40m QIL Cryo_Lab CTN SUS_Lab TCS_Lab OMC_Lab CRIME_Lab FEA ENG_Labs OptContFac Mariner WBEEShop
  40m Log, Page 109 of 344  Not logged in ELOG logo
ID Date Authorup Type Category Subject
  10148   Mon Jul 7 22:18:26 2014 KojiUpdatePSLPMC local oscillator is going wonky

It seems that there is no better chip in MiniCircuits line-up with the same form factor.
ERA-5 is the most powerful one in the ERA (or MAR) series.

If the output is ~0dBm we have MAR-6SM in stock. But I suspect that ERA-5 was driven at the power level close to its saturation (~18dBm).

If we allow different form factors, we have GVA-** or GALI-** in the market and also in the blue tower, in order to gain more performance margin.
If it is difficult to apply them, I would rather use another ERA-5 with enhanced heat radiation.

I'm sure that Downs has EAR-5 replacement.

  10153   Tue Jul 8 15:28:32 2014 KojiUpdatePSLPMC local oscillator is going wonky

Koushik and Koji try to fix the PMC oscillator issue. So we remove the module from the rack.
This means we don't have the PMC transmission during the work.

  10159   Wed Jul 9 00:47:22 2014 KojiUpdatePSLPMC local oscillator is going wonky

Koushik replaced an ERA-5 in the PC path. We put the module back to the rack and found no change.
The epics LO level monitor monitor is still fluctuating from 6~11dBm. We need more thorough investigation
by tracing the signals everywhere on the board.

Despite the poor situation of the modulation, PMC was locking (~9PM). Rana suspect that the PMC demodulation
phase was not correctly adjusted long time. 

Koushik has the measured power levels and the photos of the board. I'll ask him to report on them.

  10179   Thu Jul 10 18:25:18 2014 KojiUpdateGeneralCoupling telescope design

CFC-2X-C has a FIXED focal length of 2mm, but the collimator lens position is adjustable.
I'm not yet sure this affects your calculation or not as what you need is an approximate mode calculation;
once you couple the any amount of the beam into the fiber, you can actually measure it at the output of the fiber with a collimator attached.

  10194   Mon Jul 14 14:28:27 2014 KojiSummaryElectronicsTiming Issues of Mini Circuits UFC-6000: Solved

Looks good. Now you have the internal timer to verify the external clock.
If you can realize the constant rate sampling without employing the external clock, that's quite handy.

  10211   Wed Jul 16 01:35:16 2014 KojiSummaryLSCPython Wavelet peak finding for dramatic ALS - Red Resonance finding speedup

From the last plot:

- Subtracting the offset of 0.0095, the modulation depth were estimated to be 0.20 for 11MHz, 0.25 for 55MHz

- Carrier TEM00 1.0, 1st order 0.01, 2nd order 0.05, 3rd order 0.002, 4th order 0.004

==> mode matching ~93%, dominat higher order is the 2nd order (5%).

Eric: now we have the number for the mode matching. How much did the cavity round-trip loss be using this number?

  10214   Wed Jul 16 02:22:10 2014 KojiUpdateElectronicsTest run of PDFR system

Log-log ... 

  10223   Wed Jul 16 23:02:16 2014 KojiSummaryElectronicsBode Plots and complete Characterization of Frequency Counter

If I assume 1sample delay for 0.1s sampling rate, the delay is Exp[-I 2 pi f T], where T is the sampling period.

This means that you expect only 36 deg phase delay at 1Hz. In reality, it's 90deg. Huge!

Also there are suspicious zeros at ~1.6Hz and ~3Hz. This may suggest that the freq counter is doing some
internal averaging like a moving average.

It would be interesting to apply a theoretical curve on the plot. It's an intellectual puzzle.

  10232   Thu Jul 17 17:39:57 2014 KojiUpdateElectronicsPDFR debugging attempt : REFL11

What is the coupling factor between the RF in and the RF mon of the demodulator?
I don't assume you have the same amount RF power at those two points unless you have an RF amplifier in the mon path.

