40m QIL Cryo_Lab CTN SUS_Lab TCS_Lab OMC_Lab CRIME_Lab FEA ENG_Labs OptContFac Mariner WBEEShop
  40m Log, Page 174 of 344  Not logged in ELOG logo
ID Date Author Type Category Subjectup
  16019   Mon Apr 12 18:34:26 2021 YehonathanSummaryPSLPMC unlocked at 2pm on Sunday; ~ Restored

PMC lost lock again at around 16:00 April 12. I was able to lock it again but the transmission is only 0.6 now and REFL is 0.14.

Rana came in and realigned the PMC stirring mirrors. Now the transmission is 0.757V, and the REFL is 0.03V.

I noticed that the PZT was around 250V. Given that the PMC got unlocked at 16:00, which is around the peak temperature time in the lab (lagging behind the outside weather), due to the PZT voltage going down to 0V, I figured that the PZT voltage would go up during the night when the lab gets cold and therefore will likely go out of range again.

I found a different working point at 150V and relocked the PMC.

 

  3542   Wed Sep 8 00:01:07 2010 rana, valeraUpdatePSLPMC update

We ran the cables for the PMC: The RF cable for the 35.5 MHz drive was cheap and so we swapped the 29.5 MHz cable for it.

There now remain 1 RG-174 cable to drive the FSS PC (21.5 MHz) and 3 Heliax for the Kiwamu Tri-Mod EOM (11, 29.5, and 55 MHz).

We also changed the BLACK HV drive cable for the RED one (previously used for the MZ). All HV cables MUST be RED.

The BLACK cable is now used for the PMC_REFL DC.

The Heliax cables are routed onto the table - it remains a Alberto/Kiwamu job to strain relieve them and attach them to the TriMod box and EOM in the morning.

The PMC is locked and we did some partially bootless alignment and mode-matching. It locks easily on a TEM00 mode (with very poor visibility), but the

rest of the beam train can now be aligned while Valera does the PMC matching mambo.   

 

  5564   Wed Sep 28 13:30:01 2011 JenneUpdatePSLPMC was unlocked

Relocked the PMC.  MC came back immediately.

  9264   Wed Oct 23 15:46:01 2013 JenneUpdatePSLPMC was unlocked

The PMC was unlocked for a little over an hour.  I relocked it, and the MC locked itself.  Today, it looks like PMC yaw alignment is bad, and maybe pitch isn't so good either.  Transmission is 0.77

  7836   Fri Dec 14 17:12:19 2012 Evan HallUpdatePSLPMC yaw tune-up (from Wednesday night)

Wednesday night, there was ~0.4 V on the PMC transmission PD. I adjusted the steering mirrors into the PMC and got the transmission up to 0.81 V.

  12679   Mon Dec 19 22:05:09 2016 KojiSummaryIOOPMC, IMC aligned. The ringdown PD/Lens removed.

PMC and IMC were aligned on Friday (16th) and Today (19th).

The PD and lens for the ringdown experiment were removed as they were blocking the WFS.

  6702   Tue May 29 14:59:39 2012 JenneUpdateIOOPMC, MC alignment are shit

[Yuta, Jenne]

PMC and MC alignment are both shit, although with the WFS on, the MC is pretty good.  We're leaving it for now, so that (a) we don't mess up Koji's work, and (b) we can work on the Xarm.  Steve is doing Yarm oplev stuff, so we'll do Yarm later.

  6704   Tue May 29 15:48:31 2012 KojiUpdateIOOPMC, MC alignment are shit

The followings are a kind of daily check. Do this without any notice:

- Align PMC.

- Check MC spot position with the script (where is it located?). Ignore MC2 result as it can be arbitrary set.

- If the MC1/MC3 spots have moved it means that the PSL beam has moved. If the beam has moved, we should have some discussion what we should do.

- If the spot positions are about the same as before, align the MC mirrors. This should be done by nulling the WFS feedback. (Someone should make a simple script for this WFS offloading.)

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

Then, start locking both arms

Quote:

[Yuta, Jenne]

PMC and MC alignment are both shit, although with the WFS on, the MC is pretty good.  We're leaving it for now, so that (a) we don't mess up Koji's work, and (b) we can work on the Xarm.  Steve is doing Yarm oplev stuff, so we'll do Yarm later.

 

  6707   Tue May 29 17:40:45 2012 JenneUpdateIOOPMC, MC alignment are shit

Quote:

[Yuta, Jenne]

PMC and MC alignment are both shit, although with the WFS on, the MC is pretty good.  We're leaving it for now, so that (a) we don't mess up Koji's work, and (b) we can work on the Xarm.  Steve is doing Yarm oplev stuff, so we'll do Yarm later.

