ID |
Date |
Author |
Type |
Category |
Subject |
8781
|
Fri Jun 28 02:23:00 2013 |
Jenne | Update | LSC | Need to measure sensing matrix at REFL165 | [Lisa, Rana, Jenne]
Lisa asked to see a model of the PRMI sensing matrix with REFL165 included, in the hopes that it wouldn't be as degenerate as REFL33.

The conclusion, immediately after looking at this, is that I should make sure the REFL beam is nicely aligned onto the REFL165 PD (Koji did some tests, swapping out the REFL165 resonant PD with a broadband PD, and I don't remember if he aligned beam back onto the REFL165 PD). Then, I need to measure the PRMI sensing matrix, including REFL165. Hopefully, it is similar to the model, and we can use it as our 3f diode for locking. |
8788
|
Mon Jul 1 23:27:07 2013 |
Jenne | Update | LSC | Sensing Matrix vs. Xarm sweep | I have modeled the PRMI sensing matrix as I bring the Xarm into resonance. In optickle, I have the PRMI on sideband resonance, the ETMY is artificially set to have a transmission of 1, and the ETMX has it's nominal transmission of 15ppm. I start with the ETMX's microscopic position set to lambda/4 (antiresonant for IR in the arm), and take several steps until the ETMX's microscopic position is 0 (resonant for IR in the arm).
Xarm antiresonant:
Modeled sensing matrix, units = W/m, Offset = 2.66e-07, phase in degrees
MICH Mag MICH Phase PRCL Mag PRCL Phase
AS55 3.348E+04 142.248 5.111E+03 70.571
POX11 3.968E+01 -66.492 1.215E+04 54.312
REFL11 3.231E+05 24.309 9.829E+07 144.311
REFL165 9.946E+03 -159.540 4.540E+05 -64.710
REFL33 1.963E+04 -168.530 1.573E+06 -2.744
REFL55 1.160E+06 -6.755 5.429E+07 86.895
Xarm resonant:
Modeled sensing matrix, units = W/m, Offset = 0, phase in degrees
MICH Mag MICH Phase PRCL Mag PRCL Phase
AS55 1.647E+06 57.353 3.676E+06 -81.916
POX11 3.927E+02 -118.791 2.578E+04 -102.158
REFL11 7.035E+05 61.203 1.039E+08 167.149
REFL165 1.602E+04 -144.586 5.971E+05 -49.802
REFL33 2.157E+04 171.658 1.940E+06 -9.133
REFL55 1.822E+06 7.762 6.900E+07 101.906
For REFL55, the MICH magnitude increases by a factor of 1.6, while the PRCL magnitude increases by 1.3 . The MICH phase changes by 15 degrees, while the PRCL phase also changes by 15 degrees. Just eye-balling (rather than calculating), the other REFL PDs look to have similar-ish magnitude and phase changes. Certainly none of them are different by orders of magnitude.
Movies forthcoming. |
8790
|
Tue Jul 2 02:29:47 2013 |
Jenne | Update | LSC | Sensing Matrix vs. Xarm sweep | Here is the Sensing Matrix movie (sorry for the iffy quality - my movies usually come out better than this):
This is the sensing matrix for the sideband locked on PRMI, bringing the Xarm into resonance from anti-resonance, in 20 equally-spaced steps. You can see the microscopic ETMX offset (units of meters) in the title of the figures.
I was surprised to see some of the 'jumps' in the sensing matrix that happen near the end, when the arm is almost in resonance. I'm in the process of making movies of the error signals as the Xarm is brought into resonance. I'll have to post those in the morning, since they're taking a long time to produce and save, however when I looked at a few, there is some weird stuff going on as we get close to resonance, even with the 3f signals.
The modeling phone call is in the morning, but if anyone who is not regularly on the call has thoughts, I'm all ears. |
8805
|
Mon Jul 8 15:31:48 2013 |
Jenne | Update | ASC | POP QPD calibration prep | I am prepping to do the POP QPD calibration, and so have turned off the POP QPD, and put it onto a micrometer stage. My plan is to (after fixing the ASC servo filters to make the servo AC coupled, rather than DC coupled) lock the PRM-ITMY half cavity, and use that beam to calibrate the QPD. While this isn't as great as the full PRMI, the PRMI beam moves too much to be useful, unless the ASC servo is engaged.
While on the table, I noticed 2 things:
* In order to place the micrometer, I had to temporarily move the POP55 RFPD (which has not been used in quite a long time). I think it's just that the panel-mount SMA connector isn't tight to the panel inside, but the RF out SMA cable connector is very loose. I have moved the POP55 RFPD to the very very south end of the SP table, until someone has time to have a quick look. (I don't want to get too distracted from my current mission, since we haven't put beam onto that PD for at least a year).
* The ITMX oplev beam setup isn't so great. The last steering mirror before the beam is launched into the vacuum is close to clipping (in yaw... pitch is totally fine), and the steering mirror outside of vacuum to put the beam on the QPD is totally clipping. The beam is falling off the bottom of this last steering mirror. Assuming the beam height is okay on all of the input optics and the in-vac table, we need to lower the last steering mirror before the oplev QPD. My current hypothesis is that by switching which in-vac steering mirror we are using (see Gautam's elog 8758) the new setup has the beam pointing downward a bit. If the problem is one of the in-vac mirrors, we can't do anything about it until the vent, so for now we can just lower the out of vac mirror. We should put it back to normal height and fix the oplev setup when we're at atmosphere. |
8810
|
Tue Jul 9 11:41:22 2013 |
Jenne | Update | ASC | POP QPD calibration attempt | I was bad, and forgot to elog the most important part of my work yesterday - that I had rotated the POP QPD by 90 degrees, so that I could fit the micrometer onto the table. There is a sticker on the front of the QPD to indicate which direction is "X" and "Y" for the output of the readout box. Right now (and the way that I will mount the QPD to the table, after I redo the calibration today), X is PITCH, and Y is YAW. Koji and Nic swapped the cables to the ADC to make this all consistent.
Yesterday, I locked the PRM-ITMY half cavity, and tried to take calibration data. However, with no ASC servo engaged, the beam was still moving. Also, with only the half-cavity, I had very little light on the QPD, and since it has internal normalization, the outputs can get a little funny if there isn't enough light. I had checked, and even with the gain cranked up to maximum, the "light level too low" LED was illuminated. So, my calibration data from yesterday isn't really useful.
Today, hopefully after lunch, I will lock the PRMI with the new AC-coupled ASC servo, so that I can have the servo on, and the PRMI locked on the sideband, so that I have more light on the QPD.
After that, it seems that the final thing we need to do before we vent is hold an arm near, but off resonance, lock the PRMI, and then swing the arm in and out of resonance a bit. |
8812
|
Tue Jul 9 16:08:32 2013 |
Jenne | Update | ASC | POP QPD calibration attempt | [Jenne, Alex]
Calibration data for the POP QPD has been taken, with the PRMI locked on sideband (with AS55Q and REFL33I, since it stayed locked longer with those 2). ASC was on, AC coupled.
We didn't get too far on either side of center of the QPD, since the ASC servo would go unstable, so we only explored the roughly linear region. Data / plots / analysis to follow. |
8825
|
Thu Jul 11 03:14:19 2013 |
Jenne | Update | LSC | Yarm held nicely on IR resonance with ALS, PRMI+arm attempt | [Annalisa, Jenne, Nic]
After having troubles with the Xarm earlier (maybe Manasa can write/say something about this? Something about perhaps seeing the phase tracker jump, and cause it to lose lock?), we moved on to the Y arm.
Annalisa locked the Yarm green, and closed the ALS loop. I believe that earlier today, she tuned the gain such that we don't start getting gain peaking at a few hundred Hz. We would like to get a script going, so that it's not so labor intensive to reclose the ALS loop after an MC lockloss....but that's a daytime task.
We then found the IR resonance, using only the Yarm ALS system. After Manasa's work yesterday, the Yarm was very stable while locked with the ALS. We took a power spectrum of POY11_I_ERR, which I have calibrated using the number in elog 6834 of 1.4e12 cts/m, or 7.14e-13 m/ct. See the figure below.
After that, we changed the offsetter2 offset such that the arm was off resonance, but not so far off that we crossed any significant resonances (in particular, we wanted to not go as far as the 55MHz resonance).
Then, I tried to lock the PRMI for a while, but the alignment wasn't very good. We knew that the Yarm was well aligned, since our IR resonance was > 0.98, but it had been a while since we had aligned the X arm. I tweaked the ITMX position to make the Michelson dark, and then tried acquiring PRMI lock. At first, I tried with REFL165 I and Q, but with the non-ideal alignment and the offset in the 165 diode (LSC offsets was not run this evening), I wasn't catching any locks. I then switched to AS55Q and REFL33I, but wasn't able to catch lock there either.
The MC lost lock, which made us lose the ALS loop, but the ALS had been locked for more than 30 minutes, at least. I tried locking the PRMI with the current alignment (after having misaligned ETMY), but was only able to get lock stretches of 1 second at maximum.
We are calling it a great success for the night, since we have confirmed that, at least for the Yarm, Manasa's beatbox work has improved things. Also, we have a pretty solid plan for trying the PRMI+arm tomorrow, even though it didn't work out tonight. |
Attachment 1: Yarm_onIRresonance_noPRMIyet_POYcalibrated.pdf
|
|
8840
|
Fri Jul 12 21:23:42 2013 |
Jenne | Update | ASC | POP QPD calibration attempt | These are the data, one plot for when the vertical QPD position was changed, and one for when the horizontal (yaw) QPD position was changed.
The micrometer is in inches, so 1 unit is 0.1 inches, I believe.
Clearly, I need to redo the measurement and take more data in the linear region. |
Attachment 1: ChangeVertMicrometer_July2013.png
|
|
Attachment 2: ChangeSideMicrometer_July2013.png
|
|
8851
|
Mon Jul 15 17:16:59 2013 |
Jenne | Update | ASC | POP QPD calibration attempt | I tried to retake POP QPD calibration data again today. The MC was mostly fine, but whenever the PRMI unlocked, both ITM watchdogs would trip. I'm not sure what was causing this, but the ITM alignment wasn't perfect after this kind of event, so I felt like I was continuously locking and realigning the arms to get the alignment back. Then, after turning on the ASC and tweaking up the PRM alignment for maximum POP110I signal, I had to recenter the QPD, so none of my previously taken data was useful. Frustrating. Also, I had recentered the PRMI-relevant oplevs, but I had these weird locklosses even with nicely centered oplevs.
I have given up for the daytime, and will come back to it if there's a spot in the evening when arm measurements aren't going on.
Here is the data from last week, and the data from today. The micrometer readings have been calibrated into mm, and I have fit a line to the linear-looking region. Obviously, for the Pitch calibration, I definitely need to take more data.



