40m QIL Cryo_Lab CTN SUS_Lab TCS_Lab OMC_Lab CRIME_Lab FEA ENG_Labs OptContFac Mariner WBEEShop
 40m Log, Page 31 of 339 Not logged in
ID Date Author Type Category Subject
8440   Thu Apr 11 03:23:12 2013 DenUpdateGeneralMCL threshold

MC down script is too slow to block MC_L when the cavity goes out of lock. As a result the loop strongly kicks MC2. We decided to make a threshold inside MCS model on MC TRANS that will block MC_L during lock loss. This is a lower threshold. Upper threshold can be slow and is implemented inside MC up script.

Fast threshold can be set inside MC2 POS. I did not correct MC2 top level medm screen as it is the same for all core optics.

Note: Fast trigger will also block ALS signal if MC loose lock.

8442   Thu Apr 11 03:38:40 2013 DenUpdateLockingangular motion

Spectra of BS, PRM, ITMX, ITMY are attached with oplevs ON and OFF (in units of urad). Loops reduce RMS from ~2urad to ~0.3urad but phase margin should be increased. REF traces show loop OFF. <-- really?

Note how PRM pitch and yaw spectra are different in the frequency range 0.5 - 7 Hz; yaw is factor of 50 larger then pitch at 2 Hz.

Attachment 1: oplevs.pdf
8446   Fri Apr 12 02:56:34 2013 DenUpdateLockingprcl angular motion

I compared PCRL and XARM angular motions by misaligning the cavities and measuring power RIN. Divergence angles for both cavities I calculated to be 100 urad.

XARM pointing noise sums from input steering TTs, PR2 and PR3 TTs, BS, ITMX, ETMY.

PRCL noise - from input TT, PRM, PR2 and PR3 TT, BS, ITMX, ITMY.

I would expect these noises to be the same as angular motion of different optics measured by oplves is simular. We do not have oplves on TT but they are present in both passes.

I measured RIN and converted to angle. Sharp 1 Hz resonance at XARM pointing spectrum is due to EMTX, it is not seen by PRCL. Other then that XARM is much quiter, especially at 3 - 30 Hz.

As PRM  is the main difference in two passes, I checked its spectrum. When PRCL was locked I excited PRM in pitch and yaw. I could see this excitation at RIN only when the peak was 100 times higher then background seismic noise measured by oplev.

Attachment 2: oplev_exc.pdf
8449   Fri Apr 12 13:21:34 2013 DenUpdateLockingprcl angular motion

 Quote: How is the cavity g-factor accounted for in this calculation?

I assume that pointing noise and dc misalignment couples 00 to 01 by a factor theta / theta_cavity

Inside the cavity 01 is suppressed by 2/pi*F*sin(arccos(sqrt(g_cav))).

For the XARM this number is 116 taking g-factor to be 0.32. So all pointing noise couples to power RIN.

Suppression factor inside PRC is 6.5 for g-factor 0.97. This means that 85% of jitter couples to RIN, I accounted for this factor while converting RIN to angle.

I did not consider translational motion of the beam. But still PRC RIN can not be explained by oples readings as we can see exciting optics in pitch and yaw. I suspect this RIN is due to PR3, as it can create stronger motion in yaw than in pitch due to incident angle and translational motion of the mirror. I do not have a number yet.

8451   Sat Apr 13 23:11:04 2013 DenUpdateLockingprcl angular motion

 Quote: For the PRM, it is also a mostly translation effect as calculated at the PRC waist position (ITM face).

I made another estimation assuming that PRCL RIN is caused by translation of the cavity axis:

• calibrated RIN to translation, beam waist = 4mm
• measured PRM yaw motion using oplev
• estimated PR3 TT yaw motion: measured BS yaw spectrum with oplev OFF, divided it by pendulum TF with f0=0.9 Hz, Q=100 (BS TF), multiplied it by pendulum TF with f0 = 1.5 Hz, Q = 2 (TT TF with eddy current damping), accounted for BS local damping that reduces Q down to 10.

PRM and TT angular motion to cavity axis translation I estimated as 0.11 mm/urad and 0.22 mm/urad assuming that TTs are flat. We can make a more detailed analysis to account for curvature.

I think beam motion is caused by PR3 and PR2 TT angular motion. I guess yaw motion is larger because horizontal g-factor is closer to unity then vertical.

Attachment 1: pointing.pdf
8455   Sun Apr 14 23:20:42 2013 DenUpdateLockingFixed

 Quote: TRY path fixed and ready for normalization. I used 2" BS at R=50 and R=98 to reflect the Y arm transmission at QPD-Y and TRY PD respectively. The residual beam transmitted by the BS is now steered by a Y1mirror to the camera. With Y arm locked, transmission currently measures 40mW against the expected 70mW. TRY shows 0.45 counts in dataviewer.

I think it is too much. Incident power to IFO is 1.3 W. Even if we assume no losses and pick-offs on the path to the arms, we should get ~100 uW out of the cavity. I measured X and Y arms transmission to be 60 uW. Did you disable triggering during your measurement?

8456   Mon Apr 15 16:10:52 2013 DenUpdatePEMseismometer isolation kit

We got granite bases today from the manufacturer. We plan to set them up on Wednesday, 8 am. Please note, there will be an installation mess at Xend, Yend and corner during ~4 hours. Let us know if you have any objections to do this at this particular time.

Installation locations are specified in elog 8270, scheme attached is valid except for Xend. Instrument will be installed on the place of nitrogen containers.