 [Yuta, Jenne, Suresh]

We pushed on the MC SUS connectors at the back of the rack, and that helped bring MC3 back to where it should be.  Then we looked at MC RFPD DC, and adjusted the optics with the WFS off, so that the refl is ~0.56.  Then when we turn the WFS on, the alignment doesn't really change, so we have offloaded the WFS. 

Now we're measuring the spot positions to check where the MC is.  Then we'll align the arms, and align the green to the arms.

  6708   Tue May 29 19:50:01 2012 JenneUpdateIOOPMC, MC alignment are shit

Quote:

The followings are a kind of daily check. Do this without any notice:

- Align PMC.

Quote:

[Yuta, Jenne]

PMC and MC alignment are both shit, although with the WFS on, the MC is pretty good.  We're leaving it for now, so that (a) we don't mess up Koji's work, and (b) we can work on the Xarm.  Steve is doing Yarm oplev stuff, so we'll do Yarm later.

 

 [Keiko, Jenne]

PMC aligned.  Suresh is fixing the measure MC spot positions script, then we'll remeasure MC spot positions.

  6709   Tue May 29 21:05:30 2012 yutaUpdateIOOPMC, MC alignment are shit

Quote:

  [Keiko, Jenne]

PMC aligned.  Suresh is fixing the measure MC spot positions script, then we'll remeasure MC spot positions.

 [Suresh, Jenne, Yuta]

We measured the MC spot positions twice tonight. Procedure for measuring them is in elog #6688.
The results were;

spot positions in mm (MC1,2,3 pit MC1,2,3 yaw):
    3.3359    3.9595    2.3171   -7.7424   -0.8406    6.4884

spot positions in mm (MC1,2,3 pit MC1,2,3 yaw):
    3.2681    4.0052    2.2808   -7.3965   -0.7624    7.1302

The spot moved by about 0.5 mm since May 25, but we concluded that this displacement is negligible and difficult to be fixed by aligning PSL beam.

We'll align Y arm and X arm next.

  745   Sun Jul 27 23:06:17 2008 ranaUpdatePSLPMC, MZ, MC-MMT, etc.
With the new PMC now in I aligned the MZ to the new beam (there is sadly no steering
between the PMC and the MZ).

I also removed the pickoff that we had put before the MZ just in case we wanted to
move the FSS pickoff to there - its been 2 years now so I guess its not going to happen.


The new PMC's cavity axis seems to be a few hundred microns higher than the old one. So I
tried to move the MZ EOMs to compensate but ended up also steering all of the MZ's mirrors
to get the contrast good, the beam onto the ISS PDs, centered (sort of) onto the MMT lenses
and onto the periscope.

Along the way I also removed some of the vestigial squeezer stuff around the power control
PBS. The output of the PBS now goes directly into the high power dump with no steering. This
eliminated around a dozen clamps, bases, etc. and a couple of mirrors.


The MC is locked on the low power beam we have running through everything. I restored the
PSL launch beam just using the MC-WFS and it locked on a TEM00. So now we know that we
really don't need the PSL quads for this as long as the MC1 angle is stable.

The good news is that the PMC PZT voltage is now flat: the problem must have really been with
the PZT
and not the cabling or notch box like I had wondered about.

Todo:
-----
1) Continue mode matching into the PMC. Its transmission now is around the same as the
   old one.

2) Put a UHV foil covered lead brick onto the PMC to quiet it down.

3) Characterize the PMC loop and retune the body notch for the new body.

4) Tweak the MZ alignment to minimize the RFAM. We can use StochMon to do this as
   long as we have the MC WFS turned off or we can put in a flipper to take the
   beam before the MC and send it to the StochMon RFPD.

5) Re-align onto the ISS.

6) Install irises around the periscope for the beam. The old iris there is way off.

7) Fix PSL ANG and center both POS and ANG.
  10030   Thu Jun 12 10:41:58 2014 SteveUpdatePSLPMC-T trend of 4 years

Quote:

Quote:

Also, while I was working on the PSL table, I heard noise that sounded like a bearing rolling around.  I suspected the HEPAs, since the one on the north east corner of the table has a problem when it's turned up high (we've known about this for a long time), however turning off the HEPAs didn't affect the noise.  The noise is strongest near the back of the PSL controller on the shelf above the table, and the PSL controller box is vibrating.  So, I suspect that the fan on the PSL controller box is about to give out.