|
8852
|
Mon Jul 15 17:20:43 2013 |
Jenne | Configuration | endtable upgrade | DAC at 1Y4- Power Spectrum -with the right units | Those 'peaks' for the oscillations seem ridiculously broad. I think you should look again, really quickly, with smaller bandwidth at, say, the 2kHz oscillation, to make sure it looks reasonable. |
8854
|
Tue Jul 16 01:17:21 2013 |
Jenne | Update | ASC | POP QPD calibration attempt | [Rana, Jenne]
I took POP QPD calibration data with a new method, on Rana's suggestion. I locked the PRMI, and engaged the ASC servo, and then used awggui (x8) to put dither lines on all of the PRMI-relevant optic's ASCPIT and ASCYAW excitation points. I then took the transfer function of the suspensions' oplev signals (which are already calibrated into microradians) to the POP_QPD signals (which are in counts). This way, we know what shaking of any optic does to the axis translation as seen by the POP QPD. We can also infer (from BS or PRM motion for PR3, and ITMX motion for PR2) what the folding mirrors do to the axis translation. Note that we'll have to do a bit of matrix math to go from, say, PRM tilt effect to PR3 tilt effect on the axis motion.
The data is saved in /users/jenne/PRCL/July152013_POP_TFs.xml . There is also a .txt file with the same name, in the same folder, listing the frequencies used by the awg.
I'll analyze and meditate tomorrow, when my brain is not so sleepy. |
8860
|
Tue Jul 16 18:20:25 2013 |
Jenne | Update | CDS | Proto-ASC implemented in ASS model | The proto-ASC now includes triggering. I have updated the hacky temp ASC screen to show the DoF triggering. I have to go, but when I get back, I'll also expose the filter module triggering. So, for now we may still need the up/down scripts, but at least the ASC will turn itself off if there is a lockloss. |
8871
|
Thu Jul 18 15:55:31 2013 |
Jenne | Update | LSC | PRMI+Y arm ALS Sensing Matrices | Last night, I took sensing matrix data at various different offsets for the Yarm. The sensing matrices I measured were of the PRMI, while the Yarm was (a) Held off resonance, (b) Held at ~50% peak power, and (c) Held on resonance.
The dither lines were clear in the MICH and PRCL spectrum, so I think I'm driving hard enough, but something else seems funny, since clearly the REFL165 I and Q signals were not completely overlapping last night. If they were, we wouldn't have been able to lock the PRMI using REFL 165 I&Q.
Anyhow, here's the data that was taken. Data folder is ...../scipts/LSC/SensingMatrix/SensMatData/
Yarm off resonance, SensMat_PRMI_1000cts_580Hz_2013-07-18_012848.dat

Yarm at ~50% resonance, SensMat_PRMI_1000cts_580Hz_2013-07-18_013937.dat

Yarm on resonance, SensMat_PRMI_1000cts_580Hz_2013-07-18_013619.dat

|
8890
|
Mon Jul 22 16:56:14 2013 |
Jenne | Update | General | Vent preparation - In progress | Pre-vent checklist
- Center all
oplevs/IPPOS/IPANG
Align the arm cavities for IR and align Xgreen and Ygreen lasers to the arms.
(X green+PSL green = TRX ~0.7 pre-swap and ~ 0.6 post-swap, Ygreen +PSL green TRY ~600 counts an hour or so after green was aligned to the arm.)
Make a record of the MC pointing
Align the beam at the PSL angle and position QPDs
Record good OSEM values.
Reduce input power by placing wave plate+PBS setup on the PSL table either BEFORE or AFTER THE PMC. (We will try attenuating the power using the WP + PBS that already exist after the laser. If this does not help attenuate enough, we will introduce WP+PBS after the PMC). Refer elog 6892 and elog 7299 for after the PMC detailed procedure.
Replace 10% BS before MC REFL PD with Y1 mirror and lock MC at low power.
Check the MC spot position measurement under the low power mode.
Close shutter of PSL-IR and green shutters at the ends
- Make sure the jam nuts are protecting bellows
|
8891
|
Mon Jul 22 17:03:25 2013 |
Jenne | Update | General | MC spot positions | The results of today's MC spot position measurements:
spot positions in mm (MC1,2,3 pit MC1,2,3 yaw):
[2.3244717046516197, -0.094366247149508087, 1.6060842142158149, -0.74616561350974353, -0.67461746482832874, -1.3301448018100492]
MC1 and MC3 both have spots that are a little high in pitch, but everything else looks okay.
Actual Script:
/opt/rtcds/caltech/c1/scripts/ASS/MC/mcassMCdecenter
Plotting Script:
/opt/rtcds/caltech/c1/scripts/ASS/MC/MC_spotMeasurement_history.py

|
8893
|
Mon Jul 22 18:49:16 2013 |
Jenne | Update | General | Vent preparation - In progress | I have just centered IPPOS, as well as PSL POS and PSL ANG (also called IOO POS and IOO ANG on the screens). Annalisa is working on placing mirrors to get the IPANG beam to its QPD, so that one will be centered later. |
8897
|
Tue Jul 23 01:30:27 2013 |
Jenne | Update | ASC | POP QPD analysis | I have some data for how much motion of any PRMI-relevant optic affects the beam seen by the POP QPD.
For this, I am using the QPD calibration from the micrometer (elog 8851) to get me from counts to mm of motion. Note that the pitch calibration hasn't been redone (I tried locking the PRMI this afternoon, but ITMX kept drifting away from me**, so I didn't get any more data.) The pitch calibration is obviously very rough, since I only have 2 points defining my fit line.
Anyhow, if we assume that's close enough to get us started, I now have a calibrated QPD spectrum:

