40m QIL Cryo_Lab CTN SUS_Lab TCS_Lab OMC_Lab CRIME_Lab FEA ENG_Labs OptContFac Mariner WBEEShop
  40m Log, Page 247 of 346  Not logged in ELOG logo
ID Date Author Type Category Subjectup
  13483   Fri Dec 15 18:23:03 2017 ranaUpdatePEMTrillium seismometer DC offset

UVW refers to the 3 internal, orthogonal velocity sensors which are not aligned with the vertical or horizontal directions. XYZ refers to the linear combinations of UVW which correspond to north, east, and up.

  8466   Fri Apr 19 15:19:25 2013 JamieUpdatePEMTrilliums moved from bench to concrete

I moved the two Trillium seismometers that Den left on the electronics bench out onto the new concrete blocks in the lab that will be their final resting places.  I moved one onto the slab at the vertex and the other to the slab at the Y end.  I left them both locked and just sitting on the concrete.

The pile of readout electronics that were sitting next to them I moved on to the yellow foam box half way down the MC tube, between the MC tube and the X arm tube.  This is obviously not a good place to store them, but I couldn't think of a better place to put them for the moment.

  11532   Thu Aug 27 01:41:41 2015 IgnacioUpdateIOOTriply Improved SISO (T240-X) FF of MCL

Earlier today I constructed yet another SISO filter for MCL. The one thing that stands out about this filter is its strong roll off wink. This prevents high frequency noise injection into YARM. The caviat, filter performance suffered broken heart quite a bit, but there is subtraction going on.

I have realized that Vectfit lacks the ability of constraining the fits it produces, (AC coupling, rolloff, etc) even with very nitpicky weighting. So the way I used vectfit to produce this filter will be explained in a future eLOG, I think it might be promising. 

Anyways, the usual plots are shown below. 

 

Filter:

T240-X (SISO)

 

 

Training data + Predicted FIR and IIR subtraction:

 

Online subtraction results:(High freq. stuff shown for noise injection evaluation of the filter)

MCL
 
YARM
 
 
 

Subtraction performace:

 

  15698   Thu Dec 3 10:33:00 2020 gautamUpdateVACTrippLite UPS delivered

The latest greatest UPS has been delivered. I will move it to near the vacuum rack in its packaging for storage. It weighs >100lbs so care will have to be taken when installing - can the rack even support this?

Attachment 1: DFDD4F39-3F8A-439D-888D-7C0CE2E030CF.jpeg
DFDD4F39-3F8A-439D-888D-7C0CE2E030CF.jpeg
  7123   Wed Aug 8 20:34:29 2012 JenneUpdateASSTrouble measuring sensing matrix

I turned on the ASS, without closing the loops, to try to measure the sensing matrix. 

The Yarm was locked (Eric did a nice job earlier - he'll ELOG ABOUT IT before he goes home!), and I used an LO CLKGAIN of 300 on all of the TRY Lockins.  Then I put on and took away a 10% offset in pitch, but it's almost impossible to see the difference. 

The attached is a truly awful screenshot, but you can kind of see what's going on.  The big steps are me increasing the LO gain, but around "0" on the x-axis I changed the pitch offset from 10% away to nominal.  Since there are such big oscillations, the change is basically non-existent.  Grrrr. I'll look at it again tomorrow, since I have an exiting bike ride home ahead of me....

 

  7124   Wed Aug 8 20:50:39 2012 KojiUpdateASSTrouble measuring sensing matrix

From the log, I couldn't understand what has been done.

The procedure we should perform is

  1. Dither total 4 dofs of the two mirrors with different frequencies. Some fluctuation of TRY is even visible in dataviewer.
  2. The cavity is aligned at the beginning. These 4 peaks in TRY in DTT is small or invisible. Some 2nd harmonics are visible.
  3. Misalign one of the dofs. Some peaks get bigger.
  4. Correspoding lockin output becomes bigger.

Then you can start measuring the sensing matrix. At which part did the attempt fail?

Quote:

I turned on the ASS, without closing the loops, to try to measure the sensing matrix. 

The Yarm was locked (Eric did a nice job earlier - he'll ELOG ABOUT IT before he goes home!), and I used an LO CLKGAIN of 300 on all of the TRY Lockins.  Then I put on and took away a 10% offset in pitch, but it's almost impossible to see the difference. 

The attached is a truly awful screenshot, but you can kind of see what's going on.  The big steps are me increasing the LO gain, but around "0" on the x-axis I changed the pitch offset from 10% away to nominal.  Since there are such big oscillations, the change is basically non-existent.  Grrrr. I'll look at it again tomorrow, since I have an exiting bike ride home ahead of me....

 

  7129   Thu Aug 9 00:23:11 2012 JenneUpdateASSTrouble measuring sensing matrix

Quote:

From the log, I couldn't understand what has been done.

The procedure we should perform is

  1. Dither total 4 dofs of the two mirrors with different frequencies. Some fluctuation of TRY is even visible in dataviewer.
  2. The cavity is aligned at the beginning. These 4 peaks in TRY in DTT is small or invisible. Some 2nd harmonics are visible.
  3. Misalign one of the dofs. Some peaks get bigger.
  4. Correspoding lockin output becomes bigger.

Then you can start measuring the sensing matrix. At which part did the attempt fail?

Quote:
 

 Cavity started out aligned pretty well, but not 100%.  Transmission was ~0.8 . Perhaps this was part of the problem.

I realize now that you mention it, it was totally amateur hour of me to only look at the lockin outputs on StripTool (plus POY and TRY on Dataviewer), and not look at TRY on DTT...or any spectra at all.  Not so intelligent.  I could see some fluctuation of TRY on Dataviewer that corresponded to me turning on the oscillators, as well as the spot wiggling on the camera view of ETMYT a teeny bit.

When applying a 10% misalignment to ETMY Pit (by adding 0.1 to the Pit components of the output matrix, as is done in the MC spot position calibration), I could see that there was a small jump in the StripTool trace, but it was much smaller than the ambient fluctuations of the output. 

I just looked back and realized that I must have forgotten to add my screenshot, but it's saved on a desktop on Rossa.  It would be better if I had attached the data, but from that you see that the average of the lockin output signal didn't change very much in the last several minutes of the measurement, but the fluctuations (no misalignment offsets) are pretty big, maybe ~10% or 15% the size of the signal.  Then when I added the misalignment to one mirror (ETMY PIT), there is a very small jump in the lockin signal, but it is much, much smaller than the size of the ambient fluctuations.  Perhaps a long average would result in a "real" value, but by looking by eye, I can't see a discernible difference in the average value of the lockin outputs.

My plan is to do as you say, dithering all 4 optics, and misaligning a single optic's single DoF (Pit or Yaw), and seeing how that misalignment affected each of the sensors (the lockin outputs).  Then put that DoF back to nominal, and misalign a different DoF, rinse and repeat.

Okay, so this is a little stream-of-consciousness-y, and you're going to think I'm really dumb, but I just realized that I haven't set the phase of the lockin demodulators yet.  So I think I need to dither the optics, and go through each of the sensors, and adjust the phase until the peak in TRY in DTT is maximized for the I phase, and minimized for the Q phase (since we use the I-output).  Bah.  Bad Jenne.

  7131   Thu Aug 9 01:26:03 2012 KojiUpdateASSTrouble measuring sensing matrix

That's a good point, but I suspect that you end up with the in-phase (0deg) as the response of the IFO is immediate compared with the dithering frequency
as long as the whitening/dewhitening are properly compensated in the digital realm.