EDIT:  To clarify, I mean the Innolight's controller.

 The bearing is chirping in the back of the 2W Innolight laser controller. It is loud enough to hear it. I placed 4 soft  rubber feet under the controller to avoid shaking other things on self.

The HEPA filter bearing becomes noisy at 50V

 Keep it at 20V for low noise

  The aging of the laser came up when the noisy bearing showed.  ~10% down in in 4 years. That is pretty good.

  12072   Tue Apr 12 22:41:00 2016 KojiUpdateIOOPMC/IMC aligned, WFS offset adjusted

Did it again.

PMC Trans ~0.739
IMC Trans ~15000

  6262   Thu Feb 9 13:04:11 2012 KojiSummaryIOOPMC/IMC alignment

There has been no lock of input MC for more than 5days. WTF???

I have fixed a loose mirror of the PMC input and the alignment of the MC2 Yaw.


- The PSL mech-shutter was closed. It has been opened.

- Then, I checked the MC suspensions. Mainly MC2 Yaw has kept drifting. (Fig.1)
In fact, there was no WFS actions during this drift.

Anyway, now MC2 Yaw was aligned and the lock was restored.

- It was very unsatisfactory for me that the PMC alignment kept drifting.
The trend of the PMC REFL and PMC TRANS for a year suggests that:

  • Occasional drifts exist since a year ago (or probably since we built this new PMC setup in 2010 Sep)
  • The drift has got frequent for the recent four months, and got more for the recent one month.

I went into the PMC setup and tapped several optics in order to find any loose optic.
Immediately I found that the mirror before the AOM was loose. Basically any mild tapping was enough
to misalign the mirror such that the caivty loose the TEM00 mode.

I tightened the retainer set screw of the optic and aligned the PMC again. It looks OK now as I can not
misalign this optic by the tapping anymore. But if it still remains drifting, we need to replace the mount.

  12947   Wed Apr 19 15:13:30 2017 gautamUpdatePSLPMC/MCL multicoherence

I used a one hour stretch of data from last night to look at coherence between the PMC control signal and MCL, to see if the former can be used as a witness channel in some frequency band for MCL stabilization. Here is a plot of the predicted subtraction and coherence, made using EricQs pynoisesub code. I had thought about adopting the greedy channel ranking algorithm that Eric has been developing for noise subtraction in site data, but since I am just considering 3 witness channels, I figured this straight up comparison between different sets of witness channels was adequate. Looks like we get some additional coherence with MCL by adding the PMC control signal to the list of witness channels, there is about a factor of a few improvement in in the 1-2Hz band...  

  903   Fri Aug 29 17:39:25 2008 ranaConfigurationPSLPMC: ADC Channels
The attached PNG shows the PMC error and controls signals with no calibration.

There are 3 states:

DARK - RF input disabled & output blanked. This should be a measure of the ADC noise

(-10 dB) - This is with the gain slider down at 5 dB instead of the nominal 15 dB.

Looks like the Generic DAQ board whitening is good enough for these signal levels above ~1 Hz.

From the low and high gain spectra it also looks like the UGF is ~500 Hz with the gain at 15 dB.
  906   Sat Aug 30 13:28:01 2008 ranaConfigurationPSLPMC: List of changes
This is a list of changes made to the PMC board while we had it out for modifying the notch:

  • LC-LC 4th order low pass filter
  • Replace the AD797 (U2) with an OP27. AD797's are bad - do not use them anywhere for any reason. The OP27 is slower and has a 3x worse input noise but doesn't compromise the bandwidth or noise performance of the PMC by any significant amount. The rule is: use OP27 everywhere unless you have a very good reason why not.
  • There is no 'H1' jumper on board. R9 is 90.9 Ohms and R2=900 Ohms so that the U2 stage has a gain of 10.
  • Cut a trace and inserted a 500 Ohm resistor between U2-pin6 and U5A-pin2 (the AD602). The AD602 has a 100 Ohm input impedance which cannot be driven without limiting by the AD797 or the OP27. The 500 Ohm resistor makes it a driveable load for low level signals which is all that should be there since its the error point of the servo. it also becomes a 6:1 voltage divider. Since the AD602 has a fixed output voltage noise of 100 nV/rHz, this will limit the noise performance if the VGA gain is less than 20 dB, but whatever.
  • R11 7.87k -> 1.74k, R12 = 78.7k -> 700k. This increases the high frequency gain of that stage by 7.87/1.74 = 4.5 and lowers the low frequency pole from 2 to 0.2 Hz to give the PMC some more staying power at DC. The loop shape is now 1/f^2 in the 9-480 Hz band and so the phase dips enough to make it almost conditionally stable, but not quite.
  • C26 changed from ??? + a 30 pF trim cap into a fixed NNN pF cap to set the notch frequency for the 14.5 kHz body mode that we measured. Once our brick configuration is more settled we can increase the Q of this notch from small to big.
  • Grounded pin 5 of U14 & U15 (AD620). These have sometimes been used as "differential" drivers in LIGO by connecting this reference voltage pin to the remote ground of the next board. This has always lead to insidious oscillation and noise. This beauty also has an output noise of 100 nV/rHz. Just never use this chip if you can help it; we can make true differential drivers - we have the technology.

Of course, we didn't have a current version of a schematic sitting around so I printed out a Rev E schematic and marked it up with red pen. I'll post pictures later and put the schematic into the PSL schematics notebook. Would be useful to take the old schematic and update it in Acrobat so that we have something electronic.
  904   Fri Aug 29 18:24:48 2008 ranaHowToPSLPMC: PZT Calibration
I calibrated the PMC PZT at DC by using 'trianglewave' to drive the DC offset slider
and reading back PMC_PZT and PMC_TRANSPD_F (both are DC coupled DAQ channels).

The attached PDF illustrates the method: look at the voltage required to span 1 FSR and then divide.
PMC_cal (m/V) = (1064 nm)/2 / V_FSR
The calibration for our PZT is therefore 10.4 nm/V.
The full scale (0-300 V) range is 3.1 microns.

From Jenne's elog entry we know that the series resistor to the PZT is 63.6 kOhms. The PZT is labeled as
having a capacitance of 279 nF. So the PMC drive's pole frequency is 1/2/pi/63.6e3/279e-9 = 9 Hz +/- 0.5 Hz.
The cable capacitance is ~20 pF/foot so its not significant for this.

The template file is Templates/PMC-PZTcal.xml.

Using the above calibrations, also plot the calibrated PMC ERR and PZT spectra.
  12042   Tue Mar 22 21:30:15 2016 KojiUpdateIOOPMCIMC aligned, WFS offset adjusted

The alignment of the PMC adjusted on the PSL table: Trans 0.737->0.749

The alignment of the IMC adjusrted on the sliders: Trans 14300->15300

WFS offset has been reset by /opt/rtcds/caltech/c1/scripts/MC/WFS/WFSoffsets

  15134   Mon Jan 20 15:11:20 2020 gautamUpdatePSLPMCT photodiode grounding issue

For a few days, I've noticed that the PSL overview StripTool panel shows PMC transmission and FSS RMTEMP channels with variation that is too large to be believable. Looking at these signals on an oscilloscope, there was no such fuzziness in the waveform. I ruled out flaky connections, and while these are the only two channels currently being acquired by the temporary Acromag setup underneath the PSL enclosure, the Acromags themselves are not to blame, because once I connected a function generator to the Acromag instead of the PMC transmission photodiode, both channels are well behaved. So the problem seems to be with the PMC transmission photodiode, perhaps a grouding issue? Someone please fix this.

  15205   Mon Feb 10 15:55:46 2020 JordanUpdatePSLPMCTRANSPD

[Gautam, Jordan]

Gautam showed me how the PMCTRANSPD signal was reading zero, and he suspected it might have to do with the acromag wiring. Disconnected the acromag box underneath the PSL table and checked the ADC wiring. Side note: When benchtesting the c1psl acromag chassis there was excess noise in the AI channels, and grounding the minus pin of the ADC channel eliminates the noise.

So I grounded the (-) pins on the ADC1 (192.168.113.122), which PMCTRANSPD is connected to and that seemed to fix the problem. As of right now PMCTRANSPD is reading ~.75 V.

See attached pictures

gautam: While this fix seems to have worked, I wonder why this became necessary only in the last month. Note that the problem was a noisy readback on the PMC transmission PD, which also made the FSS_RMTEMP channel noisy, leading me to suspect some kind of ground loop issue.

  9019   Fri Aug 16 19:36:49 2013 CharlesUpdatePSLPMC_trans Channel

Rana and I connected the PMC_trans output to the BNC connector board on the west end of the PSL table (the channel is labeled). I took a few spectra off of PMC_trans and the SR785 was connected directly to the PMC_trans output for about an hour.

Data will follow.

  5748   Fri Oct 28 00:53:39 2011 ranaUpdateElectronicsPOP 22/110 Design

The attached PDF shows a possible gain / input noise config for the POP 22/110 that we would use to detect the RF power in the DRMI. Design is in the SVN.

If Kiwamu/Jenne say that this has good enough sensing noise for the lock triggering than we will build it. This is using a 2mm diode.

If we can get away with 1 mm, we might as well use a PDA10CF for now.

  9558   Wed Jan 15 18:42:57 2014 JenneUpdateASCPOP ASC QPD offline for a few hours this afternoon

I was in the lab, near the south end of the ITMX oplev table, looking for something, and I bumped the POP ASC QPD's power supply.  I thought that it was fine, but did not adequately check it.  When EricQ asked me just now about why the PRC is so wobbly today, I checked, and the power for the QPD wasn't properly connected (it's kind of a crappy connector, that if you nudge, contacts or loses contact).  Anyhow, I restored power to the QPD, and the PRC looks a little more stable now.  My fault for not checking more carefully, and my apologies to Q and Gabriele for their frustrations this afternoon.

  9930   Thu May 8 14:37:02 2014 JenneUpdateASCPOP ASC QPD power

I was thinking about POP today, and wanted to know if there was something to be done to allow us to use the PRCL ASC for at least a little bit farther into arm power buildup.

Anyhow, I checked, and while PRMI is locked on sidebands (ETMs misaligned), POP DC is about 80 counts, and the power measured by the Ophir power meter is 24 microWatts. 

We were on the 3rd gain setting for the QPD's power amplifier.  I turned it down to the "2" option.  (When at 4, the front panel light indicates saturation).

It's not clear to me what the gain settings mean exactly.  I think that "1" means 4*10^3 V/A, and "6" means 4*10^6 V/A (On-Trak OT301 info site), but I don't know for sure how the gain changes for the settings 2-5.  Anyhow, I have changed the digital gain for the ASC to be -0.063 from -0.023 for both pitch and yaw.

  16846   Thu May 12 13:46:59 2022 JcUpdateAlignmentPOP Beam

[Tega, JC]

Tega and I went in to adjust the POP being in the ITMX Table. The beam entered the table high, so we adjusted the this by adding mirrors (The highlighted in Turqoise are mirrors which adjust the pitch of the beam). All the mirrors are set and we are now in the process of adjusting the PD.

  16847   Thu May 12 17:20:08 2022 PacoUpdateAlignmentPOP Beam on CCD

[Paco]

Got POP beam centered on camera and nominally on the two PDs. Attachment #1 shows "carrier" camera.

  8897   Tue Jul 23 01:30:27 2013 JenneUpdateASCPOP 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:

QPD_spectra_only.png

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:

QPD_yaw_motion_from_PRM.pngQPD_pit_motion_from_PRM.png

BS:

QPD_yaw_motion_from_BS.pngQPD_pit_motion_from_BS.png

ITMX:

QPD_yaw_motion_from_ITMX.pngQPD_pit_motion_from_ITMX.png

ITMY:

QPD_yaw_motion_from_ITMY.pngQPD_pit_motion_from_ITMY.png

 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.

  8926   Fri Jul 26 13:39:30 2013 KojiUpdateASCPOP QPD analysis

It was not actually easy to see from the entry what signal was taken in what condition but from the shape of the spectra
I had the impression that the ASC & OPLEV signals were measured under the presence of the ASC control.
That is (moderately to say) tricky as the ASC control imprints the angular noise
from unkown mirror on the PRM, and then the oplev observes it. The original stability of the oplev is
obscured by the injection from the servo and the fair comparison of the stability is almost impossible.

So the true comparison between the ASC and oplev signals should be done without the control loop.
http://nodus.ligo.caltech.edu:8080/40m/8532

http://nodus.ligo.caltech.edu:8080/40m/8535

We can recover the free running spectrum of the ASC signals by compensating the loop transfer functions
because the ASC signals are the in-loop error signals. The oplev signals should be measured without
the ASC loop engaged.

  8712   Mon Jun 17 17:51:43 2013 JenneUpdateLSCPOP QPD cables laid

Power not on to the POP QPD yet though.  Also, still need to reconnect POPDC.

  8810   Tue Jul 9 11:41:22 2013 JenneUpdateASCPOP 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 JenneUpdateASCPOP 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.

  8840   Fri Jul 12 21:23:42 2013 JenneUpdateASCPOP 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.

  8851   Mon Jul 15 17:16:59 2013 JenneUpdateASCPOP 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.

ChangeSideMicrometer_July2013_calib2.png

ChangeSideMicrometer_July2013_calib1.png

ChangeVertMicrometer_July2013_calib1.png

  8854   Tue Jul 16 01:17:21 2013 JenneUpdateASCPOP 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.

  8805   Mon Jul 8 15:31:48 2013 JenneUpdateASCPOP 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.

  10963   Mon Feb 2 12:24:27 2015 JenneUpdateASCPOP QPD centered

After aligning the PRC, I centered the POP QPD.

  9249   Thu Oct 17 13:26:13 2013 JenneUpdateASCPOP QPD realigned

I locked the PRMI, and tried to turn on the ASS, but this caused PRMI to lose lock. 

Since this is similar to what happened the other night (see elog 9243, 2nd big paragraph), I looked into it a little further.  I noticed that the POP QPD pitch was very close to the edge of the QPD, so I went out and (while PRMI was locked) recentered the POP QPD.  After doing so, I was able to run the PRM ASS, and it worked very nicely, just as it has before.  So, it looks like something drifted, such that the optimal PRM alignment caused the POP beam to not be fully on the QPD.  Since the ASC loop is triggered by PRMI lock, and is constantly on, falling off the QPD causes lockloss.

While I was out there, I tweaked up the PMC pitch alignment yet again.  The FSS numbers all looked reasonable, however PMC transmission was ~0.75 .  I did a tiny bit of work in pitch, and now we're back to 0.83 transmission. 

  10337   Wed Aug 6 10:45:56 2014 GabrieleUpdateASCPOP QPD signals

 In addition to the simulation described in my previous elog, I simulated the signal on a quadrant photodetector demodulated at 2F. The input laser beam is modulated at 11MHz up to the fifth order. There is no additional 55 MHz modulation.

The QPD demodulated at 2F shows good signals for PRC control for all CARM offsets, as expected from the previous simulation.

pop_qpd_2f.png

 

  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.

  9883   Wed Apr 30 18:06:06 2014 jamieUpdateCDSPOP QPD signals now on dolphin

The POP QPD X/Y/SUM signals, which are acquired in c1ioo, are now being broadcast over dolphin.  c1ass was modified to pick them up there as well:

c1ioo-POPQPD.pngc1ass-POPQPD.png

Here are the new IPC entries:

controls@fb ~ 0$ egrep -A5 'C1:IOO-POP' /opt/rtcds/caltech/c1/chans/ipc/C1.ipc
[C1:IOO-POP_QPD_SUM]
ipcType=PCIE
ipcRate=16384
ipcHost=c1ioo
ipcNum=116
desc=Automatically generated by feCodeGen.pl on 2014_Apr_30_17:33:22
--
[C1:IOO-POP_QPD_X]
ipcType=PCIE
ipcRate=16384
ipcHost=c1ioo
ipcNum=117
desc=Automatically generated by feCodeGen.pl on 2014_Apr_30_17:33:22
--
[C1:IOO-POP_QPD_Y]
ipcType=PCIE
ipcRate=16384
ipcHost=c1ioo
ipcNum=118
desc=Automatically generated by feCodeGen.pl on 2014_Apr_30_17:33:22
controls@fb ~ 0$ 

Both c1ioo and c1ass were rebuild/install/restarted, and everything came up fine.

The corresponding cruft was removed from c1rfm, which was also rebuild/installed/restarted.

  10398   Fri Aug 15 01:31:44 2014 JenneUpdateASCPOP QPD to ETMs model wiring complete

I have added a few things to the ASS model, and the ASC sub-block, so that we can send POP QPD information down to the ETMs for CARM angular control after we've reduced the CARM offset and gotten some carrier buildup.  I did not remove our ability to actuate on PRM, so that we can still play with it in PRMIsb cases.

The input matrix has been expanded so that it can send signals to new CARM_YAW and CARM_PIT filter banks.  The corresponding filter banks have been created.  The output matrix was also expanded to take in the 2 new servo outputs, and so it can send signals to both ETMs, pitch and yaw.  I did not include any triggering logic for this new CARM situation, since I assume we'll just turn it on and off with our scripts.  (We haven't really been using the triggering capability of the PRM ASC either lately, although it's all still there).  I added the inputs and outputs of the CARM servos to the list of acquired channels.

The ASC sub-block:

ASC_newCARM.png

I also modified the top level of the ASS model.  This was just a simple addition of summing nodes for the ETMs, similar to what was already in place for the PRM, so that we can send both the ASS dither alignment signals and the ASC servo control signals to the optics.

The ASS top level:

ASSoverview_newCARM.png

I also quickly modified the ASC screen to expose all of the new options:

ASC_screen.png

The ASS model was compiled, and restarted.  As usual, this temporarily removes the biases on the input pointing tip tilts, but the pointing seems to have come back without any trouble.

  15296   Fri Apr 3 17:15:53 2020 gautamUpdateASCPOP angular FF filters trained and tested

Summary:
Using the data I collected yesterday, the POP angular FF filters have been trained. The offline time-domain performance looks (unbelievably) good, online performance will be verified at the next available opportunity(see update).

Details:

The sequence of steps followed is the same as that done for the MCL FF filters. The trace that is missing from Attachment #1 is the measured online subtraction. Some rough notes:

  • The "target" channels for the subtraction are the POP QPD PIT/YAW signals, normalized by the QPD sum. For the time that the PRMI was locked yesterday, the QPD readouts suggested that the beam was well centered on the QPD, but the POP QPD (OT-301) doesn't give me access to individual quadrant signals so I couldn't actually verify this.
  • I used 64s impulse time on the FIR filter for training. Maybe this is too long, but anyways, the calculation only takes a few seconds even with 64^2 taps.
  • I found that the Levinson matrix algorithm sometimes failed for this particular dataset. I didn't bother looking too much into why this is happening, the brute force matrix inversion took ~4 times longer but still was only ~5 seconds to calculate the optimal filter for 20 mins of training data sampled at 64 Hz.
  • The actuator TF was measured with >0.9 coherence between 0.3 Hz - 10 Hz and fitted, and the fit was used for subsequent analysis. Fit is shown in Attachment #2.
  • FIR to IIR fitting took considerable tweaking, but I think I got good enough fits, see Attachments #3, #4. In fact, there may be some benifit to making the shape smoother outside the subtraction band but I couldn't get IIRrational to cooperate. Need to confirm that this isn't re-injecting noise.

Update Apr 5 1145pm:

  • Attachment #1 has now been updated to show the online performance. The comparison between the "test" and "validation" datasets aren't really apple-to-apple because they were collected at different times, but I think there's enough evidence here to say that the feedforward is helping.
  • Attachment #5 shows that the POP DC (= PRC intracavity buildup) RMS has been stabilized by more than x2. This signal wasn't part of the training process, and I guess it's good that the intracavity power is more stable with the feedforward on. Median averaging was used for the spectral densities, there were still some abrupt glitches during the time this dataset was collected.
  • The next step is to do the PRFPMI locking with all of these recently retuned feedforward loops engaged and see if that helps things.
Quote:

This afternoon, I kept the PRM locked for ~1hour and then measured transfer functions from the PRM angular actuators to the POP QPD spot motion for pitch and yaw between ~1pm and 4pm. After this work, the PRM was misaligned again. I will now work on the feedforward filter design.

  15297   Mon Apr 6 12:26:07 2020 ranaUpdateASCPOP angular FF filters trained and tested

that's pretty great performance. maybe you can also upload some code so that we can do it later too - or maybe in the 40m GIT

I wonder how much noise is getting injected into PRC length at 10-100 Hz due to this. Any change the PRC ERR?

  15298   Mon Apr 6 16:46:40 2020 gautamUpdateASCPOP angular FF filters trained and tested

I don't have a recent measurement of the optical gain of this config so I can't undo the loop, but in-loop performance doesn't suggest any excess in the 10-100 Hz band. Interestingly, there is considerable improvement below 10 Hz. Maybe some of this is reduced A2L noise because of the better angular stability, but there is also improvement at frequencies where the FF isn't doing anything, so could be some bilinear coupling. The two datasets were collected at approximately the same time in the evening, ~5pm, but on two different days.

Quote:

I wonder how much noise is getting injected into PRC length at 10-100 Hz due to this. Any change the PRC ERR?

  16832   Thu May 5 14:46:22 2022 AnchalUpdateBHDPOP beam height lowered, POP_SM4 raised

[Anchal, JC]

We first aligned the single arm cavity resonance for both arms to get maximum flashing. As we opened the chamber, I found that the POP beam was mostly hitting the POP_SM4 mirror but was clipping about 2 mm on the top edge.

I used TT2-PR3 to lower the injection beam angle and moved pairs of ITMY-ETMY, and ITMX-ETMX to recover as much flashing as I could in the both arms. Then, I moved PR2 in pitch from 49 to 71 to maximize the arm flashing again. After these steps, the POP beam was clearly within the POP_SM4 mirror but still in the upper half of the optic and there was maybe just a mm of clearance from the top edge. I decided to raise POP_SM4 mirror by 0.14" spacer. Now the beam is still in upper half of the mirror but has a good clearance from the edge.

The POP beam is coming outside in the in-air table at as a rising beam in the nominal path near the center of the window. This beam needs to be directed to the POP camera and RFPD on the far-side of the table.

Next steps:

  • In-air table work: Setup POP camera and RFPD.
  • In ITMX chamber, rotate ITMX Oplev mirror to clear the oplev beam off POP_SM5. Change oplev beam path outside accordingly.
  • Install green transmission from X-arm steering mirrors in BS chamber.
  • Install 4 steering mirrors in ITMY chamber at the two outputs of BHD BS to direct the beam outside.
  • Figure out POX11 rotation angle and get XARM locking as well.

 

  7752   Tue Nov 27 03:26:00 2012 JenneUpdateGeneralPOP beam on POP55, POP camera

Quote:

Some obvious things to be fixed

-  We need POP55 and POP CCD for diagnoses.

 Done.  The beam is also going vaguely in the direction of POP110, but I can't see the beam, so it's tricky. 

Order of operations:

1. Find POP on the table, place iris so I wouldn't forget.  Find beam by putting big IR card where I think beam should be, look at IR card with IR viewer.

2. Move and re-clamp 2" lens so beam is on center of lens.

3. Move and re-clamp 1st (2") mirror so that beam is on center of mirror. 

4. Remove BS-33% so that all the beam goes to POP55, steer that 1st mirror so beam is on POP55's little mirror.  Align little mirror so beam is centered on POP55 (as seen by looking at PD with viewer, finding "edges" of PD, going back to center).

5. Put BS-33% back in place.  The reflected portion of this beam is not possible to see using card+viewer technique.

6. Remove BS-50% that reflects half of this beam to POP110.  Find beam reflected from BS-33% by waving POP camera around.  Steer BS-33 until beam goes back in the direction that the camera used to be mounted.  Adjust camera mount and BS-33 so that beam is on camera.

7. Put BS-50% back in place.  Steer it around with voltmeter on PD to see if beam ever hits PD.  Unsuccessful. Give up, since we have POP55, and POP camera.

8. Make a youtube video: POP, AS, REFL, ITMXF (all on Quad3) - PRMI coarsely aligned, no IFO parts locked.  MICH was locked earlier, but not during video time.

  16831   Wed May 4 18:52:43 2022 TegaUpdateBHDPOP beam too high at POP SM4 on the ITMX chamber

[Yuta, Tega]

We needed to sort out the POXDC signal so we could work on X-arm alignment. Given that POXDC channel value was approx 6 compared to POYDC value of approx. 180, we decided to open the ITMX chamber to see if we could improve the situation. We worked on the alignment of POX beam but could not improve the DC level which suggests that this was already optimized for.  As an aside, we also noticed some stray IR beam from the BS chamber, just above the POX beam which we cold not identify.

Next we moved on to the POP beam alignment, where we noticed that the beam level on LO1 and POP_SM4 was a bit on the high side. Basically, the beam was completely missing the 1" POP_SM4 mirror and was close to the top edge of LO1. So we changed TT2 pitch value from 0.0143 to -0.2357 in order to move the beam position on POP_SM4 mirror. This changed the input alignment, so we compensated using PR2 (0.0 -> 49.0) and PR3 (-5976.560 -> -5689.800). This did not get back the alignment as anticipated, so we moved ITMY pitch from 0.9297 to 0.9107. All of these alignment changes moved the POP beam down by approx 1/5 of an inch from outside the mirro to the edge of POP_SM4 mirror, where about half of the beam is clipped.

 

Next Steps:

We need to repeat these aligment procedures with say 1.5 time the change in TT2 pitch to center the beam on POP_SM4 mirror.

  17269   Tue Nov 15 17:58:00 2022 PacoConfigurationCamerasPOP camera realignment after IFO alignment

[Paco, Yuta]

I swapped the 1 inch BS and lenses along the POP beam to clear the apertures and avoid clipping this beam. The results are illustrated by the attached pictures; this was done right after Yuta had optimized IFO alignment so it's hopefully a good reference from now on. Yuta also tuned the alignment of BHDC path in ITMY table, which mostly improved the alignment to DCPD A (90-ish counts improved to 100-ish counts with ITMY single bounce).

ELOG V3.1.3-