40m QIL Cryo_Lab CTN SUS_Lab TCS_Lab OMC_Lab CRIME_Lab FEA ENG_Labs OptContFac Mariner WBEEShop
  40m Log, Page 274 of 344  Not logged in ELOG logo
ID Date Author Type Categoryup Subject
  12792   Thu Feb 2 18:32:51 2017 ranaSummaryPSLPMC alignment

Re-aligned the beam going into the PMC today around 5 PM. I noticed that its all in pitch and since I moved both of the mirrors by the same amount it is essentially a vertical translation.

I wonder if the PMC is just moving up and down due to thermal expansion in the mount? How else would we get a pure vertical translation? Need to remember next time if the beam goes up or down, and by how many knob turns, and see how it correlates to the lab temperature.

  12911   Mon Mar 27 20:41:21 2017 rana, gautamUpdatePSLPMC DAQ assay for feed-forward integration

We are thinking to use the PMC signals to help us in figuring out the feedback / feedforward stuff and making it better.

Today we scoped out the PMC DAQ channels (which were never re-hooked up after the Joe/Jamie CDS upgrade 6 years ago).

There is a 4-pin LEMO connector on the front panel which gives

  1. the error signal (after the 4th order, post-mixer lowpass and a OP27 buffer with a 17 kHz low pass)
  2. the feedback voltage to the PZT, after a resistive divide by 50

Both of these signals are buffered by the AD620 inst amp configured with a gain of 1. In the green scope trace, you can see that there's a ~110 MHz signal strongly evident there. In the spectrum analyzer screen shot there is a instrument noise trace and then a PMC error point trace. You can see that all the peaks are ony there when I connect to the servo board instead of a Terminator. This RF noise is mainly the higher harmonics of the 35.5 MHz modulation getting there. It seems to be in both the error and control DAQ outputs, and a question is whether or not it is also in the servo electronics.

I also attach a close up of the servo board in the region of the post-mixer LC low pass filtering. I think its supposed to be 4th order cutoff at 1 MHz, but maybe the caps are busted or there's a way for the RF from the mixer to bypass the filters and get into the main servo path?

In the medium term, we probably want to use the new PDH servo that Rich is making. Need to buy/make a HV driver to use, but that should be easy.

  12916   Wed Mar 29 11:41:19 2017 gautamUpdatePSLPMC DAQ assay for feed-forward integration

The C1IOO frontend machine that resides in 1X1/1X2 has 2 ADCs, ADC0 and ADC1. The latter has 28 out of 32 channels unused at the moment, so I decided to use this for setting up fast channels for the PMC DAQ. On the RTCDS side of things, the PSL namespace block lives in the C1ALS model. I made the following modifications to it:

  1. Added channels for the PMC DAQ
  2. Added CDS filters for both the newly added PMC DAQ channels and the existing FSS DAQ channels, so that we can calibrate these into physical units
  3. Changed the names of the existing FSS channels from FSS_MIXER and FSS_NPRO to FSS_ERR and FSS_CTRL. The latter is still a bit ambiguous, but I felt that FSS_CM_BOARD_CTRL was too long. 
  4. Added DQ channels for the new PMC channels. These are recording at 16K at the moment, but since we have the fast testpoints courtesy of the CDS filter modules for diagnostics, perhaps the DQ channels need only be recorded at 2K?

The PSL namespace block in C1ALS looks like this now:

I then tried hooking up the DAQ signals from the PMC servo board to the ADC via the 1U generic ADC interface chassis in 1X2 - this has 4pin LEMO inputs corresponding to 2 differential input channels. I used J6 (corresponding to ADC channels 10 and 11) for the PMC_ERR and PMC_CTRL respectively. I was a little confused about the status of the 4 pin LEMO output on the front panel of the PMC servo board. According to the DCC page for the modified 40m servo board, the DAQ outputs are wired to the backplane connector instead of the 4 pin LEMO. But looking at photographs on the same DCC page, there are wires soldered on the rear-side of the PCB from the 4-pin LEMO to the backplane connector. Also, I believe the measurements made by Rana in the preceeding elog were made via the front panel LEMO. In any case, I decided to use the single pin LEMO monitor points on the front panel as a preliminary test. The uncalibrated spectra with ADC terminated, IMC unlocked and IMC locked look like:

So it looks like at the very least, we want to add some gain to the AD620 instrumentation amplifiers to better match the input range of the ADC. We also want to make the PZT voltage monitor path AC coupled. My plan then is the following:

  1. Figure out what is going on with the 4-pin LEMO connector on the front panel - is it connected to the DAQ monitor points or not?
  2. Ground pin 5 of U15 (this has already been done by Koji for U14 according to the DCC page)
  3. Add a resistor between pins 1 and 8 of U14 and U15 to get some gain. According to the datasheet, a 1k resistor will give a gain of 50, which for U15 will mean that we undo the existing 1/50 attenuation. Of course we need to AC couple this path first by adding a capacitor in series with R14. 
  4. Figure out where the RF harmonics are coming from and what is the best way to attenuate them.

I will update with a circuit diagram with proposed changes shortly.

Proposed changes:

  1. Cut PCB trace between R14 and R13, install capacitor - what is is correct type of capacitor to use here? I figured installing a series capacitor after the resistive divider, to the input of the instrumentation amplifier avoids the need for a HV capacitor, so we can use a 1uF WIMA capacitor.
  2. Add gains to U14 and U15 (error and control signal monitors respectively). Based on the uncalibrated spectra attached, I think we should go for a gain of ~50 for U15 (1kohm between pins 1 and 8), and a gain of ~200 for U14 (250ohms between pins 1 and 8).

The PCB layout is such that I think using components with leads is easier rather than SMD components.

If this sounds like a reasonable plan, I will pull out the servo card from the eurocrate and implement these changes today evening...

  12918   Thu Mar 30 00:16:09 2017 gautamUpdatePSLPSL NPRO PZT calibration

As part of the ongoing effort to try and calibrate the PMC DAQ channels into physical units, I tried to get a calibration for the PSL NPRO PZT actuator gain. In order to do this, I selected "Blank" on the PMC servo MEDM screen such that there was no feedback signal to the PMC PZT for length control. Then I used the summing box right before the  PSL PZT to inject a ~1Hz triangular wave, 4Vpp. This was sufficient to sweep the NPRO frequency over 70MHz such that both sidebands and the carrier go through resonances in the PMC cavity. I then simultaneously monitored the applied triangular wave voltage and the PMC error signal (using the single pin LEMO connector on the front panel) on an oscilloscope. Analysis is underway, but a quick look at one measurement suggests a PZT actuator gain of ~1.44MHz/V, which is close to what we expect for the Innolight NPROs. The idea is to use this calibration to convert the DQ channels into physical units. 

Details + plots + error analysis to follow...

  12920   Thu Mar 30 18:11:01 2017 ranaUpdatePSLPMC DAQ assay for feed-forward integration

What you have drawn looks good to me: the cut should be between TP3 and pin3 of the AD620. This should maintain the DC coupled respons for the single-pin LEMO and backplane EPICS monitors.