Quote:

 Okay, so this is a little stream-of-consciousness-y, and you're going to think I'm really dumb, but I just realized that I haven't set the phase of the lockin demodulators yet.  So I think I need to dither the optics, and go through each of the sensors, and adjust the phase until the peak in TRY in DTT is maximized for the I phase, and minimized for the Q phase (since we use the I-output).  Bah.  Bad Jenne.

 

  11251   Sun Apr 26 00:08:56 2015 ranaHowToelogTroubles with putting plots in external locations

If it all possible, don't use links to your home directory. Its not robust. It would be like if you clicked on your Google Music and it told you to ask me to sing that song to you. Imagine that on auto-repeat next time your fancy-bone itches.

Attachment 1: 48.png
48.png
  6383   Wed Mar 7 23:28:41 2012 Lab Cleanup CrewHowToEnvironmentTrue Beauty....

Or, how a lab should look at the end of every day.

Clean_40m_Electronics_Bench.jpg

Beat that, Bridge kids!

  17138   Tue Sep 13 14:12:03 2022 YehonathanUpdateBHDTrying LO phase locking again

[Paco, Yehonathan]

Summary:  We locked LO phase using the DC PD (A - B) error point without saturating the control point, i.e. not a "bang bang" control.


Some suspensions were improved so we figure we should go back to trying to lock the LO phase.

We misalign ETMs and lock MICH using AS55. We put a small MICH offset by putting C1:LSC-MICH_OFFSET = -80.

AS and LO beams were aligned to overlap by maximizing the BHD signal visibility.

BHD DCPDs were balanced by misaligning the AS beam and using the LO beam only.

We measure the transfer function between the DCPDs and find the coherence is 1 at 1 Hz (because of seismic motion) so we measure the ratio between them to be 0.3db.

AS beam is aligned again to overlap with the LO beam. For the work below, we use the largest MICH OFFSET we could impinge before losing the lock = +90. This has the effect of increasing our optical gain.

We started using the HPC LOCK IN screen to dither POS on the different BHD SUS. We first started with AS1 (freq = 137.137 Hz, gain = 1000). The sensing matrix element was chosen accordingly (from the demodulated output) and fed to the LO_PHASE; because this affected the AS port alignment this was of course not the best choice. We moved over to LO2 (freq = 318.75 Hz, gain = 1000) but for the longest time couldn't see the dither line at the error point (A-B).

After this we added comb60 notch filters at DCPD_A and DCPD_B input signals. We ended up just feeding the (A-B) error point to LO1, and trying to lock mid fringe, which suceeded without saturation. The gain of the LO_PHASE filter was set to 0.2 (previously 20; attributable to the newly unclipped LO beam intensity?), and again we only enabled FM4 and FM5 for this. After this a dither line at 318.75 Hz finally appeared in the A-B error point! To be continued...

Attachment 1: Screenshot_2022-09-13_17-41-33.png
Screenshot_2022-09-13_17-41-33.png
  15943   Fri Mar 19 10:49:44 2021 Paco, AnchalUpdateSUSTrying coil actuation balance

[Paco, Anchal]

  • We decided to try out the coil actuation balancing after seeing some posts from Gautum about the same on PRM and ETMY.
  • We used diaggui to send swept sine excitation signal to C1:SUS-MC3_ULCOIL_EXC and read it back at C1:SUS-MC3_ASCPIT_IN1. Idea was to create transfer function measurements similar to 15880.
  • We first tried taking the transfer function with excitation amplitude 0f 1, 10, 50, 200 with damping loops on (swept from 10 to 100 Hz lograthmically in 20 points).
  • We found no meaningful measurement and looked like we were just measuring noise.
  • We concluded that it is probably because our damping loops are damping all the excitation down.
  • So we decided to switch off damping and retry.
  • We switched off: C1:SUS-MC3_SUSPOS_SW2 , C1:SUS-MC3_SUSPIT_SW2, C1:SUS-MC3_ASCPIT_SW2, C1:SUS-MC3_ASCYAW_SW2, C1:SUS-MC3_SUSYAW_SW2, and C1:SUS-MC3_SUSSIDE_SW2.
  • We repeated teh above measurements going up in amplitudes of excitation as 1, 10, 20. We saw the oscillation going out of UL_COIL but the swept sine couldn't measure any meaningful transfer function to C1:SUS-MC3_ASCPIT_IN1. So we decided to just stop. We are probably doing something wrong.

Trying to go back to same state:

  • We switch on: C1:SUS-MC3_SUSPOS_SW2 , C1:SUS-MC3_SUSPIT_SW2, C1:SUS-MC3_ASCPIT_SW2, C1:SUS-MC3_ASCYAW_SW2, C1:SUS-MC3_SUSYAW_SW2, and C1:SUS-MC3_SUSSIDE_SW2.
  • But C1:SUS-MC3_ASCYAW_INMON had accumulated about 600 offset and was distrupting the alignment. We switched off C1:SUS-MC3_ASCYAW_SW2 hoping the offset will go away once the optic is just damped with OSEM sensors, but it didn't.
  • Even after minutes, the offset in C1:SUS-MC3_ASCYAW_INMON kept on increasing and crossed beyond 2000 counts limit set in C1:IOO-MC3_YAW filter bank.
  • We tried to unlock the IMC and lock it back again but the offset still persisted.
  • We tried to add bias in YAW DOF by increasing C1:SUS-MC3_YAW_OFFSET, and while it was able to somewhat reduce the WFS C1:SUS-MC3_ASCYAW_INMON offset  but it was misalgning the optic and the lock was lost. So we retracted the bias to 0 and made it zero.
  • We tried to track back where the offset is coming from. In C1IOO_WFS_MASTER.adl, we opened the WFS2_YAW filter bank to see if the sensor is indeed reading the increasing offset.
  • It is quite weird that C1:IOO-WFS2_YAW_INMON is just oscillating but the output in this WFS2_YAW filter bank is slowly increasing offset.
  • We tried to zero the gain and back to 0.1 to see if some holding function is causing it, but that was not the case. The output went back to high negative offset and kept increasing.
  • We don't know what else to do. Only this one WFS YAW output is increasing, everything else is at normal level with no increasing offset or peculiar behavior.
  • We are leaving C1:SUS-MC3_ASCYAW_SW2 off as it is disrupting the IMC lock.

[Jon walked in, asked him for help]

  • Jon suggested to do burt restore on IOO channels.
  • We used (selected through burtgooey):
    burtwb -f /opt/rtcds/caltech/c1/burt/autoburt/snapshots/2021/Mar/19/08:19/c1iooepics.snap -l /tmp/controls_1210319_113410_0.write.log -o /tmp/controls_1210319_113410_0.nowrite.snap -v <
  • No luck, the problem persists.
  15951   Mon Mar 22 11:57:21 2021 Paco, AnchalUpdateSUSTrying coil actuation balance

[Paco, Anchal]

  • For MC coil balancing we will use the ASC (i.e. WFS) error signals since there are no OPLEV inputs (are there OPLEVs at all?).