  10234   Thu Jul 17 22:08:14 2014 KojiUpdateGeneral1X2 Rack Changes

It sounds like the work was done carefully. Even so, Jenne or Manasa have to run the ALS (X and Y) to check if they are still functional.

  10242   Sat Jul 19 20:51:51 2014 KojiUpdateLSCRIN in arm transmission

Your calibration of the ALS signal should be revised.

The phase for the ALS is not an optical phase of the green but the phase of the phase tracker servo output.

The calibration of the phase tracker depends on the cable length of the delay line in the beat box.
It seems that we are based on this calibration. Which gives up ~19kHz/deg.

Or, equivalently, use C1:.....PHASE_OUT_HZ instead.

  10262   Wed Jul 23 11:32:04 2014 KojiUpdateLSCIFO warming up

Alone with the IFO. Started from some conversation with it.

Some ALS trials: Found the Y-end green alignment was terrible. In fact the end green set up is terrible.
Unfixed optics, clipping/fringing in the faraday, unstable suprema mounts which is unnecessarily big.

Eventualy I stopped touching the end alignment. Run ALS to see the stability of the things.
This is a performance confirmation after some touching of the ALS electronics by Manasa/SURFs

The sensing noise levels of the ALSs looks the same as before.

The intensity noise of the transmission was also checked. They are not RIN but very close to RIN
as the DC was the unity for both arms.

The X arm has worse ALS noise level and RIN.
Although I forgot to turn off the HEPA flow at the south bench during the measurement. Gurrr.

Attachment 1: 140722_ALS.pdf
  10285   Tue Jul 29 16:41:54 2014 KojiUpdateLSCMC servo

The MC openloop gains were measured with several conditions
- MC fast/PC crossover was measured to be ~30kHz.
- No feature found in the fast path above 10kHz.


I have been making a circuit to test the crossover between the PZT and PC paths.
This was supposed to allow us to inject a test signal as well as the 5V necessary to offset the voltage for the HV amp.
So far this attempt was not successful although the circuit TF looked just fine. I was wondering what was wrong.

I now suspect that the noise of the circuit was too big. It has ~65nV/rtHz noise level. This corresponds to the external
disturbance of 1~2Hz/rtHz. This is ~10 times larger noise level than the freerun frequency noise.

In the control band the circuit noise is suppressed (cancelled) by the feedback loop.
This is OK when the loop is dominated by the PZT loop. However, if the loop is dominated by the PC path,
the PC path has to work for this compensation.

So what I should do is to remove the low pass filter in the FSS and move it to the downstream of the HV amp.
This way we may be able to reduce the PC path actuation as the noise of the HV amp is also reduced by the LPF.


For the meantime, I used another approach to characterize the MC crossover. I could manage to lock the MC without the PC path.
The openloop was measured with and without the PC path in this low gain setup. In fact the loop was oscillating at 6kHz
due to the low phase margin. Nevertherless, this comparison can let us find where the crossover. The loop gain was also
measured with the nominal condition.

<<Measuerement condition>>

MC IN1 Gain: +19dB
VCO Gain: +3dB
Boosts: No boost / No super boost

FSS Common Gain: +13dB
Fast Path Gain: +21.5dB
The PC path disconnected.
(Note that the loop was almost oscillating and the apparent gain may look lower than it should have been)

MC IN1 Gain: +19dB
VCO Gain: +3dB
Boosts: No boost / No super boost

FSS Common Gain: +13dB
Fast Path Gain: +21.5dB
The PC path connected.

MC IN1 Gain: +19dB
VCO Gain: +15dB
Boosts: Boost On / Super boost 2

FSS Common Gain: +13dB
Fast Path Gain: +21.5dB
The PC path connected.


Attachment 1: MCservo.pdf
  10291   Tue Jul 29 20:14:10 2014 KojiUpdate40m Xend Table upgradeXarm Green steering mirror upgrade

That was super fast! Great job, Andres and Nic!

  10293   Wed Jul 30 00:42:27 2014 KojiUpdateLSCMC servo

I used an oscillator and an oscilloscope to measure the open loop transfer function at higher frequency than 100kHz.
(I remember that I tried to use Agilent 4375A for this and failed before ... due to low input impedance???)\

Here is the update. It seems that the gain margin is not so large. We should apply low pass to prevent too large servo bump.