(  next to the wall at corner sout-east of the south end )

8459   Thu Apr 18 02:24:58 2013 DenUpdateASCdither alignment of yarm

I modified our existing c1ass model to include alignment of input steering TT1 and TT2 for YARM and BS for XARM. Corresponding medm screens are also created.

## Dithering:

ETM_PIT: frequency = 6 Hz, amplitude = 100 cnts
ETM_YAW: 8 Hz, 400 cnts
ITM_PIT: 11 Hz, 800 cnts
ITM_YAW: 14 Hz, 1200 cnts


These values were chosen by looking at cavity transmission and length signals - excitation peaks should be high enough but do not shake the optics too much.

## Demodulation:

LO for each degree of freedom is mixed with cavity length and transmission signals that are first bandpassed at LO frequency. After mixing low-pass filter is applied. Phase rotation is chosen to minimize Q component

 ETM_PIT_LENGTH 0 ETM_YAW_LENGTH 20 ITM_PIT_LENGTH 0 ITM_YAW_LENGTH -25 ETM_PIT_TRANS -5 ETM_YAW_TRANS 10 ITM_PIT_TRANS 10 ITM_YAW_TRANS -30

## Sensing matrix:

8 * 8 matrix was measured by providing excitation at 0.03 Hz to optics and measuring the response in the demodulated signals. Excitation amplitude was different for each optics to create cavity transmission fluctuations of 25%

 -0.0373333 -0.010202 -0.018368 0.0042552 0 0 0 0 0.0432509 -0.209207 0.0139471 0.0780632 0 0 0 0 0.0483903 -0.0077304 0.00917147 0.000860323 0 0 0 0 -0.0751211 0.699778 -0.0115889 -0.09944 0 0 0 0 0.356164 0.121226 0.0690162 -0.0183074 -59.52 -21.9863 -30.9437 13.5582 -0.141744 1.15369 -0.0100607 -0.12914 -18.8434 -105.828 -48.213 14.8612 -0.0446516 0.00682156 -0.0204571 -0.00207764 21.3057 -1.66971 22.1538 3.93419 0.0278091 -0.205367 0.0114271 0.0648548 -4.66919 97.9043 -6.26847 -95.9963

Though coherence was > 0.95 during the measurement for each element (except for TT -> Length signals), after inverting and putting it to control servo, loops started to fight each other. So I decided to try a simple diagonal matrix:

TT1_PIT -> ETM_PIT_TRANS, TT1_YAW -> ETM_YAW_TRANS, TT2_PIT -> ITM_PIT_TRANS, TT2_YAW -> ITM_YAW_TRANS,

ITM_PIT -> ETM_PIT_LENGTH, ITM_YAW -> ETM_YAW_LENGTH, ETM_PIT -> ITM_PIT_LENGTH, ETM_YAW -> ITM_YAW_LENGTH

And this matrix worked much better.

## Control loops:

8 loops are running at the same time. UGF for input steering loops is 20 mHz, for cavity axis loops - 80 mHz. Slower loop is stronger at low frequencies so that cavity axis servo follows input steering alignment.

## Results:

When I started experiment the cavity was misaligned, transmission was ~0.4. Servo was able to align the cavity in ~30 seconds. This time depends on mirrors misalignment as well as input optics and cavity axis misalignment relative to each other.

When servo converged I disturbed ETMY, ITMY, TT1 and TT2. Servo was able to compensate for this.

Excitation lines seen by transmission and length of the cavity are suppressed as shown on the attached as pdf figures.

## Note:

Though the servo is able to align the cavity during my tests, this does not mean it will work perfectly any time. So please, if you lock, try to use the servo for alignment. If something goes wrong we'll fix it. This is better then to align IFO by hands every time.

Attachment 3: YARM_CTRL_DITHER.pdf
Attachment 4: TRY_DITHER.pdf
8460   Thu Apr 18 02:51:52 2013 DenUpdatePSLFSS slow servo

Today Rana pointed out that our FSS slow servo is malfunctioning. It has been for a while that our laser temperature control voltage drifted from 0 to 10.

I looked at FSSSlowServo script that runs at op340m and controls the servo. Script disables the servo when MC transmission is less then FSS_LOCKEDLEVEL. But his value was set to 0.2 probably till reference cavity time.

This means that slow servo was not disabled when MC was unlocked. I changed this value to 7000.

Also I increased integral gain from 0.0350 to 0.215 such that fast control is always in the range 4.5 - 5.5

8464   Fri Apr 19 04:20:41 2013 DenUpdateLockingPRMI on sidebands

Tonight PRMI was locked on REFL55 I&Q for PRCL and MICH with POP110I as a trigger and power normalizer.

I could see power fluctuations and beam motion on the POP camera very much the same as for carrier. The difference is that carrier stays for hours while sidebands for a few minutes.

POP110:

I&Q analog gains were set to 15 dB. Relative phase was set to 25 degrees by looking at I and Q components when the cavity goes through the resonance. Q should be 0.

## REFL55:

Phase rotation was measured by exciting PRM at 20 Hz and minimizing this line at REFL55_Q. I stopped at 33 degrees.

## RIN:

I compared power fluctuations of PRCL when it was locked on carrier (POP_DC) and on sidebands (POP110_I).

Time series of POP110_I during one of the locks

POP camera:

8465   Fri Apr 19 13:28:39 2013 DenUpdateASCdither alignment of yarm

I've put 4 scripts into ASS directory for YARM alignment. They should be called from !Scripts YARM button on c1ass main medm screen.