Test MC1

  • Using the SUS screen LockIns the plan is to feed excitation(s) through the coil outputs, and look at the ASC(Y/P) error signals.
  • A diaggui xml template was saved in /users/Templates/SUS/MC1-actDiag.xml which was based on /users/Templates/SUS/ETMY-actDiag.xml
  • Before running the measurement, we of course want to plug our input matrix, so we ran /scripts/SUS/InMatCalc/writeMatrix.py only to find that it tripped the MC1 Watchdog.
    • The SIDE input seems to have the largest rail, but we just followed the procedure of temporarily increasing the WD max! threshold to allow the damping action and then restoring it.
    • This happened because in latest iteration of our code, we followed an advice from the matlab code to ensure the SIDE OSEM -> SIDE DOF matrix element remains positive, but we found out that MC1 SIDE gain (C1:SUS-MC1_SUSSIDE_GAIN) was set to -8000 (instead of a positive value like all other suspensions).
    • So we decided to try our new input matrix with a positive gain value of 8000 at C1:SUS-MC1_SUSSIDE_GAIN and we were able to stablize the optic and acquire lock, but...
    • We saw that WFS YAW dof started accumulating offset and started disturbing the lock (much like last friday). We disabled the ASC Input button (C1:SUS-MC1_ASCYAW_SW2).
    • This made the lock stable and IMC autolocker was able to lock. But the offset kept on increasing (see attachment 1).
    • After sometime, the offset begain to exponential go to some steady state value which was around -3000.
  • We wrote back the old matrix values and changed the C1:SUS-MC1_SUSSIDE_GAIN back to -8000. But the ASCYAW offset remained to the same position. We're leaving it disabled again as we don't know how to fix this. Hopefully, it will organically come back to small value later in the day like last time (Gautum just reenabled the ASCYAW input and it worked).

Test MC3

  • Defeated by MC1, we moved to MC3.
  • Here, the gain value for C1:SUS-MC3_SUSSIDE_GAIN was already positive (+500) so it could directly take our new matrix.
  • When we switched off watchdog, loaded the new matrix and switched the watchdog back on.
  • The IMC lock was slightly distrupted but remain locked. There was no unusual activity in the WFS sensor values. However, we saw the the SIDE coil output is slowly accumulating offset.
  • So we switched off the watchdog before it will trip itself, wrote back the old matrix and reinstated the status quo.
  • This suggests we need to carefully look back our latest changes of normalization and have new input matriced which keep the system stable other than working on paper with offline data.
Attachment 1: 210322_MC1_ASCY.pdf
210322_MC1_ASCY.pdf
Attachment 2: NewandOldMatrices.tar.gz
  15952   Mon Mar 22 15:10:00 2021 ranaUpdateSUSTrying coil actuation balance

There's an integrator in the MC WFS servos, so you should never be disabling the ASC inputs in the suspensions. Disabling 1 leg in a 6 DOF MIMO system is like a kitchen table with 1 leg removedcheeky.

Just diagnose your suspension stuff with the cavity unlocked. You should be able to see the effect by characterizing the damping loops / cross-coupling.

  15954   Mon Mar 22 19:07:50 2021 Paco, AnchalUpdateSUSTrying coil actuation balance

We found that following protocol works for changing the input matrices to new matrices:

  • Shut the PSL shutter C1:PSL-PSL_ShutterRqst. Switch off IMC autolocker C1:IOO-MC_LOCK_ENABLE.
  • Switch of the watchdog, C1:SUS-MC1_LATCH_OFF.
  • Update the new matrix. (in case of MC1, we need to change sign of C1:SUS-MC1_SUSSIDE_GAIN for new matrix)
  • Switch on the watchdog back again which enables all the coil outputs. Confirm that the optic is damped with just OSEM sensors.
  • Switch on IMC autolocker C1:IOO-MC_LOCK_ENABLE and open PSL shutter C1:PSL-PSL_ShutterRqst.

We repeated this for MC2 as well and were able to lock. However, we could not do the same for MC3. It was getting unstable as soon as cavity was locked i.e. the WFS were making the lock unstable. However, the unstability was different in different attempts but we didn't try mroe times as we had to go.


Coil actuation balancing:

  • We set LOCKIN1 and LOCKIN2 oscillators at 10.5 Hz anf 13.5 Hz with amplitude of 10 counts.
  • We wrote PIT, YAW and Butterfly actuation vectors (see attached text files used for this) on LOCKIN1 and LOCKIN2 for MC1.
  • We measured C1:SUS-MC1_ASCYAW_IN1 and C1:SUS-MC1_ASCPIT_IN1 and compared it against the case when no excitation was fed.
  • We repeated the above steps for MC2 except that we did not use LOCKIN2. LOCKIN2 was found to already on at oscillator frequency of 0.03Hz with amplitude of 500 counts and was fed to all coils with gain of 1 (so it was effectively moving position DOF at 0.03 Hz.) When we changed it, it became ON back again after we turned on the autolocker, so we guess this must be due to some background script and msut be important so we did not make any changes here. But what is it for?
  • We have gotten some good data for MC1 and MC2 to ponder upon next.
  • MC1 showed no cross coupling at all while MC2 shoed significant cross coupling between PIT and YAW.
  • Both MC1 and MC2 did not show any cross coupling between butterfly actuation and PIT/YAW dof.

On another news, IOO channels died!

  • Infront of us, the medm channels starting with C1:IOO just died. See attachment 8.
  • We are not sure why that happened, but we have reported everything we did up here.
  • This happened around the time we were ready to switch back on the IMC autolocker and open the shutter. But now these channels are dead.
  • All optics were restored with old matrices and settings and are damped in good condition as of now.
  • IMC should lock back as soon as someone can restart the EPICS channels and switch on C1:IOO-MC_LOCK_ENABLE and C1:PSL-PSL_ShutterRqst.
Attachment 1: 20210322_MC1_CoilBalancePIT.pdf
20210322_MC1_CoilBalancePIT.pdf
Attachment 2: 20210322_MC1_CoilBalanceYAW.pdf
20210322_MC1_CoilBalanceYAW.pdf
Attachment 3: 20210322_MC1_CoilBalanceBUTT.pdf
20210322_MC1_CoilBalanceBUTT.pdf
Attachment 4: 20210322_MC2_CoilBalancePIT.pdf
20210322_MC2_CoilBalancePIT.pdf
Attachment 5: 20210322_MC2_CoilBalanceYAW.pdf
20210322_MC2_CoilBalanceYAW.pdf
Attachment 6: 20210322_MC2_CoilBalanceBUTT.pdf
20210322_MC2_CoilBalanceBUTT.pdf
Attachment 7: 20210322_IMC_CoilBalance.tar.gz
Attachment 8: image-e6019a14-9cf3-45f7-8f2c-cc3d7ad1c452.jpg
image-e6019a14-9cf3-45f7-8f2c-cc3d7ad1c452.jpg
  17146   Tue Sep 20 15:40:07 2022 yehonathanUpdateBHDTrying doing AC lock

We resume the LO phase locking work. MICH was locked with an offset of 80 cts. LO and AS beams were aligned to maximize the BHD readout visibility on ndscope.

We lock the LO phase on a fringe (DC locking) actuating on LO1.

Attachment 1 shows BHD readout (DCPD_A_ERR = DCPD_A - DCPD_B) spectrum with and without fringe locking while LO2 line at 318 Hz is on. It can be seen that without the fringe locking the dithering line is buried in the A-B noise floor. This is probably due to multiple fringing upconversion. We figured that trying to directly dither-lock the LO phase might be too tricky since we cannot resolve the dither line when the LO phase is unlocked.

We try to handoff the lock from the fringe lock to the AC lock in the following way: Since the AC error signal reads the derivative of the BHD readout it is the least sensitive to the LO phase when the LO phase is locked on a dark fringe, therefore we offset the LO to realize an AC error signal. LO phase offset is set to ~ 40 cts (peak-to-peak counts when LO phase is uncontrolled is ~ 400 cts).