As detailed in elog 8854, I took single frequency transfer functions, to determine the effect at the QPD from shaking any single PRMI optic. These transfer functions gave me a conversion factor between the optics' oplev readings (in microradians) to the counts seen at the QPD. I used this number, as well as the QPD calibration from the micrometer data, to convert each optics' oplev spectra to motion that one would expect to see at the QPD.
I have not yet completely figured out how to make an estimate of the PR folding optics' affect on the POP QPD spot position, if I know their motion. The current plan is to do as Den did in elog 8451, and infer the PR2/3 motion from the ITMX/BS motion measured by the oplevs. My plan was to take the spectra of the oplev signals while the BS/ITMX are undamped, divide by the SOS pendulum transfer functions, then multiply by the TT transfer functions (which I finally wrote down in elog 8564). I'm planning on using the undamped data, since the oplev signals are still within the linear range of the oplev QPDs, and I won't have to take the SUS damping into account. Anyhow, after I do that, I'll have an idea of how much the tip tilts are moving, but not what that does to the cavity axis.
However, after looking at the plots below, it seems like the PRM is the main culprit causing the PRC axis motion, although the BS (and to a smaller extent the ITMs) are not innocent. Since the plots get very busy very quickly, I have many plots, each plot comparing one of the above QPD spectra (either pitch or yaw) with a single optics' oplev inferred motion.
EDIT: After talking with Koji, I realize that, since the ASC was engaged during the PRM oplev spectrum measurement, I cannot yet say whether the motion is due to PRM, or if it is from PR2 or PR3, and imprinted on the PRM via the ASC servo. The lump where the PRM-caused motion is greater than the QPD spectra is entirely in the region where the ASC is active. So, the QPD motion I expect without the ASC would be something like the green trace in the PRM comparison plots. The blue trace is then the closed loop measurement. Since the ITMs and BS are below the closed loop values, they aren't the ones causing the big lump. I should retake all of these spectra at a time when the PRMI is locked, but the ASC is not engaged. I'm not sure if I'll have a chance to do that tonight or not. If I can find some GPS times when the PRMI was locked, before we had ASC, I can get the oplev data.
PRM:
 
BS:
 
ITMX:
 
ITMY:
 
I think part of the reason PRM is dominating is that it's damped motion is ~10x greater than any other optics', most noticeably the BS'. I'll write a quick separate elog about this. Also, note that the ~3Hz resonant gain had been turned off in the PRM oplev loop, but not in any other loops. This is why there isn't the sharp dip in the PRM's oplev motion. Also, since the PRM ASC was engaged for this measurement, and the ASC pushes on the PRM to minimize the QPD motion, it isn't totally crazy that the PRM's motion is greater than what we actually see at the QPD, if it is compensating for the motion of other optics.
** Re: PRMI locking this afternoon, it was almost as if ITMX were bi-stable. I aligned both arms, to set the ITM positions. Then, I would lock and tweak up the michelson to get the AS port nice and dark (usually touching ITMX today, since it seemed like the drifter....ITMX at this point was usually between -7 and -15 microradians in pitch from the center of the oplev QPD). When I then brought the PRM back into alignment, ITMX was starting to drift away. As soon as I hit the LSC Enable switch, and looked back over to the OpLev screen, ITMX was misaligned, usually around -65 urad in pitch. I did this circus probably 3 or so times before giving up. Koji said that he had seen this bi-stability before, but he didn't remember what fixed it. The drifting that Koji mentioned in elog 8801 seems to have been fixed by centering all the PRMI oplevs every day, but I had already done that, and was still seeing ITMX drift. |
8902
|
Tue Jul 23 04:26:54 2013 |
Jenne | Update | General | MC spot positions | After Koji and I lowered the power into the PMC and saw that the MC locked nicely, I remeasured the spot positions (no alignment on the PSL table, or of the MC mirrors has been done. Also, WFS are off, since there isn't any power going to them).
spot positions in mm (MC1,2,3 pit MC1,2,3 yaw):
[1.1999406656184595, 0.63492727550953243, 1.0769104750021909, -1.0260011922577466, -1.059439987970527, -1.2717741991488549]

