40m QIL Cryo_Lab CTN SUS_Lab TCS_Lab OMC_Lab CRIME_Lab FEA ENG_Labs OptContFac Mariner WBEEShop
  40m Log, Page 108 of 341  Not logged in ELOG logo
IDup Date Author Type Category Subject
  5387   Mon Sep 12 16:27:01 2011 KeikoUpdateLSC3f demodulation board check

Wait. I am checking the whitening filters of the 33 and 165 demodulation boards.

Also, LSC-REFL33-I-IN1(IN2, OUT) and LSC-REFL165-Q-IN1(IN2,OUT) channels may not be working??

 

Quote:

I also quickly checked the orthogonality of the demodulation board for REFL33 and REFL165 using function generators and oscilloscope. I checked the frequencies at 1,10,100,1K,10KHz of the demodulated signals. They are fine and ready for 3f signal extraction.

 

  5388   Mon Sep 12 18:40:35 2011 KeikoUpdateLSC3f demodulation board check

LSC-REFL33-I-IN1(IN2, OUT) and LSC-REFL165-Q-IN1(IN2,OUT) channels are back!

We disconnected and connected again the AA filters then the channels are fixed. Apparently the AA filters just before the digital world were somhow charged and not working... Thank you Kiwamu!

Quote:

Wait. I am checking the whitening filters of the 33 and 165 demodulation boards.

Also, LSC-REFL33-I-IN1(IN2, OUT) and LSC-REFL165-Q-IN1(IN2,OUT) channels may not be working??

 

  5389   Mon Sep 12 18:45:04 2011 AnamariaConfigurationLSCAP table current layout

Before we install the REFL 3f PDs I made a drawing of the current table layout, since there has been no update lately. Once I've incorporated the two extra PDs (now seen sitting bottom left), I will update the drawing and post in the wiki as well.

  5390   Mon Sep 12 23:45:14 2011 SureshConfigurationComputer Scripts / ProgramsStripTool does not scale properly on Pianosa

When I run StripTool on Pianosa, I get the following message

==== StripTool Xt Warning Handler ====
warning:         Axis: minVal is greater than or equal to maxVal

 

And the y-axis scale reverts to 0 -100 regardless of what ever I set in the controls panel

I ssh'ed into rosalba and ran striptool from there and did not face this problem.  So I think pianosa has a problem with Striptool.

  5391   Mon Sep 12 23:54:10 2011 kiwamuUpdateIOOEOM resonant box installed

[Mirko / Kiwamu]

 The resonant box has been installed together with a 3 dB attenuator.

The demodulation phase of the MC lock was readjusted and the MC is now happily locked.

 

(Background)

We needed more modulation depth on each modulation frequency and so for the reason we installed the resonant box to amplify the signal levels.

Since the resonant box isn't impedance matched well, the box creates some amount of the RF reflections (#5339).

In order to reduce somewhat of the RF reflection we decided to put a 3 dB attenuator in between the generation box and the resonant box.

 

(what we did)

 + attached the resonant box directly to the EOM input with a short SMA connector.

 + put stacked black plates underneath the resonant box to support the wight of the box and to relief the strain on the cable between the EOM and the box.

 + put a 3 dB attenuator just after the RF power combiner to reduce RF reflections.

 + readjusted the demodulation phase of the MC lock.

 

(Adjustment of MC demodulation phase)

 The demodulation phase was readjusted by adding more cable length in the local oscillator line.

After some iterations an additional cable length of about 30 cm was inserted to maximize the Q-phase signal.

So for the MC lock we are using the Q signal, which is the same as it had been before.

 

 Before the installation of the resonant box, the amplitude of the MC PDH signal was measured in the demodulation board's monitor pins.

The amplitude was about 500 mV in peak-peak (see the attached pictures of the I-Q projection in an oscilloscope). Then after the installation the amplitude decreased to 400 mV in peak-peak.

Therefore the amplitude of the PDH signal decreased by 20 %, which is not as bad as I expected since the previous measurement indicated 40 % reduction (#2586).

 

  5392   Tue Sep 13 03:18:14 2011 kiwamuUpdateLSCY arm locking prep

(Preparation of Y arm locking)

(A) The f2a filters were newly designed and applied to ETMY (see the attachment)

(B) Once the Y arm is aligned such that the TEM00 mode flashes, the transmitted light is visible on the ETMYT CCD camera.

(C) With the newly installed resonant EOM circuit the PDH signal from AS55 looks healthy.

 

(some notes)

(A) To design the f2a filters there is a handy python script called "F2A_LOCKIN.py" in /scripts/SUS.

The script measures the coil imbalance at high frequency and low frequency using a LOCKIN module and then gives us the information about the imbalance.

The script hasn't yet been completed, so it doesn't return the intuitive answers but returns something non-intuitive. I will modify it.

 

(B)  To see the transmitted light from the Y arm I was going to align the CCD camera on the Y end table.

However I found that once the green light is blocked, the transmitted light can be visible on the camera without any re-alignment.

Therefore I haven't rearranged anything on the Y end table, but I just blocked the green light.

Perhaps we still need to align the photo diodes for the transmitted light.

 

(C) While Suresh was working on MC, I looked at the signal from AS55 with all the optics misaligned except for ITMY, ETMY and BS.

The signal from the Y arm looked very PDH signal, and the demodulation phase seemed to be about 45 deg to maximize the I signal.

I tried locking it by feeding the signal back to ETMY but failed due to a too much POS to angle coupling in the ETMY actuators.

I was momentarily able to capture a higher order mode with a negative gain in LSC-YARM_GAIN, but it was quite difficult to keep it locked.

This was because once I increased the gain to make it stable, the angle instability became more significant and lost the lock immediately.

This was the reason why I had to do the f2a filter redesign. Tomorrow we can try locking the Y arm.