Attachment 1: MCservo.pdf
  10300   Wed Jul 30 22:01:24 2014 KojiUpdateLSCMC servo

In fact there is a pomona box between the HV amp and the laser.
It is expected that the combination of the box and the laser PZT (2.36nF by Elog #3640) provides poles at 2.9Hz and 148kHz and a zero at 32Hz.
Basically, the gain of this stage is 0.1 at 10kHz. So the injected noise is reduced by factor of 10. It is just barely OK.
I need a bit more careful design of the output stage for the MC servo.

  10301   Wed Jul 30 23:12:05 2014 KojiUpdateGeneralIFO patrol

- The cable for the beat note was disconnected from the frequency counter and reconnected to the spectrum analyzer.

- PMC/IMC had not been locked for 8 hours. 

- PMC was relocked.

- IMC got immediately relocked. Today IMC relocks very fast.

- Went to the ETMX table. Aligned the oplev beam on the QPD

- The X end green beam was realigned to the cavity.
I can feel that the two mirrors provides quite independent alignment adjustment. VERY NICE.
Green TRX: without PSL Green - 0.612, with PSL green - 0.725

I can clearly see that the mode matching is not ideal. All the higher modes are LG modes!
The input mode is very round.

- Arm cavities were aligned by ASS

- Tested ASX. PZT2 Pitch/Yaw servos run with the previous setting. We still can maximize the transmission by touching PZT1.

- Now Eric joined the activity.

-  Once the beam is aligned what we could lock was LG00/10/20/30.
   We measured the power in LGn0 modes
   LG00: 0.588
   LG10: 0.154
   LG20: 0.053
   LG30: 0.020

   This suggests that the mode-matching ratio is something like 70%

- Q is aligning the PMC. PMC transmission prev 0.783. Basically we could not improve it.
We thought this number can go up to ~0.82 or even ~0.84. We wonder if this comes from the decay of the laser power or reduced visibility?


  10302   Thu Jul 31 01:08:54 2014 KojiUpdateLSCALS stability check

- ALS X/Y arm stability was checked by IR locked arms.

- Basically the stability looks same as before.

Q sez: here are some ALS ASDs (in Hz/rtHz). 

The reference plots are with the arms locked on CARM/DARM with ALS. The main traces are with the arms locked on POX/POY. Alignment affects these traces a fair amount.


The X arm ALS seems no worse for the upgrade, and the PZT actuators do look pretty orthogonal when we play around with the alignment. 

  10306   Thu Jul 31 12:23:38 2014 KojiSummaryElectronicsPZT Calibration

1) Don't be brainless. Redo the fitting of the Y arm. Obviously the fit is not good.

2) How can you explain the value from the ADC bit and range?

e.g. +/-10V range 16bit ADC => 2^16/20 = 3276.8 count/V

  10310   Thu Jul 31 19:37:59 2014 KojiUpdateIOOSuccessful modification of the FSS

Quick note:

Migration of the 10Hz pole from the output stage of the FSS to the pomona box was successful.
This also allowed me to insert my offsetting/summing point circuit.

Trial 1:

- Remove C63 (1uF cap) of the FSS

- Short 500 Ohm in the pomona box

This removed 10Hz pole in FSS and 32 Hz zero in the pomona box.
In total we obtain the gain and range of 3.2 for the fast PZT path.

3x10^2 to 3x10^3 times more filtering of the HV amp noise between 10kHz and 100kHz.

The current maximum gains of the FSS is

Overall +19dB (prev. +13dB)
Fast     +30dB (prev +21.5dB)

Trial 2:

- Insert a summing amplifier between the FSS box and the HV amp.

- This amplifier attenuate the input by a factor of 2, and add 5V. i.e. +/-10V input => 0~10V output.

- This just worked fine.

Trial 3:

- Now the fast gain is nominally +30dB.

- In order to provide more room to play with the fast-PC cross over, I moved the pole freq from 2.9Hz to 9.9Hz
  This was done by replacing a 5kOhm in the pomona box by a 1.5kOhm.