The spot positions seem to have actually gotten a bit better in pitch (although between 2 consecutive measurements there was ~0.5mm discrepancy), and no real change in yaw. This means that Rana was right all along (surprise!), and that decreasing the power before the PMC reduces alignment pain significantly. |
8903
|
Tue Jul 23 04:31:36 2013 |
Jenne | Update | General | Vent preparation - Ready for Vent | After everyone's work today (good teamwork everybody!!), we are a GO for the vent.
Steve, please check the jam nuts, and begin the vent when you get in. Thanks. |
8914
|
Tue Jul 23 22:55:13 2013 |
Jenne | Update | VAC | BS, ITMY doors to be opened in the morning | We will open the BS and ITMY doors first thing tomorrow morning. I plan to try to be in around 9 am. The first order of business will be to flip the folding mirrors that are not currently flipped (SR2, SR3, PR3). |
8916
|
Wed Jul 24 13:41:13 2013 |
Jenne | Update | SUS | SR2 flipped | [Jenne, Annalisa]
SR2 is flipped, and reinstalled. We did that before lunch, and we're about to go in and work on SR3 and PR3.
EDITS / Notes:
I set dog clamps to have a reference position of where the tip tilt was, then I removed SR3 from the chamber. Once out, I followed the same procedure I used for PR2 during the last vent - I removed the whole suspension (top mount, wires, optic) from the cage, and laid it down flat. Then I loosened the set screw which pushes on the teflon nudge, removed the mirror, inspected it, and put it back in, with the HR side facing the back side of the ring. Then I replaced the suspension system in the cage, and put the mirror back into the chamber.
When I loosened the teflon nudge at the top of the mirror holder ring, the optic seemed to fall down a tiny bit. I think this implies that the HR surface of the optic did not used to be parallel to the front face of the mirror holder ring. When I put the suspension back onto the cage, the pitch balancing was very bad. We checked the level of the table that I had the cage on, and it was miraculously pretty level, so I did the pitch balancing out of the chamber.
Also, during my quick inspection of the mirror (not thorough, just using room lights), I noticed a small fleck of lint near the edge of the optic on the HR surface. The HR surface is now on the outside of the SRC, but we should still blow at the optic with the ionized nitrogen to get it off.
I did not think to check the fine-tuning alignment of SR2....Koji did that after lunch (which I will elog about in a separate elog).
|
8924
|
Thu Jul 25 14:02:53 2013 |
Jenne | Update | SUS | SR3, PR3 flipped | Yesterday afternoon, I went back into the BS chamber, and flipped both PR3 and SR3. Now all of the recycling cavity folding mirrors have been flipped.
For PR3, I followed the same procedure as SR2, setting a reference position, removing the optic, flipping it, etc. When I put it back in, I realized that since this has a 41 degree angle of incidence, the beam going to the BS had translated north by ~1cm. After some fiddling, Koji pointed out that the 2 degree wedge probably had a more significant effect than just the HR surface having moved back a small amount. Anyhow, we adjusted PR3 such that we were going through the BS aperture, as well as the ITMY aperture.
During the flip of PR3, Annalisa and I noticed that the arrow on the barrel of the LaserOptik mirrors also indicates the thickest part of the wedge. This is opposite of our SOS optics, where the arrow's position on the barrel indicates the thinnest part of the wedge. For both PR3 and SR3, I kept the arrow on the same side of the optic as it was originally.
I then flipped SR3, following again the same procedure. PR3 I had done a tiny bit of pitch rebalancing, although I think it was unneccessary, since it is within what we can do with the poking/hysterisis method. SR3 I did not do any pitch rebalancing. With PR3 aligned at least to the ITM, Koji and I aligned SR3 and SR2 so that the AS beam was hitting the center of all the SRC optics. We also adjusted the steering mirrors after the SRM to get the beam centered on PZT3, the last optic on the BS table, which launches the beam over to the OMC chamber. We scanned around a bit by turning the PZT's knobs, but we were unable to see the AS beam on the camera.
|
8960
|
Fri Aug 2 17:50:10 2013 |
Jenne | Update | General | PR3 wedge angle adjusted | [Jenne, Manasa, Koji]
Earlier today, we locked and aligned both the X and Y arms.
I then went into the BS chamber, put on the BS' aperture, and put an aperture along the AS path. (We had Michelson fringes, so I centered the aperture around the fringes. I used one of the brass ruler things that we use to center the beam on ITMs and ETMs, on a riser. I put this aperture at the edge of the BS table, after the AS beam is launched toward the OMC chamber. The idea was to replace PR3 such that I could get the beam back through the BS aperture, and the brass ruler aperture, in hopes that we would see arm flashes, and not have to open the ITMY and ETMY heavy doors.)
I set references on the table so that I could put PR3 back in its original position, then removed PR3 from the chamber.
Steve set up a HeNe for me, that we pointed through the optic. The ghost beam was very high, indicating (as expected) that the wedge was not perfectly horizontal.
I took the suspension off of the cage and laid it down, as I have in the past.
I removed the optic from the suspension, to try to figure out which was the fat vs. skinny side. I noticed that there are very faint marks on the actual fat and skinny sides of the optic. (Mpral - for the LaserOptik mirrors, look for the faint lines that are the full width of the barrel, not the placement of the arrow which marks the HR side). I put the optic back in (HR side toward the back, fat side on the left (as you look at the face of the optic), which is consistent with the picture in the Optical Layout page of the Wiki, near the bottom.) the optic holder ring.
I put the suspension back on the cage, and saw that the HeNe's ghost beam was now nearly horizontal relative to the straight-through beam. Excellent. Also, the pitch balancing didn't seem to change noticably, which I determined was within "poking" distance of where we need it to be.
I put PR3 back onto the BS table, and adjusted it around until I got the beam through both the BS aperture, and the one on the AS path. As usual, this took quite a while, but as soon as I got through both of those apertures (really at the same place, not close to being through them, but as close as I could tell by eye - this is what took forever), Koji and Manasa saw flashes in the Yarm! Yay!
Since I had to move PR3 in angle a tiny bit, I reset the references, then dogged down PR3. We still had flashes, this time in both arms, so we closed up the light doors.
We have now locked and aligned both arms in IR after the adjustment of PR3, and see both arms' green at 01 or 02. We are about to start checking the green positioning on the periscopes. We will also need to check the AS path, as well as IPPOS and IPANG before we close up. We see REFL on the camera.
Separately - Manasa remembered that 2 clean things were dropped yesterday - a screw, and an allen key. Since they're both Clean, we're not too worried, although she thinks a long-armed person may be able to reach the allen key. |
8962
|
Fri Aug 2 22:51:10 2013 |
Jenne | Update | General | All vent tasks complete, just need oplev check | [Manasa, Koji, Jenne]
We went into the BS and IOO chambers, and aligned the green beams such that they came out of the vacuum chamber. The idea here was to get the beams at the same height, but slightly offset in yaw. This required moving the Periscope on BS table, PBS in front of that periscope, the Periscope on the IOO table, and 2 steering mirrors on the IOO table after the 2nd periscope. The tables were not releveled, although we have aligned the full interferometer to this situation, so we do not want to touch the tables. The MC spot positions are still consistent with those measured earlier this afternoon, before this work, so I'm not concerned.
We confirmed that both green beams are hitting a good place (centered in pitch, and just left and right of center in yaw) on the mirror in the OMC chamber, and are getting to the center of the first mirror on the PSL table. We then coarsely aligned the beams on the PSL table.
We then relocked and aligned the arms for IR, and checked that the AS beam is centered on the mirrors in the BS chamber, and that the beam is coming out, and to the AS table. I touched the last mirror before PZT3 a small amount in yaw, and then PZT3 in pitch and yaw, until we saw the beam recentered on the first mirror on the AS table. At that point, we were also back to the center of the AS camera (which is good, since Koji had aligned all of that the other day). So, the AS beam is good.
We checked IPPOS, and have centered the beam on all the mirrors, and aligned the beam onto the QPD.
We checked IPANG, by looking through the viewports at the mirrors in the ETMY chamber. We are now centered in yaw, but clipping a bit low. This is what we want, since we always end up drifting high during the pump-down.
We see a nice, unclipped REFL beam on the camera.
We see a beam a little high on the POP camera, but Koji looked on the table with a card, and saw the beam....we just need to do minor alignment on the out of vac mirrors.
We checked again that the green TEM00 beams from both arms come to the PSL table.
We are getting POX and POY out, since we are using them to lock and align the arms.
Manasa and Koji recovered one clean allen key from the bottom of the chambers, but one remains, as a sacrifice to the vacuum gods.
I believe that, with the exception of checking the oplevs and taking photos of PR3, and the green steering optics, we have finished all of our vent tasks. We should do a quickie alignment on Monday, check the oplevs, take some photos, and put on the heavy doors. Pumping can start either Monday afternoon or Tuesday morning.
|
8974
|
Tue Aug 6 19:53:15 2013 |
Jenne | Update | LSC | Arms locked in IR, aligned. IFO at nominal power | [Koji, Manasa, Jenne]
The Y arm was locked in IR, and we saw flashing in the Xarm (Gautam had the Xarm for green work when we began). I checked IPANG, and the beam was beautifully unclipped, almost perfectly centered on the first out of vacuum mirror. I aligned the beam onto the QPD.
We then swapped out the MC Y1 that we use at low power, and replace the usual 10% BS, so that we wouldn't crispy-fry MC REFL. Manasa adjusted the half wave plate after the laser, to maximize the power going toward the PMC. We relocked the PMC, and see transmission of ~0.84, which is at the high side of what we usually get. The beam was aligned onto MC REFL and centered on the WFS, and the MC was locked at nominal power. Koji tweaked up the alignment of the MC, and ran the WFS offset script. I aligned beam onto POP QPD and POP110 coarsely (using a flashing PRC, not a locked PRM-ITMY cavity, so the alignment should be rechecked). The arms have both been locked and aligned in IR....the green beams need to be steered to match the current cavity axis.
The AS beam, as well as REFL and POP, are all coming out of the vacuum nicely unclipped.
Notes: When Koji was aligning the SRM to get the SRC cavity roughly aligned (the AS flashes all overlapping), we noticed that there is some major pitch-yaw coupling. Serious enough that we should be concerned that perhaps some connector is loose, or an actuator isn't working properly. This should be checked.
Moral of the story: Coarse alignment of all mirrors is complete after pump-down and we have IR locked and aligned to both arms at nominal power.
Still to do:
* Restore PRM, align beam onto the REFL PDs.
* Lock PRM-ITMY cavity, align beam onto POP PDs.
* Align AS beam onto AS55.
* Recenter all oplevs.
* Recenter IPPOS and IPPANG at nominal power.
* Start locking!! |
8980
|
Wed Aug 7 19:16:20 2013 |
Jenne | Update | ASC | ASS setting up accelerated more | I have furthered Koji's work, and moved the filter on/off state for all the filter banks also to the burt snapshot.
Turning on the ASS is now much faster than it was originally, with the ezcawrites in series. |
8981
|
Wed Aug 7 21:52:11 2013 |
Jenne | Update | SUS | SRM coils fine - problem with slow bias slider | [Koji, Jenne]
We have looked a little more at the SRM situation. We aligned the SRM, and then aligned the oplev, so that we had a convenient monitor of the optic's motion.
When we use the _COMM channels, which are the usual ones on the IFO_ALIGN screen, the pitch slider makes pitch motion, but the yaw slider makes the oplev spot move ~45degrees from horizontal.
However, when we use the bias channels that are in the front end model, parallel to the ASC path, pitch moves pitch, and yaw moves pure yaw.
So, we conclude that the SRM coils are fine, and there is something funny going on with the slow part of the actuation.
Koji restarted the slow computer susaux, and burt restored it, but that did not fix the situation. We went inside and looked at all of the ribbon cable connections, and pushed them all in, but that also has not fixed things.
We have been looking at D010001-b, the coil driver board, and we think that's where the summing resistor network between the slow bias slider, and the coil outputs from the fast model exists. (It's not 100% clear, but we're confident that that's what is going on).
Tomorrow, we will pull the SRM's coil driver board, and see if any of the components in the slow slider path, before the summing point, look burned / broken / bad. |
8995
|
Mon Aug 12 12:57:59 2013 |
Jenne | Update | CDS | X-End Green ASS - Roundup |
Quote: |
- The SIMULINK model has been modified to accommodate an option to dither the cavity mirrors and not the PZT mirrors. Details are as follows:
- I have sent the LO signals (CLK,SIN and COS) from the ASS model to the ASX model via the RFM model. Appropriate changes were made to all these three models, and recompiling and restarting the models was done without issue. The SIN and COS signals are used to demodulate green transmission at the dither frequencies. ***The CLK signal is not required to be sent between models as it is not being used by ASX (I turn the dither ON using the channels already set up for ASS). I realised this a little late, and at present the ASS and RFM models are compiled such that the CLK signal is also sent from ASS to RFM. This can be removed, thus freeing up 4 unnecessary inter-process communication channels. Also, I am not too sure if this is relevant, but the maximum computation time of both the RFM and ASX models seem to have gone up after I added these inter-process communication links.***
|
Getting rid of the LO transmission will certainly help / be good. After adding these channels, the RFM model is regularly hitting 62usec (out of a max acceptable of 60).
I'm not really sure why the ASS was involved in this. I feel like it might have been simpler to just do everything in the ASX model, to keep things cleaner. Also, the IPC blocks for this stuff (in both ASS and ASX) are not on the top level of the model. I had thought that this was expressly forbidden (although I'm not sure why). I'm emailing Jamie, to see if he remembers what, if anything, is breakable if the IPC blocks are down a level. |
8997
|
Mon Aug 12 14:05:34 2013 |
Jenne | Update | ASC | PRCL ASS software in place |
Quote: |
- We are ready to implement ASS for PRM
|
I have added an IPC sender from the LSC model, to send POPDC to ASS. I have copied over the structure of the arms' ASS, to do the same for PRCL. I have set it up to dither the PRM, and feed back to the PRM. I did not include an LSC set, since I'm assuming that we'll set the input pointing with the arms, and just want to move the PRM to maximize POPDC.
Models have been compiled, installed, and restarted, and the daqd was restarted. |
8998
|
Mon Aug 12 15:39:40 2013 |
Jenne | Update | ASC | PRCL ASS screens in place | I have added the PRCL ASS to the main ASS screen, and created the servo and lockin screens. The filters loaded are the same as those used for the arms (bandpasses and lowpasses for the lockins, and an integrator for the servo).
I'm going to try to lock, and get the ASS to work. |
9001
|
Mon Aug 12 23:13:14 2013 |
Jenne | Update | ASC | PRCL ASS software in place |
I guess I was thinking that POPDC was a proxy for any type of PRCL lock. Even if we're sideband locked, there is still some signal in POPDC (although it is very small relative to a carrier lock - ~40cts vs. 1,000cts). However, as soon as this question was asked of me, I realized that one of the 2f demodulated signals made more sense.
Since I want the ability to choose between POP110 and POP22, I have put a little 1x3 input matrix before the PRCL lockins in the ASS model. Since POPDC was already there, I included it as an option in the matrix (in case we ever want to do some PRCL ASS after we have some carrier resonating as well). |
9030
|
Mon Aug 19 11:30:20 2013 |
Jenne | Update | IOO | MC mirrors' ASC has non-zero inputs | [Masayuki, Jenne]
When I came in this morning, I noticed that the Mode Cleaner had not been locked for at least the past 8 hours. We moved the MC SUS sliders until the MC SUSPIT and SUSYAW values for each mirror were back to approximately the place they were the last time the MC was nicely locked (~12 hours ago). This got the MC flashing TEM00, so we thought we were doing well.
However, if the servo was enabled, any time the cavity flashed a small-order mode (especially 00), the mirrors would get super kicked. Not good.
We went to investigate, and discovered that the RFPD aux laser was left on again. We turned that off, however that didn't fix the situation.
Manasa suggested checking that the WFS were really, really off. When we looked at the WFS master screen, we noticed that although the WFS servos were off, the MC mirrors' ASC filter banks had non-zero inputs. We checked, and this is not from the MCASS, nor is it from the MC WFS lockins. At this point, I have no idea where these signals are coming from. I have turned off the ASC outputs for all the MC mirrors (which means that we cannot turn on the WFS), and the MC locks fine.
So, we need to know where the ASC signals are coming from. There isn't anything that I can see, from any screen that I can find, that indicates some signals being sent over there. Has anyone done anything lately? I know Koji was working on IPC stuff the other day, but the MC was locking fine over the weekend until yesterday afternoon, so I suspect that's not the culprit.
I have turned off the outputs of the WFS lockins, as part of my turning things off, so if whatever script needs them doesn't enable them, they should be turned back on by hand. |
9036
|
Mon Aug 19 23:08:31 2013 |
Jenne | Update | LSC | DRMI sensing signals | Here are a bunch of sensing signals. The configuration is always DRMI. Except for the optic noted in the title and the x-axis of any individual plot, other optics are held in their nominal position. DRMI condition is sidebands resonant in PRCL, 55MHz sideband resonant in SRCL. Each plot has an error signal, as well as the 2f signals at POP and AS.
The phases of POP22 and POP110 have been adjusted so that the I signal is maximized when everything is at the nominal positions (sideband resonant for PRMI). The phase of AS110 has been adjusted so that the I signal is maximized when the DRMI is in the nominal position (f2 resonant in SRC). The phases of the 1f1, 1f2, 2f1 and 2f2 REFL signals were all adjusted to have max PRCL signal in the I phase. AS55 was adjusted to have max SRCL signal in the Q phase.