We want to use the PMC signal down to low frequencies, so the filter on the input of the AD620 should have a low frequency cutoff, but we should take care not to spoil the noise of the AD620 with a high impedance resistor.

It has a noise of 100 nV/rHz and 1 pA/rHz at 1 Hz. If you use 47 uF and 10 kOhm, you'll get fc = 1/2/pi/R/C ~ 0.3 Hz so that would be OK. 

  12925   Mon Apr 3 17:25:13 2017 gautamUpdatePSLPSL NPRO PZT calibration

Summary:

By sweeping the laser frequency and looking at the PMC PDH error signal, I have determined the 2W Mephisto Innolight PZT actuator gain to be 1.47 +/- 0.04 MHz/V

Method:

  1. Re-aligned the input beam into the PMC to maximize transmission level on the oscilloscope on the PSL table to 0.73V.
  2. Disabled control signal from IMC servo to PSL. 
  3. Unlocked the PMC and disabled the loop by selecting "BLANK" on the PMC MEDM screen.
  4. Connected a 0.381 Hz 5Vpp triangular wave with SR function generator to the "SUM" input of the Fast I/F box just before the PSL PZT input. These params were chosen considering the Pomona box just before the NPRO has a corner at 2.9Hz, and also to sweep the voltage to the NPRO PZT over the full 150V permitted by the Thorlabs HV amplifier unit. Monitored the voltage to the Thorlabs HV amp from the "AFTER SUM" monitor point on the same box. Monitored the PMC PDH error signal using the single-pin LEMO monitor point on the PMC servo board (call this Vmon). Both of these signals were monitored using a Tektronix digital O'scope.
  5. Downloaded the data using ethernet.
  6. Fit a line to the voltage applied to the NPRO PZT - I assumed the actual voltage being applied to the PZT is 15*Vmon, the pre-factor being what the Thorlabs HV amplifier outputs. The zero crossings of the sideband resonances in the PDH error signal are separated by 2*fmod (separated by fmod from the carrier resonance, fmod = 35.5MHz assumed). With this information, the x-axis of the sweeps can be converted to Hz, from which we get the PZT actuator gain in MHz/V. 

An example of the data used to calculate the actuator gain (left), and the spread of the calculated actuator gain (right - error bars calculated assuming 5e-4 s uncertainty in the sideband zero-crossing interval, and using the error in the slope of the linear fit to the sweep voltage):

This will now allow calibration of the PMC DAQ channels into Hz.

GV 4 April - The y-axis of the lower plot in Attachment #1 has mis-labelled units. It should be [V], not [MHz/V].

  12926   Mon Apr 3 23:07:09 2017 gautamUpdatePSLPMC DAQ assay for feed-forward integration

I made some changes to the DAQ path on the PMC servo board, as per the plan posted earlier in this thread. Summary of changes:

  1. AC coupling PMC control signal path using 2 x 47uF metal film capacitors (in parallel)
  2. Grounding pin 5 of U15
  3. Adding gain to U14 (gain of ~500) and U15 (gain of ~50)

Details + photos + calibration of DAQ channels to follow. The PMC and IMC both seem to remain stably locked after this work.

  12928   Tue Apr 4 17:27:58 2017 ranaUpdatePSLPSL NPRO PZT calibration

good cal. I wonder if this data also gives us a good measurement of the cavity pole or if the photo-thermal self-locking effect ruins it. You should look at the data for the positive sweeps and negative sweeps and see if they give the same answer for the cavity poles. Also, maybe we can estimate the PMC cavity pole using the sidebands as well as the carrier and see if they give the same answer? 

  12939   Tue Apr 11 00:38:37 2017 gautamUpdatePSLPMC demod moved off servo board

As discussed at the Wednesday meeting last week, I tried moving the demodulation of the PMC error signal off the PMC servo board, by using some minicircuits components. This is just a quick summary elog, more details to follow tomorrow.

  • I used the Mini Circuits ZAD-6+. This is a level 7 mixer, and the LO board puts out ~16dBm, so I replaced the existing 3dB attenuator between the LO board and the input to the PMC servo board with a 9dB attenuator.
  • On the RF side, I retained the 35.5 MHz bandpass filter on the PD input.
  • On the IF output, I used an in-line 50ohm terminator in series with a minicircuits BLP1.9+ low pass filter
  • The mixer output was routed to the FP1 test input of the servo board
  • After some twiddling with the demod phase MEDM screen, I was able to lock the PMC. I've not done a thorough characterization of the loop with the current configuration, this will be done tomorrow. But the PMC and IMC have been stably locked for the last couple of hours...

During the course of this work, I noticed that there was a 35.5MHz line (at ~-55dBm) in the 4-pin LEMO DAQ outputs even when all other inputs to the servo board were terminated. So it seems like this pickup is not coming from the RFPD or demod path. The LO board has a shield enclosure similar to what we have on the LSC demod boards, but perhaps this shield does not enclose the full RF path, and there is some residual pickup between the two cards in close proximity in the Eurocrate?

On the bright side, with this demod setup, the higher harmonic peaks seem to be significantly suppressed.

In particular, the 3x35.5 MHz peak which was very prominent when I looked at these spectra with the nominal demod setup, seems to be much suppressed. 

I'm leaving the PMC servo in this configuration (off servo board demodulation using minicircuits parts) overnight.

  12940   Wed Apr 12 00:36:53 2017 gautamUpdatePSLPMC demod moved off servo board

Here is a more detailed comparison of the spectra of the signals at the front panel DAQ LEMO output, measured with the Agilent analyzer. I've left the scale linear, it looks like when the demodulation is done on the servo board, the 1x, 3x and 5x harmonics of the 35.5MHz modulation are clearly visible. I also plut in a plot of the spectra when both the PD and LO inputs to the servo board are terminated (and so the PMC is unlocked), but with the HV In and OUT of the servo board still connected. In this case, the higher harmonics vanish, but a 35.5MHz peak of ~-50dBm remains. Since this is present with no input to the servo board, this must be direct pickup from the nearby LO board? 

In any case, it looks like many of the harmonics that are present with the nominal demod setup either vanish or are much more suppressed when the error signal demodulation is done off the servo board yes.


Further down the signal chain, I had noticed sometime last week that the ADC signals for the PMC DAQ channels I set up seemed to saturate around 4000 counts. Rana mentioned that the ADC interface box with LEMO connectors on the front is powered with +/-5V. Valera and co. had simply increased the suppy voltage sometime ago to get around this problem, so I did something similar, and increased the supply voltage to +/- 15V. I then confirmed that the ADC doesn't get saturated by driving the input with a +/-5V signal. So now the amplified AD620 signals from the PMC servo board are better matched to the ADC range. 

Here is an uncalibrated spectrum (taken with IMC locked), compared to the current ADC noise and signal levels before the AD620s were given gain.

I now need to think a little about what exactly the control scheme would be if the PMC is used as a reference for the IMC over some frequency range...

 

  12944   Tue Apr 18 01:01:03 2017 gautamUpdatePSLPMC OLTF measured, DAQ channels calibrated

Quick entry, details to follow in the AM tomorrow.