Scripts configure the servo to align the cavity and then save computed offsets. If everything goes right, no tuning of the servo is needed.

Call TRANS MON script to monitor YARM transmission, then "ON" script for aligning the cavity, then "SAVE OFFSETS" and "OFF" for turning the servo off.

## ON script:

• sets demodulation gains that I used during OL measuments
• sets LO oscillator frequency and amplitude for each optic
• sets demodulation phase rotation
• sets sensing matrix
• sets servo gains for each degree of freedom
• sets up limits for servo outputs
• gently increases the common gain from 0 to 1

## SAVE OFFSETS script:

• holds servo outputs
• sets servo common gain to 0 and clears outputs
• reads old optics DC offsets
• computes new DC offsets
• writes new offsets to C1:SUS-OPTIC_ANGLE_OFFSET channel
• holds off servo outputs

## OFF script:

• sets LO amplitudes to 0
• blocks servo outputs

## Notes:

SAVE OFFSET script writes DC offsets to C1:OPTIC_ANGLE_OFFSET channel, not to _COMM channel!

LIMITS are set to 500 for cavity axis degrees of freedom and to 0.5 for input steering. Usually servo outputs is ~30% if these numbers. But if something goes wrong, check this for saturation.

DC offsets of all 8 degrees of freedom are written one by one but the whole offset of put at the same time. This works fine so far, but we might change it to ezcastep in future.

8477   Tue Apr 23 16:17:45 2013 DenUpdatePEMseismometer isolation kit in place

 Quote: The carpenter shop finished the installation of the 3 granite bases.Rapid Set Cement All high strength non-shrink grout was used.  Compressive strength  3000 PSI at 1 hour and 9000 PSI at day 28 The janitor is still cleaning up after them at the south end. The  soft silicon gas kits are working well with the SS can.  Den is making  the adaptor plate drawing for the feedthrough.

To put everything in one place I add a final drawing of the base to this elog.

Next time we continue with wiring and putting temperature and pressure sensors inside the box. Connector support plate drawing is attached. We'll have sensors inside the kit with STS-2 or Trillium as their connector is small enough (19 pin vs 26 pin for Guralps) that we can put an additional 4 pin lemo connecor (2 pins for each sensor). I think EGG.0B.304.CLL is good for this application. Temperature and pressure sensor we can by from omega.

Attachment 1: Base.pdf.pdf
Attachment 2: ConnectorPlate.pdf
9300   Sun Oct 27 19:19:42 2013 DenUpdatePEMSeismometer status

 Quote: Is there anything else that I'm forgetting??  Please reply with thoughts.

I attach the drawings for Guralp and T-240/STS-2 connector plates. Drawings contain all information about the screws, O-rings and connectors.

Basically, box mounting receptacle for seismometer cable is attached to the connector plate with 6-32 screws. Inside cable should be ~ 1m long and connect the plate with seismometer.

For T-240 realization we have an additional LEMO connector for temperature and pressure monitoring inside the station. We should buy sensors and plug them into some machine with slow controls.

LEMO connector has 9 pins. 4 will be used for temperature and pressure sensors and spare 5 can be used for future ideas.

Also I think it might be better to put two T-240 into isolation stations.

9456   Thu Dec 12 00:47:45 2013 DenUpdateLSClocking activity

Jenne, Den

Today we worked on PRM angular servos and Y-arm ALS stabilization.

In the current PRMI angular control configuration two servos simultaneously drive PRM - oplev and POP ASC. We considered 2 ways to redesign this topology:

• once lock is acquired, turn on POP ASC servo that corrects oplev error signal
• turn off PRM oplev and turn on POP ASC  servo

The first option requires model rewiring so we started from the second one. We had to redesign POP ASC pitch and yaw servos for this because PRM TF has changed. Attached is servo OLTF.

This method worked out well and once PRMI is locked we turned off oplev servo with ramp of 0.5 sec and enable ASC POP servo with ramp of 1 sec.

Once PRMI was locked and ASC running we have turned off PRM angular local damping that presumably prevents us from bringing arms into resonance due to IR coupling to shadow sensors.

PRMI was stable using only ASC POP servo and we moved on to ALS. We found Y-arm beatnote and enabled control to ETMY.

Cavity was stabilized but not robust - we were loosing IR in a minute because green relocked to 01 mode with transmission equal to more than half of 00 mode. This is probably due to angle to length coupling of ETMY.

We were also loosing IMC during cavity stabilization. We made MCL servo and will tune it tomorrow looking at the arm spectrum as an OOL sensor.

Attachment 1: POP_ASC.pdf
9465   Fri Dec 13 13:28:07 2013 DenUpdateLSCarm calibration template

I have calibrated ETMX and ETMY actuators and added a template armSpectra.xml into /users/Templates directory.

Template shows control and error signals of both arms. Procedure is standard: calibrate control to meters and match error based on UGF measurement. XARM UGF: 200 Hz, YARM UGF 210 Hz.

Noise level at high frequencies (>100 Hz) for YARM is 3*10-15 and is factor of 3 better then for XARM. Servo gains are in the same ratio. I think there is less light on POX than on POY RF PD because I checked phase rotation and analog gain. I assume transimpedances are the same.

Attachment 1: armsCal.pdf
9468   Fri Dec 13 18:03:00 2013 DenUpdateIOOcommon mode servo

 Quote: Well, let's see how the CM servo can handle this. The key point here is that we have enough data to start the design of the CM servo.

It seems to me that current design of the common mode servo is already fine. Attached plots show common mode open and closed loop transfer function.