  5393   Tue Sep 13 09:16:00 2011 SureshUpdateIOOMC spots recentered and input beam aligned

The shift of MC2 which Rana noted caused the beam spots on the MC mirrors to decenter. I used the mcassUp and mcassOn scripts and checked the output of the C1IOO lockins to get the spot positions.  I first tried to realign just the MC2 to recenter the spots.  But this was not sufficient.  I then worked on the pitch of all three optics since it is easier to align.   By the time this was done the offset in yaw also reduced, probably due to cross coupling between pitch and yaw in the coils.  At the end of the process I obtained all decentering around 1.5mm or less, then I went over to adjust the MC2TransQPD beam path so that we center the spot on the QPD.  This action shifted the stack,  I had to iterate this two more times before the successive corrections grew sufficiently small.  I think it may shift again if we touch the chamber (the image of MC2Face is still inverted).

The new spot positions in mm (MC1,2,3 pit MC1,2,3 yaw):
    1.3212   -0.8415    0.6795   -1.4292   -0.3574   -1.5208

 

 mcdecenter20110912_1.png    mcdecenter20110912_2.png      

 

- Further improvement of beam centering can be done but first I would like to be sure that the MC is stable.  The MC2Trans light is centered on the QPD as a reference.

 

  5394   Tue Sep 13 15:00:25 2011 KeikoUpdateLSC3f demodulation board check

Whitening filters for the REFL33 & 165 demodulated channels were measured and confirmed that they are working. They can be turned on and off by un-white filter switches on the MEDM screen because they are properly linked. The measured filter responses are showen below. (Sorry, apparentyl the thumbnails are not shown here. Please click the attachments.) 

WF33.pdf

WF165.pdf

Attachments: (top) Whitening filter for REFL33 demodulation board. (bottom) Whitening filter response for REFL 165 demodulation board.

  5395   Tue Sep 13 16:57:44 2011 steveUpdateLSCITMX oplev **

Quote:

I lined up the Y Arm for locking and then centered the oplevs for ETMY and ITMY.

* The ITMY OL has still got the old style laser. Steve, pleaes swap this one for a HeNe. Also the optical layout seems strange: there are two copies of the laser beam going into the chamber (??). Also, the QPD transimpedance needs to be increase by a factor of ~10. We're only getting ~500 counts per quadrant. Its worth it for someone to re-examine the whole ITMY OL beam layout.

* The ETMY OL beam was coming out but clipping on the mount for the ETMY OL HeNe. This indicates a failure on our part to do the ETMY closeout alignment properly. In fact, I get the feeling from looking around that we overlooked aligning the OL and IPPOS/ANG beams this time. If we're unlucky this could cause us to vent again. I undid part of the laser mount and changed the height on the receiving mirror to get the beam back onto the QPD.

I noticed that there is significant green light now getting into some of the IR PDs; beacuse of this there are weird offsets in the TRY QPD and perhaps elsewhere. We had better purchase some filters to tape over the front of the sensitive IR sensors to prevent the couplling from the green laser.

* There is a beam on IPPOS, but its too big for the detector (this has always been the case). We need to put a 2" lens with a weak focusing power on this path so as to halve the beam size on the detector. Right now its clipping and misleading. There is also a 0.9V offset on the SUM signal. I'm not sure if this readout is working at all.

* I couldn't find any beam on IPANG at all. Not sure what's changed since Kiwamu saw it.

 Old Coherent diode laser was replaced by Uniphase HE/NE 1125P at ITMX.

Newport 10B20NC.1 broadband beam sampler set up as beamspitter to dump 90% of the light into beam trap. Beam in to test mass  0.7 mW ,  returning to qpd 0.07 mW  = ~ 3,700 counts

f 1.5 m lens placed into ingoing beam path to reduce the spot size on the qpd.         ITMY oplev will be done in this manner tomorrow.

 

* IP-ANG is lost with the Piezo Jena PS

* IP-POS cable have to be found at the LSC rack

 

  5396   Tue Sep 13 19:04:58 2011 SureshUpdateComputer Scripts / ProgramsRestarted Frame builder several times while compiling c1ioo, c1mcs and c1rfm

I restarted the frame builder at the following times

 

Tue Sep 13 14:53:49 PDT 2011

 

Tue Sep 13 16:46:32 PDT 2011

 

Tue Sep 13 17:24:16 PDT 2011

  5397   Tue Sep 13 19:12:53 2011 SureshUpdateComputer Scripts / Programschanges to the c1ioo, c1mcs and c1rfm

[Suresh, Jamie]

The new versions of these three models have been committed to the svn.  I copy below the svn log I wrote over there.

I edited three models,namely c1ioo, c1mcs and c1rfm to bring four channels from C1MCS model into the
 C1IOO model through the RFM.

We plan to use the MC2-Trans-QPD as a third sensor in addition to the WFS1 and WFS2 in the ASC system so that we can sense all the six degrees of freedom of the MC.  However the MC2-Trans_QPD is a new incarnation of the old MC2 Oplev QPD and its four segments are are picked up in the c1mcs model running on the C1SUS machine.  Since we need these    in the C1IOO machine we    had to port these signals via the RFM.  The    changes    I made to these    models are described below:
1) c1rfm.mdl -->  I added several cds parts to carry these four    channels from c1mcs to c1ioo via c1rfm

2) c1mcs.adl -->  In the MC2 block of c1mcs I cut out the structure which converts the four segments of the  QPD in the pitch, yaw and sum signals and copied it to the c1ioo model.     In the    c1mcs I  grounded the input of the oplev signals just as they are in    the MC1    and MC2    suspension blocks. I then routed the ADC channels associated with the oplev QPD signals to the rfm model.

3) c1ioo.mdl --> I have made extensive changes to the c1ioo model to include the third sensor in the WFS feedback loop.  The six lockins in the model are used to excite the MC mirrors and the signals from WFS and QPD can be demodulated to determine the input or output matrices in the WFS feedback.  A sensor_demod_array permits us to select the signals we wish to demodulate. The MCL signal, used in the MC_ASS and A2L measurements, is retained as one of the signals.  The MC_TRANS_SUM was used several in  scripts and to preserve the continuity with this channel name we inserted three EPICS parts to generate a slow channel by the same name from this model.

Since the MC_TRANS_SUM is used in the MC-autolocker script we checked to make sure that the script is running after we recompiled all the three models and restarted them.  It is all fine.

