40m QIL Cryo_Lab CTN SUS_Lab TCS_Lab OMC_Lab CRIME_Lab FEA ENG_Labs OptContFac Mariner WBEEShop
  40m Log, Page 207 of 341  Not logged in ELOG logo
ID Date Authordown Type Category Subject
  10252   Tue Jul 22 15:50:35 2014 NichinSummaryElectronicsCharacterization of demodulator boards.

Quote:

Rack 1Y2, I took transfer function measurements for each of the following demodulator boards: REFL11, REFL33, REFL55, REFL165, AS55, POP22, POX11 and POY11.

What I did:

1) Removed the wire at PD Input to demodulator board.

2) Put the MOD output from network analyzer into PD input of board.

3) Ran a sweep from 100kHz to 100MHz.

4) Measured the transfer function between PD RF MON and PD Input. (The PD RF MON signal came out of the RF multiplexer, so the mux is included as well )

5) Put the original wire back at PD Input.

Results:

The plots clearly show an attenuation of 20dB (factor of 10) for all the demodulator boards. This explains why my transimpedance measurements are off by 10 times.

Note: for REFL 165, there was an extra 100MHz high pass filter installed at PD Input. I did not remove this and made my measurements along with this.

To Do:

a) Modify the PDFR system to calibrate out this attenuation.

b) Measure the transfer function between the input and output of RF mux, so that we can have just the transfer function between PD input an PD RF MON (for documentation's sake)

 

I repeated the exact steps above and made sure everything was back where it should be after I was done.

Reason I had to retake the measurements:

My script for acquiring data from the AG4395A network analyzer was such that it first acquired the magnitude data from channel 1 and then recorded phase data from channel 2 without holding its trace. Hence the phase and magnitude data were not exactly in sync with each other. So, when I tried to fit the data to a model using vector fitting, I ended up with very bad results.

I have now changed every single script relating to the network analyzer to just get the real and imaginary data in one go and then calculate the phase using this data.

The fitting process is now in progress and results will be up shortly.

Attachment 1: Demodulators_TF.pdf
Demodulators_TF.pdf Demodulators_TF.pdf Demodulators_TF.pdf Demodulators_TF.pdf Demodulators_TF.pdf Demodulators_TF.pdf Demodulators_TF.pdf Demodulators_TF.pdf
  10260   Wed Jul 23 10:40:23 2014 NichinUpdateGeneralWeekly Update

To do:

  1. Measure and calibrate out  attenuation and phase changes due to RF cables in the PDFR system.
  2. Create a database of canonical plots for comparison each time new data is acquired.
  3. Vector fitting or LISO fitting of transimpedance curves.

Does not require time from a lab expert.

  10263   Wed Jul 23 11:54:27 2014 NichinUpdateElectronicsCharacterization of demodulator boards.

Quote:

 

I repeated the exact steps above and made sure everything was back where it should be after I was done.

Reason I had to retake the measurements:

My script for acquiring data from the AG4395A network analyzer was such that it first acquired the magnitude data from channel 1 and then recorded phase data from channel 2 without holding its trace. Hence the phase and magnitude data were not exactly in sync with each other. So, when I tried to fit the data to a model using vector fitting, I ended up with very bad results.

I have now changed every single script relating to the network analyzer to just get the real and imaginary data in one go and then calculate the phase using this data.

The fitting process is now in progress and results will be up shortly.

The plots in the previous Elog includes delay and a little attenuation by RF cables and the RF mux.

Today I separately calculated the delay and attenuation for an RG405 cable (550 cm) and the RF mux(using really small RF cables). These delays should be accounted for when fitting the transfer function of Demodulator boards and transimpedance of PDs.

The plots are in both semilogx and linear.

Attachment 1: 1.pdf
1.pdf 1.pdf
Attachment 2: 2.pdf
2.pdf 2.pdf
  10265   Wed Jul 23 18:53:11 2014 NichinUpdateElectronicsTime delay in RG405 coaxial cables

 A time delay can be modeled as the exponential transfer function :  e(-sTd)  as seen HERE . Therefore the slope of the phase gives us the time delay.

A RG405 coaxial cable, exactly 5.5 meters in length, was fit to an ideal delay function e(-sTd) , with Td = 150 ns.

The plots shows the actual data, fit data and data after correction using the ideal model stated above.

Conclusion:

Delay in RG405 cables is approximately 27.27 ns per meter. This value can be used to correct the phase in measurements of transimpedance for each PD by dividing out the ideal transfer function for time delay.

[EDIT: This looks like we have about 12 % the speed of light inside the RF cables. Too small to be true. I will check tomorrow if the Network analyzer itself has some delay and update this value.]

The varying attenuation of about 1dB due to the cable is not compensated by this. We need to separately include this.

Things to do:

1) Get the length of RF cables that is being used by each PD, so that the compensation can be made.

2) Calculate the attenuation and delay caused by RF multiplexer and Demodulator boards. Include these in the correction factor for transimpedance measurements. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Attachment 1: RFcable1.pdf
RFcable1.pdf
Attachment 2: RFcable2.pdf
RFcable2.pdf
  10266   Wed Jul 23 19:30:34 2014 NichinUpdateElectronicsTime delay in the RF multiplexer (Rack 1Y1)

A time delay can be modeled as the exponential transfer function :  e(-sTd)  as seen HERE . Therefore the slope of the phase gives us the time delay.

The transfer function of RF multiplexer in rack 1Y1 (NI PXI-2547) was fit to an ideal delay function e(-sTd) , with Td = 59 ns.

The plots shows the actual data, fit data and data after correction using the ideal model stated above.

Conclusion:

Delay the RF Multiplexer is approximately 59 ns. This value can be used to correct the phase in measurements of transimpedance for each PD by dividing out the ideal transfer function for time delay.