Frequency response of the servo is taken from the document D040180. I assumed coupled cavity pole to be ~100 Hz.

The only question is if our EOM has enough range. Boost 2 increases noise injection by 10 dB in the frequency range 20-50 kHz. Boost 3 has even higher factor.

Attachment 1: CM_OL.pdf
Attachment 2: CM_CL.pdf
9469   Fri Dec 13 19:33:56 2013 DenUpdateASCETM X,Y QPDs

I have modified/compiled/installed/restarted c1scx and c1scy models to include arm transmission QPDs in angular controls.

For initial test I have wired normalized QPD pitch and yaw outputs to ASC input of ETMs. This was done to keep the signals inside the model.

QPD signals are summed with ASS dither lines and control. So do not forget to turn off QPD output before turning on dither alignment.

Medm screens were made and put to medm/c1sc{x,y}/master directory. Access from sitemap is QPDs -> ETM{ X,Y} QPD

9471   Sat Dec 14 02:51:47 2013 DenUpdateLSClocking activity

I had a look on x,y arms stabilization using ALS. Input green beam was misaligned and I was loosing 00 every few minutes. I vent on the floor and realigned green beams.

YARM alignemt was smooth - transmission increased from 0.4 to 0.85 with PSL shutter off.

XARM was tough. Steering mirrors did not have any derivatives when transmission power was 0.5. I walked the beam with piezos but got only 0.55. It seems that the input beam is mismatched to the cavity. When the transmission was 1 last time? Does anyone have a model of the xend table to compute mode matching?

Input green alignent was improved and I could keep arms stabilized for periods of ~30min - 1 hour. Still not forever.

I noticed that ALS_XARM and ALS_YARM servos have limiters of 6000 and control signal had high frequency components that were not rolled off as shown on the plot "ETMY_DRIVE". I have added a low pass filter that reduced RMS by factor of 5 and took 7 degrees of phase at UGF=150 Hz. Now margin is 33 degrees.

Then I excited ETMY longitudinally at 100 Hz and measured first and second harmonics of the YARM RIN. I got total DC offset of 0.3 nm. This means significant length coupling to RIN. First of all, "scan arm" script does not tune the offset very precise. I guess it looks at DC power, checks when cavity passes through symmetrical points of the resonance and takes the average. It is also useful to look at POX/POY and confirm that average is 0. Plot "ALS_RIN" shows comparison of YARM power fluctuations when it is locked using IR and stabilized using ALS. By manually correcting the offset I could reduce length coupling into RIN, coherence was ~0.1.

Cavity RMS motion also couples length to RIN. Plot "ALS_IR" shows YARM error signal. I also looked at POY signal (LSC-YARM_IN1) as an OOL sensor. At low frequencies POY sees only IMC length fluctuations converted to frequency. I have engaged MCL path and ALS error and LSC error signals overlaped. Cavity RMS motion is measured to be 200 pm.

Attachment 1: ETMY_DRIVE.pdf
Attachment 2: ALS_RIN.pdf
Attachment 3: ALS_IR.pdf
9473   Sat Dec 14 13:46:54 2013 DenUpdateIOOlow bandwidth MCL loop

Last time we designed MCL loop with UGF ~ 30 Hz and I think, it was hard to lock the arm because of large frequency noise injected to IFO.

This time I made a low bandwidth MCL loop with UGF=8 Hz. MCL error RMS is suppressed by factor of 10 and arms lock fine.

Attached plots show MCL OL, MCL error suppression and frequency noise injection to arms.

It is interesting that spectrum of arms increases below 1 Hz meaning that IMC sensing noise dominates in this range.

I did not include the loop into the IMC autolocker. I think it is necessary to turn it on only during day time activity and when beatnote is moving too much during arm stabilization.

Attachment 1: MCL_OL.pdf
Attachment 2: MCL_ERR.pdf
Attachment 3: MCL_ARMS.pdf
Attachment 4: MCL_MEDM.png
9474   Sat Dec 14 14:21:46 2013 DenUpdateLSCcommon mode servo

 Quote: These seem like pretty terrible loop shapes. Can you give us a plot with the breakdown of several of the TFs and some .m file?

Attached is matlab code that I used

% IMC OL
G = zpk(-2*pi*8964, 2*pi*[-10; -10; -10; -1000; -274000], db2mag(242.5)) * ...
tf([1 0.8*1.55e+05 3.1806e+10], 1);

% CARM PATH
CARM = G/(1+G);

% Common mode boosts
BOOST = zpk(-2*pi*4000, -2*pi*40, 1);
BOOST1 = zpk(-2*pi*20000, -2*pi*1000, 1);
BOOST2 = zpk(-2*pi*20000, -2*pi*1000, 1);
BOOST3 = zpk(-2*pi*4500, -2*pi*300, 1);

% Coupled cavity pole
CCPole = zpk([], -2*pi*100, 2*pi*100);

% Servo gain
Gain = db2mag(43);

% CARM OL with boosts
H = CARM * CCPole * BOOST * Gain;
H1 = H * BOOST1;
H2 = H1 * BOOST2;
H3 = H2 * BOOST3;

% Plot
% bode(H, H1, H2, H3, 2*pi*logspace(3, 5, 10000));
% bode(1/(1+H), 1/(1+H1), 1/(1+H2), 1/(1+H3), 2*pi*logspace(3, 5, 10000));

9475   Sun Dec 15 03:13:15 2013 DenUpdateLSCattempt to reduce carm offset

X,Y arms were stabilized using ALS and moved 5 nm from the resonance, PRMI was locked on sideband using REFL165 I&Q. POP angular servo was running; PRMI RIN was good (~2-3%)

During slow offset reduction I was sweeping MICH, PRCL and POP servos for instabilities due to possible optical gain variations, loops were fine.