  5398   Tue Sep 13 19:31:09 2011 kiwamuUpdateLSCY arm locking prep

The Y arm has been locked with AS55.

A next thing is to check the spot positions on the ETMY and ITMY mirrors so that we can evaluate the recent beam pointing.

 

- - - parameter settings - - -

C1:LSC-YARM_GAIN = -0.03

AS55 demod phase = 0.2

WF gains = 21 dB

C1:LSC-TRY_OUT = 0.57 (maximized by steering PZT2)

Quote from #5392

This was the reason why I had to do the f2a filter redesign. Tomorrow we can try locking the Y arm.

 

  5399   Tue Sep 13 23:08:51 2011 KeikoUpdateLSC3f demodulation board check

Keiko, Jamie , Kiwamu

The I and Q orthogonalities of REFL33 and 165 demodulation board were measured by "orthogonality.py"  Python package scipy were addied on Pianosa to run this code. Please note that "orthogonality.py" can be run only on Pianosa.  

The results were:

REFL165

ABS = 1.070274, PHASE = -81.802479 [deg]

if you wanna change epics values according to this result, just copy and execute the following commands

ezcawrite C1:LSC-REFL165_Q_GAIN 0.934340 && ezcawrite C1:LSC-REFL165_PHASE_D -81.802479

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

REFL33

ABS = 1.016008 PHASE = -89.618724 [deg]

if you wanna change epics values according to this result, just copy and execute the following commands

ezcawrite C1:LSC-REFL33_Q_GAIN 0.984244 && ezcawrite C1:LSC-REFL33_PHASE_D -89.618724


Fig.1 and 2  are the resulting plots for 33 and 165 MHz demod baoards, respectively.You should look at the 3Hz in x axis, as the demodulated signal frequency was set as 3 Hz.REFL33-modified.png

Fig. 1 REFL33 I and Q orthogonality at 3 Hz.

REFL165-modified.png

 

Fig. 2 REFL165 I and Q orthogonality at 3 Hz.

 

 

 

  5400   Wed Sep 14 01:17:51 2011 kiwamuUpdateLSCmeasurement of spot position on Y arm

The spot positions on ITMY and ETMY were measured using the LOCKIN modules in C1ASS when the Y arm stayed locked.

The beam was successfully aligned such that it hits the center of the ETMY mirror.

However on the other hand the angle of the beam is pitching and it's going upward as the beam propagates to ETMY.

 

/***** RESULTS ******/

Here is a summary of the measurement :

  amount of off-centering [mm]
ETMY_PIT  0.0032
ETMY_YAW  -0.13
ITMY_PIT  -12
ETMY_YAW  0.91

  

Also a cartoon is shown below.

The scale is not quite true, but at least it gives you a 3D information of how the beam is pointing down to the Y arm.

 misposition.png


  /***** MEASUREMENT *****/

 In order to measure the spot positions the standard technique, namely A2L, was used.

Since the C1ASS model was made for doing the A2L measurements on each arm cavity, the LOCKIN modules in C1ASS were used.

First the Y arm was locked with AS55 (#5398), and then the C1ASS was activated by calling some scripts from C1ASS_QPDs.adl.

In order to calibrate the signals from LOCKINs, an intentional coil imbalance was introduce.

This is the same calibration technique as Valera explained before (#4355) for measurement of the MC spot positions.

Quote from #5398

The Y arm has been locked with AS55.

A next thing is to check the spot positions on the ETMY and ITMY mirrors so that we can evaluate the recent beam pointing.

 

  5401   Wed Sep 14 01:19:20 2011 AnamariaConfigurationLSC3f PD Install in Progress

I have reconfigured the refl beam path on the AP table to include REFL33 and REFL165. Would be done if we hadn't prepared P BSs instead of S, which required some serious digging to find two others. And if someone hadn't stolen our two 3m SMA cables that Keiko and I made on our previous visit and I had left with the 3f PDs. I don't expect them to reappear but if they do, it would be grand.

Note: Refl beam from ifo looks a bit high, ~1cm on the lens 20'' from output port. Not sure what that means about ifo alignment change, I've left it as is. When we know we have a good alignment, we should be able to easily realign the beam path if necessary. If it remains the same, we might want to change the lens height.

Done:

1) REFL11 and REFL55 are now hooked up and aligned in a low power beam. (I set the power as low as I could by eye to not risk burning the PDs during alignment)

2) The required BSs and REFL33 and REFL165 are in place, powered.

3) I have set them in a configuration such that the beam is the same distance from the main beam, to adjust beam size easily for all 4.

4) Camera has been moved from main beam to behind a steering mirror, ND filters removed, centered on camera.

To Do:

1) Find one more longish SMA cable.

2) Align beam on REFL33 and REFL165.

3) Check beam size carefully. (I get a plateau on the scope, and I can "hide" the beam on the PD, but it could be better. The path has become longer by ~5-8inches.)

4) Adjust power.

5) Redo layout diagram, post in wiki.

  5402   Wed Sep 14 01:21:17 2011 JenneUpdateAdaptive FilteringModifications to LSC, RFM models, added OAF model

[Jenne, Mirko, with supervision from Jamie]

We are starting to create the new OAF model, so that it works with the new CDS system. 

I created (and did an "svn add" for) a new c1oaf.mdl, in the same place as the current c1lsc.mdl . Since the oaf will kind of be working with ISC things, I decided to put it in that folder.  So far this new OAF model just has SHMEM/PCIE memory sharing things to get info from the LSC and PEM models.  The OAF model has dcuid=22 (the same as in the old system), and lives on the LSC machine with specific_cpu=4.  This is the CPU number that Yoichi was going to use, but he ended up putting his FF stuff directly into the LSC model for delay reasons.

I modified the c1rfm.mdl to take seismometer and accelerometer info from the PEM model, and give it to the "rfm" via shmem, and then using PCIE (dolphin) to get the channel to the OAF model.