  • I calibrated the PMC DAQ channels into physical units - there now exists in the filter modules  cts2m and cts2Hz filter modules, though of course only one must be used at a time
  • Finally measured the PMC OLTF, after moving the PMC PDH error signal demodulation off the servo board - I used the same procedure as Koji when he made the modifications to the PMC servo board, I will put up the algebra here tomorrow. Turns out the previously nominal servo gain of +10dB on the MEDM sliders was a little low, the new nominal gain is +20dB, and has been updated on the MEDM screen.

ToDo:

  • Put up the modified schematic on the 40m DCC tree Done April 18 10pm
  • Check calibration by comparing inferred PMC cavity displacement from error point and control point spectra, using the measured OLTF
  • Finish up looking at multicoherence with MCL and various witness channel combinations

   

  12945   Tue Apr 18 16:10:00 2017 gautamUpdatePSLPMC OLTF measured, DAQ channels calibrated

Here are the details:

  1. PMC OLTF:
    • the procedure used was identical to what Koji describes in this entry.
    • I used the SR785 to take the measurement.
    • MEDM gain slider was at +20dB 
    • I used the two single pin LEMO front panel monitor points to make the measurement. 
    • Mix_out_mon was CH2A, HV_out_mon was CH1A on the SR785
    • A = CH2A/CH1A with the SR785 excitation applied to the EXT_DC single pin LEMO input on the front panel. I used an excitation amplitude of 15mV
    • B = CH2A/CH1A without any excitation
    • Couple of lines of loop algebra tells us that the OLTF is given by the ratio A/B. The plot below lines up fairly well with what Koji measured here, UGF is ~3.3kHz with a phase margin of ~60degrees, and comparable gain margin at ~28kHz. As noted by Koji, the feature at ~8kHz prevents further increase of the servo gain. I've updated the nominal gain on the PMC MEDM screen accordingly... I couldn't figure out how to easily extract Koji's modelled OLTF so I didn't overlay that here... Overlaid is the model OLTF. No great care was taken in analyzing the goodness of the agreement with the model and measurement by looking at residuals etc, except that the feature that was previously at 28.8kHz now seems to have migrated to about 33.5 kHz. I'm not sure what to make of that. 
  2. PMC DAQ calibration:
    • The calibration was done using the swept cavity, the procedure is basically the same as described by Koji in this elog.
    • The procedure was slightly complicated by the fact that I added gain to the AD620 buffers that provide the DAQ signals. So simply sweeping the cavity saturates the AD620 very quickly.
    • To workaround this, I first hooked up the un-amplified single pin LEMO front panel monitor points to the DAQ channels using some of the available BNC-LEMO patch cables.
    • I then did the swept cavity measurement, and recorded the error and control signals fron the single pin LEMO front panel monitor points. Sweep signal was applied to EXT_DC input on front panel.
    • In the nominal DAQ setup however, we have the amplification on the AD620. I measured this amplification factor by hooking up the single pin LEMO monitor point, along with its corresponding AD620 amplified counterpart, to an SR785 and measuring the transfer function. For the PMC_ERR channel, the AD620 gain is ~53.7dB (i.e. approx 484x). For the PMC_CTRL channel, the AD620 gain is ~33.6dB (i.e. approx 48x). These numbers match up well with what I would expect given the resistors I installed on the PMC board between pins 1 and 8 of the AD620. These gains are digitally undone in the corresponding filter modules, FM1.
    • To calibrate the time axis into frequency, I located the zero crossings of the sidebands and equated the interval to 2 x fmod. For the PMC servo, fmod = 35.5MHz. I used ~1Hz triangle wave, 2Vpp to do the sweep. The resulting slope was 1.7026 GHz/s.
    • The linear part of the PDH error signal for the carrier resonance was fitted with a line. It had a slope of 1.5*10^6 cts/s.
    • The round trip length of the PMC cavity was assumed to be 0.4095m as per Koji's previous entry. This allows us to calibrate the swept cavity motion from Hz to m. The number is 1.4534 * 10^-15 m/Hz. I guess we could confirm this by sweeping the cavity with the DC bias slider through the full range of 0-250V, but we only have a slow readback of the PMC reflection (and no readback of the PMC transmission).
    • Putting the last three numbers together, I get the PMC_ERR signal calibration as 1.6496 pm/ct. This is the number in the "cts2m" filter module (FM10).
    • An analogous procedure was done to calibrate the control signal slope: from the sweep, I got 4617 cts/s, which corresponds to 2.7117*10^-6 cts/Hz. Using the FSR to convert into cts/m, I get for PMC_CTRL, 535.96 pm/ct. This is the number in the "cts2m" filter module (FM10).
    • For convenience, I also added "cts2Hz" calibration filters in FM9 in the corresponding filter modules. 

The updated schematic with changes made, along with some pictures, have been uploaded to the DCC page...

Quote:

Quick entry, details to follow in the AM tomorrow.​

 

  12946   Tue Apr 18 23:37:15 2017 ranaUpdatePSLPMC OLTF measured, DAQ channels calibrated

What's the reasoning behind setting the the gain to this new value? i.e. why do these 'margins' determine what the gain should be?

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

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

  13137   Mon Jul 24 12:00:21 2017 gautamUpdatePSLPSL NPRO mysteriously shut off

Summary:

At around 10:30AM today morning, the PSL mysteriously shut off. Steve and I confirmed that the NPRO controller had the RED "OFF" LED lit up. It is unknown why this happened. We manually turned the NPRO back on and hte PMC has been stably locked for the last hour or so.

Details:

There are so many changes to lab hardware/software that have been happening recently, it's not entirely clear to me what exactly was the problem here. But here are the observations:

  1. Yesterday, when I came into the lab, the MC REFL trace on the wall StripTool was 0 for the full 8 hour history - since we don't have data records, I can't go back further than this. I remember the PMC TRANS and REFL cameras looked normal, but there was no MC REFL spot on the CCD monitors. This is consistent with the PSL operating normally, the PMC being locked, and the PSL shutter being closed. Isn't the emergency vacuum interlock also responsible for automatically closing the PSL shutter? Perhaps if the turbo controller failure happened prior to Jamie/me coming in yesterday, maybe this was just the interlock doing its job. On Friday evening, the PSL shutter was certainly open and the MC REFL spot was visible on the camera. I also confirmed with Jamie that he didn't close the shutter.
  2. Attachment #1 shows the wall StripTool traces from earlier this morning. It looks like ~7.40AM, the MC REFL level went back up. Steve says he didn't manually open the shutter, and in any case, this was before the turbo pump controller failure was diagnosed. So why did the shutter open again
  3. When I came in at ~10AM, the CCD monitor showed that the PMC was locked, and the MC REFL spot was visible. 
  4. Also on attachment #1, there is a ~10min dip in the MC REFL level. This corresponds to ~10:30AM this morning. Both Steve and I were sitting in the control room at this time. We noticed that the PMC TRANS and REFL CCDs were dark. When we went in to check on the laser, we saw that it was indeed off. There was no one inside the lab area at this time to our knowledge, and as far as I know, the only direct emergency shutoff for the PSL is on the North-West corner of the PSL enclosure. So it is unclear why the laser just suddenly went off.