I could reduce offset down to ~200 pm and then lost lock due to 60 Hz oscillations as shown on the attached plot "arm_offset"

Arms were stabilized with RMS comparable to the offset and power in arms was fluctuating from 3 to 45.

60 Hz line most probably comes from MICH. RMS is dominated by the power lines and is ~ 1 nm as seen on the plot "PRMI_CAL". I think this is too much but we need to do simulations.

Attachment 1: ARM_OFFSET.pdf
Attachment 2: PRMI_CAL.pdf
9478   Mon Dec 16 02:20:49 2013 DenUpdateLSCMICH rms is improved

When PRMI is locked on REFL 165 I&Q signals MICH rms is dominated by the 60 Hz line and harmonics. It comes from demodulation board.

To increase SNR ZFL-100 LN amplifier (+23.5dB) was installed in LSC analog rack. MICH 60 Hz and harmonics are improved as shown on the plot "mich_err"

I have also added a few resg at low frequencies. MICH rms is not 3*10-10. In Optickle I simulated power dependence in PRC and ARMs on MICH motion. Plot is attached.

I think we need to stabilize MICH even more, down to ~3*10-11 . We can think about increasing RF amplifier gain, modulation index and power on BB PD.

CARM offset reduction was a little better today due to improved MICH RMS. Power in arms increases up to 15 and than starts to oscillate up to 70 and then PRMI looses lock.

Tomorrow we need to discuss where to put RF amplifier. Current design has several drawbacks:

• DC power for the amplifier is wired from a custom (not rack based) +15V power supply that was already inside the lsc rack and used for other ZFL-100LN
• BNC cables are used because I could not find any long SMA cables
• we would like gain of ~40 dB instead of 23.5 dB
Attachment 1: MICH_ERR.pdf
Attachment 2: DC_power.pdf
Attachment 3: ARM_OFFSET.pdf
9480   Tue Dec 17 02:10:29 2013 DenUpdateLSClocking activity

Koji, Den

Some results and conclusions from tonight:

PRC macroscopic length is detuned. We measured REFL phases in carrier and sideband configurations - they are different by ~45 degrees for both 11 and 55 MHz sidebands. Additional measurement with phase locked lasers is required.

We got stable lock of PRMI+2arms with CARM offset of ~200 pm. We think this is the point when we should transition to 1/sqrt(TR) signals. We plan to rewire LSC model and also test CM servo with 1 arm during the day.

POP ASC OL shape changes when we reduce CARM offset probably due to normalization by sum inside the PD. Servo gets almost useless when PRMI power fluctuates by a factor of few.

SMA cables were made and installed for the REFL165 RF amplifier in lsc rack.

9485   Wed Dec 18 03:29:48 2013 DenUpdateLSCyarm locked on mc

As a CM slow path test I locked free swinging yarm by actuating on MC length with bandwidth of 200 Hz. Crossover with AO is not stable so far.

I used xarm as an ool frequency noise sensor. MC2 violin mode is at 645 Hz, I have added a notch filter to LSC-MC2 bank.

Attachment 1: MC_ARM.pdf
9492   Thu Dec 19 03:29:34 2013 DenUpdateLSCCM servo test using yarm is complete

Koji, Den

Procedure:

• lock yarm on IR, wire POY to CM input
• transition arm to CM length path by actuating on IMC
• increase AO gain for a stable crossover
• engage CM boosts

Result:

• arm can be kept on resonance and even acquired on MC2
• stable length / AO crossover is achieved
• high bandwidth loop can not be engaged because POY signal is too noisy and EOM is running out of range

We spent some time tuning CM slow servo such that fast path would be stable in the AO gain range -32db -> 29dB (UGF=20kHz) when all boosts are turned off and common gain is 25dB. Current filters that we use for locking are not good enough - AO can not be engaged due to oscillations around 1kHz. This is clearly seen from slow path closed loop transfer function. I will attach servo shapes tomorrow.

Attached plot "EOM" shows EOM rms voltage while changing AO gain from -10dB to 4dB. For UGF of 20kHz we need AO gain of 29dB.

It seems we can start using CM servo for CARM offset but the sensor should be at least factor of 30 better than POY. Add another factor of 10 if we would like to use BOOST 2 and BOOST 3.

Attachment 1: EOM.png
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
9606   Wed Feb 5 20:41:57 2014 DenUpdateLSCcalibrated spetra from OAF test

We did online adaptive filtering test with IMC and arms 1 year ago (log 7771). In the 40m presentations I can still see the plot with uncalibrated control spectra that was attached to that log. Now it the time to attach the calibrated one.

Template is in the /users/den/oaf

Attachment 1: oaf_cal.pdf
7659   Thu Nov 1 20:20:33 2012 Den, AyakaUpdateWienerFilteringacoustic noise in PMC

We've subtracted acoustic noise from PMC using 1 EM 172 microphone. We applied a 10 Hz high-pass filter to PMC length signal and 100,200,300:30,30 to whiten the signal.We used ~10 minutes of data at 2048 Hz as we did not see much coherence at higher frequencies.

We were able to subtract acoustic noise from PMC length in the frequency range 10-700 Hz. In the range 30-50 Hz error signal is less by a factor of 10 then target signal.