I modified the c1lsc model to have shmem outputs that go from the degrees of freedom to the OAF, and shmem inputs from the OAF's output to sum into the DoFs, just like Yoichi's FF stuff.  I also removed the old OAF_OUT, because it would only allow me to select one DoF at a time, and I will eventually want the ability to do multiple amounts of OAFing at the same time.  Hopefully.

All of the above changes have been svn'ed with nice log messages into the cds svn.

I have not yet modified the PEM model to give the seis/acc information to the RFM model.

I will need to acquire the PSL's PZT input as a representation of the mode cleaner's length if I want to apply the OAF to the MC to recreate past work.

  5403   Wed Sep 14 07:51:20 2011 steveUpdateSUSPRM damping restored

The PRM damping was restored at side sensor var 1050

  5404   Wed Sep 14 12:01:05 2011 ranaUpdateAdaptive FilteringModifications to LSC, RFM models, added OAF model

For the acquisition of the MC_F channel, I suggest taking the FAST_MON BNC output from the blue FSS interface card in the Eurocard crate in the PSL rack. This can then be piped into the 2-pin LEMO plug (Ch. 1) of the Generic Pentek DAQ card which used to acquire the MC_L signal from the MC Servo Board.

  5405   Wed Sep 14 14:06:44 2011 kiwamuUpdateGeneralminutes of 40m meeting : plans
+ Optical lever (Steve/Paul)
+ LSC demod board (Keiko)
+ DRMI locking (Keiko / Anamaria)
+ Modulation depth (Mirko)
+ ALS (Katrin)
+ MC WFS (Suresh)
+ OAF (Jenne/Mirko)
+ MC_F acquisition (Jenne/Mirko)
+ SUS, free swinging (Jenne)
+ CDS (Jamie)
+ vent plan (Jamie)
+ EOM (Kiwamu)
+ PZT-HV (Kiwamu/Koji)
  5406   Wed Sep 14 15:00:00 2011 kiwamuUpdateLSCmeasurement of spot position on Y arm

Forgot to attach a picture of the ITMY's face camera when it was locked.

The horizontal position of the spot looks good, but the vertical position is apparently too low, which agrees with the A2L result.

DSC_3408_small.jpg

Quote from #5400
  amount of off-centering [mm]
ETMY_PIT  0.0032
ETMY_YAW  -0.13
ITMY_PIT  -12
ETMY_YAW  0.91

 

 

  5407   Wed Sep 14 15:05:52 2011 steveUpdatePEMair cond maintenance

Jeff has changed our AC filters inside the lab this morning. Now he is checking on the main filters at CES.  He will finish the roof units tomorrow.

Met One #1 counter is on the top of IOO chamber.  It is measuring 1 and 0.5 micron size particles.  One year of lab condition plot below.

 

  5408   Wed Sep 14 20:04:05 2011 jamieUpdateCDSUpdate to frame builder wiper.pl script for GPS 1000000000

I have updated the wiper.pl script (/opt/rtcds/caltech/c1/target/fb/wiper.pl) that runs on the framebuilder (in crontab) to delete old frames in case of file system overloading.  The point of this script is to keep the file system from overloading by deleting the oldest frames.  As it was, it was not properly sorting numbers which would have caused it to delete post-GPS 1000000000 frames first.  This issue was identified at LHO, and below is the patch that I applied to the script.


--- wiper.pl.orig  2011-04-11 13:54:40.000000000 -0700
+++ wiper.pl       2011-09-14 19:48:36.000000000 -0700
@@ -1,5 +1,7 @@
 #!/usr/bin/perl
 
+use File::Basename;
+
 print "\n" .  `date` . "\n";
 # Dry run, do not delete anything
 $dry_run = 1;
@@ -126,14 +128,23 @@
 
 if ($du{$minute_trend_frames_dir} > $minute_frames_keep) { $do_min = 1; };
 
+# sort files by GPS time split into prefixL-T-GPS-sec.gwf
+# numerically sort on 3rd field
+sub byGPSTime {
+    my $c = basename $a;
+    $c =~ s/\D+(\d+)\D+(\d+)\D+/$1/g;
+    my $d = basename $b;
+    $d =~ s/\D+(\d+)\D+(\d+)\D+/$1/g;
+    $c <=> $d;
+}
+
 # Delete frame files in $dir to free $ktofree Kbytes of space
 # This one reads file names in $dir/*/*.gwf sorts them by file names
 # and progressively deletes them up to $ktofree limit
 sub delete_frames {
        ($dir, $ktofree) = @_;
        # Read file names; Could this be inefficient?
-       @a= <$dir/*/*.gwf>;
-       sort @a;
+       @a = sort byGPSTime <$dir/*/*.gwf>;
        $dacc = 0; # How many kilobytes we deleted
        $fnum = @a;
        $dnum = 0;
@@ -145,6 +156,7 @@
          if ($dacc >= $ktofree)  { last; }
          $dnum ++;
          # Delete $file here
+         print "- " . $file . "\n";
          if (!$dry_run) {     
            unlink($file);
          }

  5409   Wed Sep 14 20:30:36 2011 ranaUpdateSUSSome screens are still bad

I've found that a few of the screens still have Whited-Out fields due to naming changes (OL SUM and ALS-> TM OFFSET). I attach a screen shot of it.

The OL screens have the wrong SUM names and the IFO ALIGN screen is pointing to the wrong SUS screens.

Untitled.png

  5410   Wed Sep 14 21:18:45 2011 kiwamuUpdateLSCY arm locking prep

Although we did some of the Input Matrix diagonalization, we have not yet actually used this knowledge. As a result all of the optics are shaking all over the place.

Sunshine Task: Set the input matrices to their calculated values and then adjust the OSEM damping gains for all optics so as to get a Q ~ 5.

  5411   Wed Sep 14 22:07:41 2011 ranaUpdateSUSITM Oplevs are broken

I went to see what was wrong with the ITMs and found that people have been working on them and have left them in a broken state with no elog entry.

This is sad and unacceptable.

Whoever is working on these should post into the elog what the Oplev layout plan is, have someone check it, and ONLY THEN get to work on it.