Trial 4:

- I just noticed that the output impedance of the FSS (15.8kOhm) and the input impedance of the summing amp (10k Ohm)
  interfere and gives additional 1/2.58 attenuation in addition to the attenuation in the summing amplifier.
  This yields the output range of the HV amp between 45-105V, instead of 0-150V. This is not nice.

- The output impedance of the FSS box (R46 15.8kOhm) was replaced with 100Ohm.

- Now the PMC unlocks very frequently. This might have come from the PMC locking issue or too much gain of the IMC

Trial 5 (final):

- I suspected that the PMC unlock is caused by too much actuation at the high freq. So I decided to revert the  pomona box change

  10311   Thu Jul 31 21:21:49 2014 KojiFrogselogMicroSoft BingBot is attacking us

Oh, this is cool! Thanks!
I could not figure out how to place robot.txt as it was not so obvious how elogd handles the files in the "logfile" directory.

  10312   Thu Jul 31 21:59:25 2014 KojiBureaucracyGeneralAnts

Don't leave your food on tables and desks!

Also I put the souvenir chocolates in the microwave, just in case.

Attachment 1: P7316690.JPG
  10313   Thu Jul 31 23:19:22 2014 KojiUpdateComputer Scripts / ProgramsSVN bulletin

Did this break "netgpibdata"?

I couldn't download data from SR785. Downloading from AG4395A was OK.

The cause seemed the module for SR785

-rw-rw-r-- 1 controls controls   24225 2014-07-30 18:36 SR785.py

I had a local copy of this file and replaced it with mine. Now netgpibdata start working.
The old one is named SR785.py_bak

-rwxr-xr-x   1 controls staff      12944 Jul 31 23:08 SR785.py

The file size is significantly different from the one we had.

  10314   Thu Jul 31 23:43:00 2014 KojiUpdateIOOModulation frequency adjustment

The main IFO modulation frequency was adjusted to match with the FSR of the IMC.

The new frequency is 11.066128 MHz. This corresponds to the IMC round-trip length of 27.0910 m

This has been done by looking at the peak at 25.845MHz (5* fmod - 29.5MHz) in the MC REFL PD mon.

  10315   Fri Aug 1 00:51:07 2014 KojiUpdatePSLFSSSlowServo update

FSS Slow set point to be zero

op340m:FSS>cat FSSSlowServo
#!/usr/bin/perl -w

# PID Servo for PSL-FSS (Slow)
# Tobin Fricke 2007-01-09

use strict;
#use Scalar::Util qw(looks_like_number);

sub looks_like_number {
    return ($_[0] =~ /^-?\d+\.?\d*$/);  #FIXME

use EpicsTools;

# Parameters
my $process  = 'C1:PSL-FSS_FAST';
my $actuator = 'C1:PSL-FSS_SLOWDC';
#my $setpoint = 5.5;
my $setpoint = 0;
my $blinkystatus = 0;

op340m:scripts>/opt/rtcds/caltech/c1/scripts/PSL/FSS/FSSSlowServo > /cvs/cds/caltech/logs/scripts/FSSslow.cronlog &

  10316   Fri Aug 1 01:29:55 2014 KojiUpdateIOOPMC issue

- PMC suddenly refused to lock.

- Investigated what's wrong

- Finally, I touched RF Output Adjust (C1:PSL-PMC_RFADJ). Then it started locking.

- C1:PSL-PMC_RFADJ was set to 2.0 by rana when we looked at the PMC LO issue.
  Now PMC does not lock with this value. I set it to 6.0 so that the lock is robust.

- Right before I lost PMC locking, I had some difficulty in locking IMC. Of course,  the robustness of the PMC is related to the robustness of the IMC.
  We definitely need to investigate this. (RF powers, open loop TF, etc)

  10317   Fri Aug 1 01:57:24 2014 KojiSummaryIOOMC auto locker

To make MC auto locker running correctly, mcdown and mcup were revised

I tried it by unlocking MC several times. It seems OK. Let's see how it works.