Steve says that this kind of behaviour is characteristic of a power glitch/surge, but nothing else seems to have been affected (I confirmed that the X and Y end lasers are ON). 

  13213   Wed Aug 16 14:57:01 2017 SteveUpdatePSLref Cavity heating blanket power supply

The last entry I found relating to ref cavity was 2011 Aug 19

  13223   Thu Aug 17 08:42:27 2017 SteveUpdatePSLPSL HEPA

The PSL HEPA was running noisy at 100V   The bearing is wearing out. I turned it down to 30V It is quiet there.

  13264   Mon Aug 28 23:22:56 2017 johannesUpdatePSLPSL table auxiliary NPRO

I moved the axuiliary NPRO to the PSL table today and started setting up the optics.

The Faraday Isolator was showing a pretty unclean mode at the output so I took the polarizers off to take a look through them, and found that the front polarizer is either out of place or damaged (there is a straight edge visible right in the middle of the aperture, but the way the polarizer is packaged prevents me from inspecting it closer). I proceeded without it but left space so an FI can be added in the future. The same goes for the broadband EOM.

There are two spare AOMs (ISOMET and Intraaction, both resonant at 40MHz) available before we have to resort to the one currently installed in the PSL.

I installed the Intraaction AOM first and looked at the switching speed of its first order diffracted beam using both its commercial driver and a combination of minicircuits components. Both show similar behavior. The fall time of the initial step is ~110ns in both cases, but it doesn't decay rapidly no light but a slower exponential. Need to check the 0 order beam and also the other AOM.

Intraaction Driver

   

Mini Circuits Drive

   

  13270   Tue Aug 29 20:04:09 2017 ranaUpdatePSLPSL table auxiliary NPRO

I don't understand why the 1st order diffracted beam doesn't go to zero when you shut off the drive. My guess is that the standing acoustic wave in the AO crystal needs some time to decay: f = 40 MHz, tau = 1 usec... Q ~ 100. Perhaps, the crystal is damped by the PZT and ther output impedance of the mini-circuits switch is different from the AO driver.

In any case, if you need a faster shut off, or want something that more cleanly goes to zero, there is a large (~1 cm) aperture Pockels cell that Frank Siefert was using for making pulses to damage photo diodes. There is a DEI Pulser unit near the entrance to the QIL in Bridge which can drive it.

  13271   Tue Aug 29 21:36:59 2017 johannesUpdatePSLPSL table auxiliary NPRO
Quote:

 there is a large (~1 cm) aperture Pockels cell that Frank Siefert was using for making pulses to damage photo diodes. There is a DEI Pulser unit near the entrance to the QIL in Bridge which can drive it.

I'll look for it tomorrow, but I haven't given up on the AOMs yet. I swapped in the ISOMET modulator today and saw the same behavior, both in 0th and 1st order. The fall time is pretty much identical. Gautam saw no such thing in the PSL AOM using the same photodetector.

1st order diffracted                                                          0th order

     

In the meantime I prepared the fiber mode-matching but realized in the process that I had mixed up some lenses. As a result the beam did not have a waist at the AOM location and thus didn't have the intended size, although I doubt that this would cause the slower decay. I'll fix it tomorrow, along with setting up the fiber injection, beat note with the PSL, and routing the fiber if possible.

  13278   Thu Aug 31 00:19:35 2017 rana[^r]UpdatePSLIMC/FSS FAST gain

nominal changed from 22 to 23 dB to minimize PC drive RMS

previous loop gain measurement is sort of bogus (made on SR785); need some 4395 loop measurements and checking of crossover and error point spectrum

  13298   Tue Sep 5 23:13:44 2017 johannesUpdatePSLPSL table auxiliary NPRO

I used Gautam's mode measurement of the auxiliary NPRO (w=127.3um, z=82mm) for the spacing of the optics on the PSL table for the fiber injection and light modulation. As mentioned in previous posts, for the time being there is no Faraday isolator and no broadband EOM installed, but they're accounted for in the mode propagation and they have space reserved if desired/required/available.

The coupler used for the injection is a Thorlabs F220APC-1064, which allegedly collimates the beam from the fiber type we use to 2.4mm diameter, which I used as the target for the mode calculations. I coupled the first order diffracted beam to a ~60m fiber, which is a tad long but the only fiber I could locate that was long enough. The coupling efficiency from free-space to fiber is 47.5%, and we can currently get up to 63 mW out of the fiber.

Tomorrow Steve and I are going to pull the fiber through protective tubing and bring it to the AS port. The next step is then characterizing the beam out of the collimator to match it into the interferometer.

As far as the switching itself is concerned: I confirmed that the exponential decay is still present when looking at the fiber output. I located the DEI Pulser unit in the QIL lab, and also found several more AOMs, including a 200MHz Crystal Technologies one, same brand that the PSL has, where the ringdown was not observed. According to past elogs, with good polarizers we can expect an extinction ratio of ~200 from the Pockels cell, which should be fine, but it's going to be tradeoff switching speed <-> extinction (if the alternate AOM doesn't show this ringdown behavior).

  13301   Thu Sep 7 23:09:00 2017 johannesUpdatePSLPSL table auxiliary NPRO

I brought the DEI Pulser unit and a suitable Pockels cell over from Bridge today (I also found an identical Pockels cell already at the 40m on the SP table, now that I knew what to look for).

I also brought the 200MHz AOM (Crystal Technology 3200-1113) along which can achieve rise times of 10 ns(!). Before I start setting up the Pockels cell I wanted to try this different AOM and look at its switching behavior. It asks for a much smaller beam (<65 um diam.) than what's currently in the path to the fiber (500 um diam.), although it's clear aperture is technically big enough (~1mm diam.). So I still tried, and the result was a somewhat elliptical deflected beam, and the slower decay was again visible after switching the RF input.

I was using the big Fluke function generator for the 200MHz seed signal, a Mini Circuits ZASWA-2-50 switch and a Mini Circuits ZHL-5W-1 amplifier. For the last two I moved two power supplies (+/-5V for the switch and +24V for the amplifier) into the PSL enclosure. I started at low seed power on the Fluke, routing the amplified signal into a 20dB attenuator before measuring it with an RF power meter. The AOM saturates at 2.5W (34 dBm), which I determined is achieved with a power setting on the Fluke of -4 dBm. As expected, this AOM performed faster (~80ns fall time) but I again observed the slower decay.

This struck me as weird and I started swapping components other than the AOM, which I probably should have done before. It turned out that it was the PD I was using (the same PDA10CF Gautam had used for his MC ringdown investigations). When I changed it to a PDA10A (Si diode, 150MHz bandwidth) the slow decay vanished! One last round of crappy screenshots:

   

Rather than proceeding with the Pockels cell, tomorrow I will make the beam in the AOM smaller and hope that that takes care of the ellipticity. If it does: the AOM can theoretically switch on ~10ns timescale, same for the switch (5-15ns typical), and the amplifier is non-resonant and works up to 500MHz, so it shouldn't be a limiting factor either. If this doesn't work out, we can still have ~100ns switching times with the other AOMs.