The layout as it looks tonight is too complicated. With too many optics we will not have a low noise optical lever setup. The new layout should use a bare minimum number of optics and only use very stable mounts.

mm.jpg

  5412   Thu Sep 15 01:06:20 2011 KeikoUpdateLSC3f demodulation board check

In addition to REFL 33 ans 165, I checked the orthogonality for the other existing three channels.

 

AS11

ABS = 1.025035  PHASE = -93.124929 [deg]

REFL11]

ABS = 0.920984  PHASE = -88.824691 [deg]

REFL55

ABS = 1.029985 , PHASE = -90.901123 [deg]

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

 

The demodulated signal was set as 50 Hz (for example LO 11MHz and RF 11MHz+50Hz from function generators.) These AS11, REFL11, REL55, REFL33m REFL165 are the current available channels in terms of the connection to the data system from the demodulation board. I am going to estimate the error next.

Quote:

REFL165

ABS = 1.070274, PHASE = -81.802479 [deg]

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

REFL33

ABS = 1.016008 PHASE = -89.618724 [deg]

 

  5413   Thu Sep 15 01:17:10 2011 KeikoUpdateLSCMICH locked and attempt to lock PRCL

 Anamaria, Keiko

- We aligned MICH and were successfully locked MICH using AS55Q. The other mirrors were misaligned so that the other degrees of freedom didn't exist. AS55 was fed back to BS. The f2a filters on BS suspension were required to lock, because the pos feedback was unbalanced to angle degrees of freedom.

- We tried to lock PRCL next, however, because we aligned the MICH and the REFL beam paths were changed, REFL PDs didn't have the light anymore. The REFL paths were modified now, so we will try the PRCL locking next.

- We couldn't confirm REFL55 signals although we alined the REFL paths to REFL55 PD.

  5414   Thu Sep 15 02:18:19 2011 AnamariaUpdateLSCMICH locked and attempt to lock PRCL

Kiwamu, Keiko, Anamaria

 

We were able to lock PRC using REFL11I after improving the MICH dark fringe a bit (moving BS) and rotating AS55 and REFL11 such that the signal was maximized in the phases we were using. The dark port is not so dark... but the lock is stable.

I had finished the whole REFL path alignment, but I didn't have a good input beam reference at the time, which is why we had to realign the PDs and the camera. We only had strength to realign 11 and 55. Otherwise, we just need to tweak and center beam on 33 and 165, figure out what's up with 55 and be done with the AP table mods. I hope.

 

Quote:

 Anamaria, Keiko

- We aligned MICH and were successfully locked MICH using AS55Q. The other mirrors were misaligned so that the other degrees of freedom didn't exist. AS55 was fed back to BS. The f2a filters on BS suspension were required to lock, because the pos feedback was unbalanced to angle degrees of freedom.

- We tried to lock PRCL next, however, because we aligned the MICH and the REFL beam paths were changed, REFL PDs didn't have the light anymore. The REFL paths were modified now, so we will try the PRCL locking next.

- We couldn't confirm REFL55 signals although we alined the REFL paths to REFL55 PD.

 

  5415   Thu Sep 15 07:28:08 2011 steveUpdateSUSPRM damping restored

Quote:

The PRM damping was restored at side sensor var 1050

 The PRM sus damping restored.

  5416   Thu Sep 15 11:37:24 2011 SureshUpdateComputer Scripts / Programsfb restarted at Thu Sep 15 11:30:30 PDT 2011

I changed a filter bank name (C1IOO-WFS1_PIT) in c1ioo model reverting it to its earlier name.  Had to restart c1ioo model and the fb

  5417   Thu Sep 15 15:11:38 2011 kiwamuUpdateSUSf2a filters on BS and PRM

The f2a filters were newly designed and installed on BS and PRM.

So the lock of PRMI will be more stable .

Once the SRM oplev project settles down, I will adjust the f2a filters on SRM too.

  5418   Thu Sep 15 16:45:59 2011 PaulUpdateSUSITMY and SRM Oplev status

Today I worked on getting the ITMY and SRM oplevs back in working order. I aligned the SRM path back onto the QPD. I put excitations on the ITMY and SRM in pitch and yaw and observed the beam at the QPDs to check for clipping. They looked clean from clipping.

 
Measurements of the beam power at various points:
 
Straight after the laser - 7.54mW
After the BS in the SRM path - 1.59mW
After the BS in the ITMY path - 3.24mW
Incident on the SRM QPD - 0.03mW
Incident on the ITMY QPD - 0.25mW
 
Counts registered from the QPD sum channels:
 
SRM QPD SUM dark count - 1140
SRM QPD SUM bright count - 3250
 
ITMY QPD SUM dark count - 150
ITMY QDP SUM bright count - 12680
 
The power incident on the SRM QPD seems very low with respect to the ITMY QPD. Is the SRM mirror coating not very reflective for the He-Ne laser?There are some back reflections from lenses, which we should be careful of to avoid scattering.
  5419   Thu Sep 15 17:00:10 2011 Paul and SteveUpdateSUSNew ITMY and SRM oplev plan

 We have made a new plan for the ITMY and SRM oplev optical path which uses as few optics as possible. This should help to reduce coupling from vibrations of optics in the oplev path back into the GW channel. To get enough room for the turning mirror into the SRM it might be necessary to move the POY optics a bit nearer to the tank. 

  5420   Thu Sep 15 17:12:29 2011 MirkoUpdateLSCRF modulation depth measurement

[Mirko, Kiwamu]

Put up a temp. setup on the laser table to measure the RF modulation depths using the optical spectrum analyzer. First with a pickoff beam with about 2mW => SNR of 8 of 1 peak per FSR.

Then with a beam with about 100mW. Much better SNR on the single peak but still no sidebands visible. Modematching not too good in either case. Shouldn't matter.