We look at the "demodulated" signal of LO1 from which the fringe locking error signal is derived (0 Hz frequency modulation 0  amplitude) and the demodulated signal of LO2 where a ~ 700 Hz line is applied. We dither the LO phase at ~ 50Hz to create a clear signal in order to compare the two error signals. Although the 50 Hz signal was clearly seen on the fringe lock error signal it was completely unresolved in the LO2 demodulated signal no matter how hard we drove the 700Hz line and no matter what demodulation phase we chose. Interestingly, changing the demodulation phase shifted the noisy LO2 demodulated signal by some constant. Will post a picture later.

Could there be some problem with the modulation-demodulation model? We should check again but I'm almost certain we saw the 700Hz line with an SNR of ~ 100 in diaggui, even with the small LO offset changes in the 700Hz signal phase should have been clearly seen in the demodulated signal. Maybe we should also check that we see the 50Hz side-bands around the 700Hz line on diaggui to be sure.

Attachment 1: Screenshot_2022-09-20_15-38-44.png
Screenshot_2022-09-20_15-38-44.png
  3467   Wed Aug 25 12:18:47 2010 josephbUpdateelogTrying new version of elog to see if it helps stability

So unfortunately, I made the start-elog-nodus script smart enough to kill the debugging run I had (although thats probably good since there might have been issues with continuing to run - just poor timing on part of the crash).

In related news, I have gotten the latest version of the elog code to actually compile on Nodus.  I had to hack the cryptic.c file (elog/src/cryptic.c) to get it to work though.

The following was copied from the #ifdef _MSC_VER section of the code into the #else directly following that section. 

#define MAX(x,y) ((x)>(y)?(x):(y))
#define MIN(x,y) ((x)<(y)?(x):(y))
#define __alignof__(x) sizeof(x)
#define alloca(x) malloc(x)
#define mempcpy(d, s, n) ((char *)memcpy(d,s,n)+n)
#define ERANGE 34


I also removed #include <stdint.h> as the functionality it provides is covered by inttypes.h on Solaris machines, which is automatically included.

This new code was released August 5th 2010, while the old elog code we were running was 2.7.5 and was released sometime in 2008.  There are several crash fixes mentioned in the version notes so I'm hoping this may improve stability. I'm in the process of making a copy of the elog logbooks into the elog-2.8.0 install (so as to have a backup with the original 2.7.5).  I'm also copying over all the configuration files.   In a few minutes I'm going to try switching over to the new elog.  If it doesn't work, or is worse, its easy enough to just start up the current version.

All files are located in /cvs/cds/caltech/elog/elog-2.8.0 (the old directory is elog-2.7.5).  I've made  a new startup script called start-elog-nodus-2.8.0.  To start the new one, just run that script.  To start the old one, just go to the elog-2.7.5 directory and run the old start-elog-nodus script.

  10641   Mon Oct 27 19:15:54 2014 ericqUpdateLSCTrying to PRMI on 165

I spent some time trying to debug our inability to get MICH onto REFL165Q while the arms are held off with ALS, to no real success. 

I set up our usual repeatable situation of PRMI on 33 I&Q, arms held off with ALS. I figured that it may help to first sideband lock on REFL55, since 165 is looking for the f2 sidebands and maybe there is some odd offset between the locking points for f1 and f2 or other weirdness. 


REFL 55 settings:

Demod angle 98->126 (was previously set for PRY locking)

PRCL = 0.5 * REFL55 I (UGF of ~200 Hz) (FM gain unchanged from REFL33 situation of -0.02)

MICH = 0.125 * REFL55 Q (UGF of ~60Hz) (same FM gain as 33)

Some REFL55 offset adjusting had to be done in order to not disturb the 33-initiated lock when handing off. 

I also adjusted POP110 phase to zero the Q when locked, and switched the triggering over to 110I


The PRMI can acquire lock like this with arms held off with ALS, no problem. 

Here, I tried to hop over to 165. PRCL was no problem, needing a +1 on 165I. However, I had no success in handing off MICH.   I twiddled many knobs, but none that provably helped. 

I saw indications that the sensing angle in 165 is small (~20deg), which is not consistent with current knowledge of the cavity lengths. We last interferometrically measured the PRC length by letting the PRMI swing and looking at sideband splitting in POP110. At LLO, they did a length measurement by looking at demod angle differences in PRMI carrier vs. sideband locking. (alog8562) This might be worth checking out...

  10649   Wed Oct 29 03:33:38 2014 ericqUpdateLSCTrying to PRMI on 165

 

Short report: Further frustrated by 165 tonight. The weird thing is, the procedure I'm trying with the arms held off on ALS (i.e. excitation line in MICH and PRCL, adjust relative gains to make the signs and magnitudes mach, ezcastep over) works flawlessly with the ETMs misaligned. One can even acquire SB PRMI lock on 165 I&Q, with 80-90 degrees of demod angle between MICH and PRCL. The only real difference in REFL55 settings for misaligned vs. ALS-offset arms is an extra factor of two in the FM gains to maintain the same UGF, so I hoped that the matrix elements for 165 with misaligned arms would hold for ALS-offset arms. 

Alas, no such fortune. I still have no clear explanation for why we can't get MICH on 165Q with the arms held off on ALS. 

I also gave a quick try to measuring the PRCL->REFL55 demod phase difference between carrier and sideband lock (with arms misaligned), and got something on the order of 55 degrees, which really just makes me think I wasn't well set up / aligned, rather than actually conveying information about the PRC length...

  13227   Thu Aug 17 22:54:49 2017 ericqUpdateComputersTrying to access JetStor RAID files

The JetStor RAID unit that we had been using for frame writing before the fb meltdown has some archived frames from DRFPMI locks that I want to get at. I spent some time today trying to mount it on optimus with no success crying

The unit was connected to fb via a SCSI cable to a SCSI-to-PCI card inside of fb. I moved the card to optimus, and attached the cable. However, no mountable device corresponding to the RAID seems to show up anywhere.

The RAID unit can tell that it's hooked up to a computer, because when optimus restarts, the RAID event log says "Host Channel 0 - SCSI Bus Reset."

The computer is able to get some sort of signals from the RAID unit, because when I change the SCSI ID, the syslog will say 'detected non-optimal RAID status'.

The PCI card is ID'd fine in lspci as "06:01.0 SCSI storage controller: LSI Logic / Symbios Logic 53c1030 PCI-X Fusion-MPT Dual Ultra320 SCSI (rev c1)"

'lsssci' does not list anything related to the unit

Using 'mpt-status -p', which is somehow associated with this kind of thing returns the disheartening output:

Checking for SCSI ID:0
Checking for SCSI ID:1
Checking for SCSI ID:2
Checking for SCSI ID:3
Checking for SCSI ID:4
Checking for SCSI ID:5
Checking for SCSI ID:6
Checking for SCSI ID:7
Checking for SCSI ID:8
Checking for SCSI ID:9
Checking for SCSI ID:10
Checking for SCSI ID:11
Checking for SCSI ID:12
Checking for SCSI ID:13
Checking for SCSI ID:14
Checking for SCSI ID:15
Nothing found, contact the author
 
I don't know what to try at this point.
  17105   Thu Aug 25 16:05:51 2022 YehonathanUpdateSUSTrying to fix some SUS

I tried to lock the Y/X arms to take some noise budget. However, we noticed that TRX/Y were oscillating coherently together (by tens of percent), meaning some input optics, essentially PR2/3 are swinging. There was no way I could do noise budgeting in this situation.