  13306   Mon Sep 11 12:40:32 2017 johannesUpdatePSLPSL table auxiliary NPRO

I changed the PSL table auxiliary laser setup to the 200 MHz AOM and put the light back in the fiber. Coupling efficiency is again ~50%, giving us up to about 75 mW of auxiliary laser light on the AS table. The 90% to 10% fall time of the light power out of the fiber when switched off is 16.5 ns with this AOM on the PDA10A, which will be sufficient for the ringdown measurements.

  13457   Wed Nov 29 15:33:16 2017 ranaUpdatePSLPMC locking

PMC wasn't locking. Had to power down c1psl. Did burt restore. Still not great.

I think many of the readbacks on the PMC MEDM screen are now bogus and misleading since the PMC RF upgrade that Gautam did awhile ago. We ought to fix the screen and clearly label which readbacks and actuators are no longer valid.

Also, the locking procedure is not so nice. The output V adjust doesn't work anymore with BLANK enabled. Would be good to make an autolocker script if we find a visitor wanting to do something fun.

  13488   Mon Dec 18 20:37:18 2017 gautamUpdatePSLPMC MEDM cleanup

There are fewer lies on this screen now. For reference, the details of the electronics modifications made are in this elog.

  1. Error and control signals are now in units of nm, the appropriate filter switches have been SDF'ed.
  2. I think it's useful to see the control voltage to the PZT in volts as well, so I've made two readbacks available at the control point, one in V and one in nm.
  3. Indicated that the on-board LO mon readback, which reads "nan", is no longer meaningful, as the mixer is off the demod board.
  4. Indicated that the PMC Trans readback of "0" is because of a dead ADC.
Quote:

I think many of the readbacks on the PMC MEDM screen are now bogus and misleading since the PMC RF upgrade that Gautam did awhile ago. We ought to fix the screen and clearly label which readbacks and actuators are no longer valid.

 

  13532   Thu Jan 11 14:47:11 2018 SteveUpdatePSLshelf work for tomorrow

I have just received the scheduling of the PSL self work for tomorrow. Gautam and I agreed that if it is needed I will shut the laser off and cover the hole table with plastic.

  13538   Fri Jan 12 10:26:24 2018 SteveUpdatePSL PSL shelf work schedule

Measurements for good fit were made. The new shelf will be installed on next Tuesday at 2pm

The reference cavity ion pump is in the way  so the cavity will be moved 5" westward. The shelf height space will be 10"  Under shelf working height 18" to optical table.

Quote:

I have just received the scheduling of the PSL self work for tomorrow. Gautam and I agreed that if it is needed I will shut the laser off and cover the hole table with plastic.

 

  13549   Tue Jan 16 11:05:51 2018 gautamUpdatePSL PSL shelf - AOM power connection interrupted

While moving the RefCav to facilitate the PSL shelf install, I bumped the power cable to the AOM driver. I will re-solder it in the evening after the shelf installation. PMC and IMC have been re-locked. Judging by the PMC refl camera image, I may also have bumped the camera as the REFL spot is now a little shifted. The fact that the IMC re-locked readily suggests that the input pointing can't have changed significantly because of the RefCav move.

 

  13550   Tue Jan 16 16:18:47 2018 SteveUpdatePSLnew PSL shelf in place

[ Johannes, Rana, Mark and Steve ]

On the second trial the shelf was installed. Plastic cover removed. South end door put back on and 2W Inno turned on.

Shelf 10 " below the existing one:   92" x 30" x 3/4" melamine (or MDF) covered with white Formica.  200 lbs it's max load. Working distance to top of the table 18"

Quote:

While moving the RefCav to facilitate the PSL shelf install, I bumped the power cable to the AOM driver. I will re-solder it in the evening after the shelf installation. PMC and IMC have been re-locked. Judging by the PMC refl camera image, I may also have bumped the camera as the REFL spot is now a little shifted. The fact that the IMC re-locked readily suggests that the input pointing can't have changed significantly because of the RefCav move.

 

 

  13551   Tue Jan 16 21:46:02 2018 gautamUpdatePSL PSL shelf - AOM power connection interrupted

Johannes informed me that he touched up the PMC REFL camera alignment. I am holding off on re-soldering the AOM driver power as I could use another pair of hands getting the power cable disentangled and removed from the 1X2 rack rails, so that I can bring it out to the lab and solder it back on.

Is anyone aware of a more robust connector solution for the type of power pins we have on the AOM driver?

Quote:

While moving the RefCav to facilitate the PSL shelf install, I bumped the power cable to the AOM driver. I will re-solder it in the evening after the shelf installation. PMC and IMC have been re-locked. Judging by the PMC refl camera image, I may also have bumped the camera as the REFL spot is now a little shifted. The fact that the IMC re-locked readily suggests that the input pointing can't have changed significantly because of the RefCav move.

 

 

  13714   Wed Mar 28 17:28:58 2018 SteveUpdatePSLnoise eater on or off

Till RIN measurement noise eater is off on 2W laser. The inno 1W  has no noise eater.

2010 power v current table is below.

Quote:

Koji and Kevin measured the output power vs injection current for the Innolight 2W laser.

The threshold current is 0.75 A.

 

The following data was taken with the laser crystal temperature at 25.04ºC (dial setting: 0.12).

Injection Current (A) Dial Setting Output Power (mW)
0.000 0.0 1.2
0.744 3.66 1.1
0.753 3.72 4.6
0.851 4.22 102
0.954 4.74 219
1.051 5.22 355
1.151 5.71 512
1.249 6.18 692
1.350 6.64 901
1.451 7.08 1118
1.556 7.52 1352
1.654 7.92 1546
1.761 8.32 1720
1.853 8.67 1855
1.959 9.05 1989
2.098 9.50 2146

 

 

  13743   Mon Apr 9 23:49:50 2018 ranaUpdatePSLPSL chans

I think we can scrap the 126MOPA channels since they're associated with the Lightwave NPRO and MOPA. We should add the channels that we need for monitoring the Innolight NPRO from the d-sub connector on its controller.

  13818   Sat May 5 20:30:21 2018 KojiUpdatePSLModulation depth measurement for the 3IFO aLIGO EOM and aftermath

Caution: Because of this work and my negligence, the RF output of the main Marconi for the IFO modulation is probably off. The amplifier (freq gen. box) was turned on. Therefore, we need to turn the Marconi on for the IFO locking.

I worked on my EOM m easurement using the beat setup. As there was the aux injection electronics, I performed my measurement having tried not to disturb the aux setup. The aux Marconi, the splitted PD output, and an open channel of the oscilloscope were used for my purpose. I have brought the RF spectrum analyzer from the control room. I think I have restored all the electronics back as before. I have re-aligned the beat setup after the EOM removed. Note that the aux NPRO, which had been on, was turned off to save the remaining life of the laser diode.

  13819   Sat May 5 22:32:07 2018 KojiUpdatePSLModulation depth measurement for the 3IFO aLIGO EOM

The 3IFO EOM was formerly tuned as the H2 EOM, so the resonant frequencies are different from the nominal aLIGO ones.