7716   Thu Nov 15 21:52:48 2012 Den, AyakaUpdateGreen Lockingyarm locked

We aligned and locked Y arm for green:

• installed camera on PSL to monitor green transmission
• aligned green path on the ETMY table to see the beam on the PSL camera
• misaligned ETMY and aligned ITMY to see reflected beam on REFL PD
• installed green transmission PD on PSL
• aligned ETMY and locked YARM to 00 mode

I've switched error channel cable to output monitor. Whitening filter is need for scattering measurements.

7720   Sat Nov 17 03:30:13 2012 Den, AyakaUpdateAlignmentred in arms

We aligned accurately 00 green in yarm, changed voltage on PZT2 to see red flashing at TRY at the normalized level 0.2-0.3. The plan was to lock yarm using POY11 and green from other side, maximize red TRY by adjusting PZT2. But POY11 does not go out of the vacuum, so we adjusted TRY by flashing. 2 DOFs of PZT2 is not enough to match 4 DOFs of red beam so we adjusted both PZT2 and cavity mirrors. TRY flashing is 0.5-0.6 and green is still locking to 00 though its transmission is not maximized. We'll fix it later by adjusting input green beam.

Next we wanted to get red beam on TRX PD. Beam steering was done by BS only. We misaligned BS in pitch and excited BS angle motion by 1000 counts. We could see red beam moving on the wall of ETMX chamber. We moved it to ETMX mirror frame, estimated position of the mirror center and moved BS to this position. The beam should be approximately in the middle. For now we can not see red beam on the camera at ETMX table, more work is needed.

7772   Sat Dec 1 00:24:37 2012 Den, AyakaUpdateAlignmentBS chamber

Today at 11:13 AM the stack of invacuum BS table was kicked and IFO misaligned. We adjusted PZT2 voltage by ~20 V in yaw such that IPPOS was restored. Then we could lock arms.

7798   Fri Dec 7 19:24:43 2012 Den, AyakaUpdateSUSoplevs as acoustic and seismic noise couplers at high frequencies

We've provided acoustic excitation using speakers on the AS table and saw that PSD of YARM feedback signal increased in the frequency range 50 - 100 Hz. Meanwhile, XARM feedback signal did not change. Moreover, YARM noise is much higher at these frequencies compared to XARM.

The problem was with YARM oplev servos. Both ITMY and ETMY produced noise to YARM length. ITMY oplev signal had a huge resonance at 55 Hz. We measured coherence with accelerometers, it was 0.8. It turned out that one of the mirror mounts was not fixed in the oplev path. When we fixed it, noise has gone.

Note: speakers were on AS table but mirror mounts could steel feel it on ITMY table.

Then we had a look on ETMY table. We saw a mirror on suspiciously long mirror mount that was used in the ETMY oplev path. We slightly kicked long mount with a small screwdriver and YARM control signal went up with resonance at 100 Hz.

7761   Thu Nov 29 00:15:13 2012 Den, KojiUpdateIOOMC WFS work

 Quote: The instability started about 48hour ago, that means my work on the AP table did not  made immediate trouble. But it does not mean anything. For now, the WFS outputs are off. More work is needed to find what's wrong.

The problem was caused by low reflectivity of the mirror that splits MC reflected beam into two: first goes to trash, second - to WFS. Power before the mirror was 100mW, reflected beam that goes to WFS was 0.3mW. Using dataviewer we learnt that the beam intensity was ~5 times more in the past.

This happened because the mirror position was adjusted a few days ago. Its reflection depends on the angle of incidence and amount of light to WFS was significantly reduced. We could either increase the angle of incidence or use two mirrors with high reflectivity instead of this with high transmission.

We've chosen the second variant not to confuse anyone in future with non-45 degrees angles. We are now using one mirror with reflectivity 98% to direct most power to the trash while other 2% are directed using the second mirror to WFS path. We now have 0.7 mW on WFS1 and 1.3 mW on WFS2.

• blocked the beam and run scripts/MC/WFS/WFS_FilterBank_offsets to calculate offsets in the WFS servo
• aligned MC and centered beams on WFS 1 and 2
• provided excitation to MC1 at 5 Hz (400 counts) and adjusted I&Q phase rotation
• adjusted the gain and changed it in MC autolocker (reduced from 0.25 to 0.15 as we now have more power of WFS as before)

We were able to close the loops. The phase margin is too low though, we need to improve feedback filters.

Attachment 1: wfs_fb.pdf
6007   Fri Nov 25 18:45:31 2011 Den, RanaSummarySUSExcess Noise in Digital Filtering

We are now trying to understand why the coherence between SUS-X_SUSPOS_IN1 and SUS-X_SUSPOS_OUT is lost below 1 Hz for X = MC1, MC2, MC3, BS, ITMX, ITMY, ETMX, ETMY, SRM. It is OKEY only for PRM but the different filteres are used there. For PRM - 30:0.0 and Bounce Roll, for all others - 30:0.0 and Cheby. The transfer functions between these two signals plotted in foton and fft tools are also not the same.

If we switch off all the filters between these 2 signals, than the coherence is one. If one of the filters is switched on, everything is also fine. But if there are several present, than they filter the signal in unexpected way.

Moreover it seems that the coherence is dependent on the input signal. The coherence is better with local dumping than without.

Attachment 1: FiltNoise.png
13840   Mon May 14 08:55:40 2018 Dennis CoyneHowToSEIpreparation of load cell measurement at ETMX

follow up email from Dennis 5-13-2018. The last line agrees with the numbers in elog13821.