  5421   Thu Sep 15 18:12:21 2011 JenneUpdateSUSfree swinging test in vacuum condition

Quote:

All the optcs were excited

Sat Sep 10 02:14:11 PDT 2011
999681266

 

 

Optic The Plot Input Matrix BADness
ITMX  ITMX.png       pit     yaw     pos     side    butt
UL    0.601   0.680   1.260  -1.009   0.223 
UR    0.769  -1.254  -0.175  -0.179   0.581 
LR   -1.231   0.065   0.566  -0.480   0.252 
LL   -1.399   2.000   2.000  -1.310  -2.944 
SD   -0.580   0.868   2.451   1.000  -1.597 

 
7.95029
ITMY  ITMY.png       pit     yaw     pos     side    butt
UL    1.067   0.485   1.145  -0.195   0.929 
UR    0.548  -1.515   0.949  -0.142  -1.059 
LR   -1.452  -0.478   0.855  -0.101   1.051 
LL   -0.933   1.522   1.051  -0.153  -0.962 
SD   -0.530   0.903   2.115   1.000   0.142 
3.93939
ETMX ETMX.png       pit     yaw     pos     side    butt
UL    0.842   1.547   1.588  -0.018   1.026 
UR    0.126  -0.453   1.843   0.499  -1.173 
LR   -1.874  -0.428   0.412   0.511   0.934 
LL   -1.158   1.572   0.157  -0.006  -0.867 
SD    1.834   3.513  -0.763   1.000  -0.133
5.39825
ETMY ETMY.png       pit     yaw     pos     side    butt
UL   -0.344   1.280   1.425  -0.024   0.903 
UR    1.038  -0.720   1.484  -0.056  -1.161 
LR   -0.618  -1.445   0.575  -0.040   0.753 
LL   -2.000   0.555   0.516  -0.007  -1.184 
SD   -0.047  -0.038   0.986   1.000   0.083 
4.15747
BS  BS.png       pit     yaw     pos     side    butt
UL    1.549   0.655   0.393   0.263   0.997 
UR    0.192  -1.345   1.701  -0.063  -0.949 
LR   -1.808  -0.206   1.607  -0.085   0.952 
LL   -0.451   1.794   0.299   0.241  -1.101 
SD    0.724   0.293  -3.454   1.000   0.037 
5.66432
PRM  PRM.png       pit     yaw     pos     side    butt
UL    0.697   1.427   1.782  -0.337   0.934 
UR    1.294  -0.573   0.660  -0.068  -0.943 
LR   -0.706  -1.027   0.218   0.016   0.867 
LL   -1.303   0.973   1.340  -0.254  -1.257 
SD    0.369  -0.448  -0.496   1.000   0.456 
5.1026
SRM   Can't invert....need to fix the peak-finding.  
MC1  MC1.png       pit     yaw     pos     side    butt
UL    0.872   0.986   0.160   0.054   0.000 
UR    0.176  -0.752   0.917   0.018   0.000 
LR   -1.824  -2.000   1.840   0.002   3.999 
LL   -1.128  -0.262   1.083   0.038  -0.000 
SD    0.041   0.036  -0.193   1.000  -0.001 
5.31462
MC2  MC2.png       pit     yaw     pos     side    butt
UL    1.042   0.767   0.980   0.131   0.928 
UR    0.577  -1.233   1.076  -0.134  -0.905 
LR   -1.423  -0.640   1.020  -0.146   1.050 
LL   -0.958   1.360   0.924   0.120  -1.117 
SD   -0.073  -0.164  -0.702   1.000  -0.056 
4.07827
MC3  MC3.png       pit     yaw     pos     side    butt
UL    1.595   0.363   1.152   0.166   1.107 
UR    0.025  -1.629   1.135   0.197  -0.994 
LR   -1.975   0.008   0.848   0.105   0.904 
LL   -0.405   2.000   0.865   0.074  -0.995 
SD   -0.433   0.400  -1.624   1.000   0.022 
3.64881

 

  5422   Thu Sep 15 18:24:54 2011 PaulUpdateSUSITMY and SRM Oplev current status - comparison with ITMY

Just to find out where we are currently, I plotted the ITMY and SRM oplev spectra along with the ETMY oplev spectra. ETMY seems to be very good, so comparing with this seemed useful, so we know how much we have to improve by. The SRM power spectrum appears to be around 2 orders of magnitude higher than ETMY over pretty much the whole measurement band. The ITMY power spectrum is not so bad as the SRM above about 60Hz. Next thing to do is to check the dark noise level for the ITMY and SRM QPDs.

  5423   Thu Sep 15 18:31:27 2011 PaulUpdateSUSITMY and SRM Oplev current status - comparison with ITMY

Quote:

Just to find out where we are currently, I plotted the ITMY and SRM oplev spectra along with the ETMY oplev spectra. ETMY seems to be very good, so comparing with this seemed useful, so we know how much we have to improve by. The SRM power spectrum appears to be around 2 orders of magnitude higher than ETMY over pretty much the whole measurement band. The ITMY power spectrum is not so bad as the SRM above about 60Hz. Next thing to do is to check the dark noise level for the ITMY and SRM QPDs.

 The title of this post should of course have been " ... - comparison with ETMY" not " ... - comparison with ITMY"

  5424   Thu Sep 15 20:16:15 2011 jamieUpdateCDSNew c1oaf model installed and running

[Jamie, Jenne, Mirko]

New c1oaf model installed

We have installed the new c1oaf (online adaptive feed-forward) model.  This model is now running on c1lsc.  It's not really doing anything at the moment, but we wanted to get the model running, with all of it's interconnections to the other models.

c1oaf has interconnections to both c1lsc and c1pem via the following routes:

c1lsc ->SHMEM-> c1oaf
c1oaf ->SHMEM-> c1lsc
c1pem ->SHMEM-> c1rfm ->PCIE-> c1oaf

Therefore c1lsc, c1pem, and c1rfm also had to be modified to receive/send the relevant signals.

As always, when adding PCIx senders and receivers, we had to compile all the models multiple times in succession so that the /opt/rtcds/caltech/c1/chans/ipc/C1.ipc would be properly populated with the channel IPC info.