Nominal gains for locking (to be taken care by mcdown)

was 16 and is 19 now.

was 9 and is 9 now too.

was missing and now +13

was +23.5 and is now +20.0

Nominal gains for operation ( to be taken care by mcup.

was 19 and is 19 now too.

was 25 and now uses ezcastep (ezcastep C1:IOO-MC_VCO_GAIN=9 +1,16 -s 0.1)


ezcawrite C1:PSL-FSS_MGAIN `ezcaread -n C1:PSL-STAT_FSS_NOM_C_GAIN`
ezcawrite C1:PSL-FSS_FASTGAIN `ezcaread -n C1:PSL-STAT_FSS_NOM_F_GAIN`



  10318   Fri Aug 1 03:49:26 2014 KojiSummaryGeneralKoji - to do

- Put the circuit diagram of the sum amp on/in the circuit enclosure and associate it with an elog [done].
- Update the circuit diagram of the pomona box [done]


  10319   Fri Aug 1 08:55:34 2014 KojiSummaryIOOMC auto locker

It seems that the MC auto locker and the FSSSlow PID servo survived a night.

PC Drive is still angry occasionally. We want to know what this is.

Attachment 1: MC.png
  10320   Fri Aug 1 10:40:48 2014 KojiSummaryIOOMC servo summing amp

The summing amp is prepared to allow up to use bipolar full range of the FSS box output

This means that the FSS fast PZT output is now nominally 0V and can range +/-10V.

- FSS Box has the output range of +/-10V

- Thorlabs HV amp MDT694 accepts 0V ~ +10V

- This circuit add an offset of +5V while the main signal is attenuated by a factor of 2. The offset voltage is produced from the voltage reference IC AD586.

- In addition, a summing node and voltage monitors before and after the summing node are provided. They are useful to test the crossover frequency of the fast/PC loops.

- The output noise level at 10kHz was ~60 nV/rtHz. The transfer function of the circuit was measured and flat up to 100kHz. The phase delay is negligible at 10kHz and less than 3deg at 100kHz

- Although the schematic was drawn in Altium, the board is a universal 1U eurocard and all wires were hand soldered.

Attachment 1: Fast_PZT_IF.PDF
  10321   Fri Aug 1 11:11:12 2014 KojiUpdateIOOCurrent IMC servo configuration

The comparison between the new and old MC servo (FSS part) was attached.

- The new servo has the same DC range as before.
  Even though there is 1/2 gain in the chain now, the previous range of the FSS box was 0 to 10V.
  Now it is +/-10V. So we did not lose the range.

- The new servo has x3.2 larger range above 100Hz.

- x1.6 enhancement of the FSS Box output noise above 10Hz.

- The noise of the HV amp (and the summing amp) is x300 and x2600 more filtered at 10kHz and 100kHz respectively.

Attachment 1: diagram.pdf
  10322   Fri Aug 1 12:49:06 2014 KojiSummaryIOOMC servo analysis

Reasoning to choose the current parameters:

FSS Common: 18dB
FSS Fast: 20dB

Attachment 1:
Openloop transfer function of the IMC loop with the nominal gain setting. The UGF is 176kHz and the phase margin is 48 deg.
This is about 3 time more bandwidth than the previous setting. (Good)

It is visible that the TF has sharp roll off around 1MHz. I wonder if this comes from the demodboard LPF and/or the PMC cav pole.
In fact, according to Manasa, the PMC has the ringdown of 164.6ns which corresponds to the cavity pole of 967kHz. So this must
be there in the OLTF.

From the plot, the order of the low pass is about 5. Subtracting the slope by the cavity pole, the order is four. If I look at the TF of the minicircuits
LPFs (this entry), the phase delay of the filter at 1/10 of the cut off freq is ~30deg. And the order of the filters are maybe 6th elliptic?
So it's not yet clear if the LPF is causing a significant phase delay at 180kHz.

More significantly, the gain margin at ~1MHz is way too small. This is causing a big servo bump at that frequency as seen in Attachment 2.

In total, my recommendation is to move the LPF freq up by x2 or x3, and give a mild LPF above 500kHz.
This requires some modeling as well as try and error.