Hi Steve & Gautam,

I've made some measurements of the spare (damaged) 40m bellows. Unfortunately neither of our coordinate measurement arms are currently set up (and I couldn't find an appropriate micrometer or caliper), so I could not (yet) directly measure the thickness. However from the other dimensional measurements, and a measurement of the axial stiffness (100 lb/in), and calculations (from the Standards of the Expansion Joint Manufacturers Association (EJMA), 6th ed., 1993) I infer a thickness of 0.010 inch in . This is close to a value of 0.012 in used by MDC Vacuum for bellows of about this size.

I calculate that the maximum allowable torsional rotation is 1.3 mrad. This corresponds to a differential height, across the 32 in span between support points, of 0.041 in.

In addition using the EJMA formulas I find that one can laterally displace the bellows by 0.50 inch (assuming a simultaneous axial displacement of 0.25 inch, but no torsion), but no more than ~200 times. I might be good to stay well below this limit, say no more than ~0.25 inch (6 mm).

If interested I've uploaded my calculations as a file associated with the bellows drawing at D990577-A/v1.

BTW in some notes that I was given (by either Larry Jones or Alan Weinstein) related to the 40m Stacis units, I see a sketch from Steve dated 3/2000 faxed to TMC which indicates 1200 lbs on each of two Stacis units and 2400 on the third Stacis.

12997   Wed May 17 18:08:45 2017 DhruvaUpdateOptical LeversBeam Profiling Setup

Andrew and I set up the razor blade beam profiling experiment for He-Ne lasers on the "SP" table.  Once I receive the laser safety training, I will make power measurements and fit it to an erfc curve from which I will calculate the gaussian profile of the beam. I'm attaching some pictures of the setup.

Least count of the micrometer - 2 microns

Laser  : Lumentum 22037130:1103P

Photodetector : Thor Labs PDA100A

Attachment 1: 1.jpg
Attachment 2: 2.jpg
Attachment 3: 3.jpg
Attachment 4: 4.jpg
Attachment 5: 5.jpg
13002   Mon May 22 10:53:02 2017 DhruvaUpdateOptical LeversBeam Profiling Results

 Quote: Andrew and I set up the razor blade beam profiling experiment for He-Ne lasers on the "SP" table.  Once I receive the laser safety training, I will make power measurements and fit it to an erfc curve from which I will calculate the gaussian profile of the beam. I'm attaching some pictures of the setup.  Least count of the micrometer - 2 microns  Laser  : Lumentum 22037130:1103P Photodetector : Thor Labs PDA100A

I had measured the y-profile of the beam of Friday at 5 axial locations and fit them to an erfc function using the lsqcurvefit function of MATLAB.

The results were as follows -

z(cm)    w (in)

4          0.0131

10        0.0132

15        0.0137

20       0.0139

25        0.0147

I left w in inches in the intensity plots as MATLAB gave more accurate fits for those values.

I converted these to S.I while making the spot-size vs z plot and the corresponding values in microns were

332.74, 335.28, 347.98, 353.06, 373.38.

On fitting these values to the formula for the spot size of a Gaussian beam, the beam waist came out to be 330.54 microns and the location of the beam waist was at z=-2cm, where z=0 marks the head of the laser.

TO-DO : Measure the spot size of the beam at more axial points to obtain a better fit.

Measure the x-profile of the beam.

Analyse the error in the spot sizes and corresponding error in the beam waist.

Attachment 1: spot_size_.pdf
Attachment 2: z_25.pdf
Attachment 3: z_20.pdf
Attachment 4: z_15.pdf
Attachment 5: z_10.pdf
Attachment 6: z_4.pdf
13006   Tue May 23 10:27:24 2017 DhruvaUpdateOptical LeversBeam Profiling Results

I have attempted to calculate the instrument error (micrometer least count) using the values of the spot size obtained by the least squares fitting method. This error is large towards the centre of the beam as the power varies significantly between adjecent markings of the micrometer. Using the new values of error obtained, I used the chi-square fitting minimisation method to further optimise the waist size.

The modified values are -

z(cm)    w (in)

4         0.0134

10        0.0135

15        0.0140

20        0.0142

25        0.0150

And the revised values for the beam waist and location are 338.63 microns and -2.65 cm respectively.

I will now try to use the chi-square stastitic to estimate the error in spot size.

Attachment 1: z_25_chisq.pdf
Attachment 2: z_20_chisq.pdf
Attachment 3: z_15_chisq.pdf
Attachment 4: z_10_chisq.pdf
Attachment 5: z_4_chisq.pdf
Attachment 6: spotsize.pdf
13021   Tue May 30 18:31:54 2017 DhruvaUpdateOptical LeversBeam Profiling Results

​Updates in the He-Ne beam profiling experiment.

1. I've made intensity profile plots at two more points on the z-axis. The additition of this plots hasn't affected the earlier obtained beam waist significantly.
2. I have added other sources of error, such as the statisitical fluctuations on the oscilloscope(which is small compared to the least count error of the micrometer) and the least count of the z-axis scale.
3. I have also calculated the error in the parameters obtained by fiiting by calculating the covariance matrix using the jacobian returned by the lsqcurvefit function in MATLAB.
4. I have also added horizontal error bars to all plots.
5. All plots are now in S.I. units

Attachment 1: plots.pdf
Attachment 2: spot_size_y.pdf
13053   Thu Jun 8 12:43:42 2017 DhruvaUpdateOptical LeversBeam Profiling Results

 Quote: ​Updates in the He-Ne beam profiling experiment. ​

New and improved plots for the He-Ne profiling experiment

Font size has been increased to 30.