Issues:

There were a couple of issues that came up when we installed and re/started the models:

c1oaf not being registered by frame builder

When the c1oaf model was started, it had no C1:DAQ-FB0_C1OAF_STATUS channel, as it's supposed to.  In the daqd log (/opt/rtcds/caltech/c1/target/fb/logs/daqd.log.19901) I found the following:

Unable to find GDS node 22 system c1oaf in INI files

It turns out this channel is actually created by the frame builder, and it could not find the channel definition file for the new model, so it was failing to create the channels for it.  The frame builder "master" file (/opt/rtcds/caltech/c1/target/fb/master) needs to list the c1oaf daq ini files:

/opt/rtcds/caltech/c1/chans/daq/C1OAF.ini
/opt/rtcds/caltech/c1/target/gds/param/tpchn_c1oaf.par

These were added, and the framebuilder was restarted.  After which the C1:DAQ-FB0_C1OAF_STATUS appeared correctly.

SHMEM errors on c1lsc and c1oaf

This turned out to be because of an oversight in how we wired up the skeleton c1oaf model.  For the moment the c1oaf model has only the PCIx sends and receives.  I had therefore grounded the inputs to the SHMEM parts that were meant to send signals to C1LSC.  However, this made the RCG think that these SHMEM parts were actually receivers, since it's the grounding of the inputs to these parts that actually tells the RCG that the part is a receiver.  I fixed this by adding a filter module to the input of all the senders.

Once this was all fixed, the models were recompiled, installed, and restarted, and everything came up fine.

All model changes were of course committed to the cds_user_apps svn as well.

  5425   Thu Sep 15 20:30:52 2011 MirkoUpdateLSCPlan for long term optical spec. analyzer setup

Just to give some heads up on how the setup on the PSL table does / will look. We start out with one of the two reflections of a window. Power about 2mW.

DSC_3430b.jpg

  5426   Thu Sep 15 21:56:01 2011 MirkoUpdateCDSc1oaf check, possible shmem problem

After Jamie installed the c1oaf model ( entry 5424 ) I went and checked the intermodel communication.

Remember the config is:

c1lsc ->SHMEM-> c1oaf
c1oaf ->SHMEM-> c1lsc
c1pem ->SHMEM-> c1rfm ->PCIE-> c1oaf

I checked at least one of every communications type.

-All signals reach their destinations.
-c1lsc_to_c1oaf_via_shmem is more noisy adding noise to the signal. lsc runs at 16kHz and oaf at 2kHz but that should actually smooth things out.

c1lsc_to_c1oaf_via_shmem.png

 

  5427   Thu Sep 15 22:26:32 2011 PaulUpdateSUSITMY Oplev QPD dark noise PSD

 I took a dark noise measurement for the ITMY QPD, for comparison with measurements of the oplev noise later on. Initially I was plotting the data from test points after multiplication by the oplev matrix (i.e. the OLPIT_IN1 / OLYAW_IN1), but found that the dark noise level seemed higher than the bright noise level (!?). Kiwamu realised that this is because at that test point the data is already divided by QPD SUM, thus making the dark noise level appear to be greater than the bright level, since QPD SUM is much smaller for the dark measurements. The way around this was to record the direct signals from each quadrant before the division. I took a power spectrum of the dark noise from each quadrant, then added them in quadrature, then divided by QPD SUM at the end to get an uncalibrated PSD. Next I will convert these into the equivalent for pitch and yaw noise spectra. To calibrate the plots in radians per root Hz requires some specific knowledge of the oplev path, so I won't do this until I have adjusted the path.

  5428   Thu Sep 15 22:31:44 2011 ManuelUpdateSUSSummary screen

I changed some colors on the Summary of Suspension Sensor  using my italian creativity.

I wrote a script in Python to change the thresholds for the "alarm mode" of the screen.

The script takes a GPS-format start time as the 1st argument and a duration time as the second argument.

For every channel shown in the screen, it compute the mean value during this time.

The 3rd argument is the ratio between the mean and the LOW threshold. The 4th argument is the ratio between the mean and the LOLO threshold.

Then it sets the thresholds simmetrycally for HIGH and HIHI threshold.

It does that for all channels skipping the Gains and the Off Sets because this data are not stored.

For example is ratio are 0.9 and 0.7 and the mean is 10, thresholds will be LOLO=7, LOW=9, HIGH=11, HIHI=13.

You can run the script on pianosa writing on a terminal '/opt/rtcds/caltech/c1/scripts/SUS/set_thresholds.py' and the arguments.

I already run my program with those arguments: 1000123215 600 0.9 0.7

The time is of this morning at 5:00 for 10 minutes

 

This is the help I wrote

HELP: This program set the thresholds for the "alarm mode" of the C1SUS_SUMMARY.adl medm screen.

 Written by Manuel Marchio`, visiting student from University of Pisa - INFN for the 2011 summer at Ligo-Caltech. Thrusday, 15th September 2011.

The 1st argument is the time in gps format when you want to START the mean

The 2nd argument is the DURATION

The 3rd argument is the ratio of the LOW and the HIGH thresholds. It must be in the range [0,1]

The 4th argument is the ratio of the LOLO and the HIHI thresholds. It must be in the range [0,1]

Example: path/set_thresholds.py 1000123215 600 0.9 0.7

and if the the mean is 10, thresholds will be set as LOLO=7, LOW=9, HIGH=11, HIHI=13

 

  5429   Fri Sep 16 00:08:30 2011 PaulUpdateSUSITMY Oplev QPD dark and bright noise spectra

 I tried again at plotting the ITMY_QPD noise spectra in for dark and bright operation. Before we had the strange situation where the dark noise seemed higher, but Kiwamu noticed this was caused by dividing by the SUM before the testpoint I was looking at. This time I tried just multiplying by the measured SUM for bright and dark to normalise the spectra against each other. The results looks more reasonable now, the dark noise is lower than the bright noise for a start! However, the dark noise spectrum now doesn't look the same as the one I showed in my previous post.

  5430   Fri Sep 16 03:22:11 2011 AnamariaUpdateLSCMore Refl PDs Work and Attempt at DRMI

Kiwamu, Keiko, Anamaria

I started today with a different input beam, so I had to realign the REFL path again. Then we measured the RF signal out of the 4 REFL PDs and found them to be too low. We increased the power to around 10mA for each diode, and we can see the right modulation frequency on each diode, though REFL165 is way too weak so we might need an RF amplifier on it. We will measure demod board noise tomorrow.