Attachment 2:

This figure is to explain how the common FSS gain was set. By increasing the gain, the UGF is increased and we can enjoy more supression (from red to purple).
The more gain, however, the more servo bump we observe above the UGF. The gain was chosen so that the total PC feedback does not exceed 3V.

Attachment 3/4:

This figure explains how the fast FSS gain (namely crossover frequency between fast and PC) was set. When the fast is low (red) the phase margin between two loops
are plenty and therefore the openloop TF is smooth. But the PC's frequency domain is large and has to work more (in rms). As the fast gain is increased, the actuation
by the PC is offloaded to the fast PZT (that's good). But eventually the phase margin is not enough and the dip start to show up (purple). This dip cause worse closed loop TF,
as seen in Attachment 4, or even an instability of the loop eventually. So the fast gain was set somewhere in between (green).

Attachment 1: MC_OLTF.pdf
Attachment 2: MC_Error_Common.pdf
Attachment 3: MC_Crossover.pdf
Attachment 4: MC_CLTF_Fast.pdf
  10325   Fri Aug 1 22:56:27 2014 KojiUpdateGeneralBeam lost in the chamber???

I was investigating several issues on the IFO. As many of you noticed and not elogged, ITMX had frequent kicking without its oplev servo.
Also I had C1:LSC-TRY_OUT flatted out to zero even though I could see some fringes C1:SUS-ETMY_TRY_OUT.

Restarted all of the realtime models (no machine reboot).

Now I don't find any beam on REFL/AS/POP cameras.

If I look at BS-PRM camera, I can see big scattering, the beam is in the BS chamber.
I jiggled TT1 but cannot find neither a Michelson fringe nor POP beam.

So far I can't figure out what has happened but I'm leaving the lab now.

IMC is locked fine.
I can see some higher order mode of the Yarm green, so the Y arm alignment is no so far from the correct one.

  10327   Sun Aug 3 23:47:56 2014 KojiUpdateGeneralRecovery efforts

It's great that you guys found the beam.
Yes, ITMX kick and lost communication for TRY were the motivation of my CDS rebooting.

  10338   Wed Aug 6 12:44:52 2014 KojiUpdateASCPOP QPD signals

This is nice. Can we test this idea with POP22 + a razor blade?

Just to take transfer functions in PRMIsb between the PRM angle to POP QPD/POP22+razor blade
as well as the noise spectrum measurement are already useful.

We want to figure out the requirement for the 2f QPD.
(Transimpedance / Noise level / Beam size / etc)

Depending on the requirement we'll see if we need demodulation or just a power detector.

  10341   Wed Aug 6 21:22:09 2014 KojiUpdateIOOFSS offset changed

The fast feedback should be around zero now!

  10343   Thu Aug 7 11:57:59 2014 KojiSummaryIOOMC servo analysis

LISO Fit for the IMC open loop TF. The data and liso source for the fitting were attached in the ZIP file.

I noticed now that the open loop TF I measured has too less phase delay.
I used the closed loop TF to estimate the openloop TF.

Looking at this comparison, I'm afraid that the superboost was not on during the measurement.
I need a new measurement to design MC loop modification to give the AO path for broader bandwidth.

Attachment 1: MC_OLTF_Fit.pdf
Attachment 2: IMC_OLTF.zip
Attachment 3: MC_OLTF_estimated.pdf
  10356   Fri Aug 8 18:08:12 2014 KojiSummaryIOOMC servo analysis

The closed gain I meant is the AO path: Use IN2 to excite the MC loop and measure IN1 using MON2(?).
In order to obtain the open loop gain from this meausrement, the gain mismatching needs to be compensated, though.

This measurement is to correctly predict the AO path response from the open loop transfer function.

Anyway, the openloop gain seems nicely measured. I'll try to predict AO path response from this.

  10359   Sat Aug 9 14:35:28 2014 KojiSummaryIOOMC servo analysis

Eric's OLTF turned out consistent with the AO path TF that has been measured by me on Jul 31 (entry 10322).

Attachment 1:
Updated empirical fit of the open loop TF by LISO.
In this fit, I gave some of the poles/zeros associated with the boost manually set so that I can use them for the servo design.
LISO itself can make better fitting if all of the variables are moved.