|
9038
|
Tue Aug 20 01:28:47 2013 |
Jenne | Update | LSC | REFL investigations | According to the wiki, REFL 11 has a transimpedance of 4.08kV/A, and REFL 55 has a transimpedance of 615V/A. This is a ratio of ~6.5 . My optickle simulations from earlier this evening indicate that, at maximum, there is a ~factor of 2 more signal in REFL 11 than REFL 55. This is a factor of order 10-15. Then, REFL 55 has 15dB whitening gain, which is a factor of ~4. So, this explains why we're seeing so much more digital signal on REFL11 than REFL55.
Tomorrow, I need to replace the 50/50 beam splitter that splits the beam between REFL55 and REFL11 (33 and 165 have already had their light picked off at this point). I want to put in a 10% reflector, 90% transmission beamsplitter. Steve, can you please find me one of these, and if we don't have one, order one? This will give us a little more light on 55, and less light on 11, so hopefully we won't be saturating things anymore.
|
9041
|
Tue Aug 20 11:52:20 2013 |
Jenne | Update | LSC | REFL investigations |
Quote: |
As I always tell everyone: Don't use a 10% reflector which produce ghost beams. Use a 90% reflector.
|
Hmmm, yes, I forgot (bad me). I'll find a 90% refl BS, and swap the positions of REFL11 and REFL55. |
9043
|
Tue Aug 20 18:42:57 2013 |
Jenne | Update | LSC | REFL investigations | I have done the swap in the REFL path. First, I swapped the positions of REFL11 and REFL55. Then, I swapped out the 50/50 BS for a 90% reflection BS. (90% goes to REFL55, 10% goes to REFL11). I also changed the aluminum dump that was dumping the old REFL165 path into a razor dump.
Before: REFL11 had 4.0mW, REFL55 had 3.1mW. Now, REFL11 has 0.53mW, and REFL55 has 6.9mW. REFL165 still has around 61mW of light, and REFL33 has 3.3mW (the things that were changed were after 165 and 33 in the REFL path).
Now, the DC value of the REFL PDs are: REFL165 = 10.4V, REFL33 = 110mV, REFL55 = 232mV, REFL11 = 18.6mV.
As I was finishing aligning the beams onto all of the REFL diodes, Manasa asked for the IFO so she and Masayuki could continue their work on the Xarm, so I'll check the signals acquired a little later. |
9049
|
Thu Aug 22 02:40:12 2013 |
Jenne | Update | LSC | DRMI Locked for 1+ minute!!!!!! | [Jenne, Koji]
The DRMI has been locked!! And at least one time, it was for more than one minute!!

