min for 0.5 micron particles

Do not open chamber over 10,000 counts / cf min of 0.5 micron

Attachment 1: badair.png
Attachment 2: 100d_airq.png
  7681   Wed Nov 7 14:59:35 2012 SteveUpdatePEMhigh particle count ALART & oplevs


The BS camber is open only. We should close ASAP

Outside air quality is 1.7- 2.2  million particles  / cf min of 0.5 micron

 Air is still bad and the chambers are closed. Before lunch  Jamie repointed the PRM oplev. Manasa and I reset oplevs: BS and ITMX.

ETMX and ETMY are fine.

SRM and ITMY oplevs needs more work.

Attachment 1: oplevs.png
  2370   Wed Dec 9 09:07:32 2009 steveUpdatePEMhigh seismic activity

The construction activity is shaking the tables in the control room.  The compactor- large remote controlled jackhammer is in the bottom of the 16-17 ft deep hole 15 ft east of ITMY in CES bay. The suspensions  are holding OK. PRM, MC1 and MC3 are effected mostly.

Attachment 1: seis24d.png
Attachment 2: seis4h.png
Attachment 3: P1050833.JPG
Attachment 4: P1050836.JPG
  4405   Fri Mar 11 16:30:42 2011 steveUpdateGeneralhigh speed servo unit is here

New Focus Servo Controller has just arrived. We have 25 days to evaluate this product.

It will have to be shipped back to the vendor on April 4, 2011 the latest in order to get full refund.

Attachment 1: P1070462.JPG
  12888   Tue Mar 14 15:05:18 2017 SteveUpdateOptical Levershistory of ETMX oplev laser



ETMX oplev laser is dead. It will be replaced this after noon. Sus damping recovered.

This 3 years old HeNe [ JDS 1103P, sn 351889 ]  has been dying for some time or just playing possum at age 1,126 days

I did not replace the ETMX oplev laser because I was unable to bring up the the C1ASC_ETMX_OPTLEV_SERVO  medm screen on laptops.

Attachment 1: ETMX_1103P_3y.png
  2151   Tue Oct 27 18:01:49 2009 robUpdatePSLhmmm

A 30-day trend of the PCDRIVE from the FSS.

Attachment 1: pcdrive_trend.png
  1004   Mon Sep 29 11:17:14 2008 steveUpdateSAFETYhorizontal viewports are protected with lexan
The four horizontal viewports of arms are protected
by 3/8" thick, 8.5" OD Lexan disk of MR10 Polycarbonate.

ITMX, ETMX, ITMY and ETMY ccd cameras are not focused now.
  12616   Tue Nov 15 19:22:17 2016 gautamUpdateGeneralhousekeeping

PRM and SRM sat. boxes have been switched for some time now - but the PRM sat. box has one channel with a different transimpedance gain, and the damping loops for the PRM and SRM were not systematically adjusted to take this into account (I just tweaked the gain for the PRM and SRM side damping loops till the optic damped). Since both sat. boxes are nominally functioning now, I saw no reason to maintain this switched configuration so I swapped the boxes back, and restored the damping settings to their values from March 29 2016, well before either of this summer's vents. In addition, I want to collect some data to analyze the sat. box noise performance so I am leaving the SRM sat. box connected to the DAQ, but with the tester box connected to where the vacuum feedthroughs would normally go (so SRM has no actuation right now). I will collect a few hours of data and revert later tonight for locking activities....

  6306   Wed Feb 22 19:45:33 2012 kiwamuUpdateLSChow much length offset do we need ?

I did a quick calculation to see if the offset of the arm length which I tried last night was reasonable or not.

The conclusion is that the 20 nm offset that i tried could be a bit too close to a resonance of the 55 MHz sidebands.

A reasonable offset can be more like 10 nm or so where the phases of all the laser fields don't get extra phases of more than ~ 5 deg.


The attached plot shows where the resonances are for each sideband as a function of the displacement from the carrier's resonance.


The red solid line represent the carrier, the other solid lines are for the upper sidebands and the dashed lines are for the lower sidebands.

The top plot shows the cavity power and the bottom plot shows how much phase shift the fields get by being reflected by the arm cavity.

Apparently the closest resonances to the the main carrier one are that of the 55 MHz sidebands, and they are at +/- 22 nm.

So if we displace the arm length by 22 nm, either of the 55 MHz sidebands will enter in the arm cavity and screw up the sensing matrix for the 55 MHz family.

Quote from #6304

In all the configurations I displaced the Y arm by 20 nm from the resonance.

  4356   Fri Feb 25 10:11:56 2011 steveUpdateSAFETYhow not to

The beam of IR for doubling  is clipping on bnc cable to green beam transmitted pd.

Attachment 1: Presentation1.jpg
  4953   Thu Jul 7 13:57:28 2011 steveHowToSAFETYhow not to

I found baked allen keys on the top of the clean optics cabinet.  Somewhat heavy box that can come down in an earthquake on our heads.

NOTHING SHOULD GO ON THE TOP OF THE CABINETS OR RACKS except  small plastic boxes that storing our clean clothing.

  9027   Mon Aug 19 10:03:17 2013 SteveHowToGeneralhow not to leave a cable

We can not leave cables connected like this. This is a burned toast award.

Attachment 1: NONOcable.jpg
  7864   Thu Dec 20 17:13:56 2012 JamieUpdateGeneralhow to deal with problem with in-vac wiring for TTs

So this is obviously a general problem for all the TTs.  Our in-vacuum wiring is unfortunately mirrored relative to that of aLIGO, or at least:

  • aLIGO: in-vacuum pin 1 tied to shield (T1200131)
  • 40m: in vacuum pin 13 tied to shield

And again, the problem is that pin 13 on the TT quadrapus cables is the one of the coil pins for one of the OSEMs.

I think the right solution is to make mirroring adapter cables for the TTs.  Modifying the pins on the stack-top brackets for just the TTs would leave us with a bunch of brackets that are different than all the rest, which I think is a bad idea.  Therefore we leave all the feed-thru-->bracket wiring the same, and make adapters.  I'll describe the adapters in a follow-up post.

The silver lining to this whole thing, if there is one, is that I wired the polarity on the out-of-vac adapter cable at the coil driver in such a way that the drive/send signal went to the grounded in-vac pin.  If I had by chance wired the polarity oppositely everything would probably have worked, except that the return for one of the coils would have gone through the cable shield and the chamber, rather than the return pin to the coil driver.  I'll let you image the problems that would have caused.

Making new adapters will take a little while, but I think we can proceed with the installation and alignment with a temporary setup in the mean time by taking advantage of the polarity I mention above.  We can temporarily swap the polarity so that we can drive current to the coil using pin 13.  This will allow us to complete the installation and do all the alignment.  Once the in-vac adapter cable arrives, we just put it in, fix the out-of-vac polarity, check that everything works as expected, and button up.

We'll pick up all this when we're back on Jan 7.  Steve will put in an order for the in-vac adapter cables ASAP.

I take full responsibility for this fuck up.  We've been unable to find any in-vac wiring diagrams, but I should have checked all of the wiring during the last vent so that we could have prepared for this ahead of time.  Sorry.

  6876   Wed Jun 27 03:43:52 2012 yutaSummaryIOOhow to improve mode matching to arms

From the mode scan measurements of the arms(elog #6859), ~6% of mode-mismatch comes from 2nd-order mode. That means we have longitudinal mismatch.

Suppose every mirrors are well positioned and well polished with designed RoC, except for the MMT1-MMT2 length. To get ~6% of mode-mismatch, MMT1-MMT2 length should be ~28cm longer (or ~26cm shorter) than designed value.
I don't know whether this is possible or not, but if they are actually longer(or shorter), we should fix it on the next vent.
I found some related elog on MMT (see #3088).


RoC and length parameters I used is below. They maybe wrong because I just guessed them. Please tell me the actual values.
Mirror thickness and effect of the incident angle is not considered yet.

== RoCs ==
MC2 19.965 m (???)
PRM 115.5 m (not used in calculation; just used to guess MC parameters)
ITM flat
ETM 57.37 m

== Lengths ==
MC round trip 27.084 m (???)
MC1 - MC3  0.18 m (???)
MC3 - MMT1 0.884+1.0442 m
MMT1 - MMT2 1.876 m
MMT2 - PRM 2.0079+0.4956 m
PRM - ITM 4.4433+2.2738 m
ITM - ETM 39 m

  6877   Wed Jun 27 10:27:09 2012 ranaSummaryIOOhow to improve mode matching to arms

The MC waist is correct as is the arm RoCs. Most likely the error is in the telescope length or its distance from the MC. Jenne probably has all the numbers and can give us a surface plot showing how the MM degrades as a function of those two parameters.

  2164   Fri Oct 30 09:24:45 2009 steveHowToMOPAhow to squeeze more out of little


Here is the plots for the powers. MC TRANS is still rising.

What I noticed was that C1:PSL-FSS_PCDRIVE nolonger hit the yellow alert.
The mean reduced from 0.4 to 0.3. This is good, at least for now.

 Koji did a nice job increasing light power with some joggling.

Attachment 1: 44to34.jpg
  4960   Mon Jul 11 14:03:37 2011 steveHowTolorehow to visit your old lab

Alberto is visiting us from Australia. He brought some terrific presents. It is going to be very demanding task to wait for the rest of the 40m team

to return from Wales to taste coffee:  PNG Peaberry of Wagonga, Monsooned Malabar of Jindebah and Signature Blue Blend of Cosmorex.

Attachment 1: P1080069.JPG
  709   Mon Jul 21 19:48:57 2008 SharonUpdate how tp restart C1ASS
How to restart C1ASS:

1. reboot
2. as root: caltech/target/c1ass:> ./startass
3. no need for root: burtgooey

that's it...
  7776   Mon Dec 3 07:40:00 2012 SteveHowToAlignmenthow was the BS chamber misalinged



 Whoever was working around the BS chamber at 11 AM on Friday should admit it now and take the punishment.

For those of you who like to do work on the interferometer without reporting it in the elog because you think that what you did doesn't affect anything, this is your example of how our time can be wasted by such laziness.

 I'm taking full responsibility for this action and I told them after lunch Friday.



The BS isolation stack  supported by two beam tubes and they can pivot around the pivot point.

Attachment 1: BSsupport.jpg
  6235   Fri Jan 27 17:16:05 2012 kiwamuUpdateLSChypothetical glitch scenario

Here is a hypothetical scenario which could make the glitches in the LSC error signals. It can be considered as a 4 step phenomenon.

        (1) up conversion noise due to a large motion at 3 Hz

   => (2) rms level exceeds the line width (a.k.a. linear range) in some LSC sensors

   => (3) unlocks some of the DOFs  in a moment

   => (4) glitches due to the short unlock.

- - plan  - -

 In order to check this hypothesis the low finesse PRMI must serve as a good test configuration.

What I will do is to gradually decrease the offset in MICH such that the finesse of PRMI becomes higher.

And at each different finesse I will check the spectra, glitch rate, and etc.

Quote from #6231

        Low finesse PRMI      

In this configuration NO glitches ( a high speed signal with an amplitude of more than 4 or 5 sigma) were found when it was locked.

Is it because I didn't use AS55 ?? or because the finesse is low ??

Also, as we have already known, the up conversion noise (#6212) showed up -- the level of the high frequency noise are sensitive to the 3 Hz motion.

  13934   Fri Jun 8 14:40:55 2018 c1lscUpdateCDSi am dead
Attachment 1: 31.png
  8394   Tue Apr 2 20:52:35 2013 ranaUpdateComputersiMac bashed

 I changed the default shell on our control room iMac to bash. Since we're really, really using bash as the shell for LIGO, we might as well get used to it. As we do this for the workstations, some things will fail, but we can adopt Jamie's private .bashrc to get started and then fix it up later.

  6765   Wed Jun 6 14:17:56 2012 steveUpdateComputersiMac ordered

Rana, Steve,


from Apple Store on line

  • $2,139.00

27-inch iMac

  • Part number: Z0M6


  • 2.7GHz Quad-Core Intel Core i5
  • 16GB 1333MHz DDR3 SDRAM - 4x4GB
  • 1TB Serial ATA Drive
  • AMD Radeon HD 6770M 512MB GDDR5
  • Apple Mouse
  • Apple Keyboard with Numeric Keypad (English) & User's Guide
  • Accessory Kit
  11081   Fri Feb 27 01:59:57 2015 ranaHowToLSCiPython Notebook for LSC Sensing Matrix

I have adapted one of Evan's python scripts into an ipython notebook for calculating our PRMI sensing matrix - the work is ~half done.

The script gets the data from the various PD channels (like REFL33_I) and demdoulates it at the modulation frequencies. At the moment its using just the sensing channels, but with the recent addition of the SUS-LSC_OUT_DQ channels, we can demod the actuation channels as well and not have to hand code the exc amplitudes and the basolute phase. Please ignore the phase for the moment.

The attached PDF shows the demod (including lowpass) outputs for a 2 minute stretch of PRMI locked on f2. Next step is to average these numbers and make the radar plots with the error bars. The script is scripts/LSC/SensingMatrix/PRMIsensMat.ipynb and is in the SVN now.

** along the way, I noticed that the reason this notebook hasn't been working since last night is that someone sadly installed a new anaconda python distro today  without telling anyone by ELOG. This new distro didn't have all the packages of the previous one.no I've updated it with astropy and uncertainties packages.

I've fixed the Radar plot making part, so that's now included too. The radial direction is linear, so you can see from the smearing of the blobs that the uncertainty is represented in the graphics due to each measurement being a small semi-transparent dot. Next, we'll put the output of the statistics on the plot: mean, std, and kurtosis.

Attachment 1: Plots_1109056456.pdf
Plots_1109056456.pdf Plots_1109056456.pdf Plots_1109056456.pdf Plots_1109056456.pdf Plots_1109056456.pdf Plots_1109056456.pdf Plots_1109056456.pdf Plots_1109056456.pdf
Attachment 2: Radar_1109056456.pdf
  11084   Fri Feb 27 11:20:49 2015 ericqUpdateComputer Scripts / ProgramsiPython Notebook for LSC Sensing Matrix

** along the way, I noticed that the reason this notebook hasn't been working since last night is that someone sadly installed a new anaconda python distro today  without telling anyone by ELOG. This new distro didn't have all the packages of the previous one.no I've updated it with astropy and uncertainties packages.

My bad, sorry! 

Yesterday, I was trying to install a package with anaconda's package manager, conda, but it was crashing in some weird way. I wasn't able to fix it, which led me to create a fresh installation. 

ELOG V3.1.3-