 

Attachment 1: RFmux1.pdf
RFmux1.pdf
Attachment 2: RFmux2.pdf
RFmux2.pdf
  10280   Mon Jul 28 10:42:43 2014 NichinUpdateElectronicsDemodulator board's characterization

 I used vector fitting to fit the transfer functions between RF input and PD RF MON of demodulator boards. These fittings can certainly do a lot better on LISO, but for the time being I will assume these to be good enough and change the main PDFR scripts to calibrate out this factor and get a decent reading of PD transimpedance. Then it will just be a matter of changing the transfer function parameters. A lot of work needs to be done on the PDFR interface and plot features.

Attached: The plots showing data and fits.

Attachment 1: Demod_Fit.pdf
Demod_Fit.pdf Demod_Fit.pdf Demod_Fit.pdf Demod_Fit.pdf Demod_Fit.pdf Demod_Fit.pdf Demod_Fit.pdf Demod_Fit.pdf
  10288   Tue Jul 29 18:58:57 2014 NichinUpdateComputer Scripts / ProgramsPDFR update and Test run

The PDFR system's interface and scripts have been updated to include quite a few more features.

On the interface side, there are buttons to open the previous plot for each PD and also a single button to run the scans on all PDs sequentially. The previous plot buttons actually open a softlink that is updated each time a measurement is taken.

Running a scan now pops up a terminal window to show messages that help understand whats going on.

16.png

In the background, the script now takes in the transfer function of the demodulator board in ZPK format and calibrates it out of each measurement. The parameters are given .dat files making it easier to replace the transfer function. (Remember my last elog which showed that the fitting of transfer functions were not really great and that I am going to use it anyway to get the script updated.)  Also, the script now takes the delay in the RF cables and calibrates out that as well. So we no longer have the huge phase variations and the phase related to transimpedance are visible.

A test run was conducted today. Plots attached.

NOTE: The test can be conducted only on REFL 11,33,55,165 , AS55, and POX11.

POY11 has an optical fiber routed from this system, but there is no space to actually illuminate this PD. So it is currently not included in our system, even though there is a button for this.

POP22 has a fiber illuminating it, but its a unknown broadband PD. I do not know it's DC transimpedance or other values. Its just of matter of updating a few files that feed it's parameters into PDFR.

However, for the above PDs, the demodulator boards have been fit to a transfer function and the script is ready to go as soon as the above problems are fixed.

Conclusion: The plots look noisy. But, the transimpedance now resembles the one on 40-m wiki for all the PDs, both the shape and values.

There will be some errors that are induced because of improper demodulator TF fitting. This has to be taken care of eventually.

Work remaining: Create a canonical set of plots for each PD and set them as the baseline. These canonical plots will be plotted along with each measurement for easy comparison.

A well documented manual for the whole system clearly explaining where and how it takes all the parameters into account so that anybody can easy update just the essential information.

Attachment 2: PDFR_testRun_29-07-2014.pdf
PDFR_testRun_29-07-2014.pdf PDFR_testRun_29-07-2014.pdf PDFR_testRun_29-07-2014.pdf PDFR_testRun_29-07-2014.pdf PDFR_testRun_29-07-2014.pdf PDFR_testRun_29-07-2014.pdf
  10305   Thu Jul 31 12:01:35 2014 NichinUpdateComputer Scripts / ProgramsPDFR update

The Transimpedance plots of PDFR now have a reference plot or baseline plot along with the current measurement, for easy comparision.

Current Work: Getting Matlab's vectfit3 to work simultaneously on the transimpedance readings and print the zeros and poles alongside the plots. 

Attachment 1: REFL11_31-07-2014_115010.pdf
REFL11_31-07-2014_115010.pdf
  10332   Tue Aug 5 17:24:37 2014 NichinUpdateComputer Scripts / ProgramsPDFR update

The PDFR system now has the capability to automatically run vectfit3.mat using a wrapper script named vectorfitzpk.m

This is done via a shell script being called from inside python that inturn runs the matlab script.

  10346   Thu Aug 7 13:39:41 2014 NichinUpdateComputer Scripts / ProgramsWrapping up PDFR

1)The PDFR scripts have all been migrated into /scripts/PDFR/

2) The MEDM screen to run PDFR is /medm/MISC/PDFR.adl

3) A new button has been added on sitemap to open the above medm window.

4) All data and plots generated will sit in /scripts/PDFR/"PD Name"/

5) All features are working after the migration and absolute file paths are being used.

Work Remaining : Manual for others to make changes and keep using my system.

 

  10355   Fri Aug 8 16:45:40 2014 NichinUpdateWikiPDFR wiki updated

 The PDFR system has been documented in the 40m wiki and all the relevant information about making changes and keeping it updated have been mentioned.

https://wiki-40m.ligo.caltech.edu/Electronics/PDFR_system

This pretty much wraps up my SURF 2014 project at the 40m lab. 

  8808   Tue Jul 9 01:18:48 2013 Nic, KojiUpdateASCPRMI locking / PRM ASC adjustment

[Koji, Nic]

- Locked PRMI with REFL165 I/Q

- Aligned the POP beam on the QPD. We found that the vertical motion of the beam appeared in the yaw signal, and horizontal motion in the pitch signal.
  This was fixed by swapping the cables to the ADC. Later it turned out that this was caused by the calibration setup for the QPD.
  We requested Jenne to fix the QPD on the table with the current orientation.

- Re-implemented the AC-coupled ASC servo. The filters were just copied from the previous PRM ASC servo (in the SUS ASC filter).
  The same filter was installed to the pitch and yaw filter modules for now. The gains were adjusted to have some stable lock stretches.
  C1:ASC-PRCL_YAW_GAIN: -0.01
  C1:ASC-PRCL_PIT_GAIN: -0.01

  The power spectra of C1:ASC-PRCL_YAW_IN1 and C1:ASC-PRCL_PIT_IN1 were attached.
  The reference curves are the ones with the servo on. The other two are the free-running stability of the QPD output.