PORT1: 8.628MHz / 101 +/- 6 mrad_pk/V_pk
PORT2: 24.082MHz / 41.2 +/- 0.7 mrad_pk/V_pk
PORT3: 43.332MHz / 62.2 +/- 4 mrad_pk/V_pk

9MHz modulation is about x2.4 better than the one installed at LHO.
24MHz modulation is about x14 better. (This is OK as the new 24MHz is not configured to be resonant.)
45MHz modulation is about x1.4 better.
 

  13842   Tue May 15 10:42:14 2018 KojiUpdatePSLModulation depth measurement for the 3IFO aLIGO EOM and aftermath

The marconi RF output was turned on and thus the RF generator condition was restored to the nominal state on Friday 11th.

  13900   Thu May 31 02:04:55 2018 johannesUpdatePSLAUX laser state of mind

The AUX laser is down to 5.4 mW output power sad

What's worse, because we wanted those fast switching times by the AOM for ringdowns, I made the beam really small, which

  1. came with a severe tradeoff against conversion efficiency. I tried to squeeze the last out of it today, but there's only about 1.3 mW of diffracted light in the first order that reaches the fiber, with higher diffraction orders already visible.
  2. produced a very elliptical mode which was difficult to match into the fiber. Gautam and I measured 600 uW coming out of the fiber on the AS table. This per se is enough for the SRC spectroscopy demonstration, but with the current setup of the drive electronics there's no amplitude modulation of the deflected beam.

When going though the labs with Koji last week I discovered a stash of modulators in the Crackle lab. Among them there's an 80 MHz AOM with compact driver that had a modulation bandwidth of 30MHz. The fall time with this one should be around 100ns, and since the arm cavities have linewidths of ~10kHz their ringdown times are a few microseconds, so that would be sufficient. I suggest we swap this or a similar one in for the current one, make the beam larger, and redo the fiber modematching. That way we may get ~3mW onto the AS table.

I think I want to use AS110 for the ringdowns, so in the next couple days I'll look into its noise to get a better idea about what power we need for the arm ringdowns.

  13911   Sun Jun 3 22:48:59 2018 johannesUpdatePSLaux laser replacement

I brought the NPRO from the Crackle experiment over to the 40m Lab and set it up on the PSL table to replace the slowly dying AUX laser. I also brought along a Faraday isolator, broadband EOM, and an ISOMET AOM with driver electronics from the optics storage in the Crackle Lab.

This laser is a much newer model, made in 2008, and still has all its mojo, but we should probably keep up the practice of turning it off when it's not going to be used for a while. I measured 320 mW leaving the laser, and 299mW of that going through the Faraday isolator, whose Brewster-angle polarizer I had to clean because they were a little dusty. While the laser output is going strong, the controller displays a power output of only 10 mW, which makes me think that the power monitoring PD is busted. This is a completely different failure mode from what we've seen with the other NPROs that we can hopefully get repaired at some point, particularly because the laser is newer, but for now it's installed on the PSL table. This likely means that the noise eater isn't working on this unit either, for different reasons, but at least we have plenty of optical power.

The setup is very similar to before, with the addition of a Faraday isolator and a broadband EOM, in case we decide to get more bandwidth in the PLL. I changed the Crystal Technologies 3200-113 200 MHz AOM for an ISOMET 80 MHz AOM with RF driver from the Crackle lab's optics storage and sized the AUX beam to a diameter of 200 micron. I couldn't locate an appropriate heat sink for the driver, which is still in factory condiction, but since the PSL AOM also runs on 80MHz I used that one instead. The two AOMs saturate at different RF powers, so care must be taken to not drive the AUX AOM too high. At 600 mV input to the driver the deflection into the first order was maximal at 73 % of the input power, with the second order beam and the first order on the other side cleary visible.

In order to speed things up I didn't spend too much time on mode-matching, but the advantage of the fiber setup is that we can always improve later if need be without affecting things downstream. I coupled the first order beam into the fiber to the AS table with 58% efficiency, and restored the beat with the PSL laser on the NewFocus 1611. The contrast there is only about 20%, netting a -20 dBm beat note. This is only a marginal improvement from before, so the PLL will work as usual, but if we get the visibility up a little in the future we won't need to amplify the PD signal for the PLL anymore.

Some more things I wanted to do but didn't get to today are

  • Measure intensity noise of aux laser
  • Measure rise and fall times of new AOM
  • Get PLL back up and running
  • Place 90/10 beamsplitter in AS path and couple IFO output into fiber (= couple fiber output into IFO)

I'll resume this work tomorrow. I turned the aux laser and the AOM driver input off. For the PSL beat the AOM drive is not needed, and the power in the optical fiber should not exceed 100 mW, so the offset voltage to the AOM RF driver has to remain below 300 mV.

  13912   Mon Jun 4 02:52:52 2018 johannesUpdatePSLaux laser replacement

> While the laser output is going strong, the controller displays a power output of only 10 mW, which makes me think that the power monitoring PD is busted.

NPRO internal power monitor often shows smaller value than the actual due to a broken PD or misalignment. I don't think we need to fix it.

STEVE: Aux Lightwave M126-1064-200, sn259 [July 2009] 1.76A, ADJ 9,  9mW on it's display should not mislead you. It's output  320mW

Quote:

I brought the NPRO from the Crackle experiment over to the 40m Lab and set it up on the PSL table to replace the slowly dying AUX laser. I also brought along a Faraday isolator, broadband EOM, and an ISOMET AOM with driver electronics from the optics storage in the Crackle Lab.

This laser is a much newer model, made in 2008, and still has all its mojo, but we should probably keep up the practice of turning it off when it's not going to be used for a while. I measured 320 mW leaving the laser, and 299mW of that going through the Faraday isolator, whose Brewster-angle polarizer I had to clean because they were a little dusty. While the laser output is going strong, the controller displays a power output of only 10 mW, which makes me think that the power monitoring PD is busted. This is a completely different failure mode from what we've seen with the other NPROs that we can hopefully get repaired at some point, particularly because the laser is newer, but for now it's installed on the PSL table. This likely means that the noise eater isn't working on this unit either, for different reasons, but at least we have plenty of optical power.

The setup is very similar to before, with the addition of a Faraday isolator and a broadband EOM, in case we decide to get more bandwidth in the PLL. I changed the Crystal Technologies 3200-113 200 MHz AOM for an ISOMET 80 MHz AOM with RF driver from the Crackle lab's optics storage and sized the AUX beam to a diameter of 200 micron. I couldn't locate an appropriate heat sink for the driver, which is still in factory condiction, but since the PSL AOM also runs on 80MHz I used that one instead. The two AOMs saturate at different RF powers, so care must be taken to not drive the AUX AOM too high. At 600 mV input to the driver the deflection into the first order was maximal at 73 % of the input power, with the second order beam and the first order on the other side cleary visible.

In order to speed things up I didn't spend too much time on mode-matching, but the advantage of the fiber setup is that we can always improve later if need be without affecting things downstream. I coupled the first order beam into the fiber to the AS table with 58% efficiency, and restored the beat with the PSL laser on the NewFocus 1611. The contrast there is only about 20%, netting a -20 dBm beat note. This is only a marginal improvement from before, so the PLL will work as usual, but if we get the visibility up a little in the future we won't need to amplify the PD signal for the PLL anymore.