I set out to debug these optics. First, I notice side motion of PR2 is very weakly damped .

The gain of the side damping loop (C1:SUS-PR2_SUSSIDE_GAIN) was increased from 10 to 150 which seem to have fixed the issue. Attachment 1 shows the current step response of  the PR2 DOFs. The residual Qs look good but there is still some cross-couplings, especially when kicking POS. Need to do some balancing there.

PR3 fixing was less successful in the beginning. I increased the following gains:

C1:SUS-PR3_SUSPOS_GAIN: 0.5 -> 30

C1:SUS-PR3_SUSPIT_GAIN: 3 -> 30

C1:SUS-PR3_SUSYAW_GAIN: 1 -> 30

C1:SUS-PR3_SUSSIDE_GAIN: 10 -> 50

But the residual Q was still > 10. Then I checked the input matrix and noticed that UL->PIT is -0.18 while UR->PIT is 0.39. I changed UL->PIT (C1:SUS-PR3_INMATRIX_2_1) to +0.18. Now the Q became 7. I continue optimizing the gains.

Was able to increase C1:SUS-PR3_SUSSIDE_GAIN: 50 -> 100.

Attachment 2 shows the step response of PR3. The change of the entry of the input matrix was very ad-hoc, it would probably be good to run a systematic tuning. I have to leave now, but the IFO is in a very misaligned state. PR3/2 should be moved to bring it back.

Attachment 1: PR2_Step_Response_Test_2022-08-25_16-23.pdf
PR2_Step_Response_Test_2022-08-25_16-23.pdf PR2_Step_Response_Test_2022-08-25_16-23.pdf PR2_Step_Response_Test_2022-08-25_16-23.pdf PR2_Step_Response_Test_2022-08-25_16-23.pdf
Attachment 2: PR3_Step_Response_Test_2022-08-25_18-37.pdf
PR3_Step_Response_Test_2022-08-25_18-37.pdf PR3_Step_Response_Test_2022-08-25_18-37.pdf PR3_Step_Response_Test_2022-08-25_18-37.pdf PR3_Step_Response_Test_2022-08-25_18-37.pdf
  3644   Mon Oct 4 15:28:10 2010 josephbUpdateCDSTrying to get c1ioo booting as Gentoo.

I modified the dhcpd.conf file in /etc/dhcp on the fb machine.  I added a entry for c1ioo, listing its MAC address and ip number near the bottom of the file.  I then restarted the dhcp server using "sudo /etc/init.d/dhcpd restart" while on the fb machine.

I also modified the rtsystab, which is used to determine which front end codes start on boot up of a machine.  I added a line: c1ioo   c1x03  c1ioo

I am now in the process of getting c1ioo to come up as a Gentoo machine so I can build a model with an RFM connection in it and test the communication between c1sus and c1ioo.  This involves removing the hard drives and checking to make sure the boot priority is correct (i.e. it checks for a network boot).

  2927   Thu May 13 15:19:44 2010 josephbUpdateCDSTrying to get lsc.mdl and lsp.mdl working

I had a chat with Alex this morning and discovered that the dcu_ids 13,14,15,16 are reserved currently, and should not be used.  I was told 9-12 and 17-26 were fine to use.  I pointed out that we will eventually have more modules than that.  His response was he is currently working on the framebuilder code and "modernizing" it, and that those restrictions will hopefully be lifted in the future although he isn't certain at this time what the real maximum gds_id number is (he was only willing to vouch for up to 26 - although the OMC seems to be currently working and set to 30).

Alex also suggested running an iop module to provide timing (since we are using adcSlave=1 option in the models).  Apparently these are x00.mdl, x01.mdl, x11.mdl files in the /home/control/cds/advLigoRTS/src/epics/simLink/ directory.  I saved x00.mdl as io1.mdl (I didn't want to use io0 as its a pain to differentiate between a zero and 'O'.  This new IOP is using gds_node=1, dcu_id=9.  I modified the approriate files to include it.

I modified /etc/rc.d/rc.local and added io1 to shmem line.  I modified /cvs/cds/caltech/target/fb/daqdrc to use dcu_id 9 as the controller (this is the new iop model dcu_id number).  In that same directory I modifed the file master by adding /cvs/cds/caltech/chans/daq/C1IO1.ini as well as uncommenting tpchn_C1 line.  I modified testpoint.par in /cvs/cds/caltech/target/gds/param to include C-node0, and modified the prognum for lsc and lsp to 0x31001003 and 0x31001005.

So I started the 3 processes with startio1, startlsc, startlsp, then went to the fb directory and started the framebuilder.  However, the model lsc.mdl is still having issues, although lsp and io1 seem to be working.  At this point I just need to track down what fundamentally is different between lsc and lsp and correct it in the lsc model.  I'm hoping its not related to the fact that we actually had a previous lsc front end and there's some legacy stuff getting in the way.  One thing I can test is changing the name and see if that runs.

 

  2299   Thu Nov 19 09:55:41 2009 josephbUpdateComputersTrying to get testpoints on megatron

This is a continuation from last night, where Peter, Koji, and I were trying to get test point channels working on megatron and with the TST module.

Things we noticed last night:

We could run starttst, and ./daqd -c daqdrc, which allowed us to get some channels in dataviewer.  The default 1k channel selection works, but none of the testpoints do. 

However, awgtpman -s tst does appear in the processes running list.

The error we get from dataviewer is:

Server error 861: unable to create thread
Server error 23328: unknown error
datasrv: DataWriteRealtime failed: daq_send: Illegal seek

Going to DTT, it starts with no errors in this configuration.  Initially it listed both MDC and TST channels.  However, as a test, I moved the tpchn_C4.par , tpchn_M4.par and tpchn_M5.par files to the directory backup, in /cvs/cds/caltech/target/gds/param.  This caused only the TST channels to show up (which is what we want when not running the mdc module.

We had changed the daqdrc file in /cvs/cds/caltech/target/fb, several times to get to this state.  According to the directions in the RCG manual written by Rolf, we're supposed to "set cit_40m=1" in the daqdrc file, but it was commented out.  However, when we uncommented it, it started causing errors on dtt startup, so we put it back.  We also tried adding lines:

set dcu_rate 13 = 16384;
set dcu_rate 14 = 16384;

But this didn't seem to help.  The reason we did this is we noticed dcuid = 13 and dcuid = 14 in the /cvs/cds/caltech/target/gds/param/tpchn_C1.par file.  We also edited the testpoint.par file so that it correctly corresponded to the tst module, and not the mdc and mdp modules.  We basically set:

[C-node1]
hostname=192.168.1.2
system=tst

in that file, and commented everything else out.

At this point, given all the things we've changed, I'm going to try a rebuild of the tst and daq and see if that solves things.

 

  3507   Wed Sep 1 12:24:47 2010 josephbUpdateCDSTrying to get up to date CDS code runnning

Alex, Joe:

We copied the latest x02 to c1x02 and modified to our the config block in it.

We removed gds_node_id.  We just have one number now, the dcuid, which is unique for each controller, simulated plant and IOP.  Set site to C1 and host to c1sus.

Alex made the latest awgtpman backwards compatible, and checked that into svn.

We installed the latest framecpp onto c1sus from www.ldas-sc.ligo.caltech.edu/packages/ using wget.

wget www.ldas-sc.ligo.caltech.edu/packages/framecpp-1.18 and then used make.

This let us compile diagd on c1sus, using the command make stand in the /advLigoRTS/build area.

We copied gds from the seiteststand over at handford and are trying to build that on megatron.  However, there's a bunch of packages we need for it to install properly.  Alex said he'd work on that later, possibly trying to make some portable binaries.