We are not 100% sure yet that it's correctly sideband locked. The test of this was to put a 50% BS in front of the AS camera (so after the beam has gone to AS55), and send the light over to a PDA10CF Thorlabs PD. I locked the Michelson on carrier for the alignment of this diode. Then I strung a cable to the control room, and plugged it into the RF spectrum analyzer. (First, I had turned off the green beat PD power, so there wasn't any RF stuff on the line that I unplugged). It's hard to watch the screen and a tv / dataviewer at the same time, so I've taken a video, so that we can see the nicely locked round DRMI beam on the AS camera, and the spectrum analyzer. My phone is working very hard at uploading the video, but we may have to wait until tomorrow for that. However, I think that we're locked on the 55MHz sideband. (Also, maybe I'm too tired or excited or something, but how do you make the real cameras take video??)
EDIT: Video uploaded. Pause the video at 10 seconds, and you'll see that we've got a strong 110MHz peak!! Hoooray! The TV in the upper right side of the video is AS. You can see as we flash, the peaks go up and down. When there's no resonance, the 110 peak goes away. (Ex., when I'm PRMI locked on the sideband, there isn't a visible peak).
Alignment procedure was as normal: Lock and align the arms. Misalign ETMs. Check that MICH fringes look good (ASS does a nice enough job that I don't actually lock and align the Michelson anymore). Restore the PRM. Lock PRMI. Tweak PRM alignment to maximize POP110I. At this point, Koji and I played a little with the PRMI, but when we finished with that, we restored the SRM, and tweaked its alignment by making nice overlap on the AS camera.
Then, we tried some DRMI settings, started seeing some locks, and played a bit with trying to optmize the settings that we have.
DETAILS:
PRMI settings:
PRCL ASC is on (with loop triggering). MICH gain = -0.8, PRCL gain = +0.05. FM4, FM5 always on, FM2 triggered. Loop and filter module triggering on POP22I. No power normalization. MICH and PRCL locked on REFL55 I&Q, with 1's in the LSC input matrix. PRCL actuating on PRM with +1, MICH actuating on BS with +0.5, PRM with -0.267.
I took transfer functions between REFL55 I&Q and REFL11 I&Q, to determine the relative gains and signs. REFL11I's gain should be -18dB relative to REFL55I, with the opposite sign. We tried PRMI locking with MICH = 1*REFL55Q and PRCL = -0.125*REFL11I for the input matrix. Still no power normalization (we haven't used power norm at all today, so I'll quit writing that).
I took transfer functions between REFL55 I&Q and REFL33 I&Q. REFL33I's gain is -8dB relative to REFL55I, but they have the same sign. We tried locking PRMI with MICH = 1*REFL55Q and PRCL = +0.6*REFL33I. Success.
Next up, some Optickle simulations, to help us go in the right direction for DRMI locking. I checked the signs of the error signals REFL55I (PRM sweep), REFL11I (PRM sweep) and REFL55Q (MICH sweep) in both PRMI and DRMI configurations. For all of these cases, the signs were the same (i.e. no sign flips needed to happen for DRMI locking, relative to PRMI locking). I checked the sensing matrices for DRMI and PRMI for those same signals, and took the ratios of the sensing matrix elements. This gave me the ratio of optical gains for each error signal, in the DRMI case vs. PRMI case, so any servo gain changes should be the inverse of these numbers. These numbers are all DRMI/PRMI: REFL55I PRCL response = 0.76, REFL11I PRCL response = 0.99, REFL55Q MICH response = 18. So, when trying to lock the DRMI, we wanted to keep the gains for PRCL about the same, reduce the servo gain for MICH by a factor of ~20, but keep the same signs for everything.
In doing that, we started seeing some short DRMI locks, so we twiddled some parameters (mostly the elements in the LSC input matrix) a bit. We eventually settled on: PRCL = -0.125*REFL11I, MICH = 0.1*REFL55Q, and SRCL = 1.0 * REFL55I. The output matrix was the same (MICH pushing on BS and PRM, PRCL on PRM), with the addition of a +1 in the SRCL -> SRM element. For all 3 degrees of freedom (PRCL, MICH, SRCL), FMs 4 and 5 were always on. For PRCL, FMs 2,3,6 were triggered to come on after 0.5 seconds of delay. The PRCL FM triggers helped enormously. I tried several other things, including changing the MICH input matrix element up and down in value, changing the SRCL input matrix element up and down in value, and engaging triggering for a few different filters in the MICH and SRCL degrees of freedom. However, none of these made things better, and several made things worse. Most notably, for SRCL, engaging triggering for FMs 2 and 3 kicked the cavities out of lock, which implies that perhaps our gain isn't high enough yet (and thus our UGF isn't very high yet). I changed FM1 of SRCL to be +3dB of gain (from +10dB), and it would live through that coming on (trigger delayed by 1 sec, then ramping up over 1 second), but within a second after the filter finishing coming on, the cavity would fall out of lock (not violently kicked, just not locked anymore).
At this point, we were trying to figure out a way to confirm what kind of lock we had. I checked Optickle again, and we do not expect to see a significant change in POP110I between the PRMI and DRMI cases, so that isn't a useful check. We dreamed of having our AS110 demod board, or the AS OSA set up, but neither of those was going to happen tonight. Instead, Koji suggested hooking up the PD, and looking directly at the output.
To-do: Set up the AS OSA. Also, perhaps temporarily borrow the 110 demod board from POP. We were triggering on POP22 tonight, and that seemed to work okay.
|
9052
|
Thu Aug 22 13:03:40 2013 |
Jenne | Update | LSC | DRMI Locked for 1+ minute!!!!!! |
Quote: |
Very nice!! I was wondering, shouldn't the driving matrix be such that MICH pushes on SRM as well?
|
Hmmm, yes, that's a very good point. I think you're right, and I'll give that a try today. |
9057
|
Fri Aug 23 01:52:34 2013 |
Jenne | Update | SUS | Violin filters moved to LSC, from SUS | [Rana, Jenne]
We were meditating a little bit on what may be the story behind the PRM violin filter situation. We locked the PRMI, and turned on and off the violin filters. We noticed, very bizarrely, that when the violin filters were ON, the servos would oscillate. Weird. Also, probably because the oscillation was causing us to hit the limit we have in the MICH servo, we rung up a 3rd harmonic of one of the violin modes, which was at 1955 Hz.
We took a transfer function of the PRCL servo, saw that the UGF was 300 Hz, and lowered it to ~180 Hz. After later investigations, that high-ish UGF probably wasn't a problem. Anyhow, we then took MICH servo transfer functions, and saw some very weird stuff.
At frequencies where we had violin filter notches, we were seeing peaks in the transfer function, which came close to touching, or crossed the 0dB line! We suspect that this may have something to do with the balancing of the drives to the optics, since we have PRCL driving PRM, but MICH driving BS and PRM. What we did was move the violin filter notches into the LSC model. There were already SUS filter banks in the LSC model (right side of the LSC screen). In preparation for the DRMI, I have put the BS violin notches into the BS, PRM and SRM filter banks, as well as the PRM and SRM filters into all 3 banks. Right now for PRMI, I have the BS and PRM notches (as well as the Vio3 notch) turned on in both BS and PRM. All of the violin-related filters are turned off in the LSC filter bank inside the SUS models. When we did this, the servo oscillations no longer are excited when we turn on the notches, and when we take a new transfer function, there are no longer weird peaks at the notch frequencies. More meditation needs to be done.
Also, for the violin3 filter, Rana noted that at 1955 Hz, after we confirmed that the REFL 55 phase was set correctly (and we're using REFL 55 I&Q for PRMI locking), the I-phase had a response of 0.36, while the Q-phase had a response of 0.20. I should be able to think about these numbers, and decide if the vio3 is for the BS or the PRM violin mode.