Atatchment 2:
The OLTF data and LISO source for the fitting.

Attachment 3:
Comparison of the AO path TFs. The red one was measured directly on Jul 31. The TF is normalized at the low frequency.
The blue was estimated from the OLTF model given above. They are well consistent now.

Attachment 4:
Now some servo design was tried. In the new design (blue), zeros of the super boost frequency was moved from 20kHz to 30kHz
with the hope of having flatter AO response. The improvement is very little while costing costing above 100kHz. Note that the vertical
axis is intentionally in a linear scale. In fact, the AO response is much improved compared to the one before the MC UGF was increased
(shown in magenta). We have a flatter response both in magnitude and phase.
Therefore I think there is no need to tweak the boost frequency for the AO path.
I'd rather recommend to inspect the high frequency LPFs to earn more gain margin at 1MHz as
explained in entry 10322.

Attachment 5:
This figure shows the comparison of the TFs for the current and new design trial, just in case someone is interested in to see.


Attachment 1: MC_OLTF_Fit.pdf
Attachment 2: liso.zip
Attachment 3: MC_CLTF_Fit.pdf
Attachment 4: MC_CLTF_new.pdf
Attachment 5: MC_OLTF_new.pdf
  10364   Mon Aug 11 22:07:31 2014 KojiSummaryIOOMC demod measurement

SCLF-5!? It's surprising as the cut off of the OLTF is just above 1Hz. cf this entry

This means that not the demod board but MC or FSS boards seem to have large attenuation above 1MHz.

In this situation, does SCLF-10/10.7 really help us?

  10385   Thu Aug 14 15:42:29 2014 KojiUpdateGeneralUpdated game plan

 - ALS

End PDH UGF improvement / post mixer LPF investigation (with in 2 weeks)


Riju measured the MC REFL PD transimpedance. See ELOG and related.


Why do we want to see less PRM motion? I thought PRC motion was causing
LSC issue of the central part. We wanted to maximize the PRM effect, don't we?
(Or is this to supress ETM motion during full lock?)

  10387   Thu Aug 14 18:02:11 2014 KojiUpdateGeneralUpdated game plan

Got the idea of ASC.

- Oplevs for PR2, PR3 => PR2 seems OK. PR3 almost impossible. well turned out not too crazy. We need outside electronics.

- RF QPD => not trivial and very technical but possible. All outside work.

- Better TT => might be a good solution.

  10406   Mon Aug 18 09:42:50 2014 KojiSummaryIOOMCREFL PD charcterization

Riju did the measurement of the MCREFL PD.
I found data files in her directory on the control machine.

I was not sure how much was the transimpedance of the DC out.
I assumed the default number from the circuit diagram which was 66.7Ohm.
This may cause the error in absolute caribration of the transimpedance but the shape does not change.

The RF preamp is gain-peeking at 250MHz.

Here is further characterization of the PD response.
As you can see in the second attachment, the 3dB cut off of the resonance is about 2.3MHz.

The game plan file in dropbox was also modified.

Attachment 1: MCREFLPD_transimpedance.pdf
Attachment 2: MCREFLPD_transimpedance_zoom.pdf
  10432   Wed Aug 27 09:12:47 2014 KojiUpdateIMCWFS tuneup

I'm sure that the 1~3Hz motion comes from the mirror motion, but not 100% sure what is causing
the broad stochastic noise. If this is the beam jitter, this penetrates to the IFO via the WFS servos.
Is there any way to characterize this noise in order to compare it with the actual (estimated) motion of the mirrors?

  10442   Tue Sep 2 22:54:27 2014 KojiSummaryLSCphase tracker UGF


Phase tracker UGF is  Q_AMP * G * 2 PI / 360 where Q_AMP is the amplitude of the Q_ERR output and G is the gain of the phase tracker.

For example: Q_AMP = 270, G = 4000\ => UGF = 1.9kHz

  10451   Thu Sep 4 10:10:23 2014 KojiUpdateLSCRecycling cavity lengths

Com'on. This is just a 60ppm change of the mod frequency from the nominal. How can it change the recycling cav length by more than a cm?