Checked out the latest dataviewer into /opt/rtcds/caltech/c1/core/daq, however its not quite working yet either.  This is another thing Alex said he'll work on later.

We are also going to test Alex and Rolf's kernel patch over on c1iscex on Centos base kernel (apparently they've been using Gentoo up at hanford for the test stands...) and see how that works.

  16005   Wed Apr 7 17:38:51 2021 AnchalUpdateSUSTrying to uncouple only PIT and YAW first

To test if our method is working at all, we went for the simpler case of just uncoupling PIT and YAW. This is also because the sensor used for these two degrees of freedom is similar (the MC Trans WFS).

We saw a successful decrease in cross-coupling between PIT and YAW over the first 50 iterations that we tried. Here are some results:


Final output matrix:

Output matrix for uncoupling PIT and YAW from eachother
PIT YAW COILS
1.01858 1.16820 UL
0.98107 -0.79706 UR
-0.98107 0.79706 LL
-1.01858 -1.16820 LR

Plots:

  • Attachment 1 shows distance of sensing matrix from identity as iterations go.
  • Attachment 2 shows the off-diagonal elements of sensing matrix as the iterations increase.
    • It is worth noting that PIT -> YAW coupling was the main element that was reduced successfully while the YAW -> PIT was reducing but much more slowly.
    • Most of the remaining cross coupling in the end was from YAW -> PIT.
  • Attachment 3 shows first 10 oscillations in the time series data during excitation of some of the iterations.
  • Attachment 4 shows the cross spectral density of the sensed data during excitation with each other. This has been normalized by reference PSD data (taken with no excitation) of the sensed DOFs involved in the CSD calculation.
  • Attachment 5 shows the TF estimate made by normalizing CSD data column wise by the diagonal elements. The excitation frequency point in these plots become the Sensing matrix in the calculation.
    • One can notice how the PIT -> YAW element is going down in these plots.
    • Even though we are using only the real value of the sensing matrix, the imaginary values are also going down.

Next, tried uncoupling POS and PIT:

  • Next, we tried to uncouple POS and PIT. We expect them to be more coupled than with YAW.
  • At the time of writing this post, 15 iterations of this attempt have been completed and it is not looking good sad.
  • The distance of the sensing matrix from identity is growing at an accelerated rate.
  • The POS output matrix column seems to be trying to go towards the negative of PIT output matrix column! Why? We don't know.
  • We have seen in the past that once POS transforms into PIT or YAW, it just makes the output matrix worse as no feedback actually goes into the POS column. Eventually, the IMC will cease to remain locked.
  • So, I'm cancelling this attempt for now. Will consider more alternatives later.
Attachment 1: SDistanceFromIdentity.pdf
SDistanceFromIdentity.pdf
Attachment 2: SmatIterations.pdf
SmatIterations.pdf
Attachment 3: TimeSeriesPlots.pdf
TimeSeriesPlots.pdf TimeSeriesPlots.pdf TimeSeriesPlots.pdf TimeSeriesPlots.pdf TimeSeriesPlots.pdf TimeSeriesPlots.pdf TimeSeriesPlots.pdf TimeSeriesPlots.pdf
Attachment 4: CSDPlots.pdf
CSDPlots.pdf CSDPlots.pdf CSDPlots.pdf CSDPlots.pdf CSDPlots.pdf CSDPlots.pdf CSDPlots.pdf CSDPlots.pdf
Attachment 5: SmatrixPlots.pdf
SmatrixPlots.pdf SmatrixPlots.pdf SmatrixPlots.pdf SmatrixPlots.pdf SmatrixPlots.pdf SmatrixPlots.pdf SmatrixPlots.pdf SmatrixPlots.pdf
  1426   Wed Mar 25 04:18:28 2009 YoichiUpdateLockingTuesday Locking
After the new PO_DC PD was installed, I tweaked several gains to make the locking scripts work right.
First of all, I increased the gain of PD12 (PD12_I is SPOB) by a factor of 1.4 to compensate for the power decrease
by the insertion of the BS. SPOB is used by the PRM alignment script. I was too lazy to modify the scripts.

Then I optimized the SRC DD signal which is taken from the POB.

I also had to do some gain adjustments for the CARM loop.

The attachment (AO path open loop TF) shows a depressing fact that the 3.8kHz peak is still there with the new PO_DC PD. So it was not a problem of the SPOB PD.
Next, I will check the cross over frequencies of the PZT and PC paths in the FSS and the VCO/MCL cross over.
Attachment 1: AO-Loop-p9.png
AO-Loop-p9.png
  568   Wed Jun 25 13:56:56 2008 JohnSummaryLockingTuesday night locking
Rob, John

Worked to try and reduce the CARM offset using the dc arm transmissions before changing to SPOB DC. This proved somewhat unsuccessful, the offset couldn't be reduced to more than five (arms storing 5x more power than single arm cavity lock).
  16091   Wed Apr 28 17:09:11 2021 AnchalUpdateSUSTuned Suspension Parameters uploaded for long term behavior monitoring

I have uploaded all the new settings mentioned in 16066 and 16072. The settings were uploaded through a single script present at anchal/20210428_IMC_Tuned_Suspension/uploadNewConfigIMC.py. The settings can be reverted back to old settings through anchal/20210428_IMC_Tuned_Suspension/restoreOldConfigIMC.py. Both these scripts can be run only through python3 in donatella or allegra.


GPSTIME of new settings: 1303690144


New settings include:

  • New input matrices for MC1 and MC2.
  • New Output coil gains for AC balancing on all three optics.
  • Switching ON the FM8 filter modulae (Q=3 F2A filter) in POS column on output matrix of all optics.

We'll wait and watch the performance through summary pages and check back the performance on Monday.

  4713   Fri May 13 17:20:48 2011 Leo SingerConfigurationSUSTuned bounce and roll mode of ETMY suspension

I tuned the bounce and roll mode bandstops for ETMY, although it was difficult for me to tell if there was improvement with the bandstops on relative to the bandstops off because it seemed like the bounce and roll modes were being excited intermittently.  I'll take spectra with the filters both on and off during an evening next week.

  9150   Sun Sep 22 21:03:15 2013 ranaConfigurationSUSTuned bounce and roll mode of ETMY suspension

 Today I noticed that there was a lot of noise at the Bounce and Roll eigenfrequencies for ETMY. I found that the bandstop filter were set at completely the wrong frequencies, so I've remade them.

The filters were last tuned by Leo in May of 2011. Even so, he left the frequencies at the frequencies of the old MOS suspensions which had f_bounce ~ 12 Hz.

 The FOTON plot shows the OLD ones versus the NEW ones. The DTT spectra shows the oplev error signals in the usual state. I have also copied these over to the SUSPOS,PIT,YAW, and SIDE filter banks and turned them all ON.

I also turned OFF and deleted the 3 Hz RG filter that was there. There's no such peak in the error signal and even if one wanted to compensate for the stack mode, it should be a low Q filter, not this monster.

Attachment 1: etmy-error.png
etmy-error.png
Attachment 2: notches.pdf
notches.pdf
  4652   Fri May 6 14:59:36 2011 Leo SingerConfigurationSUSTuning ITMY bandstop

I tuned the ITMY bandstops -- 'before' and 'after' spectra attached.  Note that the after the tuning, the bounce mode at ~16 Hz is about twice as quiet!