the above series of Bode plots shows the MICH Open Loop Gain as the REFL55 phase is adjusted (PURPLE, ORANGE) with the notches in the SUS and then (RED) as the notches are moved to the LSC and made the same for all optics.
In other news, I have the parts that Jamie ordered to make a new 110 demod board, so that's one of my daytime activities now, so we can have both POP110 and AS110. |
9062
|
Mon Aug 26 18:55:18 2013 |
Jenne | Configuration | Electronics | putting together a 110 MHz LSC demod board for AS | I have modified one of the spare demod boards that was sitting above the electronics bench (the one which was unlabeled - the others say 33MHz, 55MHz and 165MHz) to be the new AS110 demod board. In place of the T1 coil, and the C3 and C6 resistors, I have put the commercial splitter PSCQ-2-120+. In place of U5 (the low pass for the PD input) I have put an SCLF-135+.
In order to figure out how to make the pinout of the PSCQ match up with the available pads from T1, I first pulled the "AS11" board (it's not something that we use, so it would be less of a tragedy if something happened while I had the board pulled). However, while the PCB layout is the same, the splitter for the low frequencies (PSCQ-2-51W) has a different pinout than the one I need for the 110MHz. So, I put AS11 back, and pulled the POP110 board. (After I noted the pinout on POP110, I reinstalled that board. To get it out, I had to unplug the I and Q outs of POP22, but I have also replugged those in).
For my new AS110 demod board, I copied the pin connections on POP110. I have made a little diagram, so you can see what pins went where. The top 2 rectangles are the "before" installation cartoon, and the bottom is the "as installed" cartoon.

The one thing that must be noted is that, because of the pinout of the splitter and the constraints of the board layout, the +0 degrees (I-phase) output of the splitter is connected to the Q channel for the rest of the demod board. This means that the +90 degrees (Q-phase) output of the splitter is connected to the I channel for the rest of the demod board. This is not noted for POP110, but is true for both: The I and Q channels of the 110 MHz demod boards are switched. In practice, we can handle this with our digital phase rotation.
Daytime tomorrow, I will test my new board as Suresh did in elog 4736. Before we get to use AS110, we need (a) some LO juice from the RF distribution box, and (b) a spot to plug the board in, in the LSC rack. Meditating on how those are going to happen are also tasks for daytime tomorrow. |
9068
|
Tue Aug 27 02:18:28 2013 |
Jenne | Update | LSC | PRMI, DRMI sensing matrices | I have made a measurement of the PRMI and the DRMI sensing matrices.
Keiko pointed out to me in an email a little while ago that I wasn't zeroing elements in the oscillator drive matrix after using them, so I was effectively driving all the degrees of freedom at once, which is why some of the recent sensing matrices looked a little bullshitty. Anyhow, I put in a few lines to zero that row of the LSC output matrix, so that we don't do that any more.
PRMI sensing matrix:

DRMI sensing matrix, first-ever measurement, after the optic flipping / recent locking success:

Note that we don't have any error bars in the DRMI case, since the IFO fell out of lock during the error bar measurements. So, we got the "real" data from the degrees of freedom, but not extra data for making error bars. Also, the MICH / SRCL coupling hasn't been balanced out in the output matrix yet, but since the notches are engaged in the degrees of freedom during this measurement, that shouldn't be a significant effect.
To get the DRMI sensing matrix measured, I added the SRM's actuator calibration to SensMatDefinitions.py (data from elog 5637). I also created a new file runDRMI_sens, to be the equivalent of runPRMI_sens. In the new runDRMI_sens, I reduced the actuation from the oscillator by a factor of 10. I had several attempts at higher oscillator amplitudes that kept kicking the IFO out of lock.
The DRMI was pretty good, but I wasn't getting ~10s of minutes like Koji was on Friday. I also wasn't able to engage all of the FM triggers that he was. The 10-30 Hz seismic BLRMS is a little higher than a usual night, but other than that, seismic looks pretty quiet.
My settings for the night:
LSC input matrix: +0.1*REFL55Q = MICH, -0.125*REFL11I = PRCL, +1.00*REFL55I = SRCL.
Filter settings: MICH, PRCL, SRCL all had FM4,5 always on. MICH had FM2,3 triggered. PRCL had FM2,3,6 triggered. SRCL had FM2 triggered. In particular, engaging FM 6 for MICH or SRCL made some loud low-ish frequency oscillation. Engaging anything other than FM2 for SRCL kicked the IFO out of lock.
Gains: MICH = -0.800, PRCL = +0.050, SRCL = -0.100
Triggering: All triggered on POP22I, upper = 50, lower = 10 (lower = 25 for SRCL).
FM trigger thresholds: MICH on = 35, off = 2, delay = 2 sec. PRCL on = 35, off = 2, delay = 0.5 seconds. SRCL on = 80, off = 25, delay = 5 sec.
Power normalization: None, for any degree of freedom.
LSC Output matrix: MICH = -0.267 for PRM, +0.50 for BS. PRCL = +1.0 for PRM. SRCL = +1.0 for SRM.
LSC SUS filters: BS, PRM, SRM all had FM1,2,3,6 engaged for the BS, PRM and SRM violin filters, as well as the 3rd order harmonic for one of them.
Other notes:
I tried locking the SRMI, so that I could do the same kind of actuator calibration that Koji did for the PRMI in elog 8816, but was unsuccessful. I checked optickle, and found that for REFL 55 I&Q locking, MICH and SRCL keep the same signs for SRMI as DRMI. Also, for both, the optical response is a factor of ~15 lower for SRMI than DRMI, so the gains should be higher by a factor of 15 for both MICH and SRCL. I think my big problem here is that I don't have anything to trigger on. There isn't any signal to speak of in the POP PDs, with the PRM misaligned. Hopefully we'll have AS110 shortly, and that will help.
I updated the IFO Configure restore scripts to our latest versions of locking. I have also tested them, and restoring the Michelson, PRMI and DRMI all seem to work. (MICH restores to locking with AS55Q. PRMI restores to locking with REFL165 I&Q. DRMI restores to the settings noted above in this entry.) The X and Y arm restores have been working, and I have been using them (semi-)regularly since I announced them in elog 8433 back in April. Still to-do though: Add PRCL ASC to the PRMI up script, and make the dither options work for at least the arms and PRM. (Just need to point the drop down menu options to the new ASS scripts.)
|
9069
|
Tue Aug 27 15:31:48 2013 |
Jenne | Configuration | Electronics | putting together a 110 MHz LSC demod board for AS |
Quote: |
Quote: |
I have modified one of the spare demod boards that was sitting above the electronics bench (the one which was unlabeled - the others say 33MHz, 55MHz and 165MHz) to be the new AS110 demod board. In place of the T1 coil, and the C3 and C6 resistors, I have put the commercial splitter PSCQ-2-120+. In place of U5 (the low pass for the PD input) I have put an SCLF-135+.
|
OK, but what kind of filter should we be actually using? i.e. what purpose the 135 MHz low pass serve in contrast to a PHP-100+ ?
|
Hmmm. Indeed. This is just cutting off higher frequency stuff, but anything from other lower sidebands still gets through. I should actually stick in the SXBP-100's, which will band pass from 87-117 MHz. These have an insertion loss at 100 MHz of 1.64 dB.
Jamie ordered 2 of these, so I can put one in each of AS110 and POP110. |
9071
|
Tue Aug 27 17:32:52 2013 |
Jenne | Configuration | Electronics | putting together a 110 MHz LSC demod board for AS | I measured the phase split between the I and Q signals of my AS110 board. To do so, I plugged the board into an empty slot next to the PD DC readout / whitening board in the LSC rack. I borrowed the POP110 local oscillator, and used a Marconi to generate a "PD input". (I'm roughly following what Suresh did in elog 4736). Our 11MHz is currently 11.066134MHz, so I had the Marconi going at 110.662340 MHz (1kHz from 10*11MHz), and I had the Marconi source at -13dBm.
I took a transfer function using the SR785 between the I and Q outs of the AS110 demod board, and got a magnitude misbalance of 0.809 dB, and a phase split of 110.5 degrees. This isn't so close to 90 degrees, but this may be a problem with the splitter that we're using, as Suresh detailed in elog 4755. In that elog, he measured a phase split of POP110 of 105 degrees, unless the power going into the splitter was pretty high. As with POP110, since I expect that we'll usually only look at one channel (I, for instance), this isn't such a big deal for AS110.
I have left, for now, the board in the empty slot. It looks like (I'm going to go check) there are 3 open channels on the whitening board that has the PD DC signals. So, the only thing left to figure out is how we want to get some local oscillator action for this new board.
EDIT: Yes, those channels are available. Right now (as a remnant from testing the whitening filters waaaay back in the day) they are called C1:LSC-PDXXX I, Q, DC. I'll use 2 of those for the AS110 I and Q. |
9072
|
Tue Aug 27 18:21:35 2013 |
Jenne | Configuration | Electronics | 110 MHz LO options | As I see it, we have a few options for getting the 110 MHz LO to both the POP110 and AS110 demod boards.
The current situation is described by Kiwamu in elog 5746. The 55 MHz signal comes into the box, and is split 4 ways, with each path having 19.7 dBm. One of these 4 is for 110. It has a 2dB attenuator (giving us ~17.7 dBm), and then it goes to an MK-2 frequency multiplier. I'm a little lost on why we're giving the MK-2 17 dBm, since it says that it can handle an input power between 1 - 15 dBm. It has ~16 dB conversion loss, so the 110 output of the distribution board has (according to the drawing) 1.9 dBm. The demod boards have a 10 dB attenuator as the first element on the LO path, so we're giving the ERA-5 -8 dBm.
We can either amplify the 110 leaving the distribution box, split it, and then attenuate it to the appropriate level for the demod boards, or we can change the attenuators on the POP110 and AS110 demod boards.
Since we seem to be over driving the 2x frequency multiplier, I think I should change the 2dB attenuator to a 5dB attenuator, so we're giving the 2x multiplier ~15 dBm. The conversion loss of ~16 dB means we'll have -1 dBm of 110 MHz. I want to amplify that by ~10 dB, to give 9 dBm. Attenuate by 5 dB to get to 4 dBm, then split into 2, giving me 2 110 MHz spigots, each of ~1 dBm. Since the demod boards expect between 0-2 dBm for the LO's, this should be just fine.
Thoughts, before I start scrounging parts, and pulling the RF distribution box? |
9077
|
Wed Aug 28 00:41:23 2013 |
Jenne | Update | CDS | CDS svn commits not happening | svn status update. asx, als and ioo were found not committed. Not sure about who modified ioo last after Jenne.
//edit Manasa - edited the/ elog instead of replying // |
9078
|
Wed Aug 28 03:28:00 2013 |
Jenne | Update | LSC | Playing with DRMI, some ASS automation prep | [Rana, Jenne]
We did lots of poking around with the DRMI tonight. I should elog more in the morning, but the most important points are:
Locking settings same as elog 9068, except PRCL gain changed to 0.035, and the FMs that are triggered. PRCL tonight had FM2,3,6 triggered. MICH had FM1,2,3,7 triggered. SRCL had FM1,2 triggered. Engaging the MICH boosts helped make things more quiet, so that some of the SRC boosts could be enabled. Still not as good of lock stretches as Koji got last Friday (elog 9060).
REFL55 and REFL11 were still saturating (only during acquisition), after the optical path changes I did last week (elog 9043). We reduced the REFL55 whitening slider from 15 dB to 6 dB (but forgot to compensate with digital gain), to keep the counts (as seen on DTT time series, binning off) to less than ~20,000 counts. REFL11 is still saturating, and we're not sure why, since it's slider gain is 0 dB. To be investigated.
I was prepping the ASS to be more conveniently put into a wrapper script, which could be called from the IFO Configure screen. This involved adding PRCL to the burt .req and .snap files, as well as modifying the scripts a little bit to include PRCL as an option. I ended up changing the script names from DITHER_Arm_ON.py and DITHER_Arm_OFF.py to DITHER_ASS_ON.py adn DITHER_ASS_OFF.py, since they are no longer restricted to being arms-only. You must still provide an argument to the script, to tell it which degree of freedom you want to activate. I also changed the save offsets scripts. The way they were, the X and Y arms just had separate hard-coded scripts, with no convenient way to incorporate PRCL. I merged them (including PRCL) into WRITE_ASS_OFFSETS.py, which you must now provide the DoF as an argument. I tested these new scripts on all 3 of the DoFs, and made changes to the ASS screen, so it now calls only the new scripts. It should now be easy to incorporate future ASS modifications.
Rana was in the middle of modifying the ASS model to include SRCL, and we also need to include MICH. The ASS model is not compile-ready, so don't compile it!! If you need to compile the ASS, please save what's there as a different name, and do an "svn up" to get the latest working version.
We suspected that there might be angular drive issues with the SRM (it was wiggling a lot). We checked the damping via step responses - all Qs were less than 10. Then we found that the INPUT button on the SRM PIT OL was OFF (why ???). After turning this back on it behaved better. We measured the loop shape and found that the UGF was 7 Hz; good. Need to work on some loop shaping for this guy. Its just 1/f out to 300 Hz right now. UGF should be made a little lower so that we can stably turn on the Bounce/Roll notches and a ~50 Hz low pass filter.
Most importantly, the F2A filters need to be measured and implemented. They are a few years old. |
9094
|
Mon Sep 2 15:22:57 2013 |
Jenne | Update | PSL | PMC relocked | The PMC was locked on an LG 10 mode (or something like it), for at least the last 8 hours. I relocked it on the regular 00 mode, and it's fine now.
Also, in CDS news, I did an mxstream restart (the RCG upgrade is supposed to make this not an issue anymore...), and did a "diag reset" afterwards, and all of the IPC errors except for one in the LSC model have gone away (OAF is still not running....on my to-do list, but not super high priority). |
9095
|
Mon Sep 2 16:46:32 2013 |
Jenne | Update | Electronics | RF distribution box is on the bench | I have pulled the RF distribution box out of the rack, so I can look at it, and modify it to have 2 110 MHz spigots. I'm going to make the mods as in elog 9072.
Before I pulled the distribution box, I turned off the RF Generation Box, so don't be surprised that the MC will not lock. I have terminated the cables that bring the 11 and 55 MHz signals from the generation box to the distribution box, so if someone does turn on the generation box, there won't be bad reflections.
To get the box out, in addition to unplugging all of the cables that go to the distribution box, I had to disconnect 2 of the ADC ribbon cables from the top row of RFPD demod / whitening / ADC boards, since they were in the way. Everything is labeled, so it should be easy to put back together.
Note to Future Jenne: Past Jenne put the screws needed for those ADC cables and to hold the box in the rack, in the plastic box that is on the floor in front of the LSC rack.
Also, I measured the 110 MHz port before I pulled the board, so I would know what my "before" looked like. I was using the 300MHz 'scope's measurement functions, so these are in volts, not dBm. Amplitude = 1.33V, RMS = 456 mV, freq = 109.4-111.9 MHz |
9096
|
Mon Sep 2 18:06:21 2013 |
Jenne | Update | Electronics | RF distribution box: 110 MHz LO options | After scrounging for parts, and opening up the box, I have modified my proposal to the following:

Note that the freq multiplier is supposed to take, at maximum, 15 dBm. The reason I put the 5 dB attenuator, then an amplifier, then another attenuator is that I don't know of / can't find easily a 10 dB amplifier with the usual case type on the MiniCircuits site. (If anyone knows of one off the top of their head, that would be handy. Then I'd remove the attenuator between the multiplier and the amplifier, and make the 10 dB attenuator a 5 dB.)
Anyhow, the ZFL-500HLN can only output 16 dBm of power, and I don't think I have space for another ZHL-2 (which can output up to 26 dBm) inside the box, so I put an attenuator before, as well as after, the amplifier.
I think I have space inside the box for all the bits and pieces I'll need, although to do things correctly, I need to drill holes in the teflon mounting plate to mount the amplifier and splitter.

I also think that I have space on the front panel to put another isolated SMA feedthrough.

I have, on my desk, all the parts (except for mounting screws, and cables between things) to make these modifications to the distribution box. |
9099
|
Tue Sep 3 21:08:13 2013 |
Jenne | Update | Electronics | RF distribution box: 110 MHz LO options | The RF distribution box is still on the bench, so again, don't be surprised that the MC doesn't lock.
I have completed my modifications as proposed in elog 9096, but I want to do a couple of quickie tests in the morning before I declare it ready for service. |
|