Some more things I wanted to do but didn't get to today are

  • Measure intensity noise of aux laser
  • Measure rise and fall times of new AOM
  • Get PLL back up and running
  • Place 90/10 beamsplitter in AS path and couple IFO output into fiber (= couple fiber output into IFO)

I'll resume this work tomorrow. I turned the aux laser and the AOM driver input off. For the PSL beat the AOM drive is not needed, and the power in the optical fiber should not exceed 100 mW, so the offset voltage to the AOM RF driver has to remain below 300 mV.

 

  13913   Mon Jun 4 11:00:37 2018 gautamUpdatePSLaux laser replacement
Quote:

I couldn't locate an appropriate heat sink for the driver, which is still in factory condiction, but since the PSL AOM also runs on 80MHz I used that one instead.

We have the appropriate heatsink - I'd like to minimize interference with the main beam wherever possible.

Quote:

For the PSL beat the AOM drive is not needed, and the power in the optical fiber should not exceed 100 mW, so the offset voltage to the AOM RF driver has to remain below 300 mV.

If damage to the fiber is a concern, I think it's better to use a PBS + waveplate to attenuate the power going into the fiber. When the AOM switching is hooked up to CDS, it's easy to imagine a wrong button being pressed or a wrong value being typed in.

It would probably also be good to have a pickoff monitor for the NPRO DC power so that we can confirm its health (in the short run, we can hijack a PSL Acromag channel for this purpose, as we now do for FSS_RMTEMP). I don't know that we need an EOM for the PLL, as in order to get that going, we probably need some fast electronics for the EOM path, like an FSS box. 

STEVE: I ordered the right heatsink for the acousto after Koji pointed out that the vertical fins are 20% more efficient. Why? Because hot air rises. It will be here in 3-4 days.

  13916   Tue Jun 5 02:06:59 2018 gautamUpdatePSLaux laser first (NULL) results

[johannes, gautam]

  1. Johannes aligned the single bounce off the ITM into the AUX fiber on the AS table, and also the AUX beam into the fiber on the PSL table.
    • Mode matching isn't spectaular anywhere in this chain.
    • But we have 2.6mW of light going into the SRM with the AOM deflection into the 1st order beam (which is what we send into the IFO) maximum.
  2. We set up some remote capabilities for the PLL and Marconi frequency (=PLL setpoint) control.
  3. Motivation was to try and lock DRMI, and look for some resonance of the AUX beam in the SRC.
    • We soon realized this was a way too lofty goal.
    • So we decided to try the simpler system of PRMI locked on carrier.
    • We were successfully able to sweep the Marconi setpoint in up to 20kHz steps (although we can only move the setpoint in one direction, not sure I know why now).
    • Then we decided to look for resonances of the AUX beam in the arm cavity.
    • Still no cigar broken heart
  4. Plus points:
    • PLL can be reliably locked remotely.
    • Marconi freq. can be swept deterministically remotely.
  5. Tomorrow:
    • Fix polarization issues. There is some low freq drift (~5min period) of the power incident on the fiber on the PSL table which we don't understand.
    • Verify MM into IFO and also into fiber at PSL table.
    • Do mode spectroscopy.

I was wondering why the PMC modulation sidebands are showing up on the control room analyzer with ~6dB difference in amplitude. Then I realized that it is reasonable for the cabling to have 6dB higher loss at 80 MHz compared to 20 MHz.

  13924   Thu Jun 7 10:26:36 2018 keerthanaUpdatePSLobserving the resonance signal corresponding to the injected frequency.

(Johannes, Koji, Keerthana)

The PLL loop ensures that the frequency difference between the PSL laser and the AUX laser is equal to the frequency we provide to the Local Oscillator (LO) with the help of a Marconi. Only a small pick off part of both the AUX and PSL lasers are going to the PLL loop. The other part of both the lasers are going to the interferometer. Before entering into the optical fibre, the AUX laser passes through an AOM which changes its frequency by an amount of 80MHz. When the PLL is locked, the frequency coming out of the PLL will be equal to the frequency set up in the Marconi (fm). When it passes through AOM, the frequency becomes fdiff = fm ±80 MHz. If this frequency beam and the PSL laser beam is aligned properly, and if this frequency is equal to the product of an integer and the free spectral range of the cavity, this will resonate in the cavity.  Then we expect to get a peak in the ETM transmission spectrum corresponding to the frequency we injected through the optical Fibre.

Through out the experiment we need to make sure that the PSL is locked. Thus, the signal detected by the photo detector when only PSL is resonating inside the cavity, act as a DC signal. Then we give a narrow scan to the Marconi. When fdiff = N*FSRy this condition is satisfied, we will observe a peak in the output. Here FSRy  is the free spectral range of the cavity which is approximately equal to 3.893 MHz.

Yesterday afternoon, Johannes, Koji and myself tried to observe this peak. We aligned the cavity by observing the output signal from the AS100 photo detector. We made the alignment in such a way that the intensity output getting from this photo detector is maximum. We used a Spectrum analyser to see the output. After that we connected a photo detector to collect the YEND transmission signal from the ETM mirror. We used a lens to focus this directly to the photodetector. Then we connected this photodetector to the spectrum analyser, which was located near the AS table. We took a large cable to meet this purpose. But still the cable was not lengthy enough, so we joined it with another cable and finally connected it with the spectrum analyser. Then we gave a scan to the Marconi from 51 MHZ to 55 MHz. We repeated this experiment with a scan of 55 MHz to 59 MHz also. We repeated this a few times, but we were not able to see the peak.

We assume that this can be because of some issue with the alignment or it can be because of some issue with the photo detector we used. We would like to repeat this experiment and get the signal properly.

I am attaching a flow chart of the setup and also a picture of the mirrors and photo detector we inserted in the Y-End table.

 
  13930   Thu Jun 7 22:36:09 2018 not keerthanaUpdatePSLobserving the resonance signal corresponding to the injected frequency.

I worked a bit on the PSL table today

  13931   Fri Jun 8 00:36:54 2018 gautamUpdatePSLobserving the resonance signal corresponding to the injected frequency.

It isn't clear to me in the drawing where the Agilent is during this measurement. Over 40m of cabling, the loss of signal can be a few dB, and considering we don't have a whole lot of signal in the first place, it may be better to send the stronger RF signal (i.e. Marconi pickoff) over the long cable rather than the weak beat signal from the Transmission photodiode. 

  13932   Fri Jun 8 01:08:22 2018 johannesUpdatePSLFirst light of AUX at YEND

Among the things that we hadn't taken care of yesterday before beginning to look for transmission signals were the polarization of the AUX beam on the AS table and optimizing the PLL feedback. The AUX beam is s-polarized on the PSL table (choice due to availablility of mirrors), and I added a half waveplate in front of the fiber to match it's axes. I placed another half-waveplate at the fiber output and send the reflection port of a PBS cube onto a PDA1CS photodetector. By alternatingly turning the waveplates I minimized the reflected light, giving strongly p-polarized light on the AS table for best results when interfering with the IFO beam. I wiggled the fiber and found no strong dependency of the output polarization on fiber bending. Attachment 2 shows the current layout.

The beat signal between AUX and PSL table is at -20dBm, and I adjusted the PLL gain and PI-corner to get reliable locking behavior. I think it's a good idea to keep the AUX beam on the AS table blocked while it's not in use, and only unblock it when it is phaselocked to avoid a rogue beam with no fixed phase relation to the PSL in the IFO.I blocked the beam after completing this work today.

I used the signal chain that Keerthana, Koji, and I set up yesterday to look for mode flashed of the AUX light in the YARM using the RF beat with the PSL carrier in transmission. To align the AUX beam to the arm the following steps were performed:

  1. Using a spectrum analyzer to look at the RF power at the target frequency between frequency-shifted AUX beam and PSL carrier on AS110, align the beam using the mirror pair closest to the fiber coupler for maximum signal.
  2. Initiate a sweep of the PLL LO frequency sourced by the Marconi using GPIB scripts over about 1 FSR. A strong peak was visible at ~31.76 MHz offset frequency
  3. Tune and hold LO frequency (in this case at 48.2526 MHz) such that AUX beam resonates in the arm. Optimize alignment by maximizing RF signal on PD in transmission.

This was followed by a sweep over two full FSRs. Attachment #1 shows the trace recorded by the AG4395 using the max data hold setting during the sweep. Essentially the beat between AUX and PSL carrier traced out the arm's transmission curve. At minimum transmission there was still a ~82dB beat on the transmission PD visible.

The YEND QPD is currently blocked and sees no light.

  13981   Mon Jun 18 14:32:42 2018 gautamUpdatePSLOptics on AS table

Yesterday, I moved the following optics:

  1. Lens in front of AS110 PD.
  2. BS splitting light between AS110 and AS55.

After moving these components around a bit, I locked them down once I was happy that the beam was pretty well centered on both of them, and also on AS110 and AS55 (measured using O'scope with single bounce from one ITM, other optics misaligned).

The beam was close to clipping on the lens mentioned in #1, probably because this wasn't checked when the 90-10 BS was installed for the AUX laser. Furthermore, I believe we are losing more than 10% of the light due to this BS. The ASDC (which is derived from AS55 PD) level is down at ~110cts as the Michelson is fringing, while it used to be ~200 cts. I will update with a power measurement shortly. But I think we should move ahead with the plan to combine the beam into the IFO's AS mode as discussed at the meeting last week.


Unrelated to this work, but c1psl and c1iscaux were keyed. 


ASDC has something weird going on with it - my main goal yesterday was to calibrate the actuators of ITMX, ITMY and BS using the Michelson. But with the Michelson locked on a dark fringe, the ASDC level changed by up to 50 counts seemingly randomly (bright fringe was ~1000 cts, I had upped the whitening gain to +21dB), even though the CCD remained clearly dark throughout. Not sure if the problem is in the readout electronics or in the PD itself.

  13982   Mon Jun 18 15:59:17 2018 johannesUpdatePSLOptics on AS table
Quote:

Furthermore, I believe we are losing more than 10% of the light due to this BS. The ASDC (which is derived from AS55 PD) level is down at ~110cts as the Michelson is fringing, while it used to be ~200 cts. I will update with a power measurement shortly. But I think we should move ahead with the plan to combine the beam into the IFO's AS mode as discussed at the meeting last week.

Is the 10% specified for P-Pol or for UNP? I contacted CVI about beamsplitters, since their website doesn't list a BS1-1064-90-... option on the website. They say a R=90% beamsplitter would be a custom job. The closest stock item they got is BS1-1064-95-2025-45UNP specified at R=95% for UNPolarized beams. They were kind enough to sent me the measured transmission curves for a recent lot of these, which is attached was uploaded to the wiki [Elog Police K: NO PROPRIETARY DOCUMENTS ON THE ELOG, which is public. Put it on our wiki and put the link here]. The figure is not labeled, but according to the contact Red is S-Pol and Blue is P-Pol, which means that this one actually has R=~90% for P, pretty much what we want. We'll need to buy two of these to make the swap in the setup.

Back to your original point: There's only a BS1-1064-10-2025-45UNP on the website, so unless we got these as custom items, the R for P-Pol is probably NOT actually 10%, just somewhere between 0% and 20%

  13983   Mon Jun 18 16:57:54 2018 KojiUpdatePSLOptics on AS table

Of course, many (but no all) of the optics were custom-ordered back in ~2000.

  14006   Fri Jun 22 14:18:04 2018 SteveUpdatePSLOptics on AS table

 

Quote:
Quote:

Furthermore, I believe we are losing more than 10% of the light due to this BS. The ASDC (which is derived from AS55 PD) level is down at ~110cts as the Michelson is fringing, while it used to be ~200 cts. I will update with a power measurement shortly. But I think we should move ahead with the plan to combine the beam into the IFO's AS mode as discussed at the meeting last week.

Is the 10% specified for P-Pol or for UNP? I contacted CVI about beamsplitters, since their website doesn't list a BS1-1064-90-... option on the website. They say a R=90% beamsplitter would be a custom job. The closest stock item they got is BS1-1064-95-2025-45UNP specified at R=95% for UNPolarized beams. They were kind enough to sent me the measured transmission curves for a recent lot of these, which is attached was uploaded to the wiki [Elog Police K: NO PROPRIETARY DOCUMENTS ON THE ELOG, which is public. Put it on our wiki and put the link here]. The figure is not labeled, but according to the contact Red is S-Pol and Blue is P-Pol, which means that this one actually has R=~90% for P, pretty much what we want. We'll need to buy two of these to make the swap in the setup.

Back to your original point: There's only a BS1-1064-10-2025-45UNP on the website, so unless we got these as custom items, the R for P-Pol is probably NOT actually 10%, just somewhere between 0% and 20%

4  std cataloge item fused silica  BS1-1064-95-2025-45UNP 

ordered today. They will arrive no later than July 13, 2018

  14033   Fri Jun 29 18:16:32 2018 JonConfigurationPSLChanges to AUX Optical Layout on PSL Table

In order to use the 0th-order deflection beam from the AOM for cavity mode scans, I've coaligned this beam to the existing mode-matching/launch optics set up for the 1st-order beam.

Instead of being dumped, the 0th-order beam is now steered by two 45-degree mirrors into the existing beam path. The second mirror is on a flip mount so that we can quickly switch between 0th-order/1st-order injections. None of the existing optics were touched, so the 1st-order beam alignment should still be undisturbed.

Currently the 0th-order beam is being injected into the IFO. After attenuating so as to not exceed 100 mW incident on the fiber, approximately 50 mW of power reaches the AS table. That coupling efficiency is similar to what we have with the 1st-order beam. With the Y-arm cavity locked and the AUX PLL locked at RF offset = 47.60 MHz (an Y-arm FSR), I observed a -50 dBm beat note at Y-end transmission.

ELOG V3.1.3-