We had an issue with REFL165 not giving the right DC level, low by a factor of 10, even though it was receiving the same optical power as the others. We fifteen-checked clipping and alignment, then pulled it out and measured it on the test stand - found it to be ok. So I uplugged its power cable at the rack and connected it to the AS165 slot. Problem sloved. Not sure what was wrong with the other power slot.

Then we found REFL55 to be clipping on its black glass, we fixed that. But the REFL55 DC power still changes a lot with seemingly not huge motions of the PRM. We'll investigate more tomorrow.

We added a lens in the path to REFL165 because unlike the others it is a 1mm diode. All diodes have about half a turn to a full turn flatness of maximum (on tiny steering mirror).

We set the whitening gain on all four diodes to 21 db.

Not sure if we should set the power to be different on these diodes since their sensitivity is different to RF, and now REFL11 sees huge signal.

We continued the DRMI locking attempt and brought in the SRC, using AS55I to control it. It kind of works/stays locked. We did manage to get MICH and PRC better controlled than last night, but with SRC in the mix, something is wrong. We have to redo f2a filters on SRM and hopefully things will be better after Jenne's suspension work tomorrow. Oplevs not optimized yet either.

We intend to realign POY beam path so we can monitor power in cavities.

  5431   Fri Sep 16 11:15:12 2011 KojiUpdateIOOPZT1 situation

[Koji Kiwamu]

- We have checked the situation of the broken Piezo Jenna PZT (called PZT1)

- Tested PZT1 by applying a dc voltage on the cables. Found that pitch and yaw reasonably moving and the motions are well separated each other.
  The pitch requires +20V to set the IPPOS spot on the QPD center.

- Made a high-voltage (actually middle voltage) amp to convert +/-10V EPICS control signal into -5 to +30V PZTout. It is working on the prototype board and will be put into the actual setup soon.


Details:

- The Piezo Jenna driver box has 4 modules. From the left-hand side, the HV module, Yaw controller, Pitch controller, and Ben abbot's connector converter.

- We checked the voltage on Ben's converter board. (Photo1)
  It turned out that the red cable is the one have the driving voltage while the others stays zero.

- We hooked a 30V DC power supply between the red cable and the shield which is actually connected to the board ground.

- Applying +/-10V, we confirmed the strain gauge is reacting. If we actuated the pitch cable, we only saw the pitch strain gauge reacted. Same situation for yaw too.

- Kiwamu went to IPPOS QPD to see the spot position, while I change the voltage. We found that applying +20V to the pitch cable aligns the spot on the QPD center.

------------------------

- I started to make a small amplifier boards which converts +/-10V EPICS signals into -5V to +30V PZT outs.

- The OPAMP is OPA452 which can deal with the supply voltages upto +/-40V. We will supply +/-30V. The noninerting amp has the gain of +2.

- It uses a 15V zener diode to produce -15V reference voltage from -30V. This results the output voltage swing from -5V to +35V.
The actual maximum output is +30V because of the supply voltage.

- On the circut test bench, I have applied +/-5V sinusoidal to the input and successfully obtained +5V to +25V swing.

- The board will be put on Ben's board today.

  5432   Fri Sep 16 14:03:53 2011 PaulUpdateSUSSRM oplev QPD noise measurement

 I checked the dark and bright noise of the SRM oplev QPD. The SRM QPD has a rather high dark level for SUM of 478 counts. The dark noise for the SRM QPD looked a little high in the plot against the bright noise (see first attachment), so I plotted the dark noise with the ITMY QPD dark noise (see second attachment). It seems that the SRM QPD has a much higher dark noise level than the ITMY! In case anyone is wondering, to make these traces I record the data from the pitch and yaw test points, then multiply by the SUM (to correct for the fact that the test point signal has already been divided by SUM). I will check the individual quadrants of the SRM QPD to see if one in particular is very noisy. If so, we/I should probably fix it.

  5433   Fri Sep 16 14:43:43 2011 SureshUpdateComputer Scripts / ProgramsChanged c1ioo model and restarted fb

I had to change the c1ioo model and restart the fb since the paths allowing us to select various signals to demodulate using the lockins were not correct. The signal selection vector was not flexible enough to permit us to select the signals to demod.

fb was restarted twice at following times.  The changes have been commited to the svn.

Fri Sep 16 13:35:47 PDT 2011

Fri Sep 16 14:36:21 PDT 2011


 

  5434   Fri Sep 16 16:07:28 2011 steveUpdateSAFETYvisitors safety training

Paul, Mirko and Katrin visiting grad students received the 40m basic safety training.

  5435   Fri Sep 16 16:29:05 2011 kiwamuUpdateSUSf2a filters on SRM

New f2a filters were installed on SRM.

The lock of DRMI should be more stable than last night.

Quote from #5417

Once the SRM oplev project settles down, I will adjust the f2a filters on SRM too.

 

  5436   Fri Sep 16 16:34:54 2011 PaulUpdateSUSITMY SRM oplev telescope plan

I've calculated a suitable collimating telescope for the ITMY/SRM oplev laser, based on the specs for the soon-to-arrive 2mW laser (model 1122/P) available here: http://www.jdsu.com/ProductLiterature/hnlh1100_ds_cl_ae.pdf

Based on the fact that the 'beam size' value and 'divergence angle' value quoted don't match up, I am assuming that the beam radius value of 315um is _not_ the waist size value, but rather the beam size at the output coupler. From the divergence angle I calculated a 155um waist, (zR = 12cm). This gives the quoted beam size of about 316um at a distance of 8.5" away from the waist. This makes me think that the output coupler is curved and the waist is at the back of the laser, or at least 8.5" from the output coupler.

The collimating telescope gives a waist of size 1142um (zR=6.47m) at a distance of 1.427m away from the original laser waist, using the following lens combo:

 

L1 f=-0.15 @ 0.301m

L2 f=0.3 @ 0.409m

 

This should be fine to get a small enough spot size (1-2mm) on the QPDs.

 

ELOG V3.1.3-