 

However, notice that in the 'before' plot the roll mode at about 23.5 Hz did not show up at all, whereas it is quite prominent in the 'after' plot.  I was concerned that this line could have been a result of placing the bandstop there, so I made another plot with the BounceRoll filter turned off.  Sure enough, the 23.5 Hz line is still there.  So I'm not crazy: the roll mode did start acting up at some time between my 'before' and 'after' plot, but not as a result of the tuning.

Attachment 1: itmy-before.pdf
itmy-before.pdf
Attachment 2: itmy-after.pdf
itmy-after.pdf
Attachment 3: itmy-nobounceroll.pdf
itmy-nobounceroll.pdf
  8288   Wed Mar 13 16:25:16 2013 ManasaUpdateIOOTuning MC length/FSR

[Koji, Manasa]

We looked at the MC modulation frequency on the spectrum analyzer and observed beat notes between MC modulation freq (29.5MHz) and modulation frequencies (11.06 MHz and 55.3MHz).

Beat notes were suppressed by changing the carrier frequency from 11.065910 MHz to 11.066147MHz. 

Detailed discussion and data will be posted in the next elog.

  8349   Tue Mar 26 01:40:49 2013 KojiUpdateIOOTuning MC length/FSR

I'm still waiting for the follow-up analysis of the modulation freq tuning.

  8353   Tue Mar 26 15:00:55 2013 ManasaUpdateIOOTuning MC length/FSR

Quote:

[Koji, Manasa]

We looked at the MC modulation frequency on the spectrum analyzer and observed beat notes between MC modulation freq (29.5MHz) and modulation frequencies (11.06 MHz and 55.3MHz).

Beat notes were suppressed by changing the carrier frequency from 11.065910 MHz to 11.066147MHz. 

Detailed discussion and data will be posted in the next elog.

The goal was to tune the carrier modulation frequency, f1 ~ 11.06 MHz to match the FSR  (c/2L) of the MC. (Reference to the technique: R.G.DeVoe et al., PRA 30, 5, Nov 1984)

We looked at the MC_REFL output on the spectrum analyzer. Since the MC FSR was not well matched with the carrier modulation frequency, we observed significant beat notes at the following frequencies (fMC-f1),  (fMC+f1), (fMC-f2) and (fMC+f2); where fMC (the MC modulation frequency) = 29.5MHz, f1(carrier modulation frequency) ~ 11.06MHz and f2 ~ 55.3MHz. The carrier modulation frequency was changed at the frequency generator until these beat notes were suppressed i.e. until the cavity FSR matched the carrier modulation frequency.

The plot below shows the MC spectrum after the beat notes were suppressed.

MC_spectrum.png

Attachment 2: MC_spectrum.zip
  8354   Tue Mar 26 15:43:45 2013 ranaUpdateIOOTuning MC length/FSR

  Please attach the data file of the measurement - its hard to get the real information out of picture. In general, WE should always include the code / explanation of how to reconstruct the plot and get the scientific information out.

  8357   Tue Mar 26 17:27:17 2013 KojiUpdateIOOTuning MC length/FSR

Please add the discussions on the cavity absolute length (and its change, adjustment precision),
identification of the peaks, before/after comparison of the plot, the effect of the MC REFL PD response,
and comparison of the cavity linewidth vs deviation of the 55MHz SBs from the resonance.

  7748   Mon Nov 26 23:45:52 2012 AyakaUpdateIOOTuning MC_L

[Rana, Jamie, Ayaka]

We could not lock the arms with MC_L loop on. Therefore we measured the change in YARM error signal when the MC_L is turned on.

POYerr_MCL.jpg

(data; POYerr_MCF.xml in zip file)

Green line; POY error signal when MCL loop was on and the YARM loop gain (0.5) was so high that the saturated control signal made funny peak around 250 Hz.
Blue line; POY error signal when MCL loop was off and the YARM loop gain was low (0.2).
Pink line; POY error signal when MCL loop was on (the gain was -300) and the YARM loop gain was low (0.2).
Red line; POY error signal when MCL loop was on, another low pass filter (2nd order, cut off frequency of 55Hz) was added to MCL loop and the YARM loop gain was low (0.2).

We also changed the filter trigger in order to lock YARM. The FM7 and 8 trigger was turned off. It means that spectrum above was took with FM2,3,4,5,6,9,10 on. Whitening filters were also on.

MCL control signal makes the arm spectrum bad because the MCL control signal moves MC2 mirror additionally and adds extra frequency noise.
Ideally, error signal should be the same at higher frequencies and go down at the lower frequencies when the MCL loop is on because MCL signal should suppress the seismic noise.

Before we added the LPF, MCF/MCL loop cross over (which was taken with the template /users/Templates/MC/MCL-MCF_xover-2012-8-23.xml) is below;

MCL-MCFxover.jpg

(MCL-MCF_xover.xml in zip file)

After the LPF is added, the cross over has been changed as below;
MCL-MCFxover2.jpg

(MCL-MCF_xover2.xml in zip file)

For now, I will just turn off the MCL loop for the acoustic noise experiments.

Attachment 4: 121126.tar.gz
  4646   Thu May 5 17:19:21 2011 Leo SingerConfigurationSUSTuning notch filters for bounce mode suspensions

I am tuning the notch filters for the bounce modes in the suspensions, starting with the ITMs and ETMs.  I'll do the MCs, the PRMs, and the SRMs next.

 

I noticed that the filter for ITMX (in the file C1SUS.txt, the module ITMX_SUSPOS, the selection BounceRoll) that the filter was composed of two bandstops (and a constant gain).  It looked like this:

 

ellip("BandStop",4,1,40,11.4,12.2)ellip("BandStop",4,1,40,16.7,17.5)gain(1.25872)

 

Valera said that one of these was for the roll mode and the other for the bounce mode.  However, looking at the spectra that Kiwamu and I made this week, I don't perceive a resonance between 11.4 and 12.2 Hz.  So, we're taking a guess that this was for a mode that has moved due to new pendulum designs.  For many of the suspensions, in the free swinging test we noticed a line around 23 Hz; we thought we might as well re-use one of these elliptical filters to avoid exciting this line.  Of course, if this line does *not* result from excitation of an uncontrolled degree of freedom, this will not help and could be detrimental.  When we talk to Valera again, we can review this decision and at that point we might decide just to take out that bandstop.

 

ITMX is done.  I'll continue tomorrow.  I've attached closed-loop spectra for before the tuning (itmx-before.pdf) and after (itmx-after.pdf).

 

(Update: the following day, I took closed loop spectra with (itmx-withbounceroll.pdf) and without (itmx-nobounceroll.pdf) the bandstops.  It looks like the bandstops made the bounce mode slightly worse, but the roll mode slightly better.)

 

 

Attachment 1: itmx-before.pdf
itmx-before.pdf
Attachment 2: itmx-before.pdf
itmx-before.pdf
Attachment 3: itmx-withbounceroll.pdf
itmx-withbounceroll.pdf
Attachment 4: timx-nobounceroll.pdf
timx-nobounceroll.pdf
  7709   Tue Nov 13 22:12:15 2012 JenneUpdateIOOTurn off MCL path before doing MC spot measurement

[Jenne, Den]

We have discovered that the MCL loop squishes the length fluctuations that result from the MC spot measurement angular dither.  This is good, in that the MCL is doing what it ought to do.  However, we need to turn it off before doing a spot measurement.

  7711   Wed Nov 14 09:01:42 2012 Dumb statement catcherUpdateIOOTurn off MCL path before doing MC spot measurement

Quote:

We have discovered that the MCL loop squishes the length fluctuations that result from the MC spot measurement angular dither.  This is good, in that the MCL is doing what it ought to do.  However, we need to turn it off before doing a spot measurement.

 This is totally non-sensical statement, of course.

We might also say that the DARM loop totally squishes the GW signal and so its better not to have any feedback in the interferometer.

  7712   Wed Nov 14 13:58:18 2012 JenneUpdateIOOTurn off MCL path before doing MC spot measurement

Quote:

Quote:

We have discovered that the MCL loop squishes the length fluctuations that result from the MC spot measurement angular dither.  This is good, in that the MCL is doing what it ought to do.  However, we need to turn it off before doing a spot measurement.

 This is totally non-sensical statement, of course.

We might also say that the DARM loop totally squishes the GW signal and so its better not to have any feedback in the interferometer.

 Hmmm, indeed.  To keep MC_L on, we should be looking at the control signal rather than the error signal.  I think Den has MC_L running nicely such that it always comes on when the MC locks, so I can switch it.

  8617   Wed May 22 15:48:56 2013 JamieUpdateSUSTurn off zero padding in DAC outputs

After the results of the analysis in the #8598 thread, I have added the "no_zero_pad=1" flag to the cdsParameters block of all SUS models:

  • c1mcs
  • c1sus
  • c1scx
  • c1scy

The upsampling to the 64 kHz DAC output will now be done with sample-holds, instead of zero-pads.  This should reduce the 32 kHz lines we were noticing in the analog DAC output.

I note, though, that Brian Lantz points out that this might actually introduce a delay of about a half sample.  We will continue to investigate.

In any event, I have rebuilt and installed all models listed above.  I will restart as soon as opportunity allows.

  8625   Thu May 23 10:20:33 2013 JamieUpdateSUSTurn off zero padding in DAC outputs

Quote:

After the results of the analysis in the #8598 thread, I have added the "no_zero_pad=1" flag to the cdsParameters block of all SUS models:

  • c1mcs
  • c1sus
  • c1scx
  • c1scy

The upsampling to the 64 kHz DAC output will now be done with sample-holds, instead of zero-pads.  This should reduce the 32 kHz lines we were noticing in the analog DAC output.

I note, though, that Brian Lantz points out that this might actually introduce a delay of about a half sample.  We will continue to investigate.

In any event, I have rebuilt and installed all models listed above.  I will restart as soon as opportunity allows.

I have restarted all the suspension models with the new no_zero_pad flag for the DAC upsampling.  Everything came up fine and all optics are damped as expected (except for concerns about c1scy which I'll note in a followup).

  8426   Tue Apr 9 00:32:39 2013 ranaConfigurationIOOTurn on MCL

 Listening to the free swinging Y-arm, its clear that the fringe velocity is higher with the MCL path off, than on. I checked that the default gain of -300 was too high and changed it to -100 in the mcup script. With the higher gain value, there was clear gain peaking at just under 60 Hz (where the 60 Hz comb filter starts). We basically want the UGF to be between 20 and 60 Hz so that we can have the Bounce mode RG at 16.25 Hz and also the notch filter at 60 Hz.

Den is measuring and setting the UGF to be ~45 Hz.

With the MCL path on there is a high frequency horn-like noise in the Yarm when it locks. Its reduced a little by reducing the loop gain, but clearly this is just noise introduced by the MCL loop as Den noted before (and also tonight). He is cleaning up the whole MCL MEDM situation so that its useable by us. At the moment I've re-enabled it in the mcup.

My belief is that the frequency noise from the unstabilized MC is making the PRC locking harder. This will be investigated by tuning the shape of the MCL/MCF crossover so that we can turn it on without ruining the arm cavity spectra. Since the PRC length is ~2x smaller than the MC, we would expect it to be less sensitive to the MC frequency noise. But, since there is some common mode rejection in there, this may not be true. We'll only know by measuring PRC control signal with MCL on/off.

  8434   Wed Apr 10 03:59:41 2013 DenConfigurationIOOTurn on MCL

Quote:

 My belief is that the frequency noise from the unstabilized MC is making the PRC locking harder. This will be investigated by tuning the shape of the MCL/MCF crossover so that we can turn it on without ruining the arm cavity spectra. Since the PRC length is ~2x smaller than the MC, we would expect it to be less sensitive to the MC frequency noise. But, since there is some common mode rejection in there, this may not be true. We'll only know by measuring PRC control signal with MCL on/off.

 I think if we make MCL UGF higher then 20 Hz, arm cavity spectra will feel it. It might be possible to use a combination of feedback and feedforward control from ground seismometers. I made MCL UGF at 3 Hz to reduce 1 Hz motion of the pendulum; feedforward OAF subtracted the stack at 3.3 Hz. Once OAF converged, I blocked adaptation and the filter became static FIR. MC length RMS was reduced by a factor of 10 and arm cavity spectra was not affected at frequencies >20 and became better at low frequencies. We'll see if this enough.

On the attached plot red color shows MC_F with MC_L OFF, blue - MC_L is ON, green - MC_L and OAF are ON.

Then I locked PRCL (using AS_Q and REFL55_I) to carrier and aligned the cavity. Power RIN was 50-70% and 00 beam on the POP camera was moving significantly. BS oplev was shaking the optics at 5 Hz. I fixed it, but there should be something else as RIN was still high.

Attachment 1: MCL.pdf
MCL.pdf
  4209   Wed Jan 26 14:49:48 2011 AidanUpdateEnvironmentTurned on Control room AC

80 degrees is too uncomfortable in the control room so I turned on the AC. The set point is 74F.

  6905   Mon Jul 2 23:08:38 2012 YaakovUpdateSTACISTurning on STACIS

This past Friday I swapped out a burnt resistor on the spare STACIS unit I'm working with and powered it up. Here's the setup:

stacy1.JPG

And here's what happened:

X an Y directions: When I switched from open to closed loop (making the internal geophones provide feedback), the STACIS started making a loud noise- it seemed like it was oscillating uncontrollably.

Z direction: The same thing happened in z until I added some weight to the top of the STACIS- then it quieted down, and seemed to work okay. The geophone signal dropped considerably compared to the open loop signal, which is expected if the feedback is working.

Then I tried driving the PZTs with a signal from the SR785 network analyzer. With an amplitude of tens of mV and frequencies from around .1 to 200 Hz, I could see the accelerometers I mounted on top of the STACIS definitely register motion, which means I was successfully driving the PZTs.

 

Below are transfer functions of the STACIS as I drove the PZTs from .1 to 100 Hz at 10 mV. The top graph is open loop, the second is closed loop. These were measured with the internal geophones.

In the bottom graph, "A" is closed loop and "B" is open loop, where the transfer functions were taken with the accelerometers instead of the geophones.

geo_open.GIF

 

 geo_closed.GIF

SCRN0005.GIF

Attachment 2: geo_closed.GIF
geo_closed.GIF
  4817   Tue Jun 14 16:38:31 2011 JamieUpdatePSLTweaked input pointing to PMC

The PMC trans power was a little low (0.77V or so).  I tweaked up the input pointing and now we're getting about 0.875V transmitted.

  12213   Thu Jun 23 17:24:32 2016 ericqUpdateGeneralTweaks

I spent some time this afternoon reviving some of my CESAR/ESCOBAR shenanigans on the Y arm. I found it neccesary to adjust a few things.

  • PMC realigned 
  • ETMY oplev centered
  • Y End green realigned
  • PSL/Y Green beat realigned

Afterwards, ALSY noise levels were good. 

ELOG V3.1.3-