This describes how the desirable recycling cavity lengths are affected by the phase of the sidebands at non-resonant reflection of the arms.

If we believe these numbers, L_PRC = 6.7538 [m] and L_SRC = 5.39915 [m].

Compare them with the measured numbers

  • Lprc = 6.752 m
  • Lsrc  = 5.474 m

You should definitely run MIST to see what is the optimal length of the RCs, and what is the effect of the given length deviations.

  10480   Tue Sep 9 23:05:01 2014 KojiUpdateCDSOTTAVIA lost network connection

Today the network connection of OTTAVIA was sporadic.

Then in the evening OTTAVIA lost completely it. I tried jiggle the cables to recover it, but in vain.

We wonder if the network card (on-board one) has an issue.

  10492   Wed Sep 10 22:17:29 2014 KojiSummaryLSCX/Y green beat mode overlap measurement

[Koji Manasa]

We made quantitative inspection of the X/Y green beat setup on the PSL table.

DC output of the BBPD for each arm was measured by blockiing the beams at either or both side of the recombination BS.

The power over lap for the X arm beat note setup was 7.8% and is now 53%.
There is 3dB of headroom for the improvement of the mode overlap.

The power over lap for the Y arm beat note setup was 1.2% and is now 35%.
There is 4dB of headroom for the improvement of the mode overlap.

The RF analyzer monitor for the beat power is about 10dB lower than expected. Can we explain this only by the cable loss?
If not it there something causing the big attenuation?

             XARM   YARM
o BBPD DC output (mV)

 V_DARK:   -  3.3  + 1.9
 V_PSL:    +  4.3  +22.5
 V_ARM:    +187.0  + 8.4

o BBPD DC photocurrent (uA)

I_DC = V_DC / R_DC ... R_DC: DC transimpedance (2kOhm)

 I_PSL:       3.8   10.3
 I_ARM:      95.0    3.3

o Expected beat note amplitude
I_beat_full = I1 + I2 + 2 sqrt(e I1 I2) cos(w t) ... e: mode overwrap (in power)

I_beat_RF = 2 sqrt(e I1 I2)

V_RF = 2 R sqrt(e I1 I2) ... R: RF transimpedance (2kOhm)

P_RF = V_RF^2/2/50 [Watt]
     = 10 log10(V_RF^2/2/50*1000) [dBm]

     = 10 log10(e I1 I2) + 82.0412 [dBm]
     = 10 log10(e) +10 log10(I1 I2) + 82.0412 [dBm]

for e=1, the expected RF power at the PDs [dBm]
 P_RF:      -12.4  -22.6

o Measured beat note power (before the alignment)     
 P_RF:      -23.5  -41.7  [dBm] (38.3MHz and 34.4MHz) 
    e:        7.8    1.2  [%]                         
o Measured beat note power (after the alignment)      
 P_RF:      -15.2  -27.1  [dBm] (26.6MHz and 26.8MHz) 
    e:       53     35    [%]                         

Measured beat note power at the RF analyzer in the control room
 P_CR:      -25    -20    [dBm]
Expected    -17    - 9    [dBm]

Expected Power:
Pin + External Amp Gain (0dB for X, 20dB for Y)
    - Isolation trans (1dB)
    + GAV81 amp (10dB)
    - Coupler (10.5dB)

  10500   Fri Sep 12 11:25:42 2014 KojiUpdateLSCDRMI locking

This is great.

And I got confused. Is REFL11 going through the CM board?
If so how the demod phase for REFL11 take an effect for the sensing?

Maybe I understood. CM SERVO SLOW has been connected to REFL11I? whitening.
Therefore using REFL11 in the CM SERVO gives us REFL11I at the usual channels.
And then how can we ensure the gain matching between I & Q?

Then is the next step 3f DRMI? How is REFL165 healthy?
I also wonder how the relative phase and modulation depths improves the sensing matrix.

  10510   Tue Sep 16 16:03:36 2014 KojiUpdatePSLLaser turned on


 Our janitor turned off the laser accidentally. 

 Didn't you take this opportunity to replace the cooling fan of the innolight controller?

ELOG V3.1.3-