The plots are maximum size (Following Rana's advice, I saved the plots as eps files(maximized) and converted them to pdf later).

There is a shaded region around the trendline that represents the parameter error.

Function that I fit my data to (should have mentioned this in my earlier elog entries)

$P = \dfrac{P_0}{2}\Bigg[1+erf\Big(\dfrac{\sqrt2(X-X_0)}{w}\Big) \Bigg]$

Description of my error analysis -

1. I have assumed a 20% deviation from markings in the micrometer error.

2. Using the error in the micrometer, I have calculated the propogated error in the beam power :

$\delta P = \sqrt{\dfrac{2}{\pi}}{P_0}\dfrac{\delta x}{w}\exp\Bigg({\frac{-2(X-X_0)^2}{w^2}}\Bigg)$

I added this error to the stastistical error due to the fluctuation of the oscilloscope reading to obtain the total error in power.

3. I found the Fisher Matrix by numerically differentiating the function at different data points $P_b$ with respect to the parameters $p_i =$  $P_0, X_0$ and $w$.

$F_{ij} = \sum_{b} {\frac{\partial P_b}{\partial p_i}\frac{\partial P_b}{\partial p_j}}$$\frac{1}{\sigma^2_b}$

I then found the covariance matrix by inverting the Fisher Matrix and found the error in spot size estimation.

Attachment 1: profile.pdf
229   Wed Jan 9 20:29:47 2008 DmassAoGTMICoffee Carafe
If you have been using the coffee machine in the 40m, you may have noticed small brown flecks in your coffee mug. The carafe in the 40m has accumulated a layer of what is presumed to be old dried up coffee. When a small amount of water is swirled around in the bottom, flecks of the brown layer come off. Pictures below are of the inside of the carafe.

But does it provide adequate protection from 1064 light?
Attachment 1: DSC_0363.JPG
Attachment 2: DSC_0365.JPG
Attachment 3: DSC_0368.JPG
279   Mon Jan 28 12:42:48 2008 DmassBureaucracyTMICoffee
There is tea in the coffee carafe @ the 40m. It is sitting as though it were fresh coffee. There is also nothing on the post it.
382   Fri Mar 14 16:56:03 2008 DmassBureaucracyComputersNew 40m control machine.
I priced out a new control machine from Dell and had Steve buy it.

GigE cards (jumbo packet capable) will be coming seperately.

Specs:
4 Gigs @ 800MHz RAM
24" LCD
low end video card (Nvidia 8300 - analog + digital output for dual head config)

No floppy drive on this one (yet?)
792   Mon Aug 4 16:20:20 2008 DmassConfigurationPhotosITMX magnet position relative to OSEMS
We have vented, and taken the following pics of the magnets to document their position before we ruin everything.
Attachment 1: DSC_0151.JPG
Attachment 2: DSC_0150.JPG
1589   Fri May 15 14:05:14 2009 DmassHowToComputersHow To: Crash the Elog

The Elog started crashing last night. It turns out I was the culprit, and whenever I tried to upload a certain 500kb .png picture, it would die. It has happened both when choosing "upload" of a picture, and when choosing "submit" after successfully uploading a picture. Both culprits were ~500kb .png files.

1724   Wed Jul 8 18:46:56 2009 DmassAoGElectronicsBeam Scan Funky

The beam scan (which has been living in the bridge subbasement for a bit now) is in a state of imperfection.

I noticed that:

• The waist reading seems to change by not insignificant amounts as you move the spot across the head, even for just small perturbations about the center.
• None of the features which require two slits seem to be working (unsure if this is software or hardware related)

I took some pictures to try and illuminate the situation - The inverted images are included to make it easier to see the flecks (?) in the slits

I am not sure how to figure out if any bit of the scan is/has been fried.

Pending further investigation, enjoy large error bars in your scan measurements!

PICTURES OF BOTH SLITS ON THE BEAMSCAN HEAD:

1766   Tue Jul 21 01:11:30 2009 DmassAoGComputersAlarms going off

I came into the 40m to sign things out briefly then swiftly return them, and the alarms were going off on op540m at 1am.

The cat and donkey? were making much noise.

3118   Fri Jun 25 01:28:33 2010 DmassHowToSVNSVN woes

I am trying to get an actual complete install of the 40m svn on my machine. It keeps stopping at the same point:

I do a

svn checkout --username svn40m https://nodus.ligo.caltech.edu:30889/svn /Users/dmass/svn

A blah blah blah many files

...

svn: In directory '/Users/dmass/svn/trunk/medm/c1/lsc'

I believe I have always had this error come up when trying to do a full svn install. Any illumination is welcome.

3194   Mon Jul 12 12:16:50 2010 DmassHowToCOMSOL TipsIntrusions (Negative Extrusions)

An entry on the 40m wiki page might serve you better, and be easier to sift through once all is said and done

3204   Tue Jul 13 11:20:07 2010 DmassUpdateGreen LockingSHG on PSL table : optimum temeprature

It seems like you might inherit an offset by using step (3) b/c of the temperature gradient between the crystal and the sensing point. Depending on how large this gradient is you could increase the linear coupling from temperature to intensity noise from zero to a significant number. Phase noise should not be effected.

SInce these things (ovens) are so low time constant, shouldn't we

1. Lock to a temperature
2. Let the oven equilibrate for however long - a few tau maybe - my oven has a time constant of 60 sec, don't know if this is fast or slow compared to that
3. Measure P_532/P_1064
4. Change the setpoint
5. Go back to step 1
ELOG V3.1.3-