- Modified the up and down scripts for the PRM ASC for the new setup.
  It first turns on the inputs of the filters and then turn on FM2/3.
  It assumes that the outputs are engaged all time.

 

Attachment 1: PRMI_ASC.pdf
PRMI_ASC.pdf
  9376   Wed Nov 13 18:32:04 2013 Nic, EvanUpdateISSSR560 ISS loop

We have implemented an SR560-based ISS loop using the AOM on the PSL table. This is a continuation of the work in 40m:9328.

We dumped the diffracted beam from the AOM onto a stack of razor blades. This beam is not terribly well separated from the main beam, so the razor blades are at a very severe angle. Any alternatives would have involved either moving the AOM or attempting to dump the diffracted beam somewhere on the PMC refl path. We trimmed the RF power potentiometer on the driver so that with 0.5 V dc applied to the AM input, about 10% of the power is diverted from the main beam.

We ran the PMC trans PD into an AC-coupled SR560. To shape the loop, we set SR560 to have a single-pole low- pass at 300 Hz and an overall gain of 5×104. We take the 600 Ω output and send it into a 50 Ω feed-through terminator; this attenuates the voltage by a factor of 10 or so and thereby ensures that the AOM driver is not overdriven.

The AOM driver's AM input accepts 0 to 1 V, so we add an offset to bias the control signal. The output of the 50 Ω feedthrough is sent into the 'A' input of a second SR560 (DC coupled, A − B setting, gain 1, no filtering). Using a DS345 function generator, a 500 mV offset is put into the 'B' input (the function generator reads −0.250 V because it expects 50 Ω input). The 50 Ω output of this SR560 is sent into the AOM driver's AM input.

A measurement of suppressed and unsuppressed RIN is attached. We have achieved a loop with a bandwidth of a few kilohertz and with an in-loop noise suppression factor of 50 from 100 Hz to 1 kHz. This measurement was done using the PMC trans PD, so this spectrum may underestimate the true RIN.

Attachment 1: psl_aom_overhead.jpg
psl_aom_overhead.jpg
Attachment 2: aom_driver.jpg
aom_driver.jpg
Attachment 3: loop_on_settings.jpg
loop_on_settings.jpg
Attachment 4: fxn_gen.jpg
fxn_gen.jpg
Attachment 5: 40m_iss.pdf
40m_iss.pdf
  9380   Wed Nov 13 20:02:12 2013 Nic, EvanUpdateISSSR560 ISS loop

Quote:

We have implemented an SR560-based ISS loop using the AOM on the PSL table. This is a continuation of the work in 40m:9328.

We dumped the diffracted beam from the AOM onto a stack of razor blades. This beam is not terribly well separated from the main beam, so the razor blades are at a very severe angle. Any alternatives would have involved either moving the AOM or attempting to dump the diffracted beam somewhere on the PMC refl path. We trimmed the RF power potentiometer on the driver so that with 0.5 V dc applied to the AM input, about 10% of the power is diverted from the main beam.

We ran the PMC trans PD into an AC-coupled SR560. To shape the loop, we set SR560 to have a single-pole low- pass at 300 Hz and an overall gain of 5×104. We take the 600 Ω output and send it into a 50 Ω feed-through terminator; this attenuates the voltage by a factor of 10 or so and thereby ensures that the AOM driver is not overdriven.

The AOM driver's AM input accepts 0 to 1 V, so we add an offset to bias the control signal. The output of the 50 Ω feedthrough is sent into the 'A' input of a second SR560 (DC coupled, A − B setting, gain 1, no filtering). Using a DS345 function generator, a 500 mV offset is put into the 'B' input (the function generator reads −0.250 V because it expects 50 Ω input). The 50 Ω output of this SR560 is sent into the AOM driver's AM input.

A measurement of suppressed and unsuppressed RIN is attached. We have achieved a loop with a bandwidth of a few kilohertz and with an in-loop noise suppression factor of 50 from 100 Hz to 1 kHz. This measurement was done using the PMC trans PD, so this spectrum may underestimate the true RIN.

 A small followup measurement. Here are spectra of the MC trans diode with and without the ISS on. The DC value of the diode (in counts) changed from 17264.2 (no ISS) to 17504.3 (with ISS), but I didn't account for this change in the plot.

There is a small inkling of benefit between 100Hz and 1kHz. Above about 100Hz, the RIN is suppressed to about the noise level of this measurement. Below 100Hz there is no change, which probably means that power fluctuations are introduced downstream of the AOM, which argues for an outer-loop ISS down the road.

Atm #2 is in units of RIN.

Attachment 1: ISS_560_rot.pdf
ISS_560_rot.pdf
Attachment 2: ISS_560cal.pdf
ISS_560cal.pdf
  13080   Mon Jun 26 09:39:15 2017 NaomiSummaryGeneralMeasure transfer functions of Mini-Circuits filters

I have spent my first few days as a SURF getting experience working with the Network/Spectrum Analyzer (AG 4395A). After an introduction to the 40m by Koji, I was tasked with using the AG4395A to measure the transfer function of several filters (for example, Mini-Circuits Low Pass Filter SLP-30). I am now familiar with configuring the AG 4395A, taking a single set of data using a command from one of the control computers, and plotting the dataset as a Bode plot (separate plots for magnitude and phase) using Python.

To Do:

  • Use AGmeasure to take multiple datasets with a single command.
  • Plot multiple datasets for each filter on a single Bode plot and perform some statistical analysis. 

To experiment with plotting multiple datasets on a single Bode plot, I used a single dataset from the Network Analyzer using the SLP-30 filter and added random noise to create ten datasets to plot. I am attaching the resulting Bode plot, which has the ten generated sets of data plotted along with their average.

We discussed with Rana and Koji how to interpret this type of dataset from the Network Analyzer. Instead of considering the magnitude and phase as separate quantities, we should consider them together as a single complex number in the form H(f) = M exp(iπP/180), where M is the magnitude and P is the phase in degrees. We can then find the average value of the measured quantity in its complex number form (x + iy), as opposed to just taking the average of the magnitude and phase separately.  

Attachment 1: Bode_Plot.png
Bode_Plot.png
  13131   Fri Jul 21 19:44:58 2017 NaomiSummaryComputer Scripts / ProgramsUsing PyKat to run Finesse

I have been working on using PyKat to run Finesse. There appear to be several ways to run an equivalent simulation using Finesse:

1: .kat only

Run a .kat file directly from the terminal. For example, if in the directory containing the Finesse kat.ini file, run the command ‘./kat file.kat’. This method does not use PyKat.

To edit the simulation using this method, one must directly edit the .kat file. This is not ideal, as all parameters must be hard-coded, and there is no looping method for duplicate commands.


Both of the following methods use PyKat in some manner. To run Finesse using PyKat from a .py file, the command ‘from pykat import finesse’ should be included. In addition, two environment variables must be defined:

  • FINESSE_DIR': directory containing ‘kat’ executable
  • KATINI’: location and name of kat.ini file

Within a .py file running PyKat, the kat object contains all of the optical components and their states. To create a kat object, we use the command:

kat = finesse.kat()


2: .kat + .py

To load Finesse commands from a .kat file, we can use the command loadKatFile(). For example, using the kat object as defined above:

kat.loadKatFile(‘file.kat’)

The kat object now contains any components defined in the .kat file. The states of these components can be altered using PyKat. For example, if in the .kat file, we defined a mirror named ‘ITM’, with R = 0.9, T = 0.1, phi = 0, and with nodes 1 and 2 to its left and right, respectively, using the Finesse command

m ITM 0.9 0.1 0 n1 n2

we can now alter the state of the mirror using a PyKat command such as

kat.ITM.phi = 30

which changes the ‘phi’ property of the mirror to 30 degrees. Once all alterations to objects are made, we can run Finesse using the command

out = kat.run()

which stores the output of the Finesse simulation in the variable out.


3: .py only

We can also run a Finesse simulation without any .kat file. There are two ways to define Finesse objects within a .py file.

- Parse a string containing Finesse commands, as would be found in a .kat file, using the command parseCommands(). For example,

            kat.parseCommands(‘m ITM 0.9 0.1 0 n1 n2’)

defines the same mirror as above. This object can now be altered using pyKat in the same manner as above.

- Define an object using the classes defined in PyKat. For example, to define the same ITM mirror, we can use:

ITM = mirror(‘ITM’, ‘n1’, ‘n2’, 0.9, 0.1, 0)

kat.add(ITM)

The syntax for these classes can be found in the files included in the PyKat package named ‘commands.py’, ‘detectors.py’, and ‘components.py’.

We can also run Finesse commands (rather than just defining components) using their respective classes. These must also be added to the kat object. For example:

x = xaxis(‘lin’, [‘-4M’, ‘4M’], ‘f’, 1000, ‘laser’)

kat.add(x)

This runs the command ‘xaxis’, which sets the x-axis of the output data to run from freq = -4 MHz to 4 MHz, in 1000 steps. This is equivalent to the following Finesse command:

xaxis laser f lin -4M 4M 1000

In theory, we should be able to use PyKat to run any Finesse command. However, not all Finesse commands appear to be defined in PyKat; one example is the Finesse command ‘yaxis’, which I cannot locate in PyKat. In addition, I have had difficulty running some commands such as ‘cav’ and ‘pd’, despite following their class definitions in the PyKat files. However, these commands can still be easily run in PyKat using parseCommands().

  3027   Tue Jun 1 18:39:59 2010 NancyUpdate Lead spheres for the seismographs

 

the lead spheres that were placed below the granite slab have been flattened by hammering to have lesser degree of wobbling of the slab.

the height of each piece, and the flatness of their surfaces was checked by placing another slab over them and checking by the spirit level.

P6010170.JPG

P6010166.JPG

P6010164.JPG

 

  3386   Mon Aug 9 12:46:24 2010 NancyUpdateIOOMode Cleaner WFS


 Yesterday , I put in the Output Matrix, and changed the gain sliders for the 4 WFS loops.

From how much to how much have you chnged the gain?

I changed the gains from all 4 0.01 to o.27, 0.23, 0.32 and 0.11 and the main alignment gain to be 0.8

 

 

Next we stepped to putting in the gains for the MC2 oplev servo.

I like to put the credit to Aidan for teaching Nancy how to use FOTON.

 Yes, I am sorry for not mentioning this.

Thanks Aidan

 

 

  8742   Tue Jun 25 10:18:34 2013 Mystery ManUpdateLSCArm Cavity scan with X-ALS after ALS servo upgrade

Quote:

RMS is now less than 1 kHz or ~50 pm. (in your face, Kiwamu!)

 Isn't this still a factor of 2 away from the limit in the paper?

  3233   Thu Jul 15 23:51:47 2010 Mr. MaricHowToSUSLevitate me if you can

You guys must work harder.

mag_lev.jpg


  2091   Wed Oct 14 15:48:26 2009 MottHowToGeneralPhase Noise measurement

I have gotten the hang of the procedure for measuring phase noise on the AOMs. 

Koji suggested I right up a short guide (wiki page?) on how to do this. 

I will finish up here, then go measure the AOMs at the other lab (may have to be tomorrow, after laser safety), and then write up the instructions.

  2117   Mon Oct 19 13:00:53 2009 MottUpdateGeneralPhase Noise Measurement

Here is the result for the measurement of the phase noise.  We used the marconi function generator and compared it with an Isomet AOM driver (model 232A-1), so this is really a measure of the relative phase between them.  We used a 5x gain and a frequency response of 13 Hz/V for the modulation.  In all the attached plots, the blue is the data and the red is the measurement limit (as determined by the noise in the SRS785).  Also note that the units on the yaxis of the Phase noise plot are incorrect, they should be dB/Sqrt(Hz), I will fix this and edit as soon as possible.

Attachment 1: PhaseNoiseWithError.jpg
PhaseNoiseWithError.jpg
Attachment 2: G.jpg
G.jpg
Attachment 3: PSD.jpg
PSD.jpg
  2362   Mon Dec 7 19:02:22 2009 MottUpdateGeneralReflectivity Measurements

I have made some measurements of the R value for some coatings we are interested in.  The plots have statistical error bars from repeated measurements, but I would suspect that these do not dominate the noise, and would guess these should be trusted to plus or minus 5% or so.  They still should give some indication of how useful these coatings will be for the green light.  I plan to measure for the ITM as soon as possible, but with the venting and finals this may not be until late this week.

 

EDIT (12/9/09): I fixed the label on the y axis of the plots, and changed them to png format.

Attachment 1: Y1-45P_R.png
Y1-45P_R.png
Attachment 2: Y1-45S_R.png
Y1-45S_R.png
Attachment 3: Y1-50CC_R.png
Y1-50CC_R.png
  2392   Thu Dec 10 18:27:48 2009 MottUpdateGeneralUpdated R & T Measurements

Attached are updated plots of the T&R Measurements for a variety of mirrors, and diagrams for the setup used to make the measurements.

T is plotted for the 1064 nm measurement, since these mirrors are highly reflective at 1064, and either R or R&T are plotted for the 532 nm measurement, depending on how larger the R signal is.

As with the previous set of plots, the error bars here are purely statistical, and there are certainly other sources of error not accounted for in these plots.  In general, the T measurement was quite stable, and the additional errors
are probably not enormous, perhaps a few percent.

The mirrors are:

Y1-1037-00.50CC

Y1-2037-45S

Y1-2037-45P

Y1S-1025-0

Y1S-1025-45

 

Attachment 1: Y1S-0.png
Y1S-0.png
Attachment 2: Y1S-45.png
Y1S-45.png
Attachment 3: Y45P.png
Y45P.png
Attachment 4: Y45S.png
Y45S.png
Attachment 5: Y150CC.png
Y150CC.png
Attachment 6: Setup.png
Setup.png
  2474   Mon Jan 4 17:26:01 2010 MottUpdateGeneralT & R plots for Y1 and Y1S mirrors

The most up-to-date T and R plots for the Y1 and Y1S mirrors, as well as a T measurement for the ETM, can be found on:

http://lhocds.ligo-wa.caltech.edu:8000/40m/Upgrade_09/Optics/RTmeasurement

 

  2696   Mon Mar 22 22:11:26 2010 MottUpdateABSLPLL reconstructed

 

 It looks like the PLL drifted alot over the weekend, and we couldn't get it back to 9 dBm.  We switched back to the new focus wideband PD to make it easier to find the beat signal.  I replaced all the electronics with the newly fixed UPDH box (#17) and we aligned it to the biggest beat frequency we could get, which ended up being -27 dBm with a -6.3V DC signal from the PD.  

Locking was still elusive, so we calculated the loop gain and found the UGF is about 45 kHz, which is too high.  We added a 20 dB attenuator to the RF input to suppress the gain and we think we may have locked at 0 gain.  I am going to add another attenuator (~6 dB) so that we can tune the gain using the gain knob on the UPDH box.  

Finally, attached is a picture of the cable that served as the smb - BNC adaptor for the DC output of the PD.  The signal was dependent on the angle of the cable into the scope or multimeter.  It has been destroyed so that it can never harm another innocent experiment again!

Attachment 1: IMG_0150.JPG
IMG_0150.JPG
  2697   Mon Mar 22 23:37:32 2010 MottUpdateABSLPLL reconstructed

 

We have managed to lock the PLL to reasonable stability. The RF input is attenuated by 26 dBm and the beat signal locks very close to the carrier of the marconi (the steps on the markers of the spectrum analyzer are coarse).  We can use the marconi and the local boost of the pdh box to catch the lock at 0 gain.  Once the lock is on, the gain can be increased to stabilize the lock.  The locked signals are shown in the first photo (the yellow is the output of the mixer and the blue is the output to the fast input of the laser.  If the gain is increased too high, the error signal enters an oscillatory regime, which probably indicates we are overloading the piezo.  This is shown in the second photo, the gain is being increased in time and we enter the non-constant regime around mid-way through.

Tomorrow I will use this locked system to measure the PZT response (finally!).

Attachment 1: 2010-03-22_23.14.00.jpg
2010-03-22_23.14.00.jpg
Attachment 2: 2010-03-22_23.24.50.jpg
2010-03-22_23.24.50.jpg
  2703   Tue Mar 23 18:44:46 2010 MottUpdateABSLPLL reconstructed

 

 After realigning and getting the lock today, I tried to add in the SR785 to measure the transfer function.  As soon as I turn on the piezo input on the PDH box, however, the lock breaks and I cannot reacquire it.  We are using an SR650 to add in the signal from the network analyzer and that has worked. We also swapped the 20 dB attenuator for a box which mimics the boost functionality (-20 dB above 100 Hz, 0 dB below 6Hz).  I took some spectra with the SR750, and will get some more with the network analyzer once Alberto has finished with it. 

The SR750 spectra is posted below.  The SR750 only goes up to 100 kHz, so I will have to use the network analyzer to get the full range. 

Attachment 1: NPRO_PLL_freqresp.png
NPRO_PLL_freqresp.png
  2729   Mon Mar 29 15:26:47 2010 MottHowToComputersNew script for controlling the AG4395A

I just put a script in the /cvs/cds/caltech/scripts/general/netgpibdata/ directory to control the network analyzer called AG4395A_Run.py .   A section has been added to the wiki with the other GPIB script sections (http://lhocds.ligo-wa.caltech.edu:8000/40m/netgpib_package#AG4395A_Run.py)

  2738   Wed Mar 31 03:45:49 2010 MottHowToComputersNew script for controlling the AG4395A

 

I took data for the 2 NPRO PLL using the script I wrote for the AG4395, but it is very noisy above about 1 MHz.  I assume this is something to do with the script (since I am fairly confident we don't have 600 dB response in the PZT), so I will go in tomorrow to more carefully understand what is going on, I may need to include a bit more latency in the script to allow the NA to settle a bit more.  I am attaching the spectrum just to show the incredibly high noise level, 

Attachment 1: noisy_spec.png
noisy_spec.png
  2746   Thu Apr 1 00:43:33 2010 MottUpdateGeneralPZT response for the innolight

Kiwamu and I measure the PZT response of the Innolight this evening from 24 kHz to 2MHz.  

We locked the PLL at ~50 MHz offset using the Lightwave NPRO and and swept the Innolight with the network analyzer (using the script I made; it has one peculiar property, but it does work correctly).  

We will post the plot of the Lightwave PZT response tomorrow morning.

 

**EDIT**: As Koji pointed out, the calibration factor on this plot is WRONG.  See my more recent update for the correctly calibrated plot.

Attachment 1: Innolight_Bode.png
Innolight_Bode.png
  2748   Thu Apr 1 10:21:58 2010 MottUpdateGeneralPZT response for the innolight

Quote:

The shape of the TF looks nice but the calibration must be wrong.

Suppose 1/f slope with 10^-4 rad/V at 10kHz. i.e. m_pm = 1/f rad/V
This means m_fm = 1 Hz/V. This is 10^7 times smaller than that of LWE NPRO.

Quote:

Kiwamu and I measure the PZT response of the Innolight this evening from 24 kHz to 2MHz.  

We locked the PLL at ~50 MHz offset using the Lightwave NPRO and and swept the Innolight with the network analyzer (using the script I made; it has one peculiar property, but it does work correctly).  

We will post the plot of the Lightwave PZT response tomorrow morning.

 

 Koji is absolutely right.  I just double checked my matlab code, and saw that I divided when I should have multiplied.  The correctly calibrated plots are attached here for the Innolight and the lightwave.  Kiwamu and I will measure the amplitude and the jitter today.

Attachment 1: Innolight_Response.png
Innolight_Response.png
Attachment 2: Lightwave_response.png
Lightwave_response.png
  2754   Thu Apr 1 18:05:29 2010 MottUpdateGeneralPZT response for the innolight

 

 We realized that we had measured the wrong calibration value; we were using the free-running error signal with the marconi far from the beat frequency, which was very small.  When we put the Marconi right at the beat, the signal increased by a factor of ~12 (turning our original calibration of 10 mV/rad into 120 mV/rad).  The re-calibrated plots are attached. 

Attachment 1: Innolight_Response_calFix.png
Innolight_Response_calFix.png
Attachment 2: Lightwave_response_calFix.png
Lightwave_response_calFix.png
  2756   Thu Apr 1 19:59:32 2010 MottUpdateGeneralPZT response for the innolight

 

 We measured the Amplitude Modulation response of the PZTs, to find regions with large phase modulation but small amplitude modulation.

We did this by blocking 1 arm of the PLL, feeding the source output of the Network Analyzer into the PZT input of the laser in question, and reading the output of the PD on the NA.  We calibrated by dividing by the DC voltage of the PD (scaled by the ratio of the AC gain to DC gain of the New Focus PD).

The AM response of the Innolight looks fairly smooth up to ~1MHz, and it is significantly below the PM response for most of its range.  The region between 20 and 30 kHz shows very good separation of about 10^3 rad/RIN (and up to 10^5 rad/RIN at ~21.88 kHz, where there is the negative spike in the AM response). The region between 1.5 MHz and 2MHz also looks viable if it is desirable to actuate at higher frequencies.

The Lightwave offers very good AM/PM separation up to about 500 kHz, but becomes quite noisy about 1MHz.

Attachment 1: Innolight_AM_Response.png
Innolight_AM_Response.png
Attachment 2: Innolight_AM_PM.png
Innolight_AM_PM.png
Attachment 3: InnoVsLW_PM.png
InnoVsLW_PM.png
Attachment 4: Innolight_AM_Response.png
Innolight_AM_Response.png
Attachment 5: Lightwave_AM_PM.png
Lightwave_AM_PM.png
  2799   Tue Apr 13 19:53:06 2010 MottUpdateGreen LockingPZT response for the innolight and lightwave

 

 I redid the PZT Phase Modulation measurement out to 5 MHz for both the Innolight and the Lightwave.  The previous measurement stopped at 2MHz, and we wanted to see if there were any sweet spots above 2MHz.  I also reduced the sweep bandwidth and increased the source amplitude at high frequency to reduce the noise (the Lighwave measurement, especially, was noise dominated above 1MHz).  I also plotted the ratio of PM/AM in rad/RIN, since this is the ultimate criterion on which we want to make a determination.

It looks like there is nothing extremely useful above 2MHz for either laser.  There are several candidates for the lightwave at about 140 kHz and again at about 1.4 MHz.  The most compelling peak, however, is in the innolight at 216 kHz, where the peak is about 2.3e5 rad/RIN.

Below about 30kHz, the loop suppresses the measurement, so one should focus on the region above there.

Attachment 1: Innolight_PM.png
Innolight_PM.png
Attachment 2: Innolight_AM_PM.png
Innolight_AM_PM.png
Attachment 3: Innolight_PM_AM_Ratio.png
Innolight_PM_AM_Ratio.png
Attachment 4: Lightwave_PM.png
Lightwave_PM.png
Attachment 5: Lightwave_AM_PM.png
Lightwave_AM_PM.png
Attachment 6: Lightwave_PM_AM_Ratio.png
Lightwave_PM_AM_Ratio.png
  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.

  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

 

Attachment 1: c1lsc_to_c1oaf_via_shmem.png
c1lsc_to_c1oaf_via_shmem.png
Attachment 2: c1oaf_to_c1lsc_via_shmem_fixed_sine_inj_at_100Hz.png
c1oaf_to_c1lsc_via_shmem_fixed_sine_inj_at_100Hz.png
Attachment 3: c1oaf_to_c1lsc_via_shmem_white_noise_inj.png
c1oaf_to_c1lsc_via_shmem_white_noise_inj.png
Attachment 4: c1pem_to_c1oaf_via_rfm.png
c1pem_to_c1oaf_via_rfm.png
  5462   Mon Sep 19 15:44:32 2011 MirkoUpdateLSCRF modulation depth measurement

Earlier measurements of the modulation index were less than optimal because we had too low transmission through the cavity. Contrary to what was believed you actually need to modematch onto the cavity.

Earlier transmitted power was about 8.5uW.

With a 250mm lens we archived 41uW.

Impinging power on the cavity is 1.7mW.

PD TF approx 0.1V / uW.

Carrier power: 4.1V => 41uW

41uW/1.7mW = 2.4 % transmission. Manufacturer clain for peak transmission: 20-30%.

11MHz SB: 28.8mV => m=0.17

55MHz SB:36mV => m=0.19


As you can see on the pic the SNR of the SBs is not too good.

P9190138.JPG

  5519   Thu Sep 22 15:53:37 2011 MirkoUpdateLSCRF modulation depth measurement again

Toyed around with the modematching some more today.

The outermost glass elements of the OSA are about 28cm apart.

With the OSA beeing a confocal cavity that should mean that the ROC of every mirror is 28cm on the cavity side. If the input surface is flat we need a 28cm focusing lens for good MM. If it's not we shouldn't need any MM.

Tried a f=250mm lens on different positions first. Got at best about 570mV (PD gain=10) in transmission of the OSA.

Then tried a f=1000mm lens. Best transmission 1.22V (7.2% transmission). SB were (PD gain =100) 11MHz: 87.2mV (m=0.17) , 55MHz: 59.2mV (m=0.14)

Lost the position while toying around. Left it then at 1.0V transmisison at 15:15 local time. Let's see how much it drifts. SBs for this were 11MHz: 52.8mV (m=0.17), 55MHz: 73.8mV (m=0.14)

[Ed by KA: If the carrier transmission was really 1.22V and 1.0V the modulation depths calculated are inconsistent with the measurement.]

Spacing between carrier 11MHz and 55MHz SBs seems consistent, and leads to a FSR measurement of 1.5GHz, also fine.

 

Update: After 90mins no change in carrier transmitted power. Next morning: Carrier transmission down by 10%.

DSC_3478.JPG

 DSC_3481.JPG

DSC_3480.JPG

  5530   Fri Sep 23 16:56:07 2011 MirkoUpdateLSCDesired MC modulation frequency measurement, tuning of modulation frequency

[ Mirko, Koji, Suresh ]

Looked into the modulation frequency that should pass the input MC. With a locked MC looked at the RF output of the PD in refl of the MC. Looked at the beat between 11MHz and 29.5MHz. Minimizing it by fine-tuning the 11MHz freq. ( which means maximizing the 11MHz transmission).

SB freq. [MHz]     Beat power [dBm]

11.065650          -75

11.065770          -80 (diving into spec. analyzer instrument noise)

11.066060          -80 (surfacing out of spec. analyzer instrument noise)

Set the freq. to the middle of the last two points: 11.065910MHz at 16:26.

ToDo: How big a problem is the AM?

  5567   Wed Sep 28 18:39:50 2011 MirkoUpdatePEMBLRM seismic channels in c1pem

[Mirko,Jenne]

Created 5-band BLRMS for seismometer data (Gur1, Gur2 and STS1 each in x,y,z respectively) and accelerometer 1 through 6.

Bands are:
0.1Hz-0.3Hz
0.3Hz-1Hz
1Hz-3Hz
3Hz-10Hz
10Hz-30Hz
each with a fitting 4th order butterworth bandpass.

Data is recorded at 256Hz as e.g. C1:PEM-ACC1_RMS_RMS_0p3_1_OUT_DQ. For the 75 channels we have that corresponds to the data rate of just 1.2 16kHz channels.

c1pem execution time increased fom 6-7us to 15-16us out of 480us available.

  5568   Wed Sep 28 21:23:23 2011 MirkoUpdateComputersISCY FE network card / cable not ok

[Mirko,Jenne]

We discovered that the left network cable is not rigidly connected to the back of the ISCY FE computer. You can easily pull it out a mm disconnecting it. It should click rigidly in place. Not clear if it's the cable or the network card.

  5569   Wed Sep 28 21:28:34 2011 MirkoUpdateComputersTorturing control computers. Fine again now

[Mirko, Jenne]

We tried to run an extended version of Matt's LMS adaptive filter c-code. We got the extension to compile separately in gcc first. Then after some tweaking of the code we could make-install c1oaf with the c-code.

This killed c1lsc (the FE computer running c1oaf). Not responding to ssh or even pings. We replaced the bad c-code with harmless code, then reset c1lsc via the hardware button. While looking for c1lsc we discovered the problem with c1iscy network card (see previous entry).

After c1lsc reboot, restart of the FB, and a BURT restore not ok yet

  5577   Thu Sep 29 20:37:12 2011 MirkoUpdateComputersNew c1oaf c-code: Breaking in new way

[Mirko, Jenne]

Programmed a new implementation of the LMS in C. Compiles fine in gcc. The full code still kills c1lsc computer. Tried to go through the code uncommenting more and more. Not perfect in reproducability. The attached version should compile and keep c1oaf running, but not actually produce an adaptive filter. At some point the code just keeps c1oaf from starting up. Leaves the c1lsc computer in working order. At some point I got error messages like ..................................................................
CA.Client.Exception...............................................
    Warning: "Identical process variable names on multiple servers"
    Context: "Channel: "C1:OAF-ADAPT_CORR_BS_Name08", Connecting to: 192.168.113.62:50970, Ignored: c1lsc:34533"
    Source File: ../cac.cpp line 1209
    Current Time: Thu Sep 29 2011 19:18:17.219208306
..................................................................
CA.Client.Exception...............................................
    Warning: "Identical process variable names on multiple servers"
    Context: "Channel: "C1:OAF-ADAPT_CORR_BS_Name09", Connecting to: 192.168.113.62:50970, Ignored: c1lsc:34533"
    Source File: ../cac.cpp line 1209
    Current Time: Thu Sep 29 2011 19:18:17.225999915
..................................................................
CA.Client.Exception...............................................
    Warning: "Identical process variable names on multiple servers"
    Context: "Channel: "C1:OAF-ADAPT_CORR_ETMX_SW1R", Connecting to: 192.168.113.62:50970, Ignored: c1lsc:34533"
    Source File: ../cac.cpp line 1209
    Current Time: Thu Sep 29 2011 19:18:17.243037042
..................................................................

This usually indicates that there are multiple carepeater running. Didn't find where that would be. After rebooting c1lsc and c1sus a couple of times everything seems fine.

Attachment 1: ADAPT_XFCODE11-09-29---20-12.c
// LMS algorithm adaptive filtering for the Caltech 40m -- Sept. 2011 by M. Prijatelj

#define nDOF 8
#define nWIT 21
#define nTAPS 1000

void ADAPT_XFCODE(double *in, int inSize, double *out, int outSize) {

//First the DOFs and their switches
//int nDOF=8;
... 136 more lines ...
  5611   Tue Oct 4 10:35:08 2011 MirkoUpdateCDSc1lsc and c1sus running again

[Alex, Mirko]

Alex fixed the computers this morning. It was in fact a dolphin problem:

Hi Jenne,  figured it out. Even though dxadmin said the Dolphin net was fine, it wasn't. Something happeneed to DIS networkmanager and I had to restart it. It is running on fb: 
controls@fb ~ $ ps -e | grep dis 12280 ?        00:00:00 dis_networkmgr
controls@fb ~ $ sudo /etc/init.d/dis_networkmgr restart
Once the restart was done both c1lsc and c1sus nodes were configured correctly, they printed the usual "node 12 is OK" "node 8 is OK" messages into the dmesg and was able to run /etc/start_fes.sh on lsc and sus to load all the FEs.  Alex

Some lights on c1lsc were still red: C1:DAQ-FBO_C1SYS_SYS and the smaller red light left of it. Restarted the fb. Didn't help. Restarted c1lsc, all green now.
Restored autoburt from Oct 3. 19:07 on c1lsc and c1sus.
  5642   Mon Oct 10 12:14:00 2011 MirkoUpdateComputer Scripts / ProgramsIMC simulations

[Mirko, Kiwamu]

I tried to answer two questions regarding the IMC:

1. What is the coupling of fluctuations in the SB freq. to SB transmitted power?
2. What (if any) is the influence of the IMC on the AM?

I ran into some weird things regarding the corresponding optickle simulations:
1. There seems to be some artifact at the beginning of every simulation sweep.
2. The position of features depends on the parameters of the sweep.

I mailed Matt asking if he sees some error in the simulations

opticke_xaxis.png

Attachment 2: DC_power.png
DC_power.png
Attachment 3: DC_power_B.png
DC_power_B.png
Attachment 4: IMC_simulation.zip
  5663   Thu Oct 13 21:44:48 2011 MirkoUpdateCDSSeismic BLRMS channels, new RMS calculation

[Rana, Koji, Mirko]

We looked into the CDS RMS block c-code as described in Rolfs RCG app guide. Seems the block uses a first order LP filter with a corner freq. / time of 20k execution cycles. There are also some weird thersholds at +-2000counts in there.

I was looking into implementing a hand-made RMS block, by squaring, filtering, rooting. The new RMS (left) seems nicer than the old one (bottom right). Signal was 141counts sinus at 4Hz.

Filters used: Before squaring: 4th order butterworth BP at given freq. & (new) 6th order inverse Chebyshew 20dB at 0.9*lower BP freq. and 1.1*upper BP freq. => about 1dB at BP freq.

                       After squaring: 4th order butterworth LP @ 1Hz.

C1PEM execution time increased from about 20us to about 45us.

Made a new medm screen with the respective filters in place of the empty C1PEM_OVERVIEW. Should go onto the sitemap.

New_RMS_vs_old_RMS.png

Original RMS LP is slower than 0.1Hz, see below for single LP at 0.1Hz in the new RMS. Original RMS is faster than single LP @ 0.01Hz

Original_RMS_LP_slower_than_0.1Hz.png

Some of the channels are recorded as 256Hz DAQ channels now. Need to figure out how to record these as 16Hz EPICS channls.

  5676   Mon Oct 17 10:43:14 2011 MirkoUpdateCDSCommited changes to c1rfm

I want to make changes to c1rfm. Found uncommited changes to it from Sept 27. Since we recompiled it since then it should be safe to commit them, so I did. See svn log for details.

  5677   Mon Oct 17 11:06:31 2011 MirkoUpdateCDSPiping data from c1lsc to c1oaf

Changed, recompiled, installed and restarted c1rfm and c1oaf to get the MC1-3 Pitch and Yaw data into the c1oaf model.
Also changed c1oaf to use MCL as a witness channel (as well as an actuator).
Added the changes to svn.

ELOG V3.1.3-