40m QIL Cryo_Lab CTN SUS_Lab TCS_Lab OMC_Lab CRIME_Lab FEA ENG_Labs OptContFac Mariner WBEEShop
  40m Log, Page 216 of 344  Not logged in ELOG logo
ID Datedown Author Type Category Subject
  6468   Thu Mar 29 20:13:21 2012 jamieConfigurationPEMPEM_SLOW (i.e. seismic RMS) channels added to fb master

I've added the PEM_SLOW.ini file to the fb master file, which should give us the slow seismic RMS channels when the framebuilder is restarted. Example channels:

[C1:PEM-RMS_ACC6_1_3]
[C1:PEM-RMS_GUR2Y_0p3_1]
[C1:PEM-RMS_STS1X_3_10]
etc.

I also updated the path to the other _SLOW.ini files.

I DID NOT RESTART FB.

I will do it first thing in the am tomorrow, when Kiwamu is not busy getting real work done.

Here's is a the diff for /opt/rtcds/caltech/c1/target/fb/master:h

controls@pianosa:/opt/rtcds/caltech/c1/target/fb 1$ diff -u master~ master
--- master~	2011-09-15 17:32:24.000000000 -0700
+++ master	2012-03-29 19:51:52.000000000 -0700
@@ -7,11 +7,12 @@
 /opt/rtcds/caltech/c1/chans/daq/C0EDCU.ini
 /opt/rtcds/caltech/c1/chans/daq/C1MCS.ini
 /opt/rtcds/caltech/c1/target/gds/param/tpchn_c1mcs.par
-/cvs/cds/rtcds/caltech/c1/chans/daq/SUS_SLOW.ini
-/cvs/cds/rtcds/caltech/c1/chans/daq/MCS_SLOW.ini
-/cvs/cds/rtcds/caltech/c1/chans/daq/RMS_SLOW.ini
-/cvs/cds/rtcds/caltech/c1/chans/daq/IOP_SLOW.ini
-/cvs/cds/rtcds/caltech/c1/chans/daq/IOO_SLOW.ini
+/opt/rtcds/caltech/c1/chans/daq/SUS_SLOW.ini
+/opt/rtcds/caltech/c1/chans/daq/MCS_SLOW.ini
+/opt/rtcds/caltech/c1/chans/daq/RMS_SLOW.ini
+/opt/rtcds/caltech/c1/chans/daq/IOP_SLOW.ini
+/opt/rtcds/caltech/c1/chans/daq/IOO_SLOW.ini
+/opt/rtcds/caltech/c1/chans/daq/PEM_SLOW.ini
 /opt/rtcds/caltech/c1/target/gds/param/tpchn_c1rfm.par
 /opt/rtcds/caltech/c1/chans/daq/C1RFM.ini
 /opt/rtcds/caltech/c1/chans/daq/C1IOO.ini
controls@pianosa:/opt/rtcds/caltech/c1/target/fb 1$

 

  6467   Thu Mar 29 19:13:56 2012 JamieOmnistructureComputersWireless router for GC

I retrieved the newly "secured" router from Junaid.  It had apparently been hooked up to the GC network via it's LAN port, but it's LAN services had no been shut off.  It was therefore offering a competing DHCP server, which will totally hose a network.  A definite NONO.

The new SSID is "40mWiFi", it's WPA2, and the password is pasted to the bottom of the unit (the unit is back in it's original spot on the office computer rack.

  6466   Thu Mar 29 18:42:11 2012 keikoUpdateLSCPOP22/POP110 amplifires

Adding two amplifiers on POP22/110, I checked the signals going to the dmod board of 22 and 110.

The signal flows: Photodetector of POP --> Amp1 --> Amp2 --> RF splotter --> bandpass filter for 22MHz / 110MHz --> 22MHz / 110MHz demod board.

 

 

 

 Here is the picture of RF spectrum just after the bandpass filter of 22MHz going to the 22MHz demod board. The signal peak at 22MHz is about -40dBm. There is a structure slightly lower than 22MHz.

P3290004.JPG

The below is the RF spectrum for 110MHz branch. The peak at 110MHz is about -15dBm. The peak on the left of 110MHz is 66MHz peak.

P3290005.JPG

 

Quote:

Yesterday I and Kiwamu connected two amplifiers (mini-circuit, ZFL-1000LNB+) for POP22/110. Dataviewer can see some signals. I'll test the signal levels and freq components before the rack just in case. [Kiwamu, Keiko]

 

  6465   Thu Mar 29 13:23:05 2012 JenneOmnistructureComputersWireless router for GC

Quote:

I installed a NETGEAR Wireless Router (WPN824N) today on the 131 network. The admin password for it as well as the wireless access password are in the usual places.

The SSID is 40EARTH. I have set it to allow WPA as well as WPA2 access, so the speed is only 54 Mbps for now. In a year or so, we can turn off the WPA support and up the speed.

 This router was confiscated by the GC guys this morning around ~10am.  They barged in and said that someone at the 40m had connected a new router, and we had magically taken down half of the GC network.  The cable was plugged in to the wrong port on the back of the router. 

Junaid / Christian said that they would "secure" the router, and then reinstall it.  Apparently just having a password didn't satisfy them.  This was the compromise, versus them just taking the router and never bringing it back.

 

Attachment 1: IMG_0079.JPG
IMG_0079.JPG
  6464   Thu Mar 29 11:29:27 2012 keikoUpdateLSCPOP22/POP110 amplifires

Yesterday I and Kiwamu connected two amplifiers (mini-circuit, ZFL-1000LNB+) for POP22/110. Dataviewer can see some signals. I'll test the signal levels and freq components before the rack just in case. [Kiwamu, Keiko]

  6463   Wed Mar 28 21:15:53 2012 ranaOmnistructureComputersWireless router for GC

I installed a NETGEAR Wireless Router (WPN824N) today on the 131 network. The admin password for it as well as the wireless access password are in the usual places.

The SSID is 40EARTH. I have set it to allow WPA as well as WPA2 access, so the speed is only 54 Mbps for now. In a year or so, we can turn off the WPA support and up the speed.

  6462   Wed Mar 28 20:54:02 2012 JenneUpdateIOOBeam Profile measurement: IPPOS beam

I fitzed by hand with the numbers for the incident angles on MMT1 and MMT2, and then let the code optimize the position of MMT1 and MMT2.

Here I have set the incident angle for MMT1 = 25deg, and MMT2 = 12deg (should be 3.5deg, 1deg by design).  The length of the telescope doesn't want to change by more than 7mm, but the position of the telescope wants to change by 1.3meters.  Is it possible that the distances on the Monday IPPOS measurements aren't actually correct?

MMT_moved_by_1pt3meters_MMT1th_25_MMT2th_12_LowRes.png

Attachment 1: MMT_moved_by_1pt3meters_MMT1th_25_MMT2th_12_LowRes.png
MMT_moved_by_1pt3meters_MMT1th_25_MMT2th_12_LowRes.png
  6461   Wed Mar 28 18:26:47 2012 JenneUpdateIOOBeam Profile measurement: IPPOS beam

More calculations....

Game Plan:  Using MC waist measured beam as the starting point of beam propagation, move MMT mirrors around until the beam profile fits with the IPPOS measurements from Monday.

Plot 1:  Allow MMT mirrors to move as much as they want to.  Note that the Y-beam goes through the IPPOS measured point. (This implies we put the MMT in the wrong place by ~half a meter.  Unlikely)

Plot 2: Using MMT locations from plot 1, what does the beam look like at the ITMs? 

Plot 3:  Allow MMT mirrors to move as much as 2cm.  Note that the Y-beam doesn't quite go through IPPOS measured point.

Plot 4: Using MMT locations from plot 3, what does the beam look like at the ITMs?

For all of the above, I was optimizing the propagation of the Y-beam profile.  Since the X-beam profile measurement is so different, if I want to optimize to X and let the MMT mirrors move as much as they want, MMT1 ends up inside the MC.  Unlikely.  So I'm just looking at Y for now, and maybe Suresh or someone needs to rethink the error bars on their measurements or just remeasure.

Plot 1:

OptimizedMMT_halfMeterChange_IPPOSviewLowRes.png

Plot 2:

OptimizedMMT_halfMeterChange_IFOviewLowRes.png

Plot 3:

OptimizedMMT_pt2cMeterChange_IPPOSviewLowRes.png

Plot 4:

OptimizedMMT_pt2cMeterChange_IFOviewLowRes.png

  6460   Wed Mar 28 01:17:29 2012 JenneUpdateIOOBeam Profile measurement: IPPOS beam

As I was a little dissatisfied with the inaccuracy in the distance numbers in Kiwamu's sketch, I went back to the 18 Dec 2010 table layout drawing for more accurate numbers.  These are now included in this round of plots.

Also, I include astigmatism due to the incident angles on MMT1 (~3.5 deg) and MMT2 (~1 deg).

First plot, IPPOS path, using the recent (fixed) measurements from Suresh to fix the beam width.  Note that the old 2010 measurements of the MC waist are consistent with this measurement.

Second plot, Main IFO path all the way to the ITM (average) position, using the 2010 MC waist measurements to fix the beam width.

Third plot, Main IFO path all the way to the ITM position, but with PRM flipped (negative RoC), using the 2010 MC measurement to fix beam width.

With the PRM correctly oriented (2nd plot), I get beam waists of (x = 2.529 mm, y = 2.646 mm), which corresponds to a mode matching to the arm cavity of (eta = 97.43%, PRM correct).

With the PRM flipped (3rd plot), I get beam waists of (x = 3.176 mm, y = 3.3 mm), which corresponds to a mode matching to the arm cavity of (eta = 99.55%, PRM flipped).

 

First plot:

BetterDistances_IPPOSLowRes.png

Second plot (this is how the MMT was designed to be, before the ETMs were moved, which made the ideal waist larger):

BetterDistances_MainIFO_PRMnormalLowRes.png

Third plot:

BetterDistances_MainIFO_PRMflippedLowRes.png

For both the 2nd and 3rd plot, we can't look at the post-MMT waist measurements, since that distance on the plots is after the PRM, which is a curved optic.  So the fact that the post-MMT measurements match the correct-PRM plot better than the flipped-PRM plot can't be taken to be meaningful.

Moral of the story:  I'm not sure how to interpret any of this to tell us if the PRM is flipped or not, since the measurements are all of the beam profile before the beam sees the PRM.  We'd have to measure the profile after the PRM somehow in order to get that information.  We have okay but not great mode matching to the arm if the PRM is correct, but I don't know that we readjusted the MMT after we moved the ETMs.  I don't remember recalculating any optimal telescope lengths after the arm length change.  If we need better mode matching, I can do that calculation, although given how much space we don't have, it would be hard in practice to move the MMT mirrors by much at all.

  6459   Tue Mar 27 23:37:35 2012 SureshUpdateIOOBeam Profile measurement: IPPOS beam

Quote:

Quote:

The moral of the story that I'm getting from this plot:  something funny is going on.

 Yup, something funny was going on.  Nic's MM code that I used, "a la mode", calls for the focal length of the optics, whereas the code that I wrote and used for ages called for the radius of curvature.  f = R/2.  Fixing that factor of 2 I get something more like:

.....

So, what does it all mean?  That I'm not sure of yet.

 In an attempt to estimate the errors on the fit parameters I upgraded my Mathematica code to use the function 'NonlinearModelFit', which allows us to define weights and also reports the errors on the fit parameters.   The plots have been upgraded to show the error bars and residuals.

Beam-Profile_IPPOS_wError.png

 

The parameters determined are given below and compared to the earlier measurements of 06/18/2010

Vertical Profile:

Parameter Estimate Standard Error 95% Confidence interval 06/18/2010 measurement
Waist (mm) 2.768 0.005 2.757 -- 2.779 2.81
Waist location from MMT2 (m) 5.85 0.12 5.625-- 6.093 5.36

 

 

Horizontal Profile:

Parameter Estimate Standard Error 95% Confidence Interval 06/18.2010 measurement
Waist (mm) 2.476 0.009 2.455 -- 2.496 2.91
Waist Location from MMT2 (m) 4.935 0.145 4.645 -- 5.225 1.96

 

There is a significant change in the beam waist location (as compared to previous report) because I corrected a mistake in the sign convention that I was using in measuring the distances to the waist from the zero-reference.
 

  6458   Tue Mar 27 21:37:51 2012 keikoConfigurationIOOBeam Profile measurement: IPPOS beam

 From the mode measurement I and Suresh have done yesterday, I calculated what beam size we expect at ETM ((1) upper Fig.1)  and at ETM after one bounce ((2) lower Fig.1).

expsche.png

Fig.1 (Yarm)

In case of (1), we expect approximately w=6300 um (radius), and w=4800 um for one-bounce spot (2) from the measured mode, see Fig.2.

drawing.png

Fig.2

This roughly agree with what we observed on CCD camera. See, pic1 for (1) and pic2 for (2). The spot at the ETMY (1) is larger than the one-bounced spot (2). From the monitor it is difficult to assume the radius ratio. The observed spot of (2) is a bit smaller than the prediction. It could happnen when (A) the ETMY (as a lens) is slightly back of the ideal position (= the distance between the ITM and ETM is longer than 40m) (B) the real waist is farer than ITM position toward MC (I assumed roughly 5 m from Jenne's plot, but could be longer than that).

P3270007-s.jpg  P3270008-s.jpg

pic1 (left): beam spot hitting on the suspension frame. pic 2 (right): the one-bounced beam spot hitting on the suspension frame.

 

Attachment 1: expsche.png
expsche.png
Attachment 3: mmtdrawing.png
mmtdrawing.png
Attachment 4: drawing.png
drawing.png
Attachment 5: drawing.png
drawing.png
Attachment 8: drawing.png
drawing.png
  6457   Tue Mar 27 21:20:32 2012 JenneUpdateIOOBeam Profile measurement: IPPOS beam

Quote:

The moral of the story that I'm getting from this plot:  something funny is going on.

 Yup, something funny was going on.  Nic's MM code that I used, "a la mode", calls for the focal length of the optics, whereas the code that I wrote and used for ages called for the radius of curvature.  f = R/2.  Fixing that factor of 2 I get something more like:

BeamProp_usingMeas2012MMTnumbersLowRes.png

This is obviously much better, in that the beam profile goes through (within some error) both of the measured sets of points - the MC waist measured in May 2010, and after the MMT measured yesterday.

So, what does it all mean?  That I'm not sure of yet.

  6456   Tue Mar 27 18:03:46 2012 JenneUpdateIOOBeam Profile measurement: IPPOS beam

This is wrong!  See following elog for corrected plot (and explanation)

I'm not done meditating on what's going on, but here's what I've got right now:

BeamProp_usingMeas2012MMTnumbersLowRes.png

This is a beam profile, using the distances from the combined Kiwamu / Jenne sketch earlier today. 

0 meters along the horizontal axis is meters from the Mode Cleaner waist. (Yes, I was bad and forgot to label it.  Get over it.)

The pink and green dots to the left of the plot are the MC fitted waist measurements that we made in May 2010.

The pink and green dots in the ~center of the plot are the fitted waist measurements that Suresh and Keiko took yesterday, of the IPPOS path, so after the MMT.

The black dot is where we would like our non-astigmatic beam to be.  This is the calculated waist size of the cavity mode, using the new ~37.76m distance, after we moved the ETMs to their current positions.  The black dot indicates 3.036 mm at the ITM (averaged between the BS-ITMX and BS-ITMY distances).

The moral of the story that I'm getting from this plot:  something funny is going on.

The distances Kiwamu quoted on the sketch are very close to the ones that I used for designing and checking the MMT in the first place, which were based off of measurements using rulers etc to measure distances.  Steve said he looked at photos today, and agreed that Kiwamu's numbers looked reasonable also.

Something that we haven't done lately is measure the position of each optic from every other optic, along the beam path.  I propose we come up with a clever way to put a target on top of / next to mirrors, and then a way to hold the laser distance measure-er at an optic, so that we can go thorough systematically and measure the actual path that our beam is seeing.  Maybe this is too much work, and not worth it, but it would make me happier.  In my head, these 'fixtures' are just small pieces of cleaned aluminum, one that can sit on a mirror mount, and one which we can use to align the laser ruler to approximately the front of an optic.  Nothing fancy.

  6455   Tue Mar 27 17:52:08 2012 KojiUpdateIOOAnother possibility / thought

It is quite likely that we touched the Faraday in Nov 2010.

In this entry http://nodus.ligo.caltech.edu:8080/40m/3874 I wrote that I removed the MCT optics in the chamber.
This is the pickoff between the IMC and the Faraday. This causes the beam shift. Therefore, the Faraday had
to be moved.

There were intensive in-chamber activities from Nov to Dec 2010. I am sure that almost everytime we went into
the chamber, we checked the spot position on the MMT mirrors as well as the TT and PZT mirrors.

Does the miscentering of the spots on the MMT mirrors cause the mode matching significantly changed?

  6454   Tue Mar 27 17:38:03 2012 JenneUpdateIOOAnother possibility / thought

I'm meditating over the mode matching from the mode cleaner to the ITMs, and I had another thought:

Have we changed the pointing of the MC significantly enough that we are no longer on the center of the MMT mirrors?  To be this significant, we would probably also have had to scoot the Faraday a bit too, since it's skinny like a straw.  It looks like our measurements of the input beam have been the following:

MC waist, 21 May 2010

After MMT2, 18 June 2010 (a few days before this, we flipped the MMT2 mount to 'perfect' the mode matching up to 99.3%, so I don't think the MMT has moved since then.)

After MMT2, 26 March 2012

There's a big o' ~2 year gap between our measurements, and we've been in and out of the vacuum a few times since then.  I'll flip through the elog, but does anyone have any memory of us moving the Faraday after June 2010?  When was the last time we made sure that we were at least close to the center of the MMT mirrors? 

  6453   Tue Mar 27 17:19:02 2012 KojiUpdateIOOBeam Profile measurement: IPPOS beam

The mode looks quite terrible in the plot, but in reality it is an illusion of the plot.

The actual TEM00 content in this beam is ~99.7%


mode_coupling.pdf

Based on the above document, you can calculate power coupling between two elliptic gaussian modes.

Give the parameters of one beam as

zRy1 = pi*(2.77e-3)^2 / 1064e-9
z1y = 3.37
zRx1 = pi*(2.47e-3)^2 / 1064e-9
z1x = 4.15

Then, assume a round beam for the other.

zRx2 = zRy2 = zR
z2x = z2y = z0

Then run the optimizer to find the maximum for the quantity |C|^2

|C|^2 max: 0.9967
zR = 20.19
z0 = 3.804

  6452   Tue Mar 27 16:06:59 2012 keikoUpdateIOOBeam Profile measurement: IPPOS beam

I changed the ETMY CCD camera angle so that we can see the suspension frame in order to repeat the same thing as yesterday. The ETMY camera is not looking at the beam or mirror right now.

  6451   Tue Mar 27 11:54:18 2012 JenneUpdateIOOBeam Profile measurement: IPPOS beam

I'd like to know what we expect for these numbers.  I've added to Kiwamu's drawing some more distances, so I can calculate the expected beam size at the IPPOS port.

IPPOS_distances.pdf

 

Quote:

Quote:
 

  Vertical

Vertical 

06/18/2010

Horizontal

Horizontal

06/18/2010

waist (radius) (mm) 2.77 2.81 2.47 2.91
Rayleigh length (m) (computed) 22.62   18.14  
Waist location w.r.t. to MM2 * 3.37 5.36 4.15 1.96

 

  6450   Tue Mar 27 02:46:28 2012 kiwamuUpdateIOOREFL beam available

The dump and some temporary mirrors were removed and now the REFL beam is available again.

I locked PRMI with REFL signals, it locked as usual.

Quote from #6440

Currently the REFL beam is bypassed by additional mirrors and blocked by a razor blade dump.

  6449   Tue Mar 27 02:18:31 2012 keikoUpdateIOOBeam Profile measurement: IPPOS beam

Keiko, Rana, Suresh

Related to the beam profile of IPPOS today, we tried to measure the beam size at the ETMY point in order to estimate the input beam mode. We measured the beam size hitting at the suspension frame by a camera image, with two situations to see two "z" for beam profile.

(1) Input beam is slightly misaligned and the injected beam hits the end mirror frame. Assuming z=0 at the input mirror, this should be z=40m.

(2) Input beam hits the centre of the end mirror, and ITMY is slightly misaligned and the beam hits the end mirror frame after the one-round trip. Assuming z=0 at the ITM, this position should be z=120m.

text9149.png

The injected beam at the end point and the one round trip ligt at the end point should be the same size, if the input mode matches to the cavity mode. You can see if your injected light is good for the cavity or not. We compared and assumed the above two beam sizes by looking at the photo of the beam spot.

(1) first_cap.png (2) second_cap.png

 Assuming the zoom factor difference by the part below the beam (shown with allow in the photos. Arbitrary unit.), the beam in (2) is smaller than expected (roughly 40%?).

However this is a very rough estimation of the beam sizes! It is difficult to assume the beam size shown on the photos! It looks smaller only because the power of (2) is smaller than of (1). I don't think we can say anything from this rough estimation. One may be able to estimate better with CCD camera instead of this normal camera. 

 

Attachment 1: text9149.png
text9149.png
  6448   Tue Mar 27 02:05:40 2012 SureshUpdateIOOBeam Profile measurement: IPPOS beam

Quote:

[Keiko, Suresh]

  Vertical Horizontal
Waist (mm) 2.77 2.48
Rayleigh length (m) 23.5m 15.87
Waist location (m) 0.81 m 1.85

BeamProfile_IPPOS.png

 

 

If we assume the nominal wavelength of the IR light to be 1064nm and constrain the Rayleigh length to be zr = (pi w0^2)/lambda we obtain the following fit parameters: (these are compared with the beam profile measurements of June/18/2010 available in the wiki )

  Vertical

Vertical 

06/18/2010

Horizontal

Horizontal

06/18/2010

waist (radius) (mm) 2.77 2.81 2.47 2.91
Rayleigh length (m) (computed) 22.62   18.14  
Waist location w.r.t. to MM2 * 3.37 5.36 4.15 1.96

* I updated the waist waist location coz because I missed-out the distance in air from the vacuum port to the optic on the IPPOS table.

 

BeamProfile_IPPOS.png

 

 

Attachment 1: BeamProfile_IPPOS.png
BeamProfile_IPPOS.png
  6447   Mon Mar 26 23:47:54 2012 SureshUpdateIOOBeam Profile measurement: IPPOS beam

[Keiko, Suresh]

   Keiko and I measured the IPPOS beam profile.  The fit parameters  are :

  Vertical Horizontal
Waist (mm) 2.77 2.48
Rayleigh length (m) 23.5m 15.87
Waist location (m) 0.81 m 1.85

BeamProfile_IPPOS.png

 

The data files are attached. 

Attachment 2: BeamProfile_IPPOS.pdf
BeamProfile_IPPOS.pdf
Attachment 3: BeamProfileData_IPPOS.xlsx
  6446   Mon Mar 26 18:04:43 2012 kiwamuUpdateIOOmode scan at the REFL port

For those who are interested in the actual data, I attache the actual data in zip file together with a python plot code.

The distance was set such that the 1st steering mirror (the one at the very left in the previous cartoon diagram #6445 ) in the REFL path is positioned at zero.


mode_profile.png

 

- - - Fitting results (chi-square fitting done by gnuplot):

All values are in unit of meter

# PRM (v) (Last tree points are excluded as the beam were clipped at the aperture of the beam scan)

w0          = 0.0015114        +/- 2.192e-05    (1.451%)
z0           = -4.46073         +/- 0.05605      (1.256%)

# PRM (h)

w0           = 0.00212796       +/- 1.287e-05    (0.6049%)
z0           = -2.53079         +/- 0.1688       (6.668%)

# ITM (v) (Last two points are excluded as the beam were clipped at the aperture of the beam scan)

w0           = 0.00190696       +/- 4.964e-05    (2.603%)
z0           = -8.09908         +/- 0.1525       (1.882%)

# ITM (h)

w0           = 0.0032539        +/- 4.602e-05    (1.414%)
z0           = -1.89484         +/- 1.524        (80.42%)

 

Attachment 2: REFLmodescan.zip
  6445   Mon Mar 26 16:25:44 2012 kiwamuUpdateIOOexpected v.s. measured beam profile of PRM reflection

[Suresh / Kiwamu]

 We did the 2nd round of the PRM reflection mode scan on Friday.

It seems that the PRM curvature maybe correct if we look at the vertical mode, however but the horizontal mode doesn't seem to agree with any of the expected lines.

In order to increase the reliability of the measurement, we need to confirm the beam profile of the incident beam by looking at the IP-POS beam.

Right now Suresh and Keiko are mode-scanning the IP-POS beam.

 

 


The plot below shows both the expected beam profiles (see the detail in #6444) and the actual data. 

PRMreflection.png

This plot is the same as one shown in the previous entry (#6444) with newly added actual data.
The errorbar in each data point is the standard deviation obtained by 100 times of averaging.
In this plot I made the error bars 10 times bigger in order to let them visible in the plot, so the actual deviation is much lesser than they appear.
 

(Discussion)

 The vertical profile (shown in red) seems to be close to the curve for the correct PRM case.
However the horizontal profile has a bigger waist size of about  2 mm.
While measuring the waist size Suresh and I have noticed that the rotational angle of the scan head affects the measurement by 10% or so.
Of course in each data point we tried making the incident beam normal to the scan head by rotating the scan head.
But this 10% is not big enough to explain the discrepancy in the horizontal mode.
There are some possible scenario which can distort the beam shape in the horizontal direction:
  • Clipping at some optics. (Since the beam shape looked very Gaussian, the amount of the clipping could be very slight ?)
  • Astigmatism at some optics. (Possibly in the telescope ?)

(Some distances)

DSC_4001_small.jpg
 

(Some notes)

We did the following things prior to the measurement.

  • Put a boost filter in the PRM_OLYAW to suppress the beam jitter below 1 Hz.
  • Checked the MC WFS servo loop although it looked healthy.

Quote from #6444

I have estimated how the mode profile of the PRM reflection should be, as shown in the plot blow.

A conclusion here is :

   we should be able to constrain the PRM curvature situation if measurements are precise and accurate enough with a level of less than ~ 100 um 

 

  6444   Mon Mar 26 15:15:16 2012 kiwamuUpdateIOOexpected beam profile of PRM reflection

I have estimated how the mode profile of the PRM reflection should be, as shown in the plot blow.

A conclusion here is :

   we should be able to constrain the PRM curvature situation if measurements are precise and accurate enough with a level of less than ~ 100 um

 

In the calculation two cases are considered :

      (1) PRM has the correct curvature of  +122 m. This is shown as solid curves in the plot.

      (2) PRM has a wrong curvature of - 122 m (mirror is flipped) This is shown as dashed curves in the plot. 

expected_edit.png

The plot above shows beam radii of the PRM reflections for vertical and horizontal profiles in each case.
The x-axis is distance from PRM in meter and the y-axis is the beam radii in mm.
As for the initial beam parameter, I used the measured values (see the wiki), which are that of after the beam exits from the mode matching telescope and before it goes to PRM.
 
(1) If PRM has the correct curvature, the reflection after it passes MMT1 will have ~ 1.6 mm beam radii.
This is intuitively correct because the beam profiles should match to that of the MC exiting beam  (see the wiki), which has waist size of 1.5 - 1.6 mm if everything is perfect.
(2) When PRM is flipped, the beam starts converging at the beginning as PRM act as a convex mirror, resulting in smaller beam sizes after it comes out from the telescope.
Roughly speaking the waist sizes will be different by ~ 5 mm between those two cases, so our measurement should be more precise and accurate than this number.

Note:

 I have omitted the effect from the PRM thickness. Therefore PRM is dealt as just a curved reflector with RoC of +/- 122 m in the calculation.

 

  6443   Mon Mar 26 12:50:24 2012 ZachUpdateelogrestarted with script

On the plus side, it was the first time I've had to do it in a while..

  6442   Sun Mar 25 20:13:31 2012 ranaHowToSUSOptical Lever Servo Tuning thoughts

To start the optical lever filter design, I looked into the noise on ITMY. It should be similar to the other arm cavity optics since they have the same whitening electronics.

The RED/BLUE are with loops open. The MAGENTA/CYAN with loops closed. Looks good; the bandwidth is a few Hz and there is not much peaking,

To figure out the contribution from the dark noise I misaligned the ITMY until the sum on the QPD went to zero. Then I took the spectra of the OL{1,2,3,4}_OUT signals (they all looked the same).

To normalize them properly I took OL4, multiplied it by 2 to account for the incoherent sum of 4 channels and then divided by the nominal SUM (which was 14685 counts). I've left the OL3 un-normalized to show the ratio.

From this plot it seems that the dark noise is not a problem at any frequency (no need to amplify for the new ADCs).

I'm going to use the open loop spectra to design the optimal feedback control. The file is saved as /users/rana/dtt/ITMY_OL-120325.xml

Attachment 1: Untitled.png
Untitled.png
  6441   Fri Mar 23 05:10:46 2012 SureshUpdateIOOBeam Profile measurements: Errors too large to yield good fits.

[Kiwamu, Suresh]

   Today we attempted to measure the beam profile of the REFL beam under two conditions:

              (a) with PRM aligned and ITMs misaligned 

              (b) with PRM misaligned and ITMs aligned

 

The raw data is shown below.  In each of the above conditions we measured in both the vertical (v) and horizontal (h) directions.   The measurements in the vertical direction were better than the ones in the horizontal direction because the optics had a horizontal oscillation which gave larger errors in measurement.

rawdataplot.png

 

Looking at the general trend of these lines it is clear that modes are not matched since the beam reflected by the PRM has a different divergence than that reflected from ITMs.  The beam is also astigmatic as the vertical and horizontal directions have different divergences.

I could find beam parameters only for the Blue line above (Profile in the vertical direction while PRM was aligned).   The fit is quite sensitive to the data points close to the waist, so we need to make better (lower St.Dev.) measurements near the AP table closer to the beam waist.  The intensity with only one ITM aligned is too low and also contributes to the errors.   The beam size is close to 6mm in the horizontal direction, this coupled with yaw oscillations give large errors in this measurement.

Here is the only reliable fit that could be obtained, which is for the prompt reflection from the PRM in the vertical direction

PRM-to-REFL-profile.pdf

The fit function I used is  Beam Dia = Waist { Sqrt [ 1+  ((z + z0)/zr)^2). The fit parameters we get for this data are

z0 = 7.7 m 

Waist = 2.4 mm

zr = 6.9 m

 

Will make another attempt later today...

 

 

 

 

  6440   Fri Mar 23 01:59:59 2012 kiwamuUpdateIOOREFL beam currently unavilable

[Suresh / Kiwamu]

Currently the REFL beam is bypassed by additional mirrors and blocked by a razor blade dump.

Therefore the signals associated with the REFL ports (e.g. REFL11, REFLDC and etc.) are unavailable.

Just be aware of it.

  6439   Thu Mar 22 23:43:56 2012 KojiUpdateCDSc1scx and c1scy not properly running

Did you guys checked if the simplant switch is set to "REAL WORLD" mode?

Edit by KI:

Bingo ! The input signals were bypassed to the simplant. I switched the simplant settings to REAL WORLD and now both end suspensions are working fine.

  6438   Thu Mar 22 17:41:15 2012 sureshUpdateCDSc1scx and c1scy not properly running

Quote:

It seems that neither c1scx nor c1scy is working properly as their ADC counts are showing digital-zeros.

Quote from #6434

The power was turned back on at 4pm It took some time for Suresh to restart the computers. We have damping but things are not perfect yet. Auto BURTH did not work well.

 When Steve and I restarted the c1iscex and c1iscey computers after the power shutdown, the models within them did not start-up automatically.  I had to start them manually from a terminal in the control room. 

I also tried rebooting the FB a couple of times.  Did not make any difference.

Manually starting the c1x05, c1scy and c1x01, c1scx models (with the Burt Restore button ON) did not resolve the issue of zeros in the epics screens.  though it did re-establish timing. 

  6437   Thu Mar 22 17:35:59 2012 kiwamuUpdateLockingmode profiles of the POP and POX beams : not bright enough

I tried to measure the beam profiles at the POP and POX ports as Koji mentioned in his entry (#6421).

However it turned out that the beam powers were too small to be measured with our beam scan at those ports.

So I will move on to measurements at the REFL port as Rana suggested because the laser power is much larger than that of POP and POX.

(If the data of the POP and POX beam profiles turn out to be very necessary, we will do the razor blade technique with a more sensitive photo diode)

Quote from #6421

More precise analysis can be done with quantitative analysis of those two spots with Beamscan. This could happen tomorrow.

 

  6436   Thu Mar 22 16:45:06 2012 kiwamuUpdateCDSc1scx and c1scy not properly running

It seems that neither c1scx nor c1scy is working properly as their ADC counts are showing digital-zeros.

However the IOPs, c1gcx and c1gcy look running fine, and also the IOPs seem successfully recognizing the ADCs according to dmesg.

Also there is one more confusing fact : c1scx and c1scy are synchronizing to the timing signal somehow.

I restarted the c1scx front end model to see if this helps, but unfortunately it didn't work.

As this is not the top priority concern for now, I am leaving them as they are now with the watchgods off.

(I may try hardware rebooting them in this evening)

Quote from #6434

The power was turned back on at 4pm It took some time for Suresh to restart the computers. We have damping but things are not perfect yet. Auto BURTH did not work well.

 

  6435   Thu Mar 22 08:14:21 2012 steveUpdateGreen Lockingdichroic mirror quotes with large wedge

Quote:

Dichroic mirror quotes are in the wiki.

ATF is pricy.

We got a good price from Laseroptik, but the wedges are 5 arcminutes. The fused silica grade is 0F, meaning the  homogeneity is 5 ppm instead of 1ppm.  I requested an other large wedge quote on the substrates.We may have to get substrates from somebody else and ship it to Germany

MLT quote is outrageously high

REO is not interested in this low volume job.

 

 The Laseroptik quote is here.The 2 degrees wedge cost is $40 on each optics!  See wiki

  6434   Wed Mar 21 19:12:27 2012 steveUpdateComputersAC power back on both ends

Quote:

Quote:

ETMY sus damping was disabled. Green locking laser and associated electronics turned off. Computers and power supplies turned off at rack 1Y4

The electricians picking up ac power from 1Y4 manual disconnect box and installing conduit line to ISCT-ETMY east end optical table.

There will be no more daisy chaining this way. 

 The power is back on at ETMY . c1iscey has not been restarted.

Now I'm turning ac power off at ETMX for the same job to be done.

 The power was turned back on at 4pm It took some time for Suresh to restart the computers. We have damping but things are not perfect yet. Auto BURTH did not work well.

  6433   Wed Mar 21 11:32:47 2012 steveUpdateSAFETYAC power to ETMX turned off

Quote:

ETMY sus damping was disabled. Green locking laser and associated electronics turned off. Computers and power supplies turned off at rack 1Y4

The electricians picking up ac power from 1Y4 manual disconnect box and installing conduit line to ISCT-ETMY east end optical table.

There will be no more daisy chaining this way. 

 The power is back on at ETMY . c1iscey has not been restarted.

Now I'm turning ac power off at ETMX for the same job to be done.

  6432   Wed Mar 21 10:31:28 2012 steveUpdateSAFETYAC power to ETMY turned off

ETMY sus damping was disabled. Green locking laser and associated electronics turned off. Computers and power supplies turned off at rack 1Y4

The electricians picking up ac power from 1Y4 manual disconnect box and installing conduit line to ISCT-ETMY east end optical table.

There will be no more daisy chaining this way. 

  6431   Tue Mar 20 17:50:44 2012 SureshUpdateComputersBeam Scan machine fixed

There was something wrong with the Beam Scan PC.  The  mouse and screen were not responding and the PC was asking for drivers for any new hardware that we plugged in.  We called in the services of Junaid and co. since we do not have a Win98 Second Edition installation disk in the lab.   Junaid came with the disk, we changed the screen and the mouse and installed everything. 

We tried to get the network going on the PC so that we could update stuff easily over the net.  This didnt succeed. For now, we still have to depend on a Win98se CD to get drivers if any new hardware is connected to this machine. 

For future reference, some notes:

1)  We will get a copy of Win98SE for the lab from Junaid

2) We have to use a USB mouse from Dell. We have several spares of this. The drivers for these are present in the machine. 

 

 

The Beam Scan is working okay now.  We will proceed with the beam profile measurements.  

  6430   Tue Mar 20 16:53:48 2012 steveUpdatePEMcranes maintenance & certified inspection of 2012

Fred Goodbar of Konecrane has completed the annual certified crane inspection and maintenance of our cranes as required in safety document.

They are in good working condition and safe to use.

  6429   Tue Mar 20 09:59:01 2012 steveUpdateIOOLaser tripped off

Today is janitor day. It still does not explain why the 2W Innolight tripped off about an hour ago. All back to normal.

.......................................................I asked Keven later, he admitted hitting the emergency shut off next to the chemical storage cabinet.

  6428   Mon Mar 19 21:25:31 2012 SureshUpdateElectronicsREFL165 calibration : measurements

Quote:

 To characterize the RF V to counts we need to know the state of the whitening filter board. Was the filter on or off ? What was the value of the whitening gain slider?

 The filter was ON and the whiterning filter gain was 45dB

 

  6427   Sun Mar 18 00:29:24 2012 DenUpdatePEMsts-2

I've turned off the power of the STS-2 readout box as it provides outputs with ~10 Volts DC offset! AA filter box works in the range -2 +2 Volts, so we do not have any useful information anyway. I'll adjust the mass positions in the seismometer.

  6426   Fri Mar 16 16:03:03 2012 kiwamuUpdateIOOMC alignment servo : put some offsets in the TRANS QPD signal

The MC alignment servo wasn't great in the last 1 hour or so as it kept disturbing the MC lock. It was found to be due to some offsets in the MC trans QPD signals.

I put some values to cancel the offsets and then the lock became stable.

This is a first aid. So we need to take a closer look at the QPD signals and also probably the spot position on the QPD.

 


The symptom was that every time the alignment servo was engaged, at the beginning the amount of the transmitted light went to 27000 counts, which is good.

However, then the amount of the transmitted light slowly decreased in a time scale of ~ 20 sec or so, ending up with destruction of the MC lock.

According to the time scale I suspected that the servos using the trans QPD signals were doing something bad because their control width had been designed to be slow and slower than the rest of the servo loops.

I switched off the servos, called C1:IOO-TRANS_PIT and C1:IOO-TRANS_YAW and found the MC stayed locked stably with 27000 counts of the transmitted light.

Leaving the trans QPD servos off, I zeroed the offsets and then switched them on. It worked.

 

The values below are the current offset that I put.

                C1:IOO-MC2_TRANS_PIT_OFFSET = -0.115203
                C1:IOO-MC2_TRANS_YAW_OFFSET = -0.0323576
 

  6425   Fri Mar 16 16:01:53 2012 ranaUpdateElectronicsREFL165 calibration : measurements

 To characterize the RF V to counts we need to know the state of the whitening filter board. Was the filter on or off ? What was the value of the whitening gain slider?

  6424   Fri Mar 16 10:37:52 2012 JenneUpdateElectronicsJenne Laser

Quote:

Here is a picture of the small black breadboard on which I have put together the PD characterisation setup.  It would be great if we can retain this portable set up as it is, since we keep reusing it every couple of weeks.  It would be convenient if we can fiber couple the path to the PD under test with a 2m long fiber.  Then we will not have to remove the PD from the optical table while testing it. 

 This is totally sweet Suresh!  I don't remember how much more fiber is coiled up under the plate that has the "Jenne Laser" label, but there's a reasonable amount.  It's not 2m, but maybe we can just extend the blue snakey thing some?

  6423   Fri Mar 16 06:17:56 2012 SureshUpdateElectronicsREFL165 calibration : measurements

 

These are the measurements for estimating the amplitude of the signal recorded in the CDS when a known amount of modulated light is incident on the photodiode. 

I mounted the PD characterisation setup onto a small breadboard which could then be placed close AP table.  I then placed position markers for REFL165 on the AP table before moving it onto my small breadboard.  The AM laser was driven by an RF function generator (Fluke 6061A) at a frequency of 165.98866 MHz, which is 102 Hz offset from the 165MHz LO.  The power level was set at -45dBm.  This power level was chosen since anything higher would have saturated the AntiAliasing  Whitening Filters.  The counts in the CDS were converted to voltage using the ADC resolution = 20V per 2^16 counts.

  

  RF source RF power to AM laser 1611 PD 1611 PD REFL165 REFL165 CDS CDS
  power set (dBm) Actual power out (dBm) DC (V) RF out (dBm) DC (mV) RF out (dBm) Amplitude (V)   102 Hz Amplitude (V) 102 Hz
                 
1  -45  -50.6  -2.5 -58.9  10  -37.4  0.171 0.172
2  -48  -53.5  -2.5 -62.1  10  -40.3  0.122  0.121
3  -51  -56.5  -2.5 -65.0  10  -43.1  0.085  0.085

    

 When the 166MHz power is decreased by a factor of 2 the amplitude of 102Hz wave recorded in CDS goes down by sqrt(2) as expected.   The RF AM power incident on the REFL165 was estimated to be 0.011mW(rms)  (case #1 in the above table)  using the DC power ratio and using the transimpedance of the 1611 BBPD to be 700 Ohms.  This produces a 171 mV amplitude wave at 102 Hz.  I then stepped down the power by factor of 2 and repeated the measurement. 

(These numbers however are not agreeing with the power incident on REFL165 if we assume its transimpedance to be 12500.  It will take a bit more effort to make all the numbers agree.  Will try again tomorrow)

Here is a picture of the small black breadboard on which I have put together the PD characterisation setup.  It would be great if we can retain this portable set up as it is, since we keep reusing it every couple of weeks.  It would be convenient if we can fiber couple the path to the PD under test with a 2m long fiber.  Then we will not have to remove the PD from the optical table while testing it.

IMG_0552.JPG

 

  6422   Thu Mar 15 08:48:40 2012 RyanSummaryCDSSummary of Syracuse Visit to 40m Mar 5-9 2012

JIMS Channels in PEM Model

The PEM model has been modified now to include the JIMS(Joint Information Management System) channel processing. Additionally Jim added test points at the outputs of the BLRMS.

For each seismometer channel, five bands are compared to threshold values to produce boolean results.  Bands with RMS below threshold produce bits with value 1, above threshold results in 0.  These bits are combined to produce one output channel that contains all of the results.

A persistent version of the channel is generated by a new library block that called persist which holds the value at 0 for a number of time steps equal to an EPICS variable setting from the time the boolean first drops to zero. The persist allows excursions shorter than the timestep of a downsampled timeseries to be seen reliably.

The EPICS variables for the thresholds are of the form (in order of increasing frequency):
C1:PEM-JIMS_GUR1X_THRES1
C1:PEM-JIMS_GUR1X_THRES2
etc.
 
The EPICS variables for the persist step size are of the form:
C1:PEM-JIMS_GUR1X_PERSIST
C1:PEM-JIMS_GUR1Y_PERSIST
etc.

The JIMS Channels are being recorded and written to frames:

The two JIMS channels at 2048:
[C1:PEM-JIMS_CH1_DQ] Persistent version of JIMS channel. When bit drops to zero indicating something bad (BLRMS threshold exceeded) happens the bit stays at zero  for >= the value of the persist EPICS variable.
[C1:PEM-JIMS_CH2_DQ] Non-persistent version of JIMS channel.

And all of the BLRMS channels at 256:
Names are of the form:
[C1:PEM-RMS_ACC1_F0p1_0p3_DQ]
[C1:PEM-RMS_ACC1_F0p3_1_DQ]

For additional details about the JIMS Channels and the implementation, please see the previous elog entries by Jim.

 

Conlog

I have a working aLIGO Conlog/EPICS Log installed and running on megatron.

Please see this wiki page for the details of use:
https://wiki-40m.ligo.caltech.edu/aLIGO%20EPICs%20log%20%28conlog%29

I also edited this page with restart instructions for megatron:
https://wiki-40m.ligo.caltech.edu/Computer_Restart_Procedures#megatron

Please see Ryan's previous elog entries for installation details.

Future Work

  • Determine useful thresholds for each band
  • Generate MEDM Screens for JIMS Channels
  • Add a decimation option to channels
  • Add EPICS Strings in PEM model to describe bits in JIMS Channels
  • Add additional JIMS Channels: Testing additional characterization methods
  • Implement a State Log on Megatron: Will Provide a 1Hz index into JIMS Channels
  • Generate a single web page that allows access to aLIGO Conlog/EPICS Log and State Log

 

  6421   Thu Mar 15 04:04:23 2012 KojiConfigurationLockingPRC Matching issues

Kiwamu and Koji

We found that the intra-cavity mode of the PRC is not round although it was obvious even with the DARK and REFL port images.
We need to review the mode matching situation.

In order to look at the PRC intra-cavity mode, we reconfigured the POP CCD.

If we look at the beam reflected from the Michelson, the beam is round. However, the PRC intra-cavity mode can never be round
in any resonant conditions. (Pict 1, 2, and 3, for the sideband resonant, carrier resonant conditions and another carrier resonant
one, respactively). Particularly the mode of the carrier resonant case is very unstable and always changing.

P3150902.jpg

P3150906.jpgP3150907.jpg

By misaligning the PRM, we can compare between the spot directly reflected from the Michelson and the one after additional round trip in the PRC (Pic 4).

They looks round, but it was obvious the secondary reflection is dimmer and larger (Pic 5). The intensity difference corresponds to the factor RPRM RMI
(i.e. product of the reflectivities for the PRM and MI). It can be understand if the dimmer spot looks smaller due to the artifact of the CCD. But it is opposite.

This may mean the mode matching is not correct. We are not sure what is not right. This could be just an incorrect incident beam, the curvature error of the PRM,
beam is distortec by the TT mirrors, or some other unknown reasons.

More precise analysis can be done with quantitative analysis of those two spots with Beamscan. This could happen tomorrow.

P3150910.jpgP3150900.jpg

  6420   Wed Mar 14 23:02:09 2012 KojiUpdateLSCLocking activity

Kiwamu and Koji

The target is to realize DRMI or PRMI + one arm with ALS.

The focus of the night is to achive stable lock of the PRMI (SB resonant) with 3f signals.
Particularly, REFL165 is back now, we are aiming to see if any of the 165 signals is useful.

We made a comparison between  REFL33Q/REFL165Q/AS55Q to find any good source of MICH.
However, none of them showed a reasonable shape of the spectra. They don't have reasonable coherence between them.

Nonetheless, we have tried to lock the IFO with those REFL signals. But any of them were useful to keep the PRMI (SB resonant).
The only kind of stable signal for MICH was AS55Q as we could keep the PRMI locked.

  6419   Wed Mar 14 21:01:36 2012 keikoUpdateLSCevolution of the sensing matrix in PRMI as a function of time

This is the simulated signals to compare with the original post #6403

 

 

PRMI configuration, PRCL signal

[W/m] Simulation Measured
REFL11 575440

 

~10000

REFL33 4571 ~50
REFL55 288400 ~5000
REFL165 891 NA
AS55 71 70

 

PRMI configuration, MICH signal

[W/m] Simulation Measured
REFL11 2290

 

~600

REFL33 36 ~4
REFL55 5623 ~200
REFL165 17 NA
AS55 6456 ~200
 

Simulated DC REFL power is 9mW (before the attenuator). AS DC is 0.3mW.

They don't agree. I suspect the PR gain for the SBs are somehow different. It is about 40 (or a bit less) in the simulation for 11MHz.

 

 

 

 

ELOG